# Do angry vegans turn you against going vegan?



## Watermelon Man (Jul 10, 2017)

OK, I'll get it out in the open. I'm vegan, pleased to meet you. 

I'm vegan because I believe we should treat animals much better in this world, and the environment, and our own health. 

There's an argument between vegans that seems to be gathering pace.  Some vegans claim that you can be vegan and eat honey, drink beer with fish bladder in it... Other vegans think that you have to be 100% vegan or get to f***.  Those in the latter group tend to be quite militant/vegans.

My question to the good people of Urban75 is this.  Do angry vegans make you want to shout bacon in their face? Do angry vegans make you think say oh f*** off would you?  Are you more receptive to a non judgemental, the right side of sanity vegan? Or do you still want to shout bacon in their face?

I'd be grateful of responses.


----------



## ItWillNeverWork (Jul 10, 2017)

Watermelon Man said:


> ...drink beer with fish bladder in it



Say what now?


----------



## ddraig (Jul 10, 2017)




----------



## TruXta (Jul 10, 2017)

ItWillNeverWork said:


> Say what now?


Finings will often be made from fish bits.


----------



## ItWillNeverWork (Jul 10, 2017)

TruXta said:


> Finings will often be made from fish bits.



What's a Fining?


----------



## TruXta (Jul 10, 2017)

ItWillNeverWork said:


> What's a Fining?


Stuff that makes your beer clear and clean.


----------



## ItWillNeverWork (Jul 10, 2017)

TruXta said:


> Stuff that makes your beer clear and clean.



You learn something new every day. Well as long as it doesn't make my pint smell fishy I guess I'm ok with it.


----------



## Poot (Jul 10, 2017)

I've always thought it rather odd for people to be defined by what they don't do.


----------



## kalidarkone (Jul 10, 2017)

Yeah angry vegans make me want to post eggs and bacon through their letterbox.

I think it's great to be vegan, and I'm really good at cooking vegan dishes. Some of my best friends are vegan..... 

I' m just not up for the judgement.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jul 10, 2017)

As a carnivore I want to eat angry vegans. All that anger and rage makes the meat super tender, like wagyu humans.


----------



## dylanredefined (Jul 10, 2017)

Loud obnoxious vegans are a comedy staple for a reason. They just put people's back up and are either ignored or ridiculed.
 When animals evolve enough to potentially order a beer then I'll stop killing and eating them.
 They and their products taste really good and the vegan alternatives don't. Imho.


----------



## Idaho (Jul 10, 2017)

Vegans, like most humans, aren't as important to others as they are to themselves.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jul 10, 2017)

i've never met one of these mythical evangelist vegans.


----------



## Supine (Jul 10, 2017)

Just stopped dating one. Conversations about veganism became boring very quickly


----------



## Nine Bob Note (Jul 10, 2017)

ItWillNeverWork said:


> What's a Fining?


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jul 10, 2017)

I must be missing out - I have never been confronted by an angry vegan. is this a common thing ? where do these gangs of tooled up furious vegans hang around, so I can take steps to avoid them ?


----------



## xenon (Jul 10, 2017)

DotCommunist said:


> i've never met one of these mythical evangelist vegans.



 Me neither.   I've never been lectured when eating with vegetarian/vegan friends.   If it's there place,  I will have what they have. If out, I may have a meat dish, I may not.  That's just standard  i'd have thought.


----------



## ginger_syn (Jul 10, 2017)

No it just puts me off that particular vegan, like the one who insisted the vegan chocolate cake I had made for the vegan and vegetarian coffeeshop I worked in was not vegan because it had chocolate in it despite being  told that it had no dairy in the cocoa powder.


----------



## killer b (Jul 10, 2017)

DotCommunist said:


> i've never met one of these mythical evangelist vegans.


No indeed. Bacon evangelists however...


----------



## Nine Bob Note (Jul 10, 2017)

killer b said:


> No indeed. Bacon evangelists however...



Oh, I had a lovely quorn bacon sandwich for dinner. With added mozzarella


----------



## NoXion (Jul 10, 2017)

I've never understood why honey is supposed to be _verboten_ for vegans. Sure, it's used by the bees as a form of food storage for winter and other times of scarcity, but my understanding is that beekeepers feed their bees because dead hives aren't very profitable. I doubt the bees in commercial hives are all that put out by the fact that their honey has been replaced with sugar.

It's not like with leather boots, where it is generally frowned upon if the animal isn't dead when you fashion footwear out of its hide.


----------



## fen_boy (Jul 10, 2017)

not-bono-ever said:


> I must be missing out - I have never been confronted by an angry vegan. is this a common thing ? where do these gangs of tooled up furious vegans hang around, so I can take steps to avoid them ?



facebook mostly.


----------



## Celyn (Jul 10, 2017)

kalidarkone said:


> Yeah angry vegans make me want to post eggs and bacon through their letterbox...



Ooh! Right, kalidarkone, I am a horribly angry vegan. Very angry, lots of angry.

So, would you come along and post bacon and eggs through my letterbox, please? (Because I might like having breakfast delivered to me and might find that I am not vegan at all, but just a greedy lying chancer.)


----------



## NoXion (Jul 10, 2017)

As for annoying vegetarians/vegans, for sure they exist. PETA is a thing, and they must be getting the funding for their cringe-worthy publicity stunts from _somewhere_.

But that's not what turns me off veganism. What turns me off veganism is the total lack of animal products. No meat is bad enough, but no dairy either? No leather too? No thanks.


----------



## T & P (Jul 10, 2017)

*Orders (vegan) popcorn*


----------



## Yuwipi Woman (Jul 10, 2017)

DotCommunist said:


> i've never met one of these mythical evangelist vegans.



I've met a couple, but they're way outnumbered by evangelist meat eaters and hypocrisy hunters.


----------



## Thora (Jul 10, 2017)

I am put off being a vegan because I like to eat animal products.  The opinions and attitudes of vegans doesn't have an impact on me.


----------



## ddraig (Jul 10, 2017)

Carnist fragility ahoy!


----------



## Yossarian (Jul 10, 2017)

I'm not that into eating meat or fish or eggs or dairy these days, but the signboards outside a restaurant near me saying things like "Vegan as fuck" or "Grow up go vegan" still kind of put me off going in there.

I don't think I've ever met a vegan in person who was boring or preachy about it though, seems to be a lot more of that kind of behaviour from people who like talking about how non-vegan they are.


----------



## alan_ (Jul 10, 2017)

No my friend. Angry vegans turn me against being angry.
you're welcome


----------



## DotCommunist (Jul 10, 2017)

NoXion said:


> As for annoying vegetarians/vegans, for sure they exist. PETA is a thing, and they must be getting the funding for their cringe-worthy publicity stunts from _somewhere_.
> 
> But that's not what turns me off veganism. What turns me off veganism is the total lack of animal products. No meat is bad enough, but no dairy either? No leather too? No thanks.


my eating problems mean I just can't get enough in me without meat and dairy. Ethically I'd like to go veggie, or at least just fish. But I'd waste away worse than I am now.


----------



## kalidarkone (Jul 10, 2017)

Celyn said:


> Ooh! Right, kalidarkone, I am a horribly angry vegan. Very angry, lots of angry.
> 
> So, would you come along and post bacon and eggs through my letterbox, please? (Because I might like having breakfast delivered to me and might find that I am not vegan at all, but just a greedy lying chancer.)



Celyn, only if you gave me a hard time about the fact I'm not vegan or tried to convince me to do so. I would feel the same way about anyone trying to convince me of anything I was not ready to be convinced about.

Pm me your address


----------



## Celyn (Jul 10, 2017)

Anyway, vegans have songs.

It's not the vegan of Liverpool that grieves me ...

Vegan on a jet plane ...


----------



## alan_ (Jul 10, 2017)

vegan work it out


----------



## Nine Bob Note (Jul 10, 2017)

Celyn said:


> Anyway, vegans have songs.
> 
> It's not the vegan of Liverpool that grieves me ...
> 
> Vegan on a jet plane ...



"Don't you forget about meat?"


----------



## Nine Bob Note (Jul 10, 2017)

alan_ said:


> vegan work it out



With the high fibre diet that's never an issue


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jul 10, 2017)

Angry vegan meets angry waiter...

Do you have a vegan option?

Yes, you can fuck off.


----------



## Steel Icarus (Jul 10, 2017)

Great troll OP, thread's doing well 

I'm not afraid of angry vegans because of the enduring stereotype which I fully believe about their weakness due to a lack of meat in their diet.


----------



## mrs quoad (Jul 10, 2017)

DotCommunist said:


> i've never met one of these mythical evangelist vegans.


Eveganlistics! 

(Id wager I didn't get there first).


----------



## editor (Jul 10, 2017)

Watermelon Man said:


> OK, I'll get it out in the open. I'm vegan, pleased to meet you.
> 
> I'm vegan because I believe we should treat animals much better in this world, and the environment, and our own health.
> 
> ...


Really pitifully crap trolling is what gets my goat.


----------



## Ranbay (Jul 10, 2017)




----------



## skyscraper101 (Jul 10, 2017)

That is an incredibly lame video.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jul 10, 2017)

editor said:


> Really pitifully crap trolling is what gets my goat.



There's a tip for OzT 

* sorry OzT, but since you posted that comment last week, posts keep coming up that fit in with my sense of humour, and I can't resit the opportunity. (((you)))


----------



## Lorca (Jul 10, 2017)

this guy made me go vegan (slightly nsfw)



Spoiler: vegan weirdness


----------



## Watermelon Man (Jul 10, 2017)

dylanredefined said:


> When animals evolve enough to potentially order a beer then I'll stop killing and eating them.



This is the superiority argument.  I think it's flawed. Firstly,  if it's just a superiority thing then why do people only eat certain animals? Also why stop there? There's loads of humans that don't have the capability to order a beer but you would not kill and eat them would you?


----------



## Watermelon Man (Jul 10, 2017)

ginger_syn said:


> No it just puts me off that particular vegan, like the one who insisted the vegan chocolate cake I had made for the vegan and vegetarian coffeeshop I worked in was not vegan because it had chocolate in it despite being  told that it had no dairy in the cocoa powder.


 
Reasonable response.  Chocolate can be a bit sketchy. Some companies say 100% vegan others are a bit more vague... "we think it is".


----------



## Watermelon Man (Jul 10, 2017)

Lorca said:


> this guy made me go vegan (slightly nsfw)
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: vegan weirdness


 This should be in a Tarantino film... I watched that thinking where the f**k is the exit door.  Run fast.


----------



## billy_bob (Jul 10, 2017)

I'm a non-evangelical vegetarian myself. But I haven't met half as many angry, aggressively vegan people as I've met (or at least read on t'web) frail-hearted meateaters who are apparently scared off veganism by these near-mythical militant yoghurt-knitters.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jul 10, 2017)

Watermelon Man said:


> This is the superiority argument.  I think it's flawed. Firstly,  if it's just a superiority thing then why do people only eat certain animals? Also why stop there? *There's loads of humans that don't have the capability to order a beer but you would not kill and eat them would you?*



I think you misjudge some people on here.


----------



## editor (Jul 10, 2017)




----------



## editor (Jul 10, 2017)




----------



## EastEnder (Jul 10, 2017)

Watermelon Man said:


> OK, I'll get it out in the open. I'm vegan, pleased to meet you.
> 
> I'm vegan because I believe we should treat animals much better in this world, and the environment, and our own health.
> 
> ...


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jul 10, 2017)

editor said:


> View attachment 111093



I followed a link here that described it as the 'naughty corner of the internet', populated by 'baby eating anarchists', hence my comment.


----------



## Yuwipi Woman (Jul 10, 2017)

EastEnder said:


>



Or perhaps:


----------



## billy_bob (Jul 10, 2017)

Is there such a thing as a straw sock puppet?


----------



## pinkmonkey (Jul 10, 2017)

fen_boy said:


> facebook mostly.


Totally, got added to a group, lasted less than a week.


----------



## mrs quoad (Jul 10, 2017)

The number of people saying they know no militant vegans leaves me wondering if our social circle is, perhaps, an artefact of the trendy hipster fringes of academia, baby yoga, NCT, Steiner toddler mornings, organic bakeries, and the militant fringe of assorted breastfeeding tubthumper collectives in which we commingle.

Are there really none in Kettering, DotCommunist ?


----------



## DotCommunist (Jul 10, 2017)

mrs quoad said:


> The number of people saying they know no militant vegans leaves me wondering if our social circle is, perhaps, an artefact of the trendy hipster fringes of academia, baby yoga, NCT, Steiner toddler mornings, organic bakeries, and the militant fringe of assorted breastfeeding tubthumper collectives in which we commingle.
> 
> Are there really none in Kettering, DotCommunist ?


there must be one or two surely, but not n my orbit.


----------



## mrs quoad (Jul 10, 2017)

Indeed, one of our closest associates is on intimate terms with the founder of Veganuary thesselves.


----------



## Gromit (Jul 10, 2017)

*The angry vegan from the Scott Pilgrin movie*


----------



## Gromit (Jul 10, 2017)

editor said:


> View attachment 111094


That's a curious Vulcan not an angry vegan.


----------



## pengaleng (Jul 10, 2017)

I dunno how anyone can be arsed to get legitimately angry about another persons dietary choices.


----------



## NoXion (Jul 10, 2017)

mrs quoad said:


> The number of people saying they know no militant vegans leaves me wondering if our social circle is, perhaps, an artefact of the trendy hipster fringes of academia, baby yoga, NCT, Steiner toddler mornings, organic bakeries, and the militant fringe of assorted breastfeeding tubthumper collectives in which we commingle.



I can say with certainty I do not personally know any vegans, militant or otherwise. Which makes deciding where to eat a hell of a lot simpler.


----------



## dessiato (Jul 10, 2017)

Some time ago I asked, on this forum, about people's personal experiences of becoming vegan/vegetarian. I was met with a lot of rudeness and open aggression, by one poster in particular, that in the end I decided that I wasn't interested in continuing the conversation. As a result I've continued to eat meat and have decided that, if this is the way vegans interact, I don't want to associate with them. I have, as a result of the conversation, actively opposed veganism when asked about it.


----------



## mrs quoad (Jul 10, 2017)

dessiato said:


> Some time ago I asked, on this forum, about people's personal experiences of becoming vegan/vegetarian. I was met with a lot of rudeness and open aggression, by one poster in particular, that in the end I decided that I wasn't interested in continuing the conversation. As a result I've continued to eat meat and have decided that, if this is the way vegans interact, I don't want to associate with them. I have, as a result of the conversation, actively opposed veganism when asked about it.


How does that work, then?

Do you not believe in anything that has >0 bellends attached, or is there a more specific mechanism?

Following this principle through, shouldn't you really be eating economy factory farmed meat for every meal?


----------



## dessiato (Jul 10, 2017)

mrs quoad said:


> How does that work, then?
> 
> Do you not believe in anything that has >0 bellends attached, or is there a more specific mechanism?
> 
> Following this principle through, shouldn't you really be eating economy factory farmed meat for every meal?


I don't have a problem with factory farmed meat. If I want to eat it, and it tastes OK, why not?


----------



## EastEnder (Jul 10, 2017)

pengaleng said:


> I dunno how anyone can be arsed to get legitimately angry about another persons dietary choices.


Cheese _then_ beans is the *only* legitimate reason to get angry. Really, _really_ angry.


----------



## bimble (Jul 10, 2017)

People talking about what they do and don't eat is just incredibly boring, whether its vegans or paleolithic meat gobblers, its just really weird and dull i think, and kind of disturbing.
I reckon that if you get to the point where your dietary rules become such a massive part of your identity that you feel the need to tell everyone about it all day long you might have a problem, like I know they are not called eating disorders but I wonder if they should be, when it takes up that much of your time and your ideas about yourself that you feel compelled to talk about it all the time. My ex is one such person now, goes on and on about not eating carbs and fermenting things.


----------



## Vintage Paw (Jul 10, 2017)

What turned me against being vegan was being vegan for a short while, which I found very difficult. I expect it is easier for those who don't already have problems with food.


----------



## NoXion (Jul 10, 2017)

"Paleos" are a weird lot. I bet most of them don't gobble up those tasty, vitamin-rich organ meats like they're supposed to - they just dodge the carbs and call it a day. As if people in paleolithic times could afford to eat only the muscles of the animal while throwing the rest away.


----------



## Watermelon Man (Jul 10, 2017)

Vintage Paw said:


> What turned me against being vegan was being vegan for a short while, which I found very difficult. I expect it is easier for those who don't already have problems with food.



If you don't mind me asking, what did you find difficult?


----------



## bimble (Jul 10, 2017)

NoXion said:


> "Paleos" are a weird lot. I bet most of them don't gobble up those tasty, vitamin-rich organ meats like they're supposed to - they just dodge the carbs and call it a day. As if people in paleolithic times could afford to eat only the muscles of the animal while throwing the rest away.


The amount of meat he gets though (my paleo ex) he'd have had to be king of a massive paleo empire. He never has to do days on just roots and berries and the odd songbird.  It's actually really shit, ecologically / socially, that stuff. Totally unsustainable wankery imo, though he does look well on it must admit.


----------



## Watermelon Man (Jul 10, 2017)

NoXion said:


> "Paleos" are a weird lot. I bet most of them don't gobble up those tasty, vitamin-rich organ meats like they're supposed to - they just dodge the carbs and call it a day. As if people in paleolithic times could afford to eat only the muscles of the animal while throwing the rest away.


 
The idea of low carb makes me confused? Why would you starve yourself of energy?  I know a few people who have lost a load of weight on low carb but are always ill, grumpy and have no energy.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jul 10, 2017)

bimble said:


> The amount of meat he gets though (my paleo ex) he'd have had to be king of a massive paleo empire. He never has to do days on just roots and berries and the odd songbird.  It's actually really shit, ecologically / socially, that stuff. Totally unsustainable wankery imo.


I bet he used to stink the bog out something rotten


----------



## bimble (Jul 10, 2017)

DotCommunist said:


> I bet he used to stink the bog out something rotten


The paleo business began after we split up, happily.


----------



## Vintage Paw (Jul 10, 2017)

Watermelon Man said:


> If you don't mind me asking, what did you find difficult?



The being vegan part.

I have a very limited diet because I have issues with food. Removing half of the foods I regularly eat was very difficult.


----------



## Vintage Paw (Jul 10, 2017)

bimble said:


> The amount of meat he gets though (my paleo ex) he'd have had to be king of a massive paleo empire. He never has to do days on just roots and berries and the odd songbird.  It's actually really shit, ecologically / socially, that stuff. Totally unsustainable wankery imo, though he does look well on it must admit.



The meat and dairy industry is a massive fucking problem for climate change, but I bet these paleo twats think they're totally right on.


----------



## Idris2002 (Jul 10, 2017)

editor said:


> View attachment 111093


Son, have you ever kissed a girl?


----------



## NoXion (Jul 10, 2017)

Watermelon Man said:


> The idea of low carb makes me confused? Why would you starve yourself of energy?  I know a few people who have lost a load of weight on low carb but are always ill, grumpy and have no energy.



I wonder if those people are getting enough fats in their diet. Fat has been the much-maligned Devil of popular nutrition since about the 60s, and even today many foods are marketed as being "low in fat" or "fat-free", where fat was either never a significant ingredient in the food item in question, or all the fat has been replaced with refined sugar which is cheaper and much, much worse than fat. Let me put it this way; humans have been consuming fat since the year dot, while refined sugar has only been around in any significant quantity for the past two, three, maybe four centuries. It seems obvious to me which one the human body metabolises more healthfully.

Those people are probably peaking and crashing because of all the sugar in their diet, while not having a decent source of energy from fat, nor having any carbs to smooth out those peaks and troughs.


----------



## Vintage Paw (Jul 10, 2017)

I read recently that they have revised their view on fats, and that dairy fat in particular isn't nearly as harmful as has been pushed for the past few decades.

I immediately switched from skimmed to 1% milk


----------



## bimble (Jul 10, 2017)

Vintage Paw said:


> The meat and dairy industry is a massive fucking problem for climate change, but I bet these paleo twats think they're totally right on.


I don't think there is any moral justification for a very high meat diet at all, its entirely selfish. Yes, the agricultural revolution was a mixed bag but its happened now - and most of the world depends on wheat rice vegetables etc: The land given over to producing one cow for your meat munchers could feed hundreds more people if it were used differently. It's a luxury lifestyle choice the paleo thing and only for the very self absorbed.


----------



## dylanredefined (Jul 10, 2017)

Watermelon Man said:


> If you don't mind me asking, what did you find difficult?



 The whole not eating food I like and having to eat food which was unappetizing. I'm sure someone can make tofu taste good I failed. Can't think of one vegan meal I would choose to eat over a conventional meal.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 10, 2017)

Watermelon Man said:


> I'd be grateful of responses.


as you can see, you've had plenty of those


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 10, 2017)

dylanredefined said:


> The whole not eating food I like and having to eat food which was unappetizing. I'm sure someone can make tofu taste good I failed. Can't think of one vegan meal I would choose to eat over a conventional meal.


by conventional i suppose you mean based on cruelty


----------



## geminisnake (Jul 10, 2017)

DotCommunist said:


> i've never met one of these mythical evangelist vegans.



You're fecking lucky then.
Sanctimonious vegans irritate me. Don't be preachy at me eating bacon maybe 6 times a year when you're driving a fecking Land Rover and flying to South America to 'find yourself'. No this is not directed at anyone


----------



## Vintage Paw (Jul 10, 2017)

I was vegetarian for 10 years, and vegan for only a few months. I'm neither now. But I'd say perhaps 90% or more of my meals are still vegetarian simply because I don't care to cook with meat and I've never considered it a part of a meal, so I only have it if it's in a ready meal or if I go out, the latter of which is very rare. Some of my meals are likely vegan as well and are perfectly tasty, but since I have a small range of foods I eat regularly (again, _issues_), I'd be eating the same thing over and over and that wouldn't be good for my physical or mental health. And I am, I'm afraid, incredibly attached to milk, which I know is a bad thing considering its role on the environment. I do have Alpro in my coffee - but there again I'm having coffee which isn't that great either so...


----------



## bimble (Jul 10, 2017)

Similar Vintage Paw,  years of being veggie means i don't really know how to cook meat, just never got into the habit of it, but am learning - did a really good spaghetti meatballs the other day. But a life without the amazing array of things that come from milk is really hard for me to imagine.


----------



## Watermelon Man (Jul 10, 2017)

dylanredefined said:


> The whole not eating food I like and having to eat food which was unappetizing. I'm sure someone can make tofu taste good I failed. Can't think of one vegan meal I would choose to eat over a conventional meal.


 Yes, the tofu issue I understand.  I like it gently fried with fruit syrup on top. Tofu can be bland otherwise. The one meal I missed was fish and chips but a good vegan chef can make an arguably better tasting "phish" and chips using seaweed and tofu.


----------



## mrs quoad (Jul 10, 2017)

bimble said:


> The amount of meat he gets though (my paleo ex) he'd have had to be king of a massive paleo empire. He never has to do days on just roots and berries and the odd songbird.  It's actually really shit, ecologically / socially, that stuff. Totally unsustainable wankery imo, though he does look well on it must admit.


There was an article in the daily mail recently about a slightly stoned family in Alaska. 100 miles from habitation. Shoot one moose / year. Lasts. 

(They did also have 2yrs worth of tinned food. But it's apparently moose every night.)


----------



## mrs quoad (Jul 10, 2017)

Watermelon Man said:


> a good vegan


Is there any other kind?

Edit: apart from that butler, bobs.

*hitler, obvs. 

(And I hear he wasn't even a real vegetarian!)


----------



## bimble (Jul 10, 2017)

mrs quoad said:


> There was an article in the daily mail recently about a slightly stoned family in Alaska. 100 miles from habitation. Shoot one moose / year. Lasts.
> 
> (They did also have 2yrs worth of tinned food. But it's apparently moose every night.)


That sounds totally legit, seeing as they live 100 miles from the nearest ocado delivery van.


----------



## Vintage Paw (Jul 10, 2017)

mrs quoad said:


> There was an article in the daily mail recently about a slightly stoned family in Alaska. 100 miles from habitation. Shoot one moose / year. Lasts.
> 
> (They did also have 2yrs worth of tinned food. But it's apparently moose every night.)



We're going to have to rediscover on a global scale these sustainable forms of survival - and start looking at food as survival again in the first place - because once the real horrors of climate change come later this century we won't know what's fucking hit us.


----------



## NoXion (Jul 10, 2017)

dylanredefined said:


> The whole not eating food I like and having to eat food which was unappetizing. I'm sure someone can make tofu taste good I failed. Can't think of one vegan meal I would choose to eat over a conventional meal.



I actually like tofu. And Quorn. But on their own merits. I think only artificially-grown meat will have what it takes to truly replace real animal flesh.


----------



## billy_bob (Jul 10, 2017)

This thing about 'it doesn't taste good' is pretty feeble though. I stopped eating meat on principle, quite young, and yes, I ate bland, repetitive, if not revolting food for some years (because my family did not share my principle). Then I was 18 more interested in amphetamine than cuisine for a good few years. But eventually I learned to cook and I believe I eat very tasty food - including tofu because I know what to do with it and don't treat it as some sort of meat substitute. If you don't *want* to be a vegetarian enough to stick with it till you work out how to cook (or where to eat) good food, I'm not judging you for it, but don't kid yourself it's because it can't be as good - that's just an excuse.


----------



## wiskey (Jul 10, 2017)

I have had some interesting discussions with vegans recently about where they stand on eating insects. 

I'm not very bothered about being vegan, I like dairy products too much, but I'm probably 80% veggie and rarely cook with meat.


----------



## Yuwipi Woman (Jul 10, 2017)

mrs quoad said:


> There was an article in the daily mail recently about a slightly stoned family in Alaska. 100 miles from habitation. Shoot one moose / year. Lasts.
> 
> (They did also have 2yrs worth of tinned food. But it's apparently moose every night.)









I read that and wondered where they got their weed.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jul 10, 2017)

NoXion said:


> I actually like tofu. And Quorn. But on their own merits. I think only artificially-grown meat will have what it takes to truly replace real animal flesh.


opens up the possibility for u-burgers. Where the meat eats itself!


probably an unsustainable gimmick but it will have niche pop up value


----------



## bimble (Jul 10, 2017)

Vintage Paw said:


> We're going to have to rediscover on a global scale these sustainable forms of survival - and start looking at food as survival again in the first place - because once the real horrors of climate change come later this century we won't know what's fucking hit us.


I'm a massive pessimist about this, I see a future of the continued sale of completely unsustainable food for those who can afford it whilst everyone else slowly incrementally starves.


----------



## Spymaster (Jul 10, 2017)

I couldn't give a toss what others eat so long as they don't bother or judge me. I don't really _get_ veganism as it's always seemed to me to just be vegetarianism on crack, but each to their own.


----------



## mrs quoad (Jul 10, 2017)

Yuwipi Woman said:


> I read that and wondered where they got their weed.


Home grown. Allowed up to 6 plants.


----------



## NoXion (Jul 10, 2017)

DotCommunist said:


> opens up the possibility for u-burgers. Where the meat eats itself!
> 
> 
> probably an unsustainable gimmick but it will have niche pop up value



I'd definitely give it a try, but maybe I'm just morbid.

As for the ownleather jacket, as long as it comes in black...


----------



## billy_bob (Jul 10, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> I couldn't give a toss what others eat so long as they don't bother or judge me. I don't really _get_ veganism as it's always seemed to me to just be vegetarianism on crack, but each to their own.



Yeah, but. Homegrown, free-range crack. Get twatted with a clear conscience.


----------



## mrs quoad (Jul 10, 2017)

Vintage Paw said:


> We're going to have to rediscover on a global scale these sustainable forms of survival - and start looking at food as survival again in the first place - because once the real horrors of climate change come later this century we won't know what's fucking hit us.


This is why we've started growing our own tomatoes 

#winningatlife #futureproof


----------



## Yuwipi Woman (Jul 10, 2017)

mrs quoad said:


> This is why we've started growing our own tomatoes
> 
> #winningatlife #futureproof



I've been learning as many edible plants as I can.  I've started to look at vacant lots as if they were supermarkets.


----------



## Yuwipi Woman (Jul 10, 2017)

mrs quoad said:


> Home grown. Allowed up to 6 plants.



From the impression I got, I'd be surprised if 6 plants would do it.


----------



## NoXion (Jul 10, 2017)

Didn't we learn from that Peak Oil nonsense that used to be popular among apocalypse fans, that the world isn't about to turn into Mad Max any time soon?


----------



## mrs quoad (Jul 10, 2017)

Yuwipi Woman said:


> From the impression I got, I'd be surprised if 6 plants would do it.


No one said they could count.


----------



## Yuwipi Woman (Jul 10, 2017)

NoXion said:


> Didn't we learn from that Peak Oil nonsense that used to be popular among apocalypse fans, that the world isn't about to turn into Mad Max any time soon?



Expanding your skill-set is always a good idea.


----------



## Yuwipi Woman (Jul 10, 2017)

mrs quoad said:


> No one said they could count.


----------



## NoXion (Jul 10, 2017)

Yuwipi Woman said:


> Expanding your skill-set is always a good idea.



Even putting aside the fact that I live in a second-floor flat and can't afford an allotment, I can't even look after a house plant without the poor thing becoming a sad little collection of withered grey leaves. As for hunting, I live in Berkshire. The wild animals that do exist here and which aren't protected, could easily fit onto a cocktail stick.


----------



## Yuwipi Woman (Jul 10, 2017)

NoXion said:


> Even putting aside the fact that I live in a second-floor flat and can't afford an allotment, I can't even look after a house plant without the poor thing becoming a sad little collection of withered grey leaves. As for hunting, I live in Berkshire. The wild animals that do exist here and which aren't protected, could easily fit onto a cocktail stick.



I'm not suggesting you go out and wrest your food from the earth.  To each their own.

(I will say that you'd be shocked (Shocked! I tell you!) at the number of plants that end up in urban landscaping that are edible.  Again not suggesting you do anything of the sort.)


----------



## alan_ (Jul 10, 2017)

NoXion said:


> Even putting aside the fact that I live in a second-floor flat and can't afford an allotment, I can't even look after a house plant without the poor thing becoming a sad little collection of withered grey leaves. As for hunting, I live in Berkshire. The wild animals that do exist here and which aren't protected, could easily fit onto a cocktail stick.


My allotment is 38 pounds a year. They usually have to chase me for the money cos thats like four bags almost


----------



## billy_bob (Jul 10, 2017)

NoXion said:


> I live in Berkshire. The wild animals that do exist here and which aren't protected, could easily fit onto a cocktail stick.



Ah, the famously delicious Berkshire prawns.


----------



## NoXion (Jul 10, 2017)

billy_bob said:


> Ah, the famously delicious Berkshire prawns.


I thought prawns were farmed? Or at least cultivated?


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Jul 10, 2017)

Watermelon Man said:


> fish and chips... a good vegan chef can make an arguably better tasting "phish" and chips using seaweed and tofu.


No they fucking can't ffs


----------



## xenon (Jul 10, 2017)

mrs quoad said:


> This is why we've started growing our own tomatoes
> 
> #winningatlife #futureproof




Smug home growing motherfuckers. 

Now they are annoying.


----------



## mrs quoad (Jul 10, 2017)

xenon said:


> Smug home growing motherfuckers.
> 
> Now they are annoying.


They've all got mould (aka blight), if that helps!


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Jul 10, 2017)

The idea of tofu and seaweed being served as an alternative to fish and chips genuinely makes me angry 

Make all the arguments about veganism you want - talk about animal rights, environmental impact, health, whatever the fuck you like. Stick to arguments that are credible. But by the very definition of what you're doing you are making meals less interesting and restricting tastes available to you, so don't bloody well come out with crap along the lines of "oh but the food is just as good". Because it isn't.

You make fish and chips with a fucking fish. There's a clue in the name. Do it right and even the chips are a vegan no go area.


----------



## xenon (Jul 10, 2017)

mrs quoad said:


> They've all got mould (aka blight), if that helps!




It does, a bit. Thank you.  

I tried to grow herbs, basil, mint, in an aeroponic system. Results were... Disappointing.


----------



## Watermelon Man (Jul 10, 2017)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> The idea of tofu and seaweed being served as an alternative to fish and chips genuinely makes me angry
> 
> Make all the arguments about veganism you want - talk about animal rights, environmental impact, health, whatever the fuck you like. Stick to arguments that are credible. But by the very definition of what you're doing you are making meals less interesting and restricting tastes available to you, so don't bloody well come out with crap along the lines of "oh but the food is just as good". Because it isn't.
> 
> You make fish and chips with a fucking fish. There's a clue in the name. Do it right and even the chips are a vegan no go area.



No. I stick by the vegan "fish"/phish and chips. Just as good. Vegan chorizo? Not as good but good enough. Vegan ice cream is better. Vegan duck pancakes. Not as good. Burgers? Just as good. Curries? Better. Vegan sausage rolls? Better. Steaks and omelettes? Not as good. Vegan bacon. Not as good. Vegan biscuits just as good. Vegan jelly sweets not as good but good enough...


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Jul 10, 2017)

Watermelon Man said:


> No. I stick by the vegan "fish"/phish and chips. Just as good. Vegan chorizo? Not as good but good enough. Vegan ice cream is better. Vegan duck pancakes. Not as good. Burgers? Just as good. Curries? Better. Vegan sausage rolls? Better. Steaks and omelettes? Not as good. Vegan bacon. Not as good. Vegan biscuits just as good. Vegan jelly sweets not as good but good enough...


Your tastebuds are fucked.


----------



## bimble (Jul 10, 2017)

Watermelon Man said:


> No. I stick by the vegan "fish"/phish and chips. Just as good. Vegan chorizo? Not as good but good enough. Vegan ice cream is better. Vegan duck pancakes. Not as good. Burgers? Just as good. Curries? Better. Vegan sausage rolls? Better. Steaks and omelettes? Not as good. Vegan bacon. Not as good. Vegan biscuits just as good. Vegan jelly sweets not as good but good enough...


Vegan shoes not as good.


----------



## pengaleng (Jul 10, 2017)

fake sausage is fuckin shit.


----------



## NoXion (Jul 10, 2017)

bimble said:


> Vegan shoes not as good.



Out of curiosity I did Google search for "vegan boots" and I clicked on the first result. These boots looked good to me. Apparently the uppers are even made of a breathable material which is often a failing. I wonder how much it costs -_Satan's hairy scrotum_, how much?!

I paid no more than £60 for my current pair of leather boots, by the way.


----------



## kebabking (Jul 10, 2017)

I'm a member of the most successful, most dominant species ever to walk the earth - we can literally do anything we want - you'll forgive me, but I'm not really interested in deliberately accepting poor substitutes that taste like shit.

Opposable thumbs, language, big brains - no, I'm not interested in tofu and seaweed....


----------



## Yuwipi Woman (Jul 10, 2017)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> The idea of tofu and seaweed being served as an alternative to fish and chips genuinely makes me angry
> 
> Make all the arguments about veganism you want - talk about animal rights, environmental impact, health, whatever the fuck you like. Stick to arguments that are credible. But by the very definition of what you're doing you are making meals less interesting and restricting tastes available to you, so don't bloody well come out with crap along the lines of "oh but the food is just as good". Because it isn't.
> 
> You make fish and chips with a fucking fish. There's a clue in the name. Do it right and even the chips are a vegan no go area.



I can't say I've found anything to rival fish and chips.  I have found a Southern Fried Cauliflower recipe that rivals fried chicken.  It has a crunchy exterior with lots of spices and a melty center. 

On the other hand, I'm an admitted garden weed eater.


----------



## billy_bob (Jul 10, 2017)

NoXion said:


> I thought prawns were farmed? Or at least cultivated?



Nope. They roam the woodlands of the home counties. Their only natural predator is the stick insect so they're quite safe.


----------



## Calamity1971 (Jul 10, 2017)

billy_bob said:


> Nope. They roam the woodlands of the home counties. Their only natural predator is the stick insect so they're quite safe.


Poor fucking prawns. Seen a programme a while back on this farming process 
Oops here's the link

Eyestalk ablation - Wikipedia


----------



## Yuwipi Woman (Jul 10, 2017)

Calamity1971 said:


> Poor fucking prawns. Seen a programme a while back on this farming process



Not to mention, the workers:

Revealed: Asian slave labour producing prawns for supermarkets in US, UK


----------



## Calamity1971 (Jul 10, 2017)

.


NoXion said:


> Out of curiosity I did Google search for "vegan boots" and I clicked on the first result. These boots looked good to me. Apparently the uppers are even made of a breathable material which is often a failing. I wonder how much it costs -_Satan's hairy scrotum_, how much?!
> 
> I paid no more than £60 for my current pair of leather boots, by the way.


I buy from them, brilliant shoes/boots. No sweaty feet unlike cheap man-made. 7 years out of my last pair. So worth it to me.


----------



## JimW (Jul 10, 2017)

Calamity1971 said:


> .
> 
> I buy from them, brilliant shoes/boots. No sweaty feet unlike cheap man-made. 7 years out of my last pair. So worth it to me.


A fair few Merrells are explicitly vegan now and that's the last pair of walking boots I got, not cheap though.


----------



## Calamity1971 (Jul 10, 2017)

Innov8's too but very pricey. Tk maxx sometimes have 'last seasons' merrells  and solomons in, ya got to hit lucky in there though.


----------



## mrs quoad (Jul 10, 2017)

dessiato said:


> I don't have a problem with factory farmed meat. If I want to eat it, and it tastes OK, why not?


It has only just struck me that, arguably, this means you_ may not have been the ideal candidate for veganism in the first place. _


----------



## Calamity1971 (Jul 11, 2017)

Maybe he was thinking health conscious veggie/vegan rather than conscience veggie/vegan. Lots of the former about.


----------



## mojo pixy (Jul 11, 2017)

Watermelon Man said:


> No. I stick by the vegan "fish"/phish and chips. Just as good. Vegan chorizo? Not as good but good enough. Vegan ice cream is better. Vegan duck pancakes. Not as good. Burgers? Just as good. Curries? Better. Vegan sausage rolls? Better. Steaks and omelettes? Not as good. Vegan bacon. Not as good. Vegan biscuits just as good. Vegan jelly sweets not as good but good enough...



Vegan food pretending to be meat is fucking lame. I love vegan food, I'm not vegan or even vegetarian because I hate imposing arbitrary rules on myself, but my diet is actually 99% vegetarian. Whatever, the point is vegan food is fine just as it is, the fetish with making pretendy meat products or like, vegan cheese - wtf even is that? Cheese is fermented fucking milk, it cannot be vegan. So eat nut paste, sesame lumps, smoked tofu, hummous, whatever that's vegan on its own merits. If you want cheese, eat cheese ffs. Making some old crap from whatever and calling it meat or cheese or egg when it's not, that shit boils my blood f'real


----------



## xenon (Jul 11, 2017)

kebabking said:


> I'm a member of the most successful, most dominant species ever to walk the earth - we can literally do anything we want - you'll forgive me, but I'm not really interested in deliberately accepting poor substitutes that taste like shit.
> 
> Opposable thumbs, language, big brains - no, I'm not interested in tofu and seaweed....




 I like those seaweed snack things. But then I don't eat them as a substitute for fish and chips.

 But then I suppose that was going to go down this daft route.   Plenty of meat eaters, such as myself, will eat tasty vegan well vegetarian at least food.  If I were giving up meat I'd probably not want the fish and chips  substitute.  Just call it something else with the chips. 

 Boring and sensible, sorry.


----------



## Celyn (Jul 11, 2017)

Also, vegans make some quite wonderful poetry. Really, they do.


----------



## mojo pixy (Jul 11, 2017)

_Vegan _is not a good word to rhyme with


----------



## Calamity1971 (Jul 11, 2017)

Celyn said:


> Also, vegans make some quite wonderful poetry. Really, they do.


Benjamin zephiniah.


----------



## pogofish (Jul 11, 2017)

Yuwipi Woman said:


> I read that and wondered where they got their weed.



The reason my cousin and her husband ended-up in Alaska was apparently not entirely unconnected with the authorities view on growing - Seems they didn't take a great interest until you had an acre or two going.


----------



## xenon (Jul 11, 2017)

Celyn said:


> Also, vegans make some quite wonderful poetry. Really, they do.




Oooofffggh    The last thing needed in persuading people to eat less meat or giv up animal derived products, is poetry.  There is never any need for people to bring poetry out. In fact I'd rather talk to an angry vegan than listen to  poetry


 I tried it once or twice.


----------



## mojo pixy (Jul 11, 2017)

that Bryan Adams, he's vegan. Poetry.


----------



## editor (Jul 11, 2017)

kebabking said:


> I'm a member of the most successful, most dominant species ever to walk the earth - we can literally do anything we want - you'll forgive me, but I'm not really interested in deliberately accepting poor substitutes that taste like shit.
> 
> Opposable thumbs, language, big brains - no, I'm not interested in tofu and seaweed....


Or animal exploitation and cruelty, apparently.


----------



## editor (Jul 11, 2017)

mojo pixy said:


> Vegan food pretending to be meat is fucking lame. I love vegan food, I'm not vegan or even vegetarian because I hate imposing arbitrary rules on myself, but my diet is actually 99% vegetarian. Whatever, the point is vegan food is fine just as it is, the fetish with making pretendy meat products or like, vegan cheese - wtf even is that? Cheese is fermented fucking milk, it cannot be vegan. So eat nut paste, sesame lumps, smoked tofu, hummous, whatever that's vegan on its own merits. If you want cheese, eat cheese ffs. Making some old crap from whatever and calling it meat or cheese or egg when it's not, that shit boils my blood f'real


Maybe you should take a closer look at the ingredients of a lot products that are sold as 'meat.'


----------



## mr steev (Jul 11, 2017)

mojo pixy said:


> Making some old crap from whatever and calling it meat or cheese or egg when it's not, that shit boils my blood f'real



Cauliflower 'steaks' ffs. What's that all about? Cauliflower can be bloody lovely when cooked right, but there's no need to pretend it's somthing it quite obviously isn't!


----------



## editor (Jul 11, 2017)

mojo pixy said:


> Vegan food pretending to be meat is fucking lame. I love vegan food, I'm not vegan or even vegetarian because I hate imposing arbitrary rules on myself, but my diet is actually 99% vegetarian. Whatever, the point is vegan food is fine just as it is, the fetish with making pretendy meat products or like, vegan cheese - wtf even is that? Cheese is fermented fucking milk, it cannot be vegan. So eat nut paste, sesame lumps, smoked tofu, hummous, whatever that's vegan on its own merits. If you want cheese, eat cheese ffs. Making some old crap from whatever and calling it meat or cheese or egg when it's not, that shit boils my blood f'real


You don't think using familiar names for alternative products might help children who are being pressurised by cunts like McD to buy into their meaty slop?


----------



## Calamity1971 (Jul 11, 2017)

mr steev said:


> Cauliflower 'steaks' ffs. What's that all about? Cauliflower can be bloody lovely when cooked right, but there's no need to pretend it's somthing it quite obviously isn't!


This looks bloody lovely to me whatever you call it. 
http://www.onegreenplanet.org/vegan-recipe/spicy-lime-cauliflower


----------



## mojo pixy (Jul 11, 2017)

editor said:


> Maybe you should take a closer look at the ingredients of a lot products that are sold as 'meat.'



I do, and I don't eat them. Personally.




editor said:


> You don't think using familiar names for alternative products might help children who are being pressurised by cunts like McD to buy into their meaty slop?



I don't think Mcdonalds should be the basis for any assumptions about food tbh. Kids should get food education, good food should be cheaper and more of us should grow more of our own, gardening, rural science or whatever it could be called should be a real subject in school. But people can do what they want and whatever they can make money from, this is all just opinions.


----------



## mojo pixy (Jul 11, 2017)

mr steev said:


> Cauliflower 'steaks' ffs. What's that all about? Cauliflower can be bloody lovely when cooked right, but there's no need to pretend it's somthing it quite obviously isn't!



like quorn sausages. Nobody knows exactly what's in normal sausages anyway so if they or linda mccartney or cauldron or whoever want to call what they make sausages, it works fine.


----------



## editor (Jul 11, 2017)

mojo pixy said:


> I do, and I don't eat them. Personally.


So how come you're not vexing about those foods rather than getting all  worked up and 'blood boilingly'-angry over the relatively tiny proportion of vegan foods using familiar 'meaty' names?


----------



## mojo pixy (Jul 11, 2017)

I do / have / will but that's not what this thread is about.


----------



## Celyn (Jul 11, 2017)

Hey, this is fun to see "vexing" as a verb.


----------



## Celyn (Jul 11, 2017)

xenon said:


> Oooofffggh	The last thing needed in persuading people to eat less meat or giv up animal derived products, is poetry.  There is never any need for people to bring poetry out. In fact I'd rather talk to an angry vegan than listen to  poetry ...



You might be too happily young to remember about "_The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy" _and the terrible nasty horrible and not very nice at all Vogons. The Vogons liked to write poetry. Very very bad poetry.


----------



## mojo pixy (Jul 11, 2017)

There was also the animal which was happy to be eaten and said so clearly and distinctly, which is a great, great, truly fucked-up scene


----------



## Vintage Paw (Jul 11, 2017)

I'm with the OP on vegan ice cream. It is very tasty.


----------



## Yossarian (Jul 11, 2017)

kebabking said:


> I'm a member of the most successful, most dominant species ever to walk the earth...



You're an ant??


----------



## kebabking (Jul 11, 2017)

Yossarian said:


> You're an ant??



It's not really dominant though is it? 

Prevailant, yes, dominant, no...


----------



## kebabking (Jul 11, 2017)

editor said:


> Or animal exploitation and cruelty, apparently.



Exploitation I have no problems with - it's what comes with being at the top of the food chain...


----------



## UnderAnOpenSky (Jul 11, 2017)

mojo pixy said:


> like quorn sausages. Nobody knows exactly what's in normal sausages anyway so if they or linda mccartney or cauldron or whoever want to call what they make sausages, it works fine.



Indeed. Sausages can be made with many different things. Id rather have veggie sausages then some of the cheap meat ones sometimes. They are also ace as with the use of a microwave and a frying pan they can be from freezer to your plate within mins. Veggie mince can also work, although I probably use to much salty flavourings when I cook it. 

Veggie bacon is a bit weird though.


----------



## Sea Star (Jul 11, 2017)

I was vegan for a few years. Took part in a health survey at the time and scored extremely well in every indicator - and since I was doing it mainly for health reasons this was a good thing. I wasn't just vegan though - I was on a mostly raw food diet, which i loved. I never loved eating more, but it was extremely costly so when i met someone and was in a relationship I had to give it up. Kept going as a vegan for a bit but that got too hard, so veggie, then i let fish creep back in and suddenly i was eating meat again. But I feel that the health benefits from being vegan for a few years have carried me a long way. Even though my family generally all have things like high blood pressure and eczema, varicose veins - loads of low level niggles - I've always been pretty healthy and my blood pressure has always been good. 
I went to vegan society meetings for a couple of years too and they were on the whole really nice people. Most of them were only vegan because they had had chronic health problems or allegies and found that going animal free helped them. That said I have come across a handful of vegan arseholes, most notably on the fringes of the Green Party  - and seemed to have upset a few when i stood for election in 2015 for said GP and refused to support their rather mad Vegan agenda. 

And finally, the man who persuaded me to being a vegan about 20 years ago - recently I found out that he is a serial abuser of women and almost certainly a sociopath. He turned his anger to me a few years ago for not being a veggie any more - lured me to his home and spent the whole time attacking me on a deep psychological level. But I don;t blame all vegans for that.


----------



## billy_bob (Jul 11, 2017)

kebabking said:


> It's not really dominant though is it?
> 
> Prevailant, yes, dominant, no...



Prevailent means widespread, powerful and influential.


----------



## mr steev (Jul 11, 2017)

mojo pixy said:


> like quorn sausages. Nobody knows exactly what's in normal sausages anyway so if they or linda mccartney or cauldron or whoever want to call what they make sausages, it works fine.



I think the etymology of 'sausage' is from salted tbh, rather than meat. It's come to refer to the shape just as much as a meat product. Like Glamorgan  sausages.
But a cauliflower is a vegetable, not a steak, and halloumi is a cheese, not fish.


----------



## editor (Jul 11, 2017)

kebabking said:


> Exploitation I have no problems with - it's what comes with being at the top of the food chain...


Wow. So you really don't give a fuck about animal welfare? Nasty.


----------



## editor (Jul 11, 2017)

AuntiStella said:


> And finally, the man who persuaded me to being a vegan about 20 years ago - recently I found out that he is a serial abuser of women and almost certainly a sociopath. He turned his anger to me a few years ago for not being a veggie any more - lured me to his home and spent the whole time attacking me on a deep psychological level. But I don;t blame all vegans for that.


You shouldn't blame any vegans at all, apart from this one unpleasant character.


----------



## kebabking (Jul 11, 2017)

editor said:


> Wow. So you really don't give a fuck about animal welfare? Nasty.



perhaps you should take a moment from your tofu enhanced rage and read up on the difference between exploitation and cruelty - you were, after all, the one who differentiated them..

for your convenience, exploitation of an animal is eating it, or harnessing its labour, or turning its skin into shoes and handbags. welfare and cruelty is the conditions under which it lives, works and dies.


----------



## EastEnder (Jul 11, 2017)

kebabking said:


> Exploitation I have no problems with - it's what comes with being at the top of the food chain...


We're only at the top of the food chain because we're the most intelligent species, not because we're an apex predator. Which also means we're probably the only species that has conscious awareness of how it treats lesser animals, and possesses the necessary sense of compassion & empathy to be cognisant of causing unnecessary suffering to other creatures. We are the only species that has the capability of farming animals for food whilst simultaneously treating them compassionately. Other species inflict suffering because they know of no other way, whereas we inflict suffering _despite_ knowing of other ways.


----------



## bimble (Jul 11, 2017)

EastEnder said:


> We're only at the top of the food chain because we're the most intelligent species, not because we're an apex predator. Which also means we're probably the only species that has conscious awareness of how it treats lesser animals, and possesses the necessary sense of compassion & empathy to be cognisant of causing unnecessary suffering to other creatures. We are the only species that has the capability of farming animals for food whilst simultaneously treating them compassionately. Other species inflict suffering because they know of no other way, whereas we inflict suffering _despite_ knowing of other ways.


Nope, its just because we have opposable thumbs. Otherwise octopuses would be farming us.


----------



## EastEnder (Jul 11, 2017)

bimble said:


> Nope, its just because we have opposable thumbs. Otherwise octopuses would be farming us.


I'm sure the octopuses would only farm free range humans.

Besides which, some monkeys & apes have opposable thumbs.


----------



## Spymaster (Jul 11, 2017)

kebabking said:


> Exploitation I have no problems with - it's what comes with being at the top of the food chain...


Quite. There are very few humans who don't exploit animals in some way. It's just a question of degree.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jul 11, 2017)

EastEnder said:


> We're only at the top of the food chain because we're the most intelligent species, not because we're an apex predator.



We're THE apex predator because we're the most intelligent species.

Well, some of us are anyway.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jul 11, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> Quite. There are very few humans who don't exploit animals in some way. It's just a question of degree.



Every human does, if you accept that bacteria are animals...


----------



## kebabking (Jul 11, 2017)

EastEnder said:


> We're only at the top of the food chain because we're the most intelligent species, not because we're an apex predator...



apex predators are only apex predators because of whatever tools they have - for us its our brain, our language, and our ability to use tools. take that away and we're just really big, really slow Dodo's - same with a Great White Shark - its an apex predator because of its size, strength, sensory capability, speed and teeth - take one of those way and its just a big Tuna.


----------



## editor (Jul 11, 2017)

kebabking said:


> perhaps you should take a moment from your tofu enhanced rage and read up on the difference between exploitation and cruelty - you were, after all, the one who differentiated them..


Gladly:


> ex·ploi·ta·tion
> The action or fact of treating someone unfairly in order to benefit from their work


PS I rarely, if ever, eat tofu, so you've made yourself look a bit silly there


----------



## editor (Jul 11, 2017)

EastEnder said:


> We're only at the top of the food chain because we're the most intelligent species, not because we're an apex predator. Which also means we're probably the only species that has conscious awareness of how it treats lesser animals, and possesses the necessary sense of compassion & empathy to be cognisant of causing unnecessary suffering to other creatures. We are the only species that has the capability of farming animals for food whilst simultaneously treating them compassionately. Other species inflict suffering because they know of no other way, whereas we inflict suffering _despite_ knowing of other ways.


Spot on.


----------



## Sea Star (Jul 11, 2017)

editor said:


> You shouldn't blame any vegans at all, apart from this one unpleasant character.


I don't. I Think that's what I was saying


----------



## DotCommunist (Jul 11, 2017)

kebabking said:


> apex predators are only apex predators because of whatever tools they have - for us its our brain, our language, and our ability to use tools. take that away and we're just really big, really slow Dodo's - same with a Great White Shark - its an apex predator because of its size, strength, sensory capability, speed and teeth - take one of those way and its just a big Tuna.


theres been a rash of Great Whites, horribly mangled washing up on the shore. Orcas are hunting them. And this is the good bit, they don't eat much flesh, they rip the shark open to eat its fucking liver. Wether fava beans and chianti are involved I don't know

Orcas are deffo clever enough for intelligence to aid their hunting. Team players


----------



## kebabking (Jul 11, 2017)

DotCommunist said:


> theres been a rash of Great Whites, horribly mangled washing up on the shore. Orcas are hunting them. And this is the good bit, they don't eat much flesh, they rip the shark open to eat its fucking liver. Wether fava beans and chianti are involved I don't know
> 
> Orcas are deffo clever enough for intelligence to aid their hunting. Team players



yeah, i've been reading about the Orca/GWS interface - wasn't there a ding-dong off the Californian coast between Orca and a GWS and all the other GWS in the area swam to Hawaii?

of course, theres only one predator with the tools to hunt Orca...


----------



## NoXion (Jul 11, 2017)

DotCommunist said:


> theres been a rash of Great Whites, horribly mangled washing up on the shore. Orcas are hunting them. And this is the good bit, they don't eat much flesh, they rip the shark open to eat its fucking liver. Wether fava beans and chianti are involved I don't know
> 
> Orcas are deffo clever enough for intelligence to aid their hunting. Team players



They also seem to consider seals to be an excellent combination of meal and plaything. Not necessarily in that order.

A bit reminiscent of the dolphins and their rapyness. Cetaceans can be pretty nasty.


----------



## Spymaster (Jul 11, 2017)

EastEnder said:


> We're only at the top of the food chain because we're the most intelligent species, not because we're an apex predator. Which also means we're probably the only species that has conscious awareness of how it treats lesser animals, and possesses the necessary sense of compassion & empathy to be cognisant of causing unnecessary suffering to other creatures. We are the only species that has the capability of farming animals for food whilst simultaneously treating them compassionately. Other species inflict suffering because they know of no other way, whereas we inflict suffering _despite_ knowing of other ways.


Well again, unless you're a staunch vegan who avoids all kinds of other day to day activities, it's very hard not to contribute to animal suffering on some level. You can try to minimise it, as do a lot of meat eaters, but everyone makes a choice as to what level of animal exploitation they are comfortable with. With the exception of anyone who deliberately seeks to cause pain or suffering, nobody is right or wrong.


----------



## Tom A (Jul 11, 2017)

NoXion said:


> They also seem to consider seals to be an excellent combination of meal and plaything. Not necessarily in that order.
> 
> A bit reminiscent of the dolphins and their rapyness. Cetaceans can be pretty nasty.


Technically speaking, orcas _are_ dolphins.

But nevertheless, cetaceans are a lot more viscous than all the lovey-dovey New Age bullshit that was popular in the 90s about them being "enlightened beings" would have you believe.


----------



## 5t3IIa (Jul 11, 2017)

Is it animal cruelty to set up a trawling net for urbanites?


----------



## kebabking (Jul 11, 2017)

editor said:


> Gladly...



i note the definition of exploitation you've given hinges on the word _unfair _- which definition of _unfair _are we going for?


----------



## Spymaster (Jul 11, 2017)

kebabking said:


> i note the definition of exploitation you've given hinges on the word _unfair _- which definition of _unfair _are we going for?


It's a selective definition too. 

Exploit = _the action of making use of and benefiting from resources, _is just as common a usage.


----------



## editor (Jul 11, 2017)

kebabking said:


> i note the definition of exploitation you've given hinges on the word _unfair _- which definition of _unfair _are we going for?


Quit the pendant, and keep on enjoying your maltreated animal food product.


----------



## Spymaster (Jul 11, 2017)

Tom A said:


> But nevertheless, cetaceans are a lot more viscous ...


Slimy fuckers.


----------



## kebabking (Jul 11, 2017)

5t3IIa said:


> Is it animal cruelty to set up a trawling net for urbanites?



i suppose it depends on what the experience of those Urbanites will be once they've been caught...


----------



## editor (Jul 11, 2017)

5t3IIa said:


> Is it animal cruelty to set up a trawling net for urbanites?


The OP lost all claim to be a King Troller after he ended up contributing so much. A real master troller just makes one post and sits back to watch the fun.  As it happens, quite a good discussion has come out of it, so it's been a good thread


----------



## Spymaster (Jul 11, 2017)

kebabking said:


> i suppose it depends on what the experience of those Urbanites will be once they've been caught...


Veal cages.


----------



## kebabking (Jul 11, 2017)

editor said:


> Quit the pendant, and keep on enjoying your maltreated animal food product.



i'm not being a pedant, i'm slightly interested in whether you believe that any use/exploitation/whatever of any animal is by definition cruelty.


----------



## Yuwipi Woman (Jul 11, 2017)

mojo pixy said:


> that Bryan Adams, he's vegan. Poetry.



I thought that was Morrissey.


----------



## 5t3IIa (Jul 11, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> Veal cages.


But do they have a central nervous system?


----------



## editor (Jul 11, 2017)

kebabking said:


> i'm not being a pedant, i'm slightly interested in whether you believe that any use/exploitation/whatever of any animal is by definition cruelty.


I would have thought that the common definition of 'exploitation' makes it clear that it's never a good thing to be on the receiving end of it, and in some cases cruelty of some kind will be involved. HTH. HAND.


----------



## kebabking (Jul 11, 2017)

editor said:


> ... HTH. HAND.



i would not have had you down as being a 14yo girl. every days a school day...


----------



## DotCommunist (Jul 11, 2017)

5t3IIa said:


> But do they have a central nervous system?


i rely on distributed ganglial nodes


----------



## veganomics (Jul 11, 2017)

My prediction is that as humans become more civilised and less savage, the dodgy practices that are currently widespread and that many people take for granted will gradually become unacceptable and slowly fade away. In the transition period there will be hardcore carnists that will desperately cling on to these unethical practices and as is evident in this thread, will resort to all sorts of ridiculous and nonsense arguments in order to try and justify what they do. "I once heard a vegan say something bad and have since concluded that all vegans are terrible and I will continue to eat meat...so there...that'll learn 'em...stupid fuckin' vegans". For those that didn't know this, vegans come in all shapes and sizes, just like people in other groups, which kinda makes the OP question a bit silly. I'm willing to bet that there are more proper dodgy meatheads on the planet than all of the vegans combined.

The various civil rights movements over the last 100+ years have resulted in better attitudes and more evolved and ethical behaviour in the more civilised countries where things like slavery, racicm, sexism, child labour, homophobia are no longer widely accepted as "normal". In order to change the attitudes of the majority, it would often take the actions and words of some brave individuals to wake up the rest of the population, sometimes at the cost of their own lives. There is no doubt that as with all groups of people, there are some amongst that group who are passionate advocates for their cause, and that their passion may occaisionally overstep the mark. Although I haven't met any myself, perhaps there are "angry vegans" that are willing to fight their corner and speak out against the widely accepted "unethical" norms. Good luck to them. Even if there do happen to be a few "bad apples" amongst vegans, I think the underlying principles of veganism are fairly sound, and the carnist counter arguments are for the most part a bit of a joke. (the apex predator "argument" being a prime example).


----------



## editor (Jul 11, 2017)

kebabking said:


> i would not have had you down as being a 14yo girl. every days a school day...


Good grief. If you act like a dull pedant, I'll treat you like one, and now that you're turning into sexist buffoon, I'll leave you to it.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jul 11, 2017)

Always makes me uneasy when I hear equivalences drawn between human civil rights issues and the ethics of eating meat.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jul 11, 2017)

I was just looking for morisey quotes because he's the only high profile angry vegan I can think of and found this:
2009: Morrissey leaves the stage at Coachella, explaining "The smell of burning animals is making me sick. I can smell burning flesh . . . and I hope to God it's human."

which is funny but then theres that time he called chinese people a subspecies cos of their animal treatment, which is not funny. Also saying the Utoya massacre was nothing compared to what happens daily in KFC 

literally never met someone like that, I struggle to believe he exists


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jul 11, 2017)

Years ago I knew one or two vegan policemen. They exist.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jul 11, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Years ago I knew one or two vegan policemen. They exist.



Vegan pigs, whatever next.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jul 11, 2017)

We always end up talking past each other on threads like this ime. The idea that you can be fine with eating meat _and_ also be concerned about animal welfare is one that some struggle to accept.


----------



## ddraig (Jul 11, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Always makes me uneasy when I hear equivalences drawn between human civil rights issues and the ethics of eating meat.


carnist fragility!


----------



## ddraig (Jul 11, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> We always end up talking past each other on threads like this ime. The idea that you can be fine with eating meat _and_ also be concerned about animal welfare is one that some struggle to accept.


but why eat meat at all if that's your concern? it's your choice after all
cue more hysterics and the usual "vegan food costs more" "how dare you tell people what to eat" "you killed 3 gnats when you were out cycling the other day so ner"  blah blah boring shite


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jul 11, 2017)

ddraig said:


> carnist fragility!


Not in the slightest. I don't draw an equivalence between all sentient life forms, and I think it is extremely dodgy to do so.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jul 11, 2017)

ddraig said:


> but why eat meat at all if that's your concern? it's your choice after all
> cue more hysterics and the usual "vegan food costs more" "how dare you tell people what to eat" "you killed 3 gnats when you were out cycling the other day so ner"  blah blah boring shite


See.


----------



## ddraig (Jul 11, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Not in the slightest. I don't draw an equivalence between all sentient life forms, and I think it is extremely dodgy to do so.


think what you like doesn't make it so
not going round with you again on this as you're proper stuck in your ways and "justifications"


----------



## veganomics (Jul 11, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Always makes me uneasy when I hear equivalences drawn between human civil rights issues and the ethics of eating meat.


Well I suppose everybody has different sensitivities and tolerance levels. I think there are many similarities between the mistreatment of humans and the mistreatment of animals. Of course those that don't want to feel any sort of guilt when they bite into their McNuggets, T-Bone or foie gras, would prefer it if the animals that they regularly munch are seen as "lesser" beings and therefore we don't need to be as concerned for their welfare.


littlebabyjesus said:


> The idea that you can be fine with eating meat _and_ also be concerned about animal welfare is one that some struggle to accept.


Killing animals for food when we don't really need to do so doesn't appear to have much to do with welfare imo. Reminds me of that oxymorinic phrase, "humane slaughter".


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jul 11, 2017)

It's the difference between intraspecific competition and interspecific competition. We as a species have made strides to curb the former and see its elimination, or at least strict regulation, as something both morally good and achievable. The latter is simply unachievable. Denying that is a form of self-hatred.


----------



## ddraig (Jul 11, 2017)




----------



## peterkro (Jul 11, 2017)

Tom A said:


> Technically speaking, orcas _are_ dolphins.
> 
> But nevertheless, cetaceans are a lot more viscous than all the lovey-dovey New Age bullshit that was popular in the 90s about them being "enlightened beings" would have you believe.


They are indeed, cetaceans can show a whole range of behaviours some vicious, puts me in mind of that land mammal, what are they called? oh yeah humans.


----------



## mrs quoad (Jul 11, 2017)

veganomics said:


> For those that didn't know this, vegans come in all shapes and sizes, just like people in other groups, which kinda makes the OP question a bit silly.
> 
> ...
> 
> Even if there do happen to be a few "bad apples" amongst vegans, I think the underlying principles of veganism are fairly sound, and the carnist counter arguments are for the most part a bit of a joke.


IME, one of the more prominent issues is the tedium of single-issue vegans who don't really talk about anything but their veganism, vegan principles, veganity, and associated vegan-oriented topics of conversation.

Someone more droller than I might also reflect that, in fairness, well* over 11% of your 9 posts are not about veganism.

*let well = 0.11111111111%


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jul 11, 2017)

Is the term 'carnist' a recent coinage or has it been around a while? It's a new one to me.


----------



## ddraig (Jul 11, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Is the term 'carnist' a recent coinage or has it been around a while? It's a new one to me.


would've been quicker to google than post that
LMGTFY
2001 apparently (save you even clicking the link!)


----------



## mrs quoad (Jul 11, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Is the term 'carnist' a recent coinage or has it been around a while? It's a new one to me.


Wiki: The term _carnism_ was coined by social psychologist Melanie Joy in 2001


----------



## veganomics (Jul 11, 2017)

mrs quoad said:


> IME, one of the more prominent issues is the tedium of single-issue vegans who don't really talk about anything but their veganism, vegan principles, veganity, and associated vegan-oriented topics of conversation.


Is this a genuinely "prominent issue". Really? Surely you jest. 



mrs quoad said:


> Someone more droller than I might also reflect that, in fairness, well* over 11% of your 9 posts are not about veganism.
> 
> *let well = 0.11111111111%


I have no idea what you're on about here. All of my posts so far have been about or related to the topic veganism, so I make it 100%. Of course anybody that is not particularly interested in this subject can choose one of the many other topics on offer.


----------



## mrs quoad (Jul 11, 2017)

Though this appears slightly idiotic:

 

The "opposite" of veganism?! At best, that's a weird take on opposites, and a partial take on veganism.


----------



## mrs quoad (Jul 11, 2017)

veganomics said:


> I have no idea what you're on about here. All of my posts so far have been about or related to the topic veganism, so I make it 100%. Of course anybody that is not particularly interested in this subject can choose one of the many other topics on offer.


You had a weak start:


veganomics said:


> I thought it was very well done, most definitely recommended. Props to Mr Amstell.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jul 11, 2017)

Strikes me as a particularly useless coinage, one that is highly culturally specific and dependent on the invisible assumptions of Western cultures in particular.


----------



## Spymaster (Jul 11, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Is the term 'carnist' a recent coinage or has it been around a while? It's a new one to me.


I had to look it up too. It seems to be a veiled pejorative used by vegans to describe meat eaters.


----------



## ddraig (Jul 11, 2017)

and here he goes! yawn

e2a here THEY go


----------



## veganomics (Jul 11, 2017)

ddraig said:


> and here he goes! yawn
> 
> e2a here THEY go


All very predictable. Meatheads scraping the bottom of the barrel when they have no decent counter arguments.


----------



## ddraig (Jul 11, 2017)

veganomics said:


> All very predictable. Meatheads scraping the bottom of the barrel when they have no decent counter arguments.


indeed, generally the same ones here too


----------



## mrs quoad (Jul 11, 2017)

veganomics said:


> All very predictable. Meatheads scraping the bottom of the barrel when they have no decent counter arguments.


#metagame


----------



## Spymaster (Jul 11, 2017)

veganomics said:


> All very predictable. Meatheads scraping the bottom of the barrel when they have no decent counter arguments.


It's far from a lack of counter arguments. The counter arguments are perfectly straightforward, reasonable, and have been done to death here over the years. It's not like any vegan has ever posted anything so compelling that anyone's thought "hold on ...", and the same vice versa. Thing is, afaia, nobody has _ever_ changed anyone's else's mind on this topic in the 17 years I've been here so it just becomes spiteful usually, with the vegans getting worked-up and abusive. Obviously that can be amusing in itself, but if you're looking for meaningful debate you're unlikely to find it on this bit of the internet.


----------



## ddraig (Jul 11, 2017)

Of course it's the vegans getting abusive, course it is...


----------



## Spymaster (Jul 11, 2017)

ddraig said:


> Of course it's the vegans getting abusive, course it is...


Well generally speaking it's the vegans that start fulminating and personalising. Your mate here for example has already used "meatheads" and this silly "carnists", as have you, whilst nobody on _the other side_ has yet resorted to name calling. Jeff Robinson is the only vegan on these boards who's worth engaging with.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jul 11, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Is the term 'carnist' a recent coinage or has it been around a while? It's a new one to me.



Not used by anyone but the very twattiest of the very twattiest vegans IME. I'm a nearly-vegan vegetarian myself but using loaded language like that, and executing demented leaps of logic like describing omnivorous lifestyles as a 'belief system' is the sort of shit that makes me want to go get a KFC bargain bucket just to teach those silly twats a lesson about how effective that sort of shit is at winning over hearts and minds.


----------



## ddraig (Jul 11, 2017)

More typical responses from both of you
So fucking tedious


----------



## Spymaster (Jul 11, 2017)

QED


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jul 11, 2017)

ddraig said:


> would've been quicker to google than post that
> LMGTFY
> 2001 apparently (save you even clicking the link!)


And now the whole thread can also get to see it without having to look it up. Pays to define new terms.


----------



## ddraig (Jul 11, 2017)

SpookyFrank said:


> Not used by anyone but the very twattiest of the very twattiest vegans IME. I'm a nearly-vegan vegetarian myself but using loaded language like that, and executing demented leaps of logic like describing omnivorous lifestyles as a 'belief system' is the sort of shit that makes me want to go get a KFC bargain bucket just to teach those silly twats a lesson about how effective that sort of shit is at winning over hearts and minds.


you such a child aren't you. 
why do you think it is a term for "winning over hearts and minds"?? it's a descriptive term and a good one imo.
"makes me want to go get a KFC bargain bucket just to teach those silly twats a lesson" just grow up, fill yourself and your boots with unhealthy crap, your funeral


----------



## veganomics (Jul 11, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> It's far from a lack of counter arguments. The counter arguments are perfectly straightforward, reasonable, and have been done to death here over the years.


Perfectly straightforward and reasonable?
Hahahahahaaaaa. That was funny.
I agree that the alleged yawnworthy "counter arguments" have been repeated to death, often by meatheads seemingly unaware that practically every single one of their "gotcha" argument has been thoroughly debunked many times over.

Top of the food chain.
Other animals do it so it's ok for us to do it.
B12
BACON!
Canine teeth.
Humans have earned the right to kill and eat other animals cos we're smarter than them
etc etc...
Heard them all before, nothing new to see here.



Spymaster said:


> It's not like any vegan has ever posted anything so compelling that anyone's thought "hold on ...", and the same vice versa. Thing is, afaia, nobody has _ever_ changed anyone's else's mind on this topic in the 17 years I've been here so it just becomes spiteful usually, with the vegans getting worked-up and abusive.


Those mean and horrible vegans eh? lol. Well as I have not read every post in this forum and I haven't had the pleasure of 17 years of urban75 residency, I'm not able to verify your claim that no minds have been changed here, however out in the real world, minds most definitely have been changed. Even though meatheadism is still overwhelmingly dominant, vegheads are gaining traction, and, imo, this might be the real reason behind the anti-vegan backlash and the increasingly desperate and feeble "counter arguments".



Spymaster said:


> Well generally speaking it's the vegans that start fulminating and personalising. Your mate here for example has already used "meatheads" and this silly "carnists", as have you, whilst nobody on _the other side_ has yet resorted to name calling.


Wow, talk about heavily one sided bias. Are you really going to cite "meatheads" and "carnists" as name calling? lol. Things really are getting desperate, I suppose this is the sort of irrelevance that is needed as a distraction from the woeful "lack of proper argument".  I'm quite happy with my use of the terms meatheads and carnist and see them as cuddly terms of endearment and accurate descriptions of our misguided meat loving friends, nothing personal or name calling about it. I didn't realise you meatheads were so sensitive.


----------



## Spymaster (Jul 11, 2017)

ddraig said:


> you such a child aren't you.
> why do you think it is a term for "winning over hearts and minds"?? it's a descriptive term and a good one imo.
> "makes me want to go get a KFC bargain bucket just to teach those silly twats a lesson" just grow up, fill yourself and your boots with unhealthy crap, your funeral


So you've been stewing over that for over an hour since you posted at #228? 

His point wasn't that it's a term for winning over hearts and minds. Quite the opposite. It's that making up silly terms and framing arguments in such a way is counterproductive if you are genuinely seeking to move people away from meat eating.


----------



## ddraig (Jul 11, 2017)

they've got your number spy!!


----------



## ddraig (Jul 11, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> So you've been stewing over that for over an hour since you posted at #228?
> 
> His point wasn't that it's a term for winning over hearts and minds. Quite the opposite. It's that making up silly terms and framing arguments in such a way is counterproductive if you are genuinely seeking to move people away from meat eating.


no i was doing something else funnily enough
just because you don't like it don't make it a silly term
did you watch Carnage?


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jul 11, 2017)

veganomics said:


> Are you really going to cite "meatheads" and "carnists" as name calling?



It pretty clearly is name calling. But it's name calling with made up names that aren't even effective at pissing people off. If I call you a grunflub, you'd probably be OK with that because it doesn't actually mean fuck all. Same applies with 'carnist'.


----------



## Spymaster (Jul 11, 2017)

veganomics said:


> Top of the food chain.
> 
> Other animals do it so it's ok for us to do it.
> B12
> ...


 None of these are counter arguments to veganism.


----------



## ddraig (Jul 11, 2017)

SpookyFrank said:


> It pretty clearly is name calling. But it's name calling with made up names that aren't even effective at pissing people off. If I call you a grunflub, you'd probably be OK with that because it doesn't actually mean fuck all. Same applies with 'carnist'.


why you so annoyed by it then? ffs


----------



## Spymaster (Jul 11, 2017)

Eh? Who's annoyed? 

People are just taking the piss.


----------



## ddraig (Jul 11, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> Eh? Who's annoyed?
> 
> People are just taking the piss.


Frank seemed pretty annoyed and wanting to teach people a lesson, but then the term meant nothing a few posts later

why are people just taking the piss? serious question


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jul 11, 2017)

ddraig said:


> why do you think it is a term for "winning over hearts and minds"??



I don't. I'm assuming that most vegans would like to see more people come around to their way of thinking, and I'm suggesting that inventing a word for 'them' to explicitly separate them from the righteous vegan 'us' is the opposite of seeking common ground.

And eating meat is neither a belief system nor a purely personal choice. It has cultural and psychological factors to it. It is not something that can or should be summed up and then dismissed with a single word, not if you ever plan on communicating with any 'carnists' anyway.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jul 11, 2017)

ddraig said:


> Frank seemed pretty annoyed and wanting to teach people a lesson, but then the term meant nothing a few posts later
> 
> n



There's what the people who use it think it means (bloodthirsty monster) and then what it means to an ordinary person (nothing).


----------



## Spymaster (Jul 11, 2017)

ddraig said:


> Frank seemed pretty annoyed and wanting to teach people a lesson, but then the term meant nothing a few posts later


He didn't seem annoyed to me. He just articulated why people would find the term ridiculous and why it's use is counterproductive.


> why are people just taking the piss? serious question


Ok, let's figure it out. 

Why did you use the term "carnist" instead of "meat-eater" or "carnivore" ?


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jul 11, 2017)

ddraig said:


> why you so annoyed by it then? ffs



I just find it sad to see people trying do something and getting it totally arse backwards.


----------



## Lorca (Jul 11, 2017)

mrs quoad said: ↑
The number of people saying they know no militant vegans leaves me wondering if our social circle is, perhaps, an artefact of the trendy hipster fringes of academia, baby yoga, NCT, Steiner toddler mornings, organic bakeries, and the militant fringe of assorted breastfeeding tubthumper collectives in which we commingle.

Are there really none in Kettering, DotCommunist ?

there must be one or two surely, but not n my orbit.

Theres some serious Hunt Sabs round there, or used tobe anyway - the northants group were the business, as it were.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jul 11, 2017)

Lorca said:


> Theres some serious Hunt Sabs round there, or used tobe anyway - the northants group were the business, as it were.


I know a fella in northampton whose spoken about drinking with sabs and that- I don't think they've gone anywhere. I believe he knows them through punk stuff, but he's not a close friend, more a rando I see in shared circles. Safe as houses mind.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jul 11, 2017)

Incidentally there are are no human 'carnivores'. We are omnivores. And we are omnivores as a species. no matter what you personally decide to eat you're still an omnivore. A cat is still a carnivore even if you only feed it vegan cat food. It's a point of biology, not choice or circumstance.

This is not a defence of meat eating, which is no longer necessary for our survival, only a clarification of a techical point that often gets mauled to death in these discussions.


----------



## Yossarian (Jul 11, 2017)

SpookyFrank said:


> Incidentally there are are no human 'carnivores'. We are omnivores. And we are omnivores as a species. no matter what you personally decide to eat you're still an omnivore. A cat is still a carnivore even if you only feed it vegan cat food. It's a point of biology, not choice or circumstance.
> 
> This is not a defence of meat eating, which is no longer necessary for our survival, only a clarification of a techical point that often gets mauled to death in these discussions.



If we're all technically omnivores, doesn't that make the term 'carnist' useful after all?


----------



## campanula (Jul 11, 2017)

My farmer neighbour keeps beef cows, having been dairy farmers for generations (no money in it) but is also a vegetarian (I don't think he is vegan). His cows are truly gorgeous (I actually bought a book - 'know your cow' so I could recognise the breeding types). I would certainly eat them - they graze on Postwick marsh all summer and get fat in the barns eating hay, sugar beet and barley all winter. His 'girls' go off to some London butchers who charge top price for organic meat...but the swine won't tell me who so a juicy steak is not likely. Personally, I am not very picky - either what I eat or what others choose...and have been both vegetarian and vegan when circumstances dictated. Have no problems catching, skinning and preparing my own food...and even grow a bit. I think being flexible and adaptable is more useful than being dogmatic. If land-use was reformed, it would not bother me to miss out on meat - it has been years since a battery chicken or egg went into my mouth...or processed food such as bacon and sausages...but if I was starving, I expect I would manage it. Food is terribly emotional (and political) but for me, it is a means to an end (survival) and I am OK with whatever is around/I can afford. Veganism does appear to be a choice which is not easily affordable if one is going to keep on eating a 'traditional' diet with meat and dairy since paying 3X for some rubbery vegan cheese or weird meat alternates is not doable on a low wage or benefits.
eta - there is a lot of shooting in Norfolk - I came across a fat wood-pigeon still warm...and had no problem whacking a breast off and sticking it on the barbecue. While arguing who got the last sliver, the collie nipped in and stole it. Roadkill is another possibility (I eye the muntjac with some resentment - the tree destroying bastards)...although nesting buzzards appear to have stripped my wood of squirrel and conies. Probably wouldn't barbecue a vole though.


----------



## ddraig (Jul 11, 2017)

Vegetarian beef farmer gives herd to animal sanctuary - BBC News

A vegetarian farmer has given his herd of cows to an animal sanctuary to protect them from the slaughterhouse.

Jay Wilde, 59, who farms in Ashbourne, Derbyshire, sent 63 cattle to a Norfolk rescue centre as he could no longer bear to send them to be killed.

Mr Wilde, a vegetarian for 25 years, grew up herding cows and took over the family farm when his father died.

"Cows have good memories and a range of emotions. They form relationships. I've even seen them cry," he said.

"It was very difficult to do your best to look after them and then send them to the slaughterhouse for what must be a terrifying death."

The Hillside Animal Sanctuary near Frettenham said 30 of the cows are pregnant and all the animals "would live out their lives essentially as pets".

Founder, Wendy Valentine, said Mr Wilde is not the first farmer to have donated his herd.

She recalls a couple who "could not bear to continue dairy farming and kept their cows as pets with the help of the sanctuary".


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jul 11, 2017)

Yossarian said:


> If we're all technically omnivores, doesn't that make the term 'carnist' useful after all?



Ooh, now that I think about it...no. No it doesn't. You can see from the definition quoted above that it's not a neutral, descriptive term but one loaded with implications and derision.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jul 11, 2017)

Lorca said:


> mrs quoad said: ↑
> The number of people saying they know no militant vegans leaves me wondering if our social circle is, perhaps, an artefact of the trendy hipster fringes of academia, baby yoga, NCT, Steiner toddler mornings, organic bakeries, and the militant fringe of assorted breastfeeding tubthumper collectives in which we commingle.
> 
> Are there really none in Kettering, DotCommunist ?
> ...



Breastfeeding not really what I'd call a fringe pursuit. It's literally what breasts are for.


----------



## Yossarian (Jul 11, 2017)

What word would you suggest vegans use to refer to people who believe eating meat is natural and normal?


----------



## Calamity1971 (Jul 11, 2017)

He was on country file ddraig. The presenter,  also a farmer couldn't get his head round why he didn't send them to slaughter for 50 grand to help his new organic/ vegan cookery school business


----------



## Calamity1971 (Jul 11, 2017)

SpookyFrank said:


> Breastfeeding not really what I'd call a fringe pursuit. It's literally what breasts are for.


As they are on a cow, but we take the calf away and claim it as ours.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jul 11, 2017)

ddraig said:


> Vegetarian beef farmer gives herd to animal sanctuary - BBC News
> 
> A vegetarian farmer has given his herd of cows to an animal sanctuary to protect them from the slaughterhouse.
> 
> ...



Most farmers genuinely care about their animals. It's a strange bit of cognitive dissonance to then send them off to slaughter after years of devotion and care, but not a million miles away from lovingly raising your kids and then feeding them face-first into the authoritarian school system and then the capitalist wage economy. At least cows die quickly, and with their souls intact.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jul 11, 2017)

Yossarian said:


> What word would you suggest vegans use to refer to people who believe eating meat is natural and normal?



People have names, so using those is always an option.

I refuse to believe that the greatest obstacle to the moral and spiritual development of humankind is a shortage of categories.


----------



## Tom A (Jul 11, 2017)

As much as the whiny preaching of the veganism-as-virtue signalling brigade annoys me online, I must admit I have never really encountered such people in real life, other than the occasional stall I see in town, plus the "Go Vegan World" bus advertisement campaigns of a few months back.


----------



## Sue (Jul 11, 2017)

Yossarian said:


> What word would you suggest vegans use to refer to people who believe eating meat is natural and normal?


I'm veggie but have two vegan sisters. We tend to use carnivores, veggies and vegans. 

Maybe omnivores would be more correct than carnivores but we've been using carnivores in this context for a v long time so...


----------



## ddraig (Jul 11, 2017)

SpookyFrank said:


> Most farmers genuinely care about their animals. It's a strange bit of cognitive dissonance to then send them off to slaughter after years of devotion and care, but not a million miles away from lovingly raising your kids and then feeding them face-first into the authoritarian school system and then the capitalist wage economy. At least cows die quickly, and with their souls intact.


what a fucking pathetic fucking post
for fucks sake man


----------



## Yossarian (Jul 11, 2017)

SpookyFrank said:


> People have names, so using those is always an option.



People also have words that they use to describe things, which saves a little time when you want to refer to groups of them. 

It's all probably a little nit-picky, but a thread about veganism isn't a bad place for wondering what the antonym to veganism is.


----------



## Spymaster (Jul 11, 2017)

Yossarian said:


> If we're all technically omnivores, doesn't that make the term 'carnist' useful after all?


No. Why would it?


----------



## mrs quoad (Jul 11, 2017)

SpookyFrank said:


> Breastfeeding not really what I'd call a fringe pursuit. It's literally what breasts are for.


I didn't refer to breastfeeding as a fringe pursuit


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jul 11, 2017)

Tom A said:


> As much as the whiny preaching of the veganism-as-virtue signalling brigade annoys me online, I must admit I have never really encountered such people in real life, other than the occasional stall I see in town, plus the "Go Vegan World" bus advertisement campaigns of a few months back.



The circles I move in probably expose me to far more unreasonable vegans than the average punter, so I may be a bit biased as to how many militant vegans there are. Mrs Frank is a vegan, without being a dick about it. Most vegans are able to pull off the same trick with minimal effort. But the troublesome evangelists do exist and IME ordinary vegans get as sick of them as I do. 

There are lots of militant vegans with very dodgy human-based politics, and lots more who will tolerate endless sexism, racism, homophobia and (insert shit behaviour here) from people as long as they turn up to meetings and help out on the stall of a Saturday afternoon.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jul 11, 2017)

mrs quoad said:


> I didn't refer to breastfeeding as a fringe pursuit



Someone, not you, lumped it in with Steiner schools (founded by a 'scientific racist' incidentally) and other Modern Parents type nonsense.


----------



## mrs quoad (Jul 11, 2017)

SpookyFrank said:


> Someone, not you, lumped it in with Steiner schools (founded by a 'scientific racist' incidentally) and other Modern Parents type nonsense.


No, pretty sure that was me 

It was a list of our social circles, including the militant fringe of assorted breastfeeding tubthumper groups. The militant fringe is definitely both quite militant, and quite fringe. It is not, however, representative of all breastfeeders. If it was, it wouldn't be a fringe.


----------



## Tom A (Jul 11, 2017)

SpookyFrank said:


> The circles I move in probably expose me to far more unreasonable vegans than the average punter, so I may be a bit biased as to how many militant vegans there are.


Whereas I tend to proactively avoid circles that would expose me to "unreasonable vegans" 



> Mrs Frank is a vegan, without being a dick about it. Most vegans are able to pull off the same trick with minimal effort. But the troublesome evangelists do exist and IME ordinary vegans get as sick of them as I do.


That's also my experience among my vegan friends.



> There are lots of militant vegans with very dodgy human-based politics, and lots more who will tolerate endless sexism, racism, homophobia and (insert shit behaviour here) from people as long as they turn up to meetings and help out on the stall of a Saturday afternoon.


Disablism is a particularly sore issue, particularly when it comes to saying "there's no such thing as a fat vegan" (one can still have an unhealthy diet without any animal products involved, and excessive weight can be caused by both physical and mental health issues), and refusal to acknowledge that food intolerances can make veganism difficult for some. Then there's the elitism that ignores the socioeconomic factors behind a person's dietary choices.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jul 11, 2017)

Militant breastfeeders eh? Struggling to think how that would work.


----------



## ddraig (Jul 11, 2017)

Tom A said:


> Whereas I tend to proactively avoid circles that would expose me to "unreasonable vegans"
> 
> 
> That's also my experience among my vegan friends.
> ...


 What Fat Vegans Eat


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jul 11, 2017)

Tom A said:


> Then there's the elitism that ignores the socioeconomic factors behind a person's dietary choices.



Anyone who was raised veggie/vegan and goes on about how easy it is to turn veggie/vegan can fucking do one. For a very large number of people the association of 'meat' with 'food' and consequently with home, family, safety and other powerful psychological forces begins before self-awareness or conscious decision making have developed. If you've never tried to tackle that level of conditioning, don't tell someone else they can do it as easy as falling off a log.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jul 11, 2017)

ddraig said:


> What Fat Vegans Eat



There was a schism in the 'what fat vegans eat' group a couple of years ago, IIRC it started over real pringles vs Lidl own brand pringles. So there are at least enough fat vegans for them to bitterly fall out with each other.


----------



## Tom A (Jul 11, 2017)

SpookyFrank said:


> There was a schism in the 'what fat vegans eat' group a couple of years ago, IIRC it started over real pringles vs Lidl own brand pringles. So there are at least enough fat vegans for them to bitterly fall out with each other.


That's Tumblr for you.


----------



## Supine (Jul 11, 2017)

Yossarian said:


> What word would you suggest vegans use to refer to people who believe eating meat is natural and normal?



Poo poo heads


----------



## veganomics (Jul 11, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> None of these are counter arguments to veganism.


Indeed, but meatists invariably wheel at least one of those "useless" arguments out whenever they feel threatened by those nasty horrible mean old vegans.

If you do have any genuinely decent arguments in favour of carnism, then I'd be happy to hear some good ones and not the worn out recycled rubbish that is usually presented.


----------



## fishfinger (Jul 11, 2017)

Who's going to defend "carnism"? It's a straw-man created by unimaginative people.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jul 11, 2017)

ddraig said:


> what a fucking pathetic fucking post
> for fucks sake man



Well I'm convinced.


----------



## veganomics (Jul 11, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> It's that making up silly terms and framing arguments in such a way is counterproductive if you are genuinely seeking to move people away from meat eating.


This appears to be the substitute for a decent argument, nit picking over the terms used to describe people who are ok with killing and eating animals. Really?
This appears to be a rearguard desperate defence of a dodgy practice. I'm fine with the word carnism, don't see anything wrong with it at all, and it's not any worse than the word veganism.  A lot of meatheads are quite happy to join in and/or condone any negative comments or terms used to describe people who chose not to eat meat, but all of a sudden cry foul at the use of a fairly innocuous word like "carnist". I suppose if you really do find such a word offensive then avoid interacting with those nasty people who use that word, and stay away from threads where they have a presence. 

...and there was me believing that you carrion crunchers were a tough breed. lol


----------



## ddraig (Jul 11, 2017)

fishfinger said:


> Who's going to defend "carnism"? It's a straw-man created by unimaginative people.


meat eater = carnivore (alson now carnist)
eating of meat = carnism

what's the big issue with that? 
obviously people who eat meat don't seem to like it, tough


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jul 11, 2017)

veganomics said:


> If you do have any genuinely decent arguments in favour of carnism, then I'd be happy to hear some good ones and not the worn out recycled rubbish that is usually presented.



Why would anyone argue in favour of a thing that doesn't exist?

Meat consumption by humans exists, meat-eating-as-ideology does not.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jul 11, 2017)

ddraig said:


> meat eater = carnivore (alson now carnist)
> eating of meat = carnism
> 
> what's the big issue with that?
> obviously people who eat meat don't seem to like it, tough



I don't eat meat and I don't like it, nor do I like the idea of a particular clique inventing a word then demanding that other people respond to it.


----------



## bimble (Jul 11, 2017)

carrion cruncher is much better than carnist, i reckon. 
Is there a word along similar lines that vegans use for dairy-eating vegetarians ?


----------



## gentlegreen (Jul 11, 2017)

SpookyFrank said:


> Meat consumption by humans exists, meat-eating-as-ideology does not.



https://www.westonaprice.org/


----------



## fishfinger (Jul 11, 2017)

ddraig said:


> meat eater = carnivore (alson now carnist)
> eating of meat = carnism
> 
> what's the big issue with that?
> obviously people who eat meat don't seem to like it, tough


People who only eat vegetables call _themselves_ vegetarians or vegans. Most of the rest of us are omnivores. Only someone with a dishonest agenda would label people who are not vegetarian/vegan as "carnists".


----------



## gentlegreen (Jul 11, 2017)

bimble said:


> carrion cruncher is much better than carnist, i reckon.
> Is there a word along similar lines that vegans use for dairy-eating vegetarians ?


teet pus-slurper ?


----------



## Spymaster (Jul 11, 2017)

veganomics said:


> I suppose if you really do find such a word offensive ...


It's not offensive. It's just silly.


----------



## gentlegreen (Jul 11, 2017)

Anyway, seeing as I'm almost certainly about to settle for a sea-gan diet, I guess I'm deserving of a nickname too ...


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jul 11, 2017)

SpookyFrank said:


> Why would anyone argue in favour of a thing that doesn't exist?
> 
> Meat consumption by humans exists, meat-eating-as-ideology does not.


Playing silly buggers with semantics, eh? Meat eating by humans exists. Some meat eating humans are happy to defend their meat eating practices and don't like it when the many negative aspects of their behaviour are highlighted. Cognitive dissonance much?


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jul 11, 2017)

veganomics said:


> This appears to be the substitute for a decent argument, nit picking over the terms used to describe people who are ok with killing and eating animals. Really?
> This appears to be a rearguard desperate defence of a dodgy practice. I'm fine with the word carnism, don't see anything wrong with it at all, and it's not any worse than the word veganism.  A lot of meatheads are quite happy to join in and/or condone any negative comments or terms used to describe people who chose not to eat meat, but all of a sudden cry foul at the use of a fairly innocuous word like "carnist". I suppose if you really do find such a word offensive then avoid interacting with those nasty people who use that word, and stay away from threads where they have a presence.
> 
> ...and there was me believing that you carrion crunchers were a tough breed. lol



It's not inoccuous, it's loaded. It was invented to serve an agenda. This is an abuse of language, which I would be more upset about if it weren't for the zero percent chance of the word catching on amongst people who don't already agree with you.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jul 11, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> It's not offensive. It's just silly.


If you don't like it then you don't need to use it, simple. I don't think it's any more or less silly than any other word used to describe meat eating humans. Arguing over terms like this is however a useful distraction away from the things that actually matter, which appears to be part of the gameplan for meatheads.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jul 11, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Meat eating by humans exists. Some meat eating humans are happy to defend their meat eating practices and don't like it when the many negative aspects of their behaviour are highlighted.



All of this is true. And look at how easily you were able to say it without inventing words.

The absence of ideology is not, in itself, an ideology. If there were ideological meat-eaters who considered meat eating to be a moral imperative, those people would be a tiny fringe of a tiny fringe of a group that includes a large chunk of humanity. If you want a word for ideolgical meat eaters fair enough, but you can't then conflate it with 'everyone who eats meat'. To do so is to knowingly use bad reasoning and then cover it up with linguistic fuckery.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jul 11, 2017)

SpookyFrank said:


> It's not inoccuous, it's loaded. It was invented to serve an agenda. This is an abuse of language, which I would be more upset about if it weren't for the zero percent chance of the word catching on amongst people who don't already agree with you.


Oh dear.  Well as I said to SpyMaster just now, if you don't like the word it's easy to avoid. I'm not sure why meatheads appear to be freaking out over it's use. It accurately descriptive of people who like and choose to eat meat. I don't really understand what the objection to it is to be honest.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jul 11, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> If you don't like it then you don't need to use it, simple. I don't think it's any more or less silly than any other word used to describe meat eating humans. Arguing over terms like this is however a useful distraction away from the things that actually matter, which appears to be part of the gameplan for meatheads.



There isn't a gameplan. People just eat what they want to eat. If you have a gameplan to change people's desires, it is going to require communication rather than adversarial nonsense.

You can't have a war if the other side isn't a side, doesn't know it's fighting and doesn't care what you do.


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Jul 11, 2017)

ddraig said:


> meat eater = carnivore (alson now carnist)
> eating of meat = carnism
> 
> what's the big issue with that?
> obviously people who eat meat don't seem to like it, tough


Can we just call meat eaters "normal" instead?


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Jul 11, 2017)

veganomics said:


> If you do have any genuinely decent arguments in favour of carnism, then I'd be happy to hear some good ones and not the worn out recycled rubbish that is usually presented.


My personal arguments for eating meat:

1 - I enjoy it
2 - That's it


----------



## ddraig (Jul 11, 2017)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> Can we just call meat eaters "normal" instead?


why? would it make you more comfortable, awww
carnist fragility in action on this page!


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jul 11, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> I don't really understand what the objection to it is to be honest.



I've explained in some detail my objection to it.

Can you explain why you'd use 'carnist' which will not be widely understood and which is used inconsistently and ambiguously even on this one thread, as opposed to the factual, non-loaded and unambiguous 'meat eater' ?


----------



## ddraig (Jul 11, 2017)

why not? all words start somewhere
it's a good descriptor and will become more wildly used


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Jul 11, 2017)

ddraig said:


> why? would it make you more comfortable


No, I simply enjoy accuracy in my world.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jul 11, 2017)

ddraig said:


> it's a good descriptor and will become more wildly used



It's not and it won't.


----------



## ddraig (Jul 11, 2017)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> No, I simply enjoy accuracy in my world.


you like telling people what's what and to be right and not be questioned


----------



## ddraig (Jul 11, 2017)

SpookyFrank said:


> It's not and it won't.


tis and yes it will

want to go round again?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 11, 2017)

SpookyFrank said:


> I've explained in some detail my objection to it.
> 
> Can you explain why you'd use 'carnist' which will not be widely understood and which is used inconsistently and ambiguously even on this one thread, as opposed to the factual, non-loaded and unambiguous 'meat eater' ?


i think it will be confused with carnies, people who work for funfairs


----------



## Septimus Rufiji (Jul 11, 2017)

Carnies. Circus folk. Nomads. Smell like cabbage. Small hands.


----------



## bimble (Jul 11, 2017)

i just read that worldwide meat production has tripled over the last four decades. Thats massive, a huge increase in carrion crunching. Crap use of land and resources but it does seem to be the thing that people all over the world tend to choose to do as soon as they can afford it, eat meat.


----------



## veganomics (Jul 11, 2017)

bimble said:


> carrion cruncher is much better than carnist, i reckon.


There seems to be a bit too much emphasis on the terms used tbh which rather conveniently diverts attention away from the issue at hand. (I like them both, but meatheads be fumin')



bimble said:


> Is there a word along similar lines that vegans use for dairy-eating vegetarians ?


I could make a new one up if you like. Veal crate facilitators? Male calf terminators? Maybe you could come up with better ones.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jul 11, 2017)

ddraig said:


> tis and yes it will
> 
> want to go round again?



No but I'll put ten quid on it. I don't even know any vegans who say 'carnist' in the real world, or amywhere else come to think of it.


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Jul 11, 2017)

ddraig said:


> you like telling people what's what and to be right and not be questioned


On many issues, yes. On this I simply don't want preaching twats telling me what I can and can't eat. 

You want to live on veg? Fine by me. But I will continue to enjoy meat as long as I'm on this earth.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 11, 2017)

veganomics said:


> There seems to be a bit too much emphasis on the terms used tbh which rather conveniently diverts attention away from the issue at hand. (I like them both, but meatheads be fumin')
> 
> I could make a new one up if you like. Veal crate facilitators? Male calf terminators? Maybe you could come up with better ones.


wouldn't be hard if that's the competition


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jul 11, 2017)

veganomics said:


> I could make a new one up if you like. Veal crate facilitators? Male calf terminators? Maybe you could come up with better ones.



Cow rapists? I find people always come round to my way of thinking once I've called them a rapist a few times.

At some point you have to decide which is more important to you, animal welfare or the moral high ground. If the former, you might need to look into moderating your language. Deliberately raising people's heckles, that's not about fewer animals being harmed. It's about you.

E2a: And your slurs aren't even catchy ffs. If you want people to take the bait and get into a row with you, I suggest you invest in some rudimentary wit.


----------



## ddraig (Jul 11, 2017)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> On many issues, yes. On this I simply don't want preaching twats telling me what I can and can't eat.
> 
> You want to live on veg? Fine by me. But I will continue to enjoy meat as long as I'm on this earth.


who here has told you what to eat?


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jul 11, 2017)

SpookyFrank said:


> There isn't a gameplan. People just eat what they want to eat. If you have a gameplan to change people's desires, it is going to require communication rather than adversarial nonsense.
> 
> You can't have a war if the other side isn't a side, doesn't know it's fighting and doesn't care what you do.


I respectfully disagree. There are consequences associated with people choice of food. If some people just wanted to eat human flesh because it tasted really good, most modern civilised people would agree that would definitely NOT be ok, although it might have been acceptable a few hundred years ago in certain parts of the world. I think much of the objections that meateaters have to certain words is that those words lift the veil and make more people aware of the consequences of their dietary practices. 

I personally don't care for trying to convert anybody to my way of thinking. I'll present my side of the argument, and my choice of words (which may or may not include the word carnist), and others are free to take or leave whatever like or don't like. It does not have to be adversarial at all.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jul 11, 2017)

Septimus Rufiji said:


> Carnies. Circus folk. Nomads. Smell like cabbage. Small hands.



Pretty sure this is not OK.


----------



## pug (Jul 11, 2017)

SpookyFrank said:


> Pretty sure this is not OK.



Urban Dictionary: veganazi


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Jul 11, 2017)

ddraig said:


> who here has told you what to eat?


Over the years on here? Plenty of people, almost certainly including you at some point.

Out in the real world I've had stand up rows with dickheads over my meat eating, particularly in my road protesting days, but then idiot hippies and that scene kinda went hand in hand


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jul 11, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> It does not have to be adversarial at all.



On this we agree at least. And yeah, people will react defensively to certain complex emotive issues. As a reformed meat-eater I can speak to both sides of that. This is why anyone who genuinely cares about changing people's  behaviour needs to be very careful with their language and, more importantly, their tone. I get that it's not always easy to do that when you feel passionately about something, but it's how human brains work. 

If people see understanding, they will make an effort to understand. If they see confrontation, they'll give it back with extra mustard. And maybe it's fair to piss people off, but will it stop any animals getting eaten?


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Jul 11, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> I respectfully disagree. There are consequences associated with people choice of food. If some people just wanted to eat human flesh because it tasted really good, most modern civilised people would agree that would definitely NOT be ok


See, the argument against eating human flesh is easy - it involves eating people.


----------



## Septimus Rufiji (Jul 11, 2017)

SpookyFrank said:


> Pretty sure this is not OK.


----------



## Spymaster (Jul 11, 2017)

SpookyFrank said:


> Cow rapists? I find people always come round to my way of thinking once I've called them a rapist a few times.
> 
> At some point you have to decide which is more important to you, animal welfare or the moral high ground. If the former, you might need to look into moderating your language. Deliberately raising people's heckles, that's not about fewer animals being harmed. It's about you.
> 
> E2a: And your slurs aren't even catchy ffs. If you want people to take the bait and get into a row with you, I suggest you invest in some rudimentary wit.


Nobody's biting because nobody can be arsed with it any more. The moral argument can't be won by either side, nothing new or groundbreaking can be said, and it just goes round in boring old circles. 

More fun just to take the piss out of each other.


----------



## ddraig (Jul 11, 2017)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> Over the years on here? Plenty of people, almost certainly including you at some point.
> 
> Out in the real world I've had stand up rows with dickheads over my meat eating, particularly in my road protesting days, but then idiot hippies and that scene kinda went hand in hand


link us up then, otherwise not true
e2a "almost certainly including you at some point."

but then you'll not back it up and just say got better things to do


----------



## ddraig (Jul 11, 2017)

pug said:


> Urban Dictionary: veganazi


like feminazi init

"look someone daring to have a different opinion that goes against mine, let's ridicule and destroy them and their arguments/different way of life"


----------



## Spymaster (Jul 11, 2017)

ddraig said:


> "look someone daring to have a different opinion that goes against mine, let's ridicule and destroy them and their arguments/different way of life"



... let's call them _carnists_!


----------



## mrs quoad (Jul 11, 2017)

SpookyFrank said:


> Militant breastfeeders eh? Struggling to think how that would work.


Being highly critical of anyone who doesn't breastfeed, seeing bottle feeding as a maternal failure, and valorising breast milk as a substance with particularly magical powers beyond anything the evidence supports.

Edit: again, I'm kinda surprised if you've spent much time around bfing / bf discussions and hadn't met a pretty hardline, unsympathetic and evangelistic fringe. Maybe that's just the circles we hang in!


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 11, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> ... let's call them _carnists_!


yeh. they'll be confused with carlists pa


----------



## Yuwipi Woman (Jul 11, 2017)

You'all do realize that you've been had by the OP?


----------



## ddraig (Jul 11, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> ... let's call them _carnists_!


oh come on, a single term isn't comparable to the massive hyperbole and abuse vegis and vegans have had on here for years by you bees and other boring knobs

highlights the carnist fragility well though
can dish it out but can't even take the smallest criticism


----------



## Sue (Jul 11, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> yeh. they'll be confused with carlists pa


Or those known for their carnal desires...


----------



## veganomics (Jul 11, 2017)

SpookyFrank said:


> Cow rapists? I find people always come round to my way of thinking once I've called them a rapist a few times.


How about cow baby milk stealers?



SpookyFrank said:


> At some point you have to decide which is more important to you, animal welfare or the moral high ground. If the former, you might need to look into moderating your language. Deliberately raising people's heckles, that's not about fewer animals being harmed. It's about you.


So you are now making the big and false assumption that I am somehow out to convert people, which is nonsense. Similar to what PaoloSanchez  said and I agree with him, I'll express my point of view. If you agree that's fine, if you disagree that's also fine. I find it rather funny and ironic that so called "normal" people are free to use derogatory language when describing vegans and nobody bats an eyelid, but my use of the innocuous word carnists is somehow "deliberately raising peoples heckles". What utter one sided nonsense. 



SpookyFrank said:


> E2a: And your slurs aren't even catchy ffs. If you want people to take the bait and get into a row with you, I suggest you invest in some rudimentary wit.


That's because they're not slurs, as I said earlier, they are terms of endearment, gentle ribbing and piss take. If you don't care for my word choices then you need not engage. It's not as if I am forcing you to reply, maybe you just can't help yourself. Try a bit of self control.


----------



## pug (Jul 11, 2017)

ddraig said:


> like feminazi init
> 
> "look someone daring to have a different opinion that goes against mine, let's ridicule and destroy them and their arguments/different way of life"





> veganazi
> A vegan that despises gypsies and jews. Identifiable by their green swastika armbands made of organic lettuce.


----------



## Spymaster (Jul 11, 2017)

ddraig said:


> oh come on, a single term isn't comparable to the massive hyperbole and abuse vegis and vegans have had on here for years ...


Well this is a fallacy. Sure individuals have been wound up on occasion, that happens with most topics here, but more often than not the abuse and snipeyness comes from your side. Most of the times that I can recall it's been about you taking things uber-personally and losing it a bit. All that's required then are a few well placed needles to get you really throwing your toys out of the pram. 


> highlights the carnist fragility well though ...


This _carnist fragility_ thing you keep banging on about, what is it?


----------



## ferrelhadley (Jul 11, 2017)

kebabking said:


> apex predators are only apex predators because of whatever tools they have - for us its our brain, our language, and our ability to use tools. take that away and we're just really big, really slow Dodo's - same with a Great White Shark - its an apex predator because of its size, strength, sensory capability, speed and teeth - take one of those way and its just a big Tuna.


Our key hunting skill is our endurance,. Almost everything can run faster than us, very little can run further than us.


----------



## ddraig (Jul 11, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> Well this is a fallacy. Sure individuals have been wound up on occasion, that happens with most topics here, but more often than not the abuse and snipeyness comes from your side. Most of the times that I can recall it's been about you taking things uber-personally and losing it a bit. All that's required then are a few well placed needles to get you really throwing your toys out of the pram.
> 
> This _carnist fragility_ thing you keep banging on about, what is it?



i know you're a wind up merchant but that is simply not true

carnist fragility is the fragileness of the likes of you bees, frank and others who go crazy when their "normality" is challenged. And the grief vegis and vegans get just for having a different diet and ethical choices


----------



## Spymaster (Jul 11, 2017)

ddraig said:


> carnist fragility is the fragileness of the likes of you bees, frank and others who go crazy when their "normality" is challenged.


How does this craziness manifest itself, and in what way is the "normality" challenged?


----------



## ddraig (Jul 11, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> How does this craziness manifest itself, and in what way is the "normality" challenged?


read the thread, and the others you and they do this shit on, it's all there


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jul 11, 2017)

Yuwipi Woman said:


> You'all do realize that you've been had by the OP?



I didn't get where I am today by reading threads.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jul 11, 2017)

ddraig said:


> i know you're a wind up merchant but that is simply not true
> 
> carnist fragility is the fragileness of the likes of you bees, frank and others who go crazy when their "normality" is challenged. And the grief vegis and vegans get just for having a different diet and ethical choices



I don't eat meat so I don't have amy fragility about it.


----------



## bimble (Jul 11, 2017)

This food-tribe boring identity bollocks is so crap and pointless. It helps nobody. My boyfriend has been a strict veggie since he was 10 but cooks a mean steak for friends sometimes.


----------



## Spymaster (Jul 11, 2017)

ddraig said:


> read the thread, and the others you and they do this shit on, it's all there


Can't you just summarise it, as you see it? This thread was a troll from the OP. Nobody took it seriously. It certainly hasn't challenged anyone's normality. 

Do you think that meat-eaters secretly want to be vegan and feel guilty, so abhor criticism. Or something? I'm still not getting _carnist fragility_.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 11, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> Can't you just summarise it, as you see it? This thread was a troll from the OP. Nobody took it seriously. It certainly hasn't challenged anyone's normality.
> 
> Do you think that meat-eaters secretly want to be vegan and feel guilty, so abhor criticism. Or something? I'm still not getting _carnist fragility_.


wait till you've had a couple more pints, pa, and a doner on the way home. i can guarantee you'll have _carnist fragility_ in the morning.


----------



## ddraig (Jul 11, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> Can't you just summarise it, as you see it? This thread was a troll from the OP. Nobody took it seriously. It certainly hasn't challenged anyone's normality.
> 
> Do you think that meat-eaters secretly want to be vegan and feel guilty, so abhor criticism. Or something? I'm still not getting _carnist fragility_.


no, they don't like their "normality" challenged or to be made to feel questioned or slightly guilty in any way so go on the attack

last post now as I can see you're trying to catch me out and it's all tedious and predictable


----------



## Spymaster (Jul 11, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> wait till you've had a couple more pints, pa, and a doner on the way home. i can guarantee you'll have _carnist fragility_ in the morning.


A chicken vindaloo and a bottle of Merlot usually does it for me, son.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jul 11, 2017)

SpookyFrank said:


> On this we agree at least. And yeah, people will react defensively to certain complex emotive issues. As a reformed meat-eater I can speak to both sides of that. This is why anyone who genuinely cares about changing people's  behaviour needs to be very careful with their language and, more importantly, their tone. I get that it's not always easy to do that when you feel passionately about something, but it's how human brains work.


You appear to be making the false assumption that my mission in life is to change peoples beliefs like one of those evangelical preachers folks. Well sorry to disappoint you but that's not what I'm about. I present my opinions and beliefs and you can take what you like and leave what you don't. I don't set out to be unfriendly or abusive to people who disagree with me, even though that seems to be one of the norms on urban75. Anyone that goes against the popular grain here appears to be fair game for abuse and mockery. If they dare to answer back then they are labelled as "disruptive". 



SpookyFrank said:


> If people see understanding, they will make an effort to understand. If they see confrontation, they'll give it back with extra mustard. And maybe it's fair to piss people off, but will it stop any animals getting eaten?


Again, you are being heavily one sided in your assessment, ignoring the large amounts of incoming mockery and piss taking that vegans deal with whilst nit picking and making a massive deal out of the use of a few words which you claim to be slurs.


----------



## Spymaster (Jul 11, 2017)

ddraig said:


> no, they don't like their "normality" challenged or to be made to feel questioned or slightly guilty in any way so go on the attack
> 
> last post now as I can see you're trying to catch me out and it's all tedious and predictable


I'm not trying to catch you out, I just genuinely don't recognise what you're talking about. Nobody has been challenged. The message to vegans/veggies has always been overwhelmingly 'eat what the fuck you like'; perhaps with a tweak of the nose, but more often than not it's you lot who attempt to establish a moral superiority and show indignant fragility when things progress against you. There are _loads_ of normal vegetarians and vegans on these boards who don't bother posting on these threads. They're perfectly comfortable and secure with their own dietary choices and don't feel the need to defend them or comment on those of others.

What's the difference between you and them?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 11, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> A chicken vindaloo and a bottle of Merlot usually does it for me, son.


it was only a few months ago it took several bottles of merlot and a curry, pa  you're losing it


----------



## veganomics (Jul 11, 2017)

ddraig said:


> i know you're a wind up merchant but that is simply not true
> 
> carnist fragility is the fragileness of the likes of you bees, frank and others who go crazy when their "normality" is challenged. And the grief vegis and vegans get just for having a different diet and ethical choices


Seriously, what is wrong with these people and their arse about face playing the victim card? What's that all about? 

Out in the real world I can honestly say that I've never seen a vegan attack anybody for their choices, but I have seen plenty of "incoming". To be fair, most people on both sides of the fence are fine and respectable. I try my best not to advertise my dietary choices but it invariably comes out sooner or later when you're out for a meal with colleagues or somebody orders pizza in the office. Then the questioning starts, again most of it fairly innocent, "where do you get your protein?", "don't you have to take supplements?", "what if you were on a desert island with no fruits or vegetables around?", yada yada yada...most of the encounters I've had IRL have been fairly benign but I've also had people try and attack my choices and accuse us of child neglect based on our food choices etc. 

I'm not saying that their aren't vegans out there who go over the top, but I've not met any in my travels, and I've met a lot of vegans. I've met a lot more dicks who were "normal" though.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jul 11, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> I'm not trying to catch you out, I just genuinely don't recognise what you're talking about. Nobody has been challenged. The message to vegans/veggies has always been overwhelmingly 'eat what the fuck you like'; perhaps with a tweak of the nose, but more often than not it's you lot who attempt to establish a moral superiority and show indignant fragility when things progress against you. There are _loads_ of normal vegetarians and vegans on these boards who don't bother posting on these threads. They're perfectly comfortable and secure with their own dietary choices and don't feel the need to defend them or comment on those of others.
> 
> What's the difference between you and them?


It would appear that some of the "normal" meat eaters in this thread are a little bit uncomfortable and insecure when the bloody reality of their dietary choices is exposed, hence the backlash and moaning about the use of the most terrible of words like "carnism", lol. This is why they would prefer it if "normal" vegetarians and vegans keep their mouth shut and "don't mention the war". Things get a bit sensitive and "confrontational" when the "war" gets mentioned.


----------



## 8115 (Jul 11, 2017)

I've never met an angry vegan off the internet and I bet someone has already pointed that out.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jul 11, 2017)

8115 said:


> I've never met an angry vegan off the internet and I bet someone has already pointed that out.


I'm beginning to think it's one of those meme driven internet myths.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 11, 2017)

8115 said:


> I've never met an angry vegan off the internet and I bet someone has already pointed that out.


should be a song like this for that


----------



## Spymaster (Jul 11, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> It would appear that some of the "normal" meat eaters in this thread are a little bit uncomfortable and insecure when the bloody reality of their dietary choices is exposed, hence the backlash and moaning about the use of the most terrible of words like "carnism"...


Well I think this is what ddraig was driving at but it is of course, total nonsense. If you genuinely think that meat eaters are generally in any way uncomfortable about meat-eating, you're deluded. Of course, given the choice, most would prefer to choose higher welfare, free range, organic, etc., but for many the cost is prohibitive so that's where it ends.

All that you've described as the "backlash and moaning" re _carnism_ is just piss-taking and laughing at the silliness of it, not some angry reaction to a deadly chink you've exposed in their moral armour!


----------



## 8115 (Jul 11, 2017)

I've met plenty of wanky meat-eaters though.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 11, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> Well I think this is what ddraig was driving at but it is of course, total nonsense. If you genuinely think that meat eaters are generally in any way uncomfortable about meat-eating, you're deluded. Of course, given the choice, most would prefer to choose higher welfare, free range, organic, etc., but for many the cost is prohibitive so that's where it ends.
> 
> All that you've described as a "backlash" above re _carnism_ is just piss-taking and laughing at the silliness of it, not some angry reaction to a killer chink you've found in their moral armour!


the problem with so many meat eaters is that they are not uncomfortable about meat eating.


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Jul 11, 2017)

ddraig said:


> i know you're a wind up merchant but that is simply not true
> 
> carnist fragility is the fragileness of the likes of you bees, frank and others who go crazy when their "normality" is challenged. And the grief vegis and vegans get just for having a different diet and ethical choices


The only one who goes crazy is you. Your hysterics on these threads are as predicatable as they are easy to provoke.


----------



## ddraig (Jul 11, 2017)

as before, link us up


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Jul 11, 2017)

ddraig said:


> as before, link us up


Well, shall we start with this thread?


----------



## ddraig (Jul 11, 2017)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> Well, shall we start with this thread?


why not, link us a "hysterical" post i've made here


----------



## Tom A (Jul 11, 2017)

I always thought that "carnist" was a term that those that were particularly unashamed about their ongoing decision to consume animal flesh had bestowed upon themselves.


----------



## veganomics (Jul 11, 2017)

bimble said:


> This food-tribe boring identity bollocks is so crap and pointless. It helps nobody. My boyfriend has been a strict veggie since he was 10 but cooks a mean steak for friends sometimes.


I don't think there's anything wrong with having a discussion or debate about things that you are passionate about. I actually believe that in the long run it can be helpful and discussion and debate can and does occasionally help to facilitate meaningful change. Whether this forum is the right sort of environment for such a discussion, I'm not so sure about. It seems to be a haven for nit picking and points scoring and ganging up on people with "unpopular" opinions.

Meals in our house are either vegetarian or vegan, no steaks. Son has milk and eggs and I think eats meat when he's out. Daughter is allergic to milk but will have eggs occasionally. Wife has milk and eggs very occasionally, I am mostly vegan. There's no preaching, no shouting no trying to convince anybody. I don't raise the subject when I'm out and about unless I'm asked and I'll explain my position to those that are genuinely interested.


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Jul 11, 2017)

SpookyFrank said:


> Why would anyone argue in favour of a thing that doesn't exist?
> 
> Meat consumption by humans exists, meat-eating-as-ideology does not.



I find this bizarre. Do you think that veganism is a belief system? It clearly is. It is a contraction of 'vegetarianism' and the -arian suffix denotes belief or concern about a specified thing. We all recognise that veganism is based around a set of beliefs about the moral status of animals (and other connected moral principles). Why wouldn't we think the same is also true of non-veganism? Flesh and bodily secretion consumption is just as much based on a system of beliefs as veganism is. This is precisely why Joy coined the term carnism - to draw attention to an invisible belief system.


----------



## Spymaster (Jul 11, 2017)

ddraig said:


> why not, link us a "hysterical" post i've made here


Well you haven't been particularly hysterical here but you are the most prolific poster on the thread, have mentioned "carnist fragility" (whatever it is) at least four times, and have tilted at windmills and set up straw men. Nobody here really cares one iota about what you do or don't eat. Good luck to you. You just get your tail pulled because you react so deliciously.


----------



## peterkro (Jul 11, 2017)

Meanwhile Air India goes veggie only on domestic flights, you are banned from cooking meat in lots of rental properties, meat providers are being strung up at an alarming rate, laws are being passed against cow slaughter for alsorts including the leather trade.Even very good and harmless ideas like vegetarianism can turn vile when zealots  appear on the scene.I believe Bhutan is a bit rough on meat eaters too.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jul 11, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> Well I think this is what ddraig was driving at but it is of course, total nonsense. If you genuinely think that meat eaters are generally in any way uncomfortable about meat-eating, you're deluded. Of course, given the choice, most would prefer to choose higher welfare, free range, organic, etc., but for many the cost is prohibitive so that's where it ends.


Deluded eh? Wow. Well we'll have to disagree on what you described as "total nonsense". I genuinely do think that many carnists do feel at least a bit uncomfortable with how their choice of food gets on to their plates, and I believe that there's plenty of evidence to support that. This is one of the reasons that so much of the meat products don't look anything like the animal from which they came and so much effort goes into disguising the origins, changing the names, hiding the conditions that they are kept in and of course not many people want to see how their food is killed. This is why you won't find any school trips to abattoirs. Wouldn't want those pesky kids going all soft and veganised, eh? For the most part in the civilised west, people are very much shielded from the brutal reality of where their meat comes from, and I'm willing to bet that most people wouldn't want to see it. A fair number of those that do eventually get a glimpse of the reality are affected by it and will at least think more about what they eat. Of course there are hard core meat munchers who will dig their heels in. That's their prerogative I suppose. It won't stop me from expressing my opinion.



Spymaster said:


> All that you've described as the "backlash and moaning" re _carnism_ is just piss-taking and laughing at the silliness of it, not some angry reaction to a deadly chink you've exposed in their moral armour!


Ironically, the use of the word carnism is also a bit of a piss take which some of the meat munchers on this thread appear to have taken offence to. Looks like some folks can dish it out but aren't so good at taking it.


----------



## veganomics (Jul 11, 2017)

peterkro said:


> Meanwhile Air India goes veggie only on domestic flights, you are banned from cooking meat in lots of rental properties, meat providers are being strung up at an alarming rate, laws are being passed against cow slaughter for alsorts including the leather trade.Even very good and harmless ideas like vegetarianism can turn vile when zealots  appear on the scene.I believe Bhutan is a bit rough on meat eaters too.


As we're not in India I'm not sure how much of that is relevant to this discussion. Again there appears to be a lot of scraping the bottom of the barrel looking for reasons not to be vegetarian or vegan, "those Indians and Butanese folks treat meat eaters real bad and for that reason, I'm going to continue to eat meat and teach those vegans a lesson".

I honestly think the best response by a meat muncher on this thread was this...


beesonthewhatnow said:


> My personal arguments for eating meat:
> 
> 1 - I enjoy it
> 2 - That's it


No beating around the bush scratching around looking for justifications and excuses. Straight to the point. Even though I totally disagree with that sentiment, I can respect that a lot more than people getting offended by the word "carnism" and claiming it is some kind of slur with an agenda behind it ffs.


----------



## peterkro (Jul 11, 2017)

veganomics said:


> As we're not in India I'm not sure how much of that is relevant to this discussion. Again there appears to be a lot of scraping the bottom of the barrel looking for reasons not to be vegetarian or vegan, "those Indians and Butanese folks treat meat eaters real bad and for that reason, I'm going to continue to eat meat and teach those vegans a lesson".



Not an Internationalist then? it's only relevant if it's localised to Britain.By the way I've been vegetarian for fifty years you dick.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jul 11, 2017)

veganomics said:


> As we're not in India I'm not sure how much of that is relevant to this discussion. Again there appears to be a lot of scraping the bottom of the barrel looking for reasons not to be vegetarian or vegan, "those Indians and Butanese folks treat meat eaters real bad and for that reason, I'm going to continue to eat meat and teach those vegans a lesson".
> 
> I honestly think the best response by a meat muncher on this thread was this...
> 
> No beating around the bush scratching around looking for justifications and excuses. Straight to the point. Even though I totally disagree with that sentiment, I can respect that a lot more than people getting offended by the word "carnism" and claiming it is some kind of slur with an agenda behind it ffs.


You're really rather determined to judge, aren't you?


----------



## Spymaster (Jul 12, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> I genuinely do think that many carnists do feel at least a bit uncomfortable with out their choice of food gets on to their plates, and I believe that there's plenty of evidence to support that. This is one of the reasons that so much of the meat products don't look anything like the animal from which they came and so much effort goes into disguising the origins, changing the names, hiding the conditions that they are kept in and of course not many people want to see how their food is killed. This is why you won't find any school trips to abattoirs. Wouldn't want those pesky kids going all soft and veganised, eh?


Yeah, this old chestnut. There's a world of difference between feeling guilty about eating meat and not wanting to support intensive production methods. We contract-out many jobs that we find distasteful or that are beyond our capabilities, including the slaughtering and butchering of animals, and you don't find school trips to abattoirs for the same reason they don't go to operating theatres. I'm not wedded to the idea that some people wouldn't be turned off, at least temporarily, if they saw how meat got to the table though, so we probably don't have much to argue about here. Your read on the _carnist_ thing though, is laughable, but you are very welcome to express your opinion.


----------



## veganomics (Jul 12, 2017)

peterkro said:


> Not an Internationalist then? it's only relevant if it's localised to Britain.


No because there is a religious context behind the reactions in India and Bhutan which is beyond the scope of this discussion imo. It is not just simply a matter of vegetarians being arseholes. The cow is seen as sacred in India and are treated with reverence. You can get lynched for knocking down a cow wandering into the road with your car. Not that I condone such behaviour, and in fact I consider that to be a bit backward,  but that is the context behind some of the reactions and laws in those countries. 



peterkro said:


> By the way I've been vegetarian for fifty years you dick.


Good for you, although it would appear that vegetarianism isn't a cure for dishing out unprovoked genuine slurs. 

Have a nice day sir.


----------



## mojo pixy (Jul 12, 2017)

why _carnist_, not _meatarian_? or _vegist_? what's up with the need to use strange words anyway? Nobody really said why _meat-eater_ isn't good enough.

Maybe using correct labels is vital, otherwise there's no way to tell who to like and dislike.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jul 12, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> Yeah, this old chestnut. There's a world of difference between feeling guilty about eating meat and not wanting to support intensive production methods. We contract-out many jobs that we find distasteful or that are beyond our capabilities, including the slaughtering and butchering of animals, and you don't find school trips to abattoirs for the same reason they don't go to operating theatres. I'm not wedded to the idea that some people wouldn't be turned off, at least temporarily, if they saw how meat got to the table though, so we probably don't have much to argue about here. Your read on the _carnist_ thing though, is laughable, but you are very welcome to express your opinion.


tbh in our particular society most of us are isolated from many processes that are/were everyday in many others. Death in all its forms is one of those. Thing is, back when most people had to kill and prepare their own meat, there were probably fewer veggies than there are now. It's a very silly argument - the very isolation is itself an important part of what makes people squeamish about things like killing animals.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jul 12, 2017)

It is ironic when ddraig shrieks about the likes of me and spymaster, the 'usual suspects' on these threads. Yeah, meat-eaters who care about and engage in issues to do with animal welfare. That's basically what you mean when you say that, but you don't quite realise it.


----------



## editor (Jul 12, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> tbh in our particular society most of us are isolated from many processes that are/were everyday in many others. Death in all its forms is one of those. Thing is, back when most people had to kill and prepare their own meat, there were probably fewer veggies than there are now. It's a very silly argument - the very isolation is itself an important part of what makes people squeamish about things like killing animals.


Well, that and changing times, a general greater understanding of animal intelligence and the massively changing farming practices from traditional to industrial.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jul 12, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> Yeah, this old chestnut. There's a world of difference between feeling guilty about eating meat and not wanting to support intensive production methods.


We'll have to disagree on that on too. I think they are in the same ball park. Of course most people would agree that looking after the animals before you kill them is "better" than treating them badly and in poor conditions before killing them. My contention is that killing them is still pretty bad and mostly unnecessary in the modern world. Surely it would be even better to not kill them at all, no? I think if you were to ask the animals involved if they'd like to be killed they'd probably say a big fat NO. (if they could speak)



Spymaster said:


> We contract-out many jobs that we find distasteful or that are beyond our capabilities, including the slaughtering and butchering of animals, and you don't find school trips to abattoirs for the same reason they don't go to operating theatres.


I mostly disagree with the comparison of trips to operating theatres with trips to abattoirs, although the bit I think has a ring of truth to it is the sight of blood and gory bits which many people don't like the sight of. I wouldn't have thought that genuine meat eaters would be so squeamish. 
Yes we do contract out jobs that most people can't do, however the amount of hiding and shielding from public view that meat production gets is on another level entirely. 



Spymaster said:


> Your read on the _carnist_ thing though, is laughable, but you are very welcome to express your opinion.


I think it's more laughable that the use of the word was even raised as an issue in the first place. Each to their own eh?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jul 12, 2017)

editor said:


> Well, that and changing times and massively changing farming practices from traditional to industrial.


Yep. that's an integral part of the process of isolation from direct contact with the process, and yes, the processes themselves have become far more horrific in many cases, although you will find better practices in slaughterhouses in many respects now than you would have found 100 years ago. Let's not romanticise the past here.


----------



## editor (Jul 12, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Yep. that's an integral part of the process of isolation from direct contact with the process, and yes, the processes themselves have become far more horrific in many cases, although you will find better practices in slaughterhouses in many respects now than you would have found 100 years ago. Let's not romanticise the past here.


Oh come on: things were grim in the past but the industrial mechanisation of some aspects of the meat industry now is horrendous. Some creatures are turned into mutated freaks, stuffed full of a mix of hormones and grown in inhumane farming practises. Some never even get to see the light of the sun or go outside.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jul 12, 2017)

editor said:


> Oh come on: things were grim in the past but the industrial mechanisation of some aspects of the meat industry now is horrendous. Some creatures are turned into mutated freaks, stuffed full of a mix of hormones and grown in inhumane farming practises. Some never even get to see the light of the sun or go outside.


I agree entirely. I'm not defending industrialised animal farming here at all. The question then becomes how do you change that.

But the narrow emotive point about abattoirs doesn't really stand up. Abattoirs have always been horrible places.


----------



## Spymaster (Jul 12, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> My contention is that killing them is still pretty bad ...


Why though? I'd agree that hurting or torturing them is bad, but why is killing (let's assume for arguments sake that this could be done painlessly) and eating them _bad_?


----------



## ddraig (Jul 12, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> It is ironic when ddraig shrieks about the likes of me and spymaster, the 'usual suspects' on these threads. Yeah, meat-eaters who care about and engage in issues to do with animal welfare. That's basically what you mean when you say that, but you don't quite realise it.


Just a little not a lot! It still dies for your tastbuds however you try and justify it, however many twists and turns and excuses you make

Ironic indeed
Engage indeed
Tedious twerp


----------



## Spymaster (Jul 12, 2017)

ddraig said:


> It still dies for your tastbuds ...


What's wrong with that?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jul 12, 2017)

ddraig said:


> It still dies for your tastbuds


I know. And I'm alright with that. You can't see how I could possibly be alright with it. So you shriek. That's all you ever do on these threads. I read every post you make on the subject in a shrill shrieking voice.


----------



## ddraig (Jul 12, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I know. And I'm alright with that. You can't see how I could possibly be alright with it. So you shriek. That's all you ever do on these threads. I read every post you make on the subject in a shrill shrieking voice.


I'm not shrieking, you are whining and projecting your views with a conceited and false authority like you do on many topics here

I can see how you can be alright with it actually, why wouldn't I? You're properly full of yourself and don't like to be questioned.
I'm quite aware many people don't give a shit about the lives of animals


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jul 12, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> tbh in our particular society most of us are isolated from many processes that are/were everyday in many others. Death in all its forms is one of those. Thing is, back when most people had to kill and prepare their own meat, there were probably fewer veggies than there are now. It's a very silly argument - the very isolation is itself an important part of what makes people squeamish about things like killing animals.


I think there's an element of truth to this and a bit of conditioning is involved. People can get accustomed to seeing certain things and become immune. In the west it is true that we are mostly shielded from death blood and gore and are not used to seeing it, however I think that is part of our true evolved nature to be repulsed by those things. This is why we respond negatively to the sites of how animals might be treated in less developed (less evolved?) countries, or we recoil at the treatment of dogs in the Yulin dog meat festival. In my opinion it's more than just "isolation", I think it's an inherent part of our evolved "humane" nature. 

This reminds me of a talk that I saw a few years ago by Dr Milton Mills called "Meat Eating and the Biology of Disgust".



tl;dr  "Although people often eat meat, WE REALLY DON'T LIKE IT, and that's why we are compelled to change it's form, taste, and texture to make it acceptable and palatable". 

imo there's more than just a ring of truth to that.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jul 12, 2017)

I'm reminded that Orwell once did a list of lefty cranks (not including his own shabby genteel self, funnily enough) that included vegetarians. It stood out to me as anachronistic for today because vegetarianism is no longer seen as some freakish aberration or even a moral decision. E.G I know a lad who grew up veggie cos his parents were, went for the burgers for a few years then went back to veggie when he started training for the navy. It interests me in light of what was mentioned earlier about how growing up as a meat eater, well that then requires a more conscious rejection of dead flesh- whereas the person I write about had no moral issues at all with eating meat, just decided it was not in line with his health and exercise regime so dropped it like it was no thang.


----------



## mojo pixy (Jul 12, 2017)

Mostly people cook meat because it's easier to digest that way, and it lasts longer / is easier to store. There are issues of taste too, no doubt. Trying to hide or disguise its provenance? That's easy to say but I'd be surprised it it figures large in Why People Mostly Eat Cooked Meat. If it is a hidden motive then it's really well hidden.


----------



## Spymaster (Jul 12, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> tl;dr  "Although people often eat meat, WE REALLY DON'T LIKE IT, and that's why we are compelled to change it's form, taste, and texture to make it acceptable and palatable".
> 
> imo there's more than just a ring of truth to that.


I'll watch the vid tomorrow because someone's sleeping next to me now, but you mentioned this before.

Give some examples of form, taste, and texture, of meat being changed.


----------



## ddraig (Jul 12, 2017)

Tenderised
Smoked
Nuggets
Burgers
Loads more


----------



## Spymaster (Jul 12, 2017)

ddraig said:


> Tenderised
> Smoked
> Nuggets
> Burgers
> Loads more


None of those are because we _don't like_ the meat though. They're methods of enhancing flavours, making it more convenient to eat, or broadening variety.


----------



## ddraig (Jul 12, 2017)

That's not what you fucking asked tho is it!?!
I give up, again


----------



## Yossarian (Jul 12, 2017)

Whenever the word "vegan" come up some people automatically react as if somebody was threatening to take away their freedom to eat meat.

I haven' t met any vegans on a big mission to convert people - they generally seem to have the attitude that with 7 billion people in the world, there's not that much point in taking a big interest in another individual's diet. Seems like the only converting some of them do comes naturally as a result of them getting into their 40s and looking a lot better than most people their age.


----------



## Spymaster (Jul 12, 2017)

ddraig said:


> That's not what you fucking asked tho is it!?!


 _Why_ do you think I asked?

But I'll make it easier, just for you. Can you give some examples of the form, texture, or taste, of meat being changed, that would support the assertion that it's done because "WE REALLY DON'T LIKE [meat}"?


----------



## veganomics (Jul 12, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> This reminds me of a talk that I saw a few years ago by Dr Milton Mills called "Meat Eating and the Biology of Disgust".
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I've seen that video and found it really interesting. He did a similar one called something like "Are Humans designed to eat meat" which is also very good. ( I assume you might have already watched it).


----------



## ddraig (Jul 12, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> _Why_ do you think I asked?
> 
> But I'll make it easier, just for you. Can you give some examples of the form, texture, or taste, of meat being changed, that would support the assertion that it's done because "WE REALLY DON'T LIKE [meat}"?


Firstly I didn't claim or post that
Secondly I was answering your questions about form, shape and texture being changed
That is all


----------



## Spymaster (Jul 12, 2017)

ddraig said:


> Firstly I didn't claim or post that
> Secondly I was answering your questions about form, shape and texture being changed
> That is all


But you were responding to a question that was specifically asked to another poster, having quoted his post which contextualised the question. If you're going to butt in and speak for someone else, at least do him the courtesy of reading and understanding what you're responding to rather than just shrieking out unhelpful words.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jul 12, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> I'll watch the vid tomorrow because someone's sleeping next to me now, but you mentioned this before.


Don't feel obliged to watch it, it's nearly an hour and a half long, although imo it's well worth the watch if you can spare the time and are interested enough.



Spymaster said:


> Give some examples of form, taste, and texture, of meat being changed.


I'm not sure I understand your question. You can pick practically any meat that you'll see in Sainsbury's for starters. Nearly all meat that is eaten by modern non primitive man is not raw, bloody and still warm which is how most genuine meat eaters consume theirs. Practically all our meat is substantially changed from it's original form, presumably to make it palatable and less "off putting". I suppose chicken would be the closest to a whole animal that you'might see in sainsbury's and some fish. The orientals appear to be less squeamish than us western folk on these matters, which is why we complain about their low standards of "animal welfare". Maybe they are a bit more honest about what they do and don't try to hide it.

 How often do you see this sort of thing...



ps, as if to illustrate the point, this video gets a "Content Warning". Why should natural meat eaters need a content warning?


----------



## Celyn (Jul 12, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> ...
> 
> tl;dr  "Although people often eat meat, WE REALLY DON'T LIKE IT, and that's why we are compelled to change it's form, taste, and texture to make it acceptable and palatable".
> 
> imo there's more than just a ring of truth to that.



What about vegetables? Some are fine raw, but I wouldn't much fancy eating raw potato or turnip, and we do really quite a lot of processing to things like wheat to make it into pasta or bread.


----------



## Spymaster (Jul 12, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> I'm not sure I understand your question. You can pick practically any meat that you'll see in Sainsbury's for starters. Nearly all meat that is eaten by modern non primitive man is not raw, bloody and still warm which is how most genuine meat eaters consume theirs. Practically all our meat is substantially changed from it's original form, presumably to make it palatable and less "off putting". I suppose chicken would be the closest to a whole animal that you'might see in sainsbury's and some fish. The orientals appear to be less squeamish than us western folk on these matters, which is why we complain about their low standards of "animal welfare". Maybe they are a bit more honest about what they do and don't try to hide it.


All of that is for convenience though, with the exception of not eating meat raw. But you're not seriously using that to support "we don't really like it" are you?


----------



## Spymaster (Jul 12, 2017)

Celyn said:


> What about vegetables? Some are fine raw, but I wouldn't much fancy eating raw potato or turnip, and we do really quite a lot of processing to things like wheat to make it into pasta or bread.


Pah, beat me to it. 

Does the fact that we cook many vegetables mean "we don't really like them"?


----------



## Yossarian (Jul 12, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> I think there's an element of truth to this and a bit of conditioning is involved. People can get accustomed to seeing certain things and become immune. In the west it is true that we are mostly shielded from death blood and gore and are not used to seeing it, however I think that is part of our true evolved nature to be repulsed by those things.



People aren't all that squeamish - hunting and fishing for food are still reasonably popular in Western countries, and lots of people prefer their steaks bloody. Most people who grew up in the countryside will probably have shot a few rabbits etc. for food at some point.


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Jul 12, 2017)

Of all the arguments being presented here "but you have to cook the meat" seems to be the most ridiculous yet.


----------



## mrs quoad (Jul 12, 2017)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> Of all the arguments being presented here "but you have to cook the meat" seems to be the most ridiculous yet.


Blue venison


----------



## sleaterkinney (Jul 12, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Deluded eh? Wow. Well we'll have to disagree on what you described as "total nonsense". I genuinely do think that many carnists do feel at least a bit uncomfortable with how their choice of food gets on to their plates, and I believe that there's plenty of evidence to support that. This is one of the reasons that so much of the meat products don't look anything like the animal from which they came and so much effort goes into disguising the origins, changing the names, hiding the conditions that they are kept in and of course not many people want to see how their food is killed. This is why you won't find any school trips to abattoirs. Wouldn't want those pesky kids going all soft and veganised, eh? For the most part in the civilised west, people are very much shielded from the brutal reality of where their meat comes from, and I'm willing to bet that most people wouldn't want to see it. A fair number of those that do eventually get a glimpse of the reality are affected by it and will at least think more about what they eat. Of course there are hard core meat munchers who will dig their heels in. That's their prerogative I suppose. It won't stop me from expressing my opinion.


It can actually work the other way, people don't know how meat is produced and scare videos fill the gap, which aren't the reality at all. I think being exposed to how farming really is would lead to less veggies, not more.


----------



## Yossarian (Jul 12, 2017)

sleaterkinney said:


> It can actually work the other way, people don't know how meat is produced and scare videos fill the gap, which aren't the reality at all. I think being exposed to how farming really is would lead to less veggies, not more.



Most meat comes from factory farms, I'd be very surprised if anybody with doubts about eating meat visited an industrial-scale pig or chicken farm and left more likely to eat meat than before. As for slaughterhouses, just living within earshot of one was enough to put a lot of people I know off eating pork.


----------



## Lorca (Jul 12, 2017)

Yossarian said:


> Most meat comes from factory farms, I'd be very surprised if anybody with doubts about eating meat visited an industrial-scale pig or chicken farm and left more likely to eat meat than before. As for slaughterhouses, just living within earshot of one was enough to put a lot of people I know off eating pork.



Indeed, I worked on a farm when I left school and that laid the foundation for me going vegan some 20 yrs ago. Some of the things I saw and did were pretty horrific really. I also went to farming college and we had to wring a chicken's neck then cook and eat it, which to be honest, I did do without many qualms at the time. 

We also visited a slaughterhouse, getting an insiders insight most people will probably never see, happily for them.Some of the things I saw stayed with me for years, honestly. When I finally went vegan, I was living in a small bumpkin town in north warwickshire, it caused me loads of trouble with the natives, especially with the local hunt, who are a bunch of violent wankers even by hunters low standards (tbf I was a known 'anti' at that point). Anyway, nowadays, I reckon veganism is quite easy, back then it was all plamil milk and sos-mix (I eat a lot of fake meat type food.)


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jul 12, 2017)

Was in India recently and there was meat available everywhere. In Maharashitra beef was recently banned, but it was a available in Goa and Rajasthan if you wanted it and of course spicy chicken was offered everywhere.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jul 12, 2017)

And local to us are the lammas lands where cows are grazed from March to June, right in the town centre, the kids enjoy patting them on their way to school. Then one day two weeks ago they were gone, then the Farncombe butcher had a sign outside, Godalming Water-Meadow Beef available.

Very tasty steaks


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Jul 12, 2017)

Lorca said:


> Indeed, I worked on a farm when I left school and that laid the foundation for me going vegan some 20 yrs ago. Some of the things I saw and did were pretty horrific really. I also went to farming college and we had to wring a chicken's neck then cook and eat it, which to be honest, I did do without many qualms at the time.
> 
> We also visited a slaughterhouse, getting an insiders insight most people will probably never see, happily for them.Some of the things I saw stayed with me for years, honestly. When I finally went vegan, I was living in a small bumpkin town in north warwickshire, it caused me loads of trouble with the natives, especially with the local hunt, who are a bunch of violent wankers even by hunters low standards (tbf I was a known 'anti' at that point). Anyway, nowadays, I reckon veganism is quite easy, back then it was all plamil milk and sos-mix (I eat a lot of fake meat type food.)



Thank you Lorca. People like you give me hope.


----------



## Spymaster (Jul 12, 2017)

Yossarian said:


> Most meat comes from factory farms, I'd be very surprised if anybody with doubts about eating meat visited an industrial-scale pig or chicken farm and left more likely to eat meat than before. As for slaughterhouses, just living within earshot of one was enough to put a lot of people I know off eating pork.


This has gone down a different path now. Few _meat eaters _would condone many industrial meat production practices. Many are extremely selective about the meat they purchase for those very reasons. But the vegan proposal goes way further than that, doesn't it?


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jul 12, 2017)

Celyn said:


> What about vegetables? Some are fine raw, but I wouldn't much fancy eating raw potato or turnip, and we do really quite a lot of processing to things like wheat to make it into pasta or bread.


The same thing applies raw potatoes and turnips for most people are not palatable. There are plenty fruits, leafy greens and some vegetables that can be eaten in their "natural" state. There appears to be an inverse relationship between the amount of processing that goes into what we call "food" and the state of our health and the health of the animals that we look after. 



Spymaster said:


> All of that is for convenience though, with the exception of not eating meat raw. But you're not seriously using that to support "we don't really like it" are you?





Spymaster said:


> Pah, beat me to it.
> 
> Does the fact that we cook many vegetables mean "we don't really like them"?


Again, without watching the whole video and the explanation, you're missing out on the full context. The sight and smell of a raw potato or turnip does not create the sort of physiological response as the sight of a dead animal with bloody entrails hanging out. A natural meat eater would be salivating at the sight of fresh kill and ready to tuck in (without a knife and fork) whereas many civilised non-savage humans would be ready to puke up.



beesonthewhatnow said:


> Of all the arguments being presented here "but you have to cook the meat" seems to be the most ridiculous yet.


Well you would say that wouldn't you. Again as I said to the spymaster just now, it's not just about the cooking.


----------



## gentlegreen (Jul 12, 2017)

My own bottom line has always been "am I prepared to do it myself ?" - which has always limited me to fish - and I have just discovered a technique which I will try to apply in future if my diet moves from vegan to seagan as I suspect it will once I get a whiff of the sea.

iki Jime | HUMANE KILLING OF FISH - FRESHWATER - ESTUARY - OFFSHORE Maximum quality, minimum fuss.

I still don't know what to do about oysters - though there are some out there arguing they're hardly more sentient than plants


----------



## Spymaster (Jul 12, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> The same thing applies raw potatoes and turnips for most people are not palatable. There are plenty fruits, leafy greens and some vegetables that can be eaten in their "natural" state. There appears to be an inverse relationship between the amount of processing that goes into what we call "food" and the state of our health and the health of the animals that we look after.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I was going to watch your video today but I thought it was a minute and a half, not an hour and a half! 

I haven't watched it but I'm assuming from your comments that the thrust is that we are not natural meat eaters, is that the case?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jul 12, 2017)

'Civilised non-savage humans'?

Think the 19th century is calling you back.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jul 12, 2017)

TruXta said:


> Finings will often be made from fish bits.



Fish bladders. 

Your beer is cleared by something that had the job of holding fish piss.


----------



## gentlegreen (Jul 12, 2017)

ViolentPanda said:


> Fish bladders.
> 
> Your beer is cleared by something that had the job of holding fish piss.


*swim* bladders - therefore air 

Isinglass - Wikipedia


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jul 12, 2017)

This rubbish about cooking is dangerous nonsense. We have evolved alongside our ability to cook and otherwise break down the chemicals in our foods to such an extent that a human eating a wholly raw diet (no cooking, pickling, curing or marinading) will very quickly become ill. We need to begin the digestion process for at least some of our diet before the food enters our bodies. We have found various methods of doing this, and due to using these methods, we have over time evolved to depend on them, as is the way with evolution. 

 Attacking the eating of a foodstuff because we have to cook it before we can eat it is unscientific twaddle.


----------



## Casually Red (Jul 12, 2017)

Just no .


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jul 12, 2017)

DotCommunist said:


> there must be one or two surely, but not n my orbit.



I think that your Fred West-looking motherfucker of an MP probably hunts them and kills them for sport, then eats them.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jul 12, 2017)

gentlegreen said:


> *swim* bladders - therefore air
> 
> Isinglass - Wikipedia



That's even worse - bladders that fish have swam in!!!  Is there no end to the fishy disgustingness?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jul 12, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> A natural meat eater would be salivating at the sight of fresh kill and ready to tuck in (without a knife and fork) whereas many civilised non-savage humans would be ready to puke up..


Humans are flexible omnivores, capable of thriving on a very wide variety of diets, which was one of the key reasons why humans were able to spread right across the globe. Not 'natural meat eaters'? Really? Tell that to the Inuit, and while you're at it, explain to them how it was that their ancestors were able to colonise the frozen north. I'm not going to watch your video because everything you say about it suggests that it is complete and utter bullshit. And offensive bullshit at that.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jul 12, 2017)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> Your tastebuds are fucked.



By rabid dogs with acid jizz.


----------



## gentlegreen (Jul 12, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> This rubbish about cooking is dangerous nonsense. We have evolved alongside our ability to cook and otherwise break down the chemicals in our foods to such an extent that a human eating a wholly raw diet (no cooking, pickling, curing or marinading) will very quickly become ill. We need to begin the digestion process for at least some of our diet before the food enters our bodies. We have found various methods of doing this, and due to using these methods, we have over time evolved to depend on them, as is the way with evolution.
> 
> Attacking the eating of a foodstuff because we have to cook it before we can eat it is unscientific twaddle.


Not that I disagree that cooking is generally a very good thing, but there are plenty of healthy raw foodists.

The most curious thing I recently learned is that the two veggies that benefit most from cooking are carrots and celery


----------



## mr steev (Jul 12, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> This has gone down a different path now. Few _meat eaters _would condone many industrial meat production practices. Many are extremely selective about the meat they purchase for those very reasons.



Few are extremely selective, the vast majority will eat factory farmed meat without a second thought


----------



## Spymaster (Jul 12, 2017)

mr steev said:


> Few are extremely selective, the vast majority will eat factory farmed meat without a second thought


Many are extremely selective, in fact most that I know. An entire sub-industry relies on it. However, the "vast majority" simply can't afford to be, and their social conditioning has meant that they are thoroughly omnivorous. Are you going to tell a struggling mum that her kids shouldn't eat cheap meat (or meat at all)?


----------



## Casually Red (Jul 12, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> ps, as if to illustrate the point, this video gets a "Content Warning". Why should natural meat eaters need a content warning?
> 
> View attachment 111193



We all naturally take a dump . Doesn't mean we want to look at people doing it . 

We aren't all Tory mps/ Germans .


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jul 12, 2017)

ddraig said:


> meat eater = carnivore (alson now carnist)
> eating of meat = carnism
> 
> what's the big issue with that?
> obviously people who eat meat don't seem to like it, tough



Calling humans that eat meat "carnivores" is just loaded name-calling.  Very few humans only eat meat (despite what Paleo twats will claim), we mostly eat omnivorously, so "carnism" too is a bag of loaded arse.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jul 12, 2017)

mr steev said:


> Few are extremely selective, the vast majority will eat factory farmed meat without a second thought


True enough. Otherwise such meat wouldn't exist. I think it is true to say that a lot of people are uneasy about factory farming but not sufficiently for them to go for more expensive options. It's also very true that a lot of meat is badly mislabelled - 'outdoor bred' pork is an example: sounds nice, but all it means is that the pig was born outside then promptly taken inside for the rest of its life. 

That's why we need more than just campaigns aimed at individual consumers to change things. We need concerted collective campaigns aimed at system change. We have seen small victories wrt things like veal crates and the extension of free-range eggs. Even McDonalds now has higher-welfare pork here in the UK at least. I do think animal farming can be reformed. I'm not sure whether those who campaign for it to be ended help or hinder that process.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jul 12, 2017)

ddraig said:


> i know you're a wind up merchant but that is simply not true
> 
> carnist fragility is the fragileness of the likes of you bees, frank and others who go crazy when their "normality" is challenged. And the grief vegis and vegans get just for having a different diet and ethical choices



To be fair though, you go bonkers whenever your dietary orthodoxy is challenged.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jul 12, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> Many are extremely selective, in fact most that I know. An entire sub-industry relies on it. However, the "vast majority" simply can't afford to be, and their social conditioning has meant that they are thoroughly omnivorous. Are you going to tell a struggling mum that her kids shouldn't eat cheap meat (or meat at all)?


Another reason why this needs to be tackled primarily at the collective level. Telling people who are struggling financially that the factory-farming business is their fault and their responsibility is absurd. Tbh the continued success of McDonald's since switching to farm-assured pork is an example of how 'down-market' food providers can change their ways and stay in business. It is rather ironic for me that their meat is now more ethically produced than the meat you'll get in the local take-away next door.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jul 12, 2017)

ddraig said:


> i know you're a wind up merchant but that is simply not true
> 
> carnist fragility is the fragileness of the likes of you bees, frank and others who go crazy when their "normality" is challenged. And the grief vegis and vegans get just for having a different diet and ethical choices


Veggies and vegans very rarely get grief on here for their choices. Haven't seen a single piece of grief for them on this thread, although I may have missed it. Any grief is almost entirely directed at meat-eaters, most of it coming from you.


----------



## Spymaster (Jul 12, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Veggies and vegans very rarely get grief on here for their choices. Haven't seen a single piece of grief for them on this thread, although I may have missed it. Any grief is almost entirely directed at meat-eaters, most of it coming from you.


 Isn't it just???

He's got an astonishing take on how these things play out here!


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jul 12, 2017)

Yossarian said:


> Most meat comes from factory farms, I'd be very surprised if anybody with doubts about eating meat visited an industrial-scale pig or chicken farm and left more likely to eat meat than before. As for slaughterhouses, just living within earshot of one was enough to put a lot of people I know off eating pork.





Lorca said:


> Indeed, I worked on a farm when I left school and that laid the foundation for me going vegan some 20 yrs ago. Some of the things I saw and did were pretty horrific really. I also went to farming college and we had to wring a chicken's neck then cook and eat it, which to be honest, I did do without many qualms at the time.
> 
> We also visited a slaughterhouse, getting an insiders insight most people will probably never see, happily for them.Some of the things I saw stayed with me for years, honestly. When I finally went vegan, I was living in a small bumpkin town in north warwickshire, it caused me loads of trouble with the natives, especially with the local hunt, who are a bunch of violent wankers even by hunters low standards (tbf I was a known 'anti' at that point). Anyway, nowadays, I reckon veganism is quite easy, back then it was all plamil milk and sos-mix (I eat a lot of fake meat type food.)


I have never been to a slaughterhouse and have no desire to do so, and I very much doubt that a visit to one would be persuasive to me and that I'd suddenly start eating dead animals.  Those two posts reminded of an acquaintance that we met while on holiday in Spain. She owned a plot of land in a town on the outskirts of Malaga from where she ran an animal sanctuary for the numerous poorly treated dogs, cats, horses and donkeys. However an abattoir was built on a neighbouring plot and her animals used to go crazy/scared at the slaughtering times. Even though she couldn't hear anything herself, the animals in her care somehow appeared to be reacting to the mass killings taking place nearby.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jul 12, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> This has gone down a different path now. Few _meat eaters _would condone many industrial meat production practices. Many are extremely selective about the meat they purchase for those very reasons. But the vegan proposal goes way further than that, doesn't it?


I don't think it is a "different path" at all. The sheer numbers involved gives a good indication of where the priorities of the majority of meat eaters lies, and they only pay lip service to the concept of animal welfare. Out of sight out of mind I suppose, as long as the steak or the bacon is tasty, eh? I'm sure that there are some meat eaters who are selective about where their meat comes from, but they are a tiny minority. The majority don't appear to give that much of a damn. 

Vegans do not condone the killing of any animals be it in industrial scale killing factories where the vast majority of the meat comes from, or the "cuddle them before you kill them" lovey dovey grass fed free range organic "humanely slaughtered" meat.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jul 12, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Vegans do not condone the killing of any animals be it in industrial scale killing factories where the vast majority of the meat comes from, or the "cuddle them before you kill them" lovey dovey grass fed free range organic "humanely slaughtered" meat.


And herein lies the problem and the reason why we always end up talking past one another on these threads. I have big problems with the former and no problems with the latter. You find that hard to accept and seem unwilling to make common cause with people like me in order to improve farming practices.

But you do your cause no favours when you fall back on dodgy pseudo-scientific claims against the eating of meat. Those claims are so flimsy that they fall apart under their own weight, and they also contain some pretty nasty unexamined assumptions.


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Jul 12, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> This has gone down a different path now. Few _meat eaters _would condone many industrial meat production practices. Many are extremely selective about the meat they purchase for those very reasons. But the vegan proposal goes way further than that, doesn't it?



Whether or not flesh and secretion consumers "condone" the systematic torture and abuse that gets dead animals and their byproducts on to their plates is irrelevant - they create the demand for it by buying them.

I also call bullshit on the 'Many are extremely selective about the meat they purchase'. Most, despite their pretensions, are happy to chow down on Macdonald's happy meals, Nando's chicken and Sainsbury's mincemeat without a second thought about it. So-called "humane" flesh and secretion products are the almost exclusive preserve of a tiny handful of middle class foodies, and even then their purchase is highly selective.

In any event, even in the best conditions there are still horrific abuses (the repeated forced impregnation of 'dairy' cows and the abduction of their babies shortly after birth is inherently cruel and violent for example) and 99.99% of the animals (whether free range, organic, grass fed) end up in the same industrial slaughterhouse hellholes and die terrifying deaths.

If people care about animals at all, being vegan is the absolute bare minimum that they can do.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jul 12, 2017)

'flesh and secretion products' 

There seems to be an underlying assumption in this kind of language (which is both patronising and arrogant) that meat-eaters and milk-drinkers must be in some kind of denial about what it is that they are doing.


----------



## Spymaster (Jul 12, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> I don't think it is a "different path" at all. The sheer numbers involved gives a good indication of where the priorities of the majority of meat eaters lies, and they only pay lip service to the concept of animal welfare. Out of sight out of mind I suppose, as long as the steak or the bacon is tasty, eh? I'm sure that there are some meat eaters who are selective about where their meat comes from, but they are a tiny minority. The majority don't appear to give that much of a damn.
> 
> Vegans do not condone the killing of any animals be it in industrial scale killing factories where the vast majority of the meat comes from, or the "cuddle them before you kill them" lovey dovey grass fed free range organic "humanely slaughtered" meat.


Aaaaand, around we go. 

There is nothing wrong with killing animals for food. It's not necessarily bad as you suggested last night. I strongly believe that, so we're at an impasse. If those animals can be treated as humanely as possible, great. Unfortunately that's not possible to do economically, all the time, so resources should be spent in providing affordable high welfare meat. 

Don't know what else to say really.


----------



## Casually Red (Jul 12, 2017)

If we aren't going to eat these animals then we will just have to kill most of them . A mass cull of epic proportions . Because this livestock simply isn't going to get fed otherwise . Its the cash from the meat and milk that pays for the grain they eat. The farmers couldn't afford to have all these expensive pet animals just sitting about the place . Gambolling willy nilly . And I'm pretty sure you wouldn't be able to adopt a Fresian bullock and take it back to your bedsit . 

I'll nominate the vegans as first in line in the dairy herd einsatzgruppen .


----------



## xenon (Jul 12, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Another reason why this needs to be tackled primarily at the collective level. Telling people who are struggling financially that the factory-farming business is their fault and their responsibility is absurd. Tbh the continued success of McDonald's since switching to farm-assured pork is an example of how 'down-market' food providers can change their ways and stay in business. It is rather ironic for me that their meat is now more ethically produced than the meat you'll get in the local take-away next door.



 I didn't even know McDonald's sold pork products. 

 I prefer a kebab  anyway.


----------



## Spymaster (Jul 12, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> 'flesh and secretion products'
> 
> There seems to be an underlying assumption in this kind of language (which is both patronising and arrogant) that meat-eaters and milk-drinkers must be in some kind of denial about what it is that they are doing.


 It's a recent thing for Jeff too. 

We've lost him to the twat-side


----------



## Spymaster (Jul 12, 2017)

xenon said:


> I didn't even know McDonald's sold pork products.


Bacon


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jul 12, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> This rubbish about cooking is dangerous nonsense. We have evolved alongside our ability to cook and otherwise break down the chemicals in our foods to such an extent that a human eating a wholly raw diet (no cooking, pickling, curing or marinading) will very quickly become ill. We need to begin the digestion process for at least some of our diet before the food enters our bodies. We have found various methods of doing this, and due to using these methods, we have over time evolved to depend on them, as is the way with evolution.
> 
> Attacking the eating of a foodstuff because we have to cook it before we can eat it is unscientific twaddle.


That is your opinion, and I disagree. 



littlebabyjesus said:


> I'm not going to watch your video because everything you say about it suggests that it is complete and utter bullshit. And offensive bullshit at that.


Well you don't come across as being particularly open minded so your refusal to watch is nut much of a surprise and is not much of an impediment to me. Anybody that is interested can watch it for themselves and draw their own conclusions or critique the bits they disagree with. That's how civilised sensible debates work. You appear to prefer the alternative of thowing your toys out of the pram and claiming to be deeply offended because your preferred eating style is under scrutiny. Wow.


----------



## Casually Red (Jul 12, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> It's a recent thing for Jeff too.
> 
> We've lost him to the twat-side



Mother nature has a way of balancing this out .

My mates fiancée  was a vegan since her teens but since she moved in with him she's become a pretty rabid carnivore . Making up for lost time . Wouldn't surprise me if she went on the Atkins diet .


----------



## xenon (Jul 12, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> Bacon




 Oh yeah, never had one of those McMuffin things.  

 I just had some chicken sausages, red onion and mustard in pitter bread for lunch.  Don't know who will need to know that but there you are.   back to work, another   Couple of pages by teatime.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jul 12, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> That is your opinion, and I disagree.


No, it's not a question of opinion. As another poster used to be fond of saying, you're entitled to your own opinion, but you're not entitled to your own facts.


----------



## xenon (Jul 12, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> That is your opinion, and I disagree.
> 
> Well you don't come across as being particularly open minded so your refusal to watch is nut much of a surprise and is not much of an impediment to me. Anybody that is interested can watch it for themselves and draw their own conclusions or critique the bits they disagree with. That's how civilised sensible debates work. You appear to prefer the alternative of thowing your toys out of the pram and claiming to be deeply offended because your preferred eating style is under scrutiny. Wow.




 You have been posting some bright nonsense here.  People don't cook meat because they wish to hide from what it is.  Sausages, as mentioned, are a convenient shape and packaged form of various food stuffs.  You of course get good and bad ones.  Chips are disguising the essential nature of potatoes.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jul 12, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> You appear to prefer the alternative of thowing your toys out of the pram and claiming to be deeply offended because your preferred eating style is under scrutiny. Wow.


As for this, it is also utter nonsense. You don't get the offensive nature of your language about civilisation and savages nor the implications your nonsense about 'natural meat-eaters' have for a wide variety of human cultures. It's nothing whatever to do with my preferred eating style.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jul 12, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> And herein lies the problem and the reason why we always end up talking past one another on these threads. I have big problems with the former and no problems with the latter. You find that hard to accept and seem unwilling to make common cause with people like me in order to improve farming practices.


Make common cause? What are you on about. If you think that some killing is ok, that is your opinion. I disagree and feel it is unnecessary for the majority of civilised humanity. You would prefer if if I didn't express my opinion that I disagree with so called "humane slaughter" and keep quiet. I'm not prepared to do that just to protect your sensitivities. In my opinion they are both wrong, one being perhaps slightly less wrong than the other. What would you say to those who believe that factory farming and industrial scale production is perfectly ok? 



littlebabyjesus said:


> But you do your cause no favours when you fall back on dodgy pseudo-scientific claims against the eating of meat. Those claims are so flimsy that they fall apart under their own weight, and they also contain some pretty nasty unexamined assumptions.


As I've said a number of times already, I am not on any kind of mission to convert or persuade anybody. I'll express my opinion and you can take it or leave it.


----------



## ddraig (Jul 12, 2017)

the arrogance from lbj and others is astounding isn't it
either shut up or say something palatable for me and my choices


----------



## bimble (Jul 12, 2017)

Casually Red said:


> Mother nature has a way of balancing this out .
> 
> My mates fiancée  was a vegan since her teens but since she moved in with him she's become a pretty rabid carnivore . Making up for lost time . Wouldn't surprise me if she went on the Atkins diet .


Dunno about Mother Nature but yeah, my sister's partner was brought up vegan and stuck with it till he was 20 or something, now a massive carcass cruncher.


----------



## Casually Red (Jul 12, 2017)

bimble said:


> Dunno about Mother Nature but yeah, my sister's partner was brought up vegan and stuck with it till he was 20 or something, now a massive carcass cruncher.



Yess...2-1 !!


----------



## Spymaster (Jul 12, 2017)

Casually Red said:


> Mother nature has a way of balancing this out .
> 
> My mates fiancée  was a vegan since her teens but since she moved in with him she's become a pretty rabid carnivore . Making up for lost time . Wouldn't surprise me if she went on the Atkins diet .



Hugh Fearnley-Whittingstall is doing some good work around this too, liberating vegans whose lifestyles were imposed on them by parents, and introducing them to high welfare meat diets.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jul 12, 2017)

Casually Red said:


> Yess...2-1 !!



My mate Anna makes 3, after 30 years of pastyness she's now noming the steaks.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jul 12, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> No, it's not a question of opinion. As another poster used to be fond of saying, you're entitled to your own opinion, but you're not entitled to your own facts.


What you presented wasn't particularly factual, more like cherry picked and incomplete. Your claim that "a human eating a wholly raw diet will quickly become ill". Really? Is that what you call a "fact"? lol


----------



## bimble (Jul 12, 2017)

Growing up as the only vegan at a state school in Hull in the 1980s was.. not very fun apparently. Good to see that folk here seem not to be imposing strict dietary rules on their offspring.


----------



## Spymaster (Jul 12, 2017)

bimble said:


> Growing up as the only vegan at a state school in Hull in the 1980s was.. not very fun apparently. Good to see that folk here seem not to be imposing strict dietary rules on their offspring.


Fancy some deep fried oysters tomorrow?


----------



## Casually Red (Jul 12, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> Hugh Fearnley-Whittingstall is doing some good work around this too, liberating vegans whose lifestyles were imposed on them by parents, and introducing them to high welfare meat diets.



This lot need to learn they lost world war 2 . Had they won we'd all be eating hummus now .

'Hitler Was A Vegetarian' His Former Food Taster Margot Woelk Confirms | HuffPost UK


----------



## mr steev (Jul 12, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> Many are extremely selective, in fact most that I know.


Most of my friends who eat meat would SAY they are selective too.. but they'll still order a meat curry or salami on pizza, or occasionally go to kfc. 



Spymaster said:


> Are you going to tell a struggling mum that her kids shouldn't eat cheap meat (or meat at all)?



I would suggest to any parent that relies on cheap meat to eat less of it and use the money they save to buy better quality.



littlebabyjesus said:


> I think it is true to say that a lot of people are uneasy about factory farming but not sufficiently for them to go for more expensive options.



If people were bothered enough there is a cheaper option... don't buy it.


----------



## bimble (Jul 12, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> Fancy some deep fried oysters tomorrow?


It's a thing I reckon: seafood (and bacon) was definitely verboten for me as a kid - very unkosher.. does seem to make the denied things that much more delicious later.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jul 12, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> Aaaaand, around we go.
> 
> There is nothing wrong with killing animals for food. It's not necessarily bad as you suggested last night. I strongly believe that, so we're at an impasse.


In your opinion there's nothing wrong with killing animals for food. This must be one of those scientific "facts" that lbj was on about. Well that is your opinion and I respectfully disagree with that. In our modern civilised societies there is no need for us to kill animals for food and in fact our insistence on doing so is having many well documented negative effects, which meat eaters appear to be in complete denial of. 



Spymaster said:


> If those animals can be treated as humanely as possible, great. Unfortunately that's not possible to do economically, all the time, so resources should be spent in providing affordable high welfare meat.


Not killing them is pretty damn humane and also very high in the welfare department. I believe it can be made to work economically, ecologically, environmentally and ethically if we used our considerable collectively brain power for better things than military hardware. 



Spymaster said:


> Don't know what else to say really.


You are not obliged to say anything at all, I am not holding you here against your will. You have chosen to respond and you can also choose to stop responding if this conversation is a bother to you.


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Jul 12, 2017)

For me, there is absolutely nothing wrong with killing an animal for food. See also, medical testing.

We may be animals ourselves but we're a rather unique one.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jul 12, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> As for this, it is also utter nonsense. You don't get the offensive nature of your language about civilisation and savages nor the implications your nonsense about 'natural meat-eaters' have for a wide variety of human cultures. It's nothing whatever to do with my preferred eating style.


I now understand why the cattle industry put so much effort into trying to sue Oprah using the food disparagement laws. I thought it was those horrible vegans that were the ones supposedly getting uppity. It is your choice to get offended. If you believe the language to be genuinely offensive then I suppose you can report me to the politically correct police and let them make a judgement, but I don't believe that anything I've said is offensive in fact I think it accurately describes the underlying harsh reality of our food choice decisions and I guess some people would rather not be reminded of it. Try a word association with the words butchery, slaughter and killing. 

As veganomics said earlier, and I agree to a certain extent, humans have evolved and more and more people are less tolerant of cruelty and killing than we were even a few hundred years ago. Of course there are primitive tribes and indigenous folks where killing and eating animals is an inherent part of their lifestyle and I have no problem with that, in the same way that I don't have a problem with the fact that lions need to kill for their food. Those indigenous folks are at the fringes of society and live closely and are more in harmony with nature. The majority of the "civilised" world does not need to live like that and we can easily live healthily without killing and eating animals. 

Even though you claim to be speaking from a factual basis (without presenting any genuine facts), I've yet to see any factual evidence presented by you demonstrating that humans cannot survive without consuming animal flesh. In fact it would appear that the opposite is true and that animal flesh consumption is associated with poorer health and earlier death. 

Anyhow, you appear to be getting rather stressed by this exchange so if my opinion and language is really bothering you that much please don't feel obliged to react or respond. I promise I won't be offended.


----------



## Calamity1971 (Jul 12, 2017)

I thought during this quiet interlude  I would share an Ahhhhh moment that we can all hopefully agree on is just lovely.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jul 12, 2017)

Oh fuck off with this passive-aggressive shit. You still don't get it.

ETA: at PSanchez


----------



## Calamity1971 (Jul 12, 2017)

Seems my timing was out lbj


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jul 12, 2017)

Calamity1971 said:


> Seems my timing was out lbj


Don't worry about it. Thanks for trying though.  It would appear that some folks really don't like their viewpoint to be challenged and get all upset and offended and abusive if you don't agree with them.


----------



## TruXta (Jul 12, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Don't worry about it. Thanks for trying though.  It would appear that some folks really don't like their viewpoint to be challenged and get all upset and offended and abusive if you don't agree with them.


Talking about yourself?


----------



## Yuwipi Woman (Jul 12, 2017)

Calamity1971 said:


> I thought during this quiet interlude  I would share an Ahhhhh moment that we can all hopefully agree on is just lovely.
> View attachment 111208



I see your cow cuddling and raise you with pig belly rubs:


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jul 12, 2017)

Casually Red said:


> This lot need to learn they lost world war 2 . Had they won we'd all be eating hummus now .
> 
> 'Hitler Was A Vegetarian' His Former Food Taster Margot Woelk Confirms | HuffPost UK


Wow. Not this old chestnut again. 

Vegan Sidekick has some good responses to this and all the other poor quality arguments that some meat munchers think we've never heard before...


> *55 Hitler was vegetarian*
> There is evidence to suggest that he wasn't. But let's just skip all that and pretend that he was a vegetarian for the sake of your argument. Presumably the point is, anything that Hitler did, we should all do the opposite. That obviously makes no sense, because as hideous as Hitler was and what he did to jews and other minorities, it does not mean that every single action he did can be compared to that or is even related.
> 
> In addition, why are we singling out Hitler? If you look at all dictators, serial killers, rapists, and tyrants throughout history, you can be sure that the vast majority are actually meat-eaters. So if the behaviour of heinous criminals dictates that you do the opposite, then why are you ignoring all of them and only talking about Hitler?


----------



## Yuwipi Woman (Jul 12, 2017)

Of course, we shouldn't let the chickens feel left out:


----------



## Spymaster (Jul 12, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> In your opinion there's nothing wrong with killing animals for food. *This must be one of those scientific "facts" that lbj was on about*.


(My bold)  

This is a joke post, right?



> Not killing them is pretty damn humane and also very high in the welfare department. I believe it can be made to work economically, ecologically, environmentally and ethically if we used our considerable collectively brain power for better things than military hardware.


And I believe that you are deluded if you think there is a much wider will to achieve this. If not eating meat makes you feel better about yourself, that's great, but don't kid yourself that you're making any difference or that you're going to change anything, because if the above is your aim, you're pissing into the wind. Far better, imo, to devote your energy to something difficult but achievable, like convincing people to eat less mass produced meat and switch to higher welfare. But that's just my opinion. You of course, are free to do as you please.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jul 12, 2017)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> For me, there is absolutely nothing wrong with killing an animal for food. See also, medical testing.
> 
> We may be animals ourselves but we're a rather unique one.



Quite. Can't believe how self-important some people are to think that any of it matters one jot.


----------



## Spymaster (Jul 12, 2017)

mr steev said:


> If people were bothered enough there is a cheaper option... don't buy it.


They not though. That's the entire point. 

This arrogant view that if people care at all for animals they'd be vegan is pure bollocks. I care for my dog, other people's pets, and animals in general, right up to the point that they get eaten. Jeff, and I assume you, just care about them enough not to eat them. It's not a complex conundrum.


----------



## IC3D (Jul 12, 2017)

People make far more fuss about vegans than vegans ever do about animal murderers.

Pretty sure Hitler was advised by his doctor to have a vegetarian diet because of a stomach problem, his meph habit probably put the kybosh on the old boys appetite anyway.


----------



## mrs quoad (Jul 12, 2017)

Casually Red said:


> This lot need to learn they lost world war 2 . Had they won we'd all be eating hummus now .
> 
> 'Hitler Was A Vegetarian' His Former Food Taster Margot Woelk Confirms | HuffPost UK


To misquote someone else:

Really? Because I don't see any Germans going around eating haggis with Yorkshire pudding, and as I recall, we won the bloody thing


----------



## mrs quoad (Jul 12, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> I care for my dog, other people's pets, and animals in general, right up to the point that they get eaten.



I feel as if this sentence is missing a critical clause break, somewhere just after "pets."


----------



## Spymaster (Jul 12, 2017)

IC3D said:


> ... animal murderers


----------



## bimble (Jul 12, 2017)

i was total twat when i was a young veggie, remembering now how i liked to talk about it quite a lot, hoping to make other people incl especially my parents, feel the shame of their moral inferiority.


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Jul 12, 2017)

Genuine question - is the a general vegan position on medical testing on animals?


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jul 12, 2017)

mrs quoad said:


> To misquote someone else:
> 
> Really? Because I don't see any Germans going around eating haggis with Yorkshire pudding, and as I recall, we won the bloody thing



The eat a lot of Big Macs in za Fatherland. Who won WW2 again?


----------



## sealion (Jul 12, 2017)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> My mate Anna makes 3, after 30 years of pastyness she's now noming the steaks.


My ex and sons mother makes it 4. She was vegan for 20 years but now she likes a bit of Sausage and ting.


----------



## Spymaster (Jul 12, 2017)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> Genuine question - is the a general vegan position on medical testing on animals?


They're fine with it


----------



## editor (Jul 12, 2017)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> Genuine question - is the a general vegan position on medical testing on animals?


Is this the start of a cunning and completely unforeseen pincer movement that ends up with the devastating question: "So you'd rather your ill mother die - YES DIE I TELL YOU -  than have her cured as a result of animal testing?"


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jul 12, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> They're fine with it



Cos beagles can't roll fags, so their manky Old Holborn is safe from the pilfering paws


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Jul 12, 2017)

editor said:


> Is this the start of a cunning and completely unforeseen pincer movement that ends up with the devastating question: "So you'd rather your ill mother die - YES DIE I TELL YOU -  than have her cured as a result of animal testing?"


No. What I'm interested is the idea that we all have a moral line in the sand and everyone's is different. Kinda like the idea that by being an atheist you're the same as a Christian, you've just rejected one more of the thousands of gods available.


----------



## editor (Jul 12, 2017)

I always love the assumption made by some that unless Vegans live a lifestyle that is unfailingly 100% consistent with their beliefs, then they must be shouted down and publicly dismissed as FRAUDS.

This process invariably starts with lots of leading questions, with plenty of hypothetical situations being presented in the quest to prove them to be FILTHY HYPOCRITES.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jul 12, 2017)

editor said:


> I always love the assumption made by some that unless Vegans live a lifestyle that is unfailingly 100% consistent with their beliefs, then they must be shouted down and publicly dismissed as FRAUDS.
> 
> This process invariably starts with lots of leading questions, with plenty of hypothetical situations being presented in the quest to prove them to be FILTHY HYPOCRITES.


On this thread, it has generally speaking been the vegans presenting the moral absolutes, including JeffR's pretty unequivocal line that if you care about other animals you must be vegan. We're allowed to investigate those lines, I would have thought, once they have been opened.

If you assume the moral high ground, you have to be prepared to defend it.


----------



## editor (Jul 12, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> On this thread, it has generally speaking been the vegans presenting the moral absolutes, including JeffR's pretty unequivocal line that if you care about other animals you must be vegan. We're allowed to investigate those lines, I would have thought, once they have been opened.


I'm sure we'll be in for a dazzlingly original line of enquiry.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jul 12, 2017)

editor said:


> I always love the assumption made by some that unless Vegans live a lifestyle that is unfailingly 100% consistent with their beliefs, then they must be shouted down and publicly dismissed as FRAUDS.



Which precisely  no one on this thread has done. Unlike some who have been equating meat eating with murder, which is really silly.

I've never killed a cow, I just eat 'em.


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Jul 12, 2017)

editor said:


> I always love the assumption made by some that unless Vegans live a lifestyle that is unfailingly 100% consistent with their beliefs, then they must be shouted down and publicly dismissed as FRAUDS.
> 
> This process invariably starts with lots of leading questions, with plenty of hypothetical situations being presented in the quest to prove them to be FILTHY HYPOCRITES.


All your terms, not mine.


----------



## ginger_syn (Jul 12, 2017)

Watermelon Man said:


> Reasonable response.  Chocolate can be a bit sketchy. Some companies say 100% vegan others are a bit more vague... "we think it is".


If they had been polite it wouldn't have been a problem, but unfortunately they were quite aggressive about it from they start.


----------



## Tom A (Jul 12, 2017)

I have encountered one or two hard-nosed "animal rights" types that totally denounce medical testing for any reason and made it clear any debate with them on the matter would be futile. Otherwise everyone else I met either accept it as a necessary evil or something they acknowledge has benefits even if they would rather see it rendered obsolete by alternatives. A lot of the animal testing abolitionists tend to be swayed by pesudoscience and anti-scientific beliefs too.

This thread could do with people differentiating between vegans (as in people who have a wide variety of opinion on issues that just happen to abstain from consuming animal products) and hardcore "animal liberation" activists, who are generally heavily criticised by people here and beyond, be they vegan or otherwise.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jul 12, 2017)

editor said:


> I'm sure we'll be in for a dazzlingly original line of enquiry.


Well I'll start you off if you like. I have deep misgivings about animal testing and think it is something we should be moving away from wherever possible. That said, a lot of people are alive today because of past animal testing, including both of my siblings. There is no denying the benefits that have come from medical testing on animals, in the case of diabetes dogs, and that, at the time of the testing, there was no alternative way to obtain that knowledge.

I look at the animal testing that goes on today, and much of it I struggle to justify, even where the results are interesting. At the very least, I would like far stringent rules to be in place forcing scientists to justify their research. However, that said, much of the most valuable research and breakthroughs have come on the back of pretty speculative stuff or studies aimed at furthering knowledge without a direct practical goal. I don't have a good answer.


----------



## Yuwipi Woman (Jul 12, 2017)

editor said:


> I always love the assumption made by some that unless Vegans live a lifestyle that is unfailingly 100% consistent with their beliefs, then they must be shouted down and publicly dismissed as FRAUDS.
> 
> This process invariably starts with lots of leading questions, with plenty of hypothetical situations being presented in the quest to prove them to be FILTHY HYPOCRITES.



And then there's the whole question of what their beliefs may be.  Just because someone is vegan doesn't mean you can predict _why_ they are vegan.  There's a growing number who aren't doing it for animal welfare, but instead are doing it for their health, or for environmental reasons.  For instance, if you're a vegan for health reasons, there's no reason why you should eschew leather.  If you're vegan for environmental reasons, you might also exclude almond milk because of its environmental footprint.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jul 12, 2017)

Tom A said:


> I have encountered one or two hard-nosed "animal rights" types that totally denounce medical testing for any reason and made it clear any debate with them on the matter would be futile. Otherwise everyone else I met either accept it as a necessary evil or something they acknowledge has benefits even if they would rather see it rendered obsolete by alternatives. A lot of the animal testing abolitionists tend to be swayed by pesudoscience and anti-scientific beliefs too.
> 
> This thread could do with people differentiating between vegans (as in people who have a wide variety of opinion on issues that just happen to abstain from consuming animal products) and hardcore "animal liberation" activists, who are generally heavily criticised by people here and beyond, be they vegan or otherwise.


I would rather see it rendered obsolete by alternatives, but I'm also very well aware that for all kinds of scientific questions there really aren't any good alternatives. I'm conflicted on the question as to whether or not the ends justifies the means. It's very much a debate that should be held publicly, though. imo this debate is not held often enough nor publicly enough. Unfortunately, it is a brave vivisectionist who talks publicly about their work. They're likely to get shit shovelled through their doors, or worse.


----------



## editor (Jul 12, 2017)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> All your terms, not mine.


Was I quoting you or referring to you in any way in that post? Why, no, I wasn't so there's no need for you to think it's _all about you_.

It was a general point based on the same fucking arguments I've heard from decades: (sneering) "Oh, so you're a_ vegetaria_n, eh.....?"


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jul 12, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> And I believe that you are deluded if you think there is a much wider will to achieve this. If not eating meat makes you feel better about yourself, that's great, but don't kid yourself that you're making any difference or that you're going to change anything, because if the above is your aim, you're pissing into the wind.


Yeah, just keep quiet and don't bother to do what you believe to be right. It's a good thing that the great historical figures, the Gandhis, Mandelas, Rosa Parkes', MLK's, Malcom X's, Steve Bikos, Ken Saro-Wiwa's Marcus Garveys of this world, who fought against major injustice didn't have that kind of defeatist mentality.  I don't claim to be anywhere close to being in their league, and I'm not sure I'd be prepared to put my life on the line in defence of my principles, however on this particular subject I'm not just going to keep quiet and not express my opinion just because over sensitive meat eaters are upset and easily offended when confronted with the reality of their choices. Whether or not there is a "wider will" or not, it doesn't change the principle of the matter.



Spymaster said:


> Far better, imo, to devote your energy to something difficult but achievable, like convincing people to eat less mass produced meat and switch to higher welfare. But that's just my opinion. You of course, are free to do as you please.


I don't know how many times I'm going to have to repeat this, but once again, I'm not on a mission to convince anybody of anything. I express my point of view and listen to other views for reference and perspective. I don't get into a hissy fit because somebody has a different view or disagrees with me. If you think that you're not deluded and that you're not "pissing in the wind" and you want to try and convince people to eat less mass produced meat then good luck to you. That is not my position and I'll speak out against ALL unnecessary killing. In my opinion it is the mindset that thinks it's ok to kill animals for food when we don't really need to do so that is driving the whole meat eating industry, that creates the cheap meat and massive profits for those large food companies who are able to get the economies of scale working for them. Whether or not you agree with me is not really any of my business, that's up to you and you can believe whatever you want, but it's not going to stop me from saying what I believe to be true.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jul 12, 2017)

editor said:


> Was I quoting you or referring to you in any way in that post?


Read to me like you were commenting directly on the post directly before your one, by bees. Read to bees like that as well.


----------



## editor (Jul 12, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Read to me like you were commenting directly on the post directly before your one, by bees. Read to bees like that as well.


Amazingly, I am pretty good  at using the quote function after all these years, and am adept at including anyone's comments I wish to refer to. 

So no, you are wrong. If I wanted to direct my comments at Bees, I would have done so.


----------



## mr steev (Jul 12, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> They not though. That's the entire point.
> 
> This arrogant view that if people care at all for animals they'd be vegan is pure bollocks. I care for my dog, other people's pets, and animals in general, right up to the point that they get eaten. Jeff, and I assume you, just care about them enough not to eat them. It's not a complex conundrum.



I think it's pretty arrogant to think that you have to have meat with every meal and that if you can't afford that then it's ok to buy shit factory farmed stuff instead of not buying it and spending the money on better meat but just not as often.

As you say, social conditioning plays a big part, and that is what needs to be challenged. The idea that veganism/vegetarianism is just a middle class privilege for a start, when infact a meat free or meat reduced diet can be a lot cheaper


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jul 12, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Yeah, just keep quiet and don't bother to do what you believe to be right. It's a good thing that the great historical figures, the Gandhis, Mandelas, Rosa Parkes', MLK's, Malcom X's, Steve Bikos, Ken Saro-Wiwa's Marcus Garveys of this world, who fought against major injustice didn't have that kind of defeatist mentality.  I don't claim to be anywhere close to being in their league, and I'm not sure I'd be prepared to put my life on the line in defence of my principles, however on this particular subject I'm not just going to keep quiet and not express my opinion just because over sensitive meat eaters are upset and easily offended when confronted with the reality of their choices. Whether or not there is a "wider will" or not, it doesn't change the principle of the matter..


This post oooozes condescension. All the figures you name-check here fought against injustice against humans. You slip from them to talk about animal welfare in a way that implies strongly that you're really talking about animal rights. There are all kinds of problems with this move, not least the problem that the vast majority of other people don't share your view that human rights should be extended to other sentient animals or that this is the right framework in which to cast the debate. 

The fight against imperialism and racism was a fight for the equal recognition and treatment of equals. How does that argument extend to other animals? How is it even relevant? Whatever one's views on the ethics of eating meat, this seems badly wrongheaded to me.


----------



## Spymaster (Jul 12, 2017)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> I've never killed a cow, I just eat 'em.


And if you did, it wouldn't be murder. That's impossible.


----------



## Spymaster (Jul 12, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Yeah, just keep quiet and don't bother to do what you believe to be right.


Not at all. As I keep repeating, it's your prerogative to do and say whatever you like. In my opinion it's a waste of time and effort but it clearly makes you feel better about yourself, which is important. So knock yourself out!


----------



## Spymaster (Jul 12, 2017)

mr steev said:


> I think it's pretty arrogant to think that you have to have meat with every meal and that if you can't afford that then it's ok to buy shit factory farmed stuff instead of not buying it and spending the money on better meat but just not as often.
> 
> As you say, social conditioning plays a big part, and that is what needs to be challenged. The idea that veganism/vegetarianism is just a middle class privilege for a start, when infact a meat free or meat reduced diet can be a lot cheaper


I'd agree with this, though I suspect that you'd seek to go the meat free route whilst I'd encourage the reduced industrial meat/high welfare approach.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jul 12, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> This post oooozes condescension. All the figures you name-check here fought against injustice against humans. You slip from them to talk about animal welfare in a way that implies strongly that you're really talking about animal rights. There are all kinds of problems with this move, not least the problem that the vast majority of other people don't share your view that human rights should be extended to other sentient animals or that this is the right framework in which to cast the debate.


...and? So what? If you don't believe that sentient beings have rights that are worth speaking out for then that's your call. The underlying principle is the same, it is only your insistence that other sentient animals are somehow "lesser beings" and so don't deserve the right not to be killed and eaten just for the taste that drives your indifference to their plight. I make no apology for mentioning those historical figures, again if you're not happy with it you don't have to respond. 



littlebabyjesus said:


> The fight against imperialism and racism was a fight for the equal recognition and treatment of equals. How does that argument extend to other animals? How is it even relevant? Whatever one's views on the ethics of eating meat, this seems badly wrongheaded to me.


As I said above, in my opinion there is no difference in principle. I view the animals right to life as equal to that of the human right to life and to not be killed unnecessarily. Of course some folks who love to taste of meat will object to that comparison, but I'm quite happy with it.


----------



## ddraig (Jul 12, 2017)

meh


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jul 12, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> As I said above, in my opinion there is no difference in principle. I view the animals right to life as equal to that of the human right to life and to not be killed unnecessarily. Of course some folks who love to taste of meat will object to that comparison, but I'm quite happy with it.


For clarity, which animals are you talking about here? Where is your line drawn?

To pick up on what bees said, I agree with him that everyone has to draw a line somewhere on this in terms of which animals we think deserve protection and which we do not, even you, unless you're advocating the right to life of a mosquito. Would you object to grasshopper farming, for instance? Serious question - they're animals that are farmed as food in some parts of the world.


----------



## Calamity1971 (Jul 12, 2017)

Anyway you eat meat and fish so you're not a proper person and your opinion here is worthless


----------



## Spymaster (Jul 12, 2017)

Calamity1971 said:


> View attachment 111228
> Anyway you eat meat and fish so you're not a proper person and your opinion here is worthless


Touché


----------



## xenon (Jul 12, 2017)

littlebabyjesus Raising arguments for more ethical meat production with idialogicaly committed vegans is pointless. To them killing animaals for consumption is wrong. That's it. Hense cuddling pigs comments. 

At least that's consisstant. Daft nonsense about cooking aside.


----------



## mr steev (Jul 12, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> I'd agree with this, though I suspect that you'd seek to go the meat free route whilst I'd encourage the reduced industrial meat/high welfare approach.



I'd encourage people to think about it and go with their conscience. I wouldn't encourage a reduction in industrial meat, but an end to it. I think that that's what most people's conscience would tell them anyway. If someone wants to cut out meat all together then great, but if they are going to eat it then at the very least they should have the decency never to eat products from the factory farmed side of it.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jul 12, 2017)

xenon said:


> littlebabyjesus Raising arguments for more ethical meat production with idialogicaly committed vegans is pointless. To them killing animaals for consumption is wrong. That's it. Hense cuddling pigs comments.
> 
> At least that's consisstant. Daft nonsense about cooking aside.


You're right. There is no common ground, sadly.


----------



## Calamity1971 (Jul 12, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> You're right. There is no common ground, sadly.


----------



## Casually Red (Jul 12, 2017)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Which precisely  no one on this thread has done. Unlike some who have been equating meat eating with murder, which is really silly.
> 
> .



Morrissey equated it with pedoism ..and the Jewish holocaust .


----------



## Casually Red (Jul 12, 2017)

Some stuff about vegan death threats here

http://nypost.com/2016/05/18/crazy-hypocritical-vegans-are-driving-me-insane/


----------



## veganomics (Jul 12, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Wow. Not this old chestnut again.
> 
> Vegan Sidekick has some good responses to this and all the other poor quality arguments that some meat munchers think we've never heard before...


Vegan Sidekick is fantastic. I love his cartoons and think they do a good job at countering a lot of the nonsense "gotcha" comments that meat eaters try to come up with.  He needs to fix up his "Under Construction" website. I guess he's busy doing proper work. I'm not sure if you've ever listened to his youtube "ask me anythings", however related to your "pissing in the wind" discussion with the spymaster, here is one of the better sets of questions that vegan sidekick got in this AMA...

Given the strength and ubiquity of non-vegan culture and given the overwhelming proclivity of humans to operate non logically do you believe veganism is ever likely to achieve mainstream acceptance or be successfully normalized in the same way that meat eating currently is?
What factors inform your optimism or pessimism in this regard?
Additionally what steps to you feel must be take in order that we progress society towards this end?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jul 12, 2017)

veganomics said:


> Given the strength and ubiquity of non-vegan culture and *given the overwhelming proclivity of humans to operate non logically* do you believe veganism is ever likely to achieve mainstream acceptance or be successfully normalized in the same way that meat eating currently is?




And again.  Yet another dripping with condescension.


----------



## Yuwipi Woman (Jul 12, 2017)

Casually Red said:


> Morrissey equated it with pedoism ..and the Jewish holocaust .



A lot of the Jewish Holocaust stuff comes from this guy:



> On Oct. 2, Alex Hershaft, _a Holocaust survivor and founder of the nonprofit Farm Animal Rights Movement (FARM)_, sat on the ground with some 100 other protesters in front of the Farmer John pig slaughterhouse in Vernon, Calif., blocking the entrance from two bi-level trucks carrying 200 pigs that had arrived to be slaughtered that day. In the next 24 hours, the pigs would be among 6,000 animals that would be stunned by electrical shock, hoisted up by their hind legs and their necks slit in the plant, which is the largest pig slaughterhouse on the West Coast.
> 
> The demonstration was just one of more than 100 such protests held across the United States and in other countries commemorating FARM’s annual World Farm Animals Day.
> 
> ...



http://jewishjournal.com/news/los_angeles/108867/

(As far as Morrisey goes, I suspect he'd be an asshat no matter what he decided to eat.)


----------



## T & P (Jul 12, 2017)

Top marks to the OP Watermelon Man anyway. I see his total post count on these boards remains at ten and has not posted or even been logged in, whilst logged in as himself at least, since yesterday lunchtime. A masterclass in the art of lighting the touch paper and stepping back to enjoy the show.


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Jul 12, 2017)

Yuwipi Woman said:


> A lot of the Jewish Holocaust stuff comes from this guy:
> http://jewishjournal.com/news/los_angeles/108867/



Powerful talk from him here:


----------



## UnderAnOpenSky (Jul 12, 2017)

Tbf to the vegans on this one the only reason I can come up with to eat meat is that it tastes good. If we were to start designing a food system that provides for a many people as possible with the least amount of environmentally impact I'm pretty sure meat would not feature highly. 

And yes I had a burger from a dodgy takeaway in Portmadoc earlier this evening.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jul 12, 2017)

UnderAnOpenSky said:


> Tbf to the vegans on this one the only reason I can come up with to eat meat is that it tastes good. If we were to start designing a food system that provides for a many people as possible with the least amount of environmentally impact I'm pretty sure meat would not feature highly.


imo this is the most honest and straightforward type of response that I've heard. The other responses just sound like excuses and attempts at justification. I have a preference for straight talking folks who don't try to wriggle out and create distractions like some of the more strident vegan haters in this thread complaining about being offended and patronised. 

As much as I disapprove of the lower animal welfare standards that some of the oriental countries appear to have, at least they don't try to hide it and pretend that it's not happening.


----------



## ash (Jul 12, 2017)

Celyn said:


> What about vegetables? Some are fine raw, but I wouldn't much fancy eating raw potato or turnip, and we do really quite a lot of processing to things like wheat to make it into pasta or bread.


I love both potato and turnip raw, strange but true


----------



## Casually Red (Jul 12, 2017)

UnderAnOpenSky said:


> Tbf to the vegans on this one the only reason I can come up with to eat meat is that it tastes good. If we were to start designing a food system that provides for a many people as possible with the least amount of environmentally impact I'm pretty sure meat would not feature highly.
> 
> And yes I had a burger from a dodgy takeaway in Portmadoc earlier this evening.



Im not fussed about being fair to any loons that believe we are mass murderers for eating a kebab . It's pretty insulting as well as completely stupid .

Here are some reasons .

Why All Humans Need to Eat Meat for Health

9 Reasons Why Eating Meat Is Good For Health


----------



## xenon (Jul 12, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> imo this is the most honest and straightforward type of response that I've heard. The other responses just sound like excuses and attempts at justification. I have a preference for straight talking folks who don't try to wriggle out and create distractions like some of the more strident vegan haters in this thread complaining about being offended and patronised.
> 
> As much as I disapprove of the lower animal welfare standards that some of the oriental countries appear to have, at least they don't try to hide it and pretend that it's not happening.


 Where is this vegan hating on this thread?

 Just because your view is logically consistent, doesn't give you  a free pass to spout shit.  To miss represent people. No one is hating on vegans as far as I can tell.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jul 12, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> For clarity, which animals are you talking about here? Where is your line drawn?
> 
> To pick up on what bees said, I agree with him that everyone has to draw a line somewhere on this in terms of which animals we think deserve protection and which we do not, even you, unless you're advocating the right to life of a mosquito. Would you object to grasshopper farming, for instance? Serious question - they're animals that are farmed as food in some parts of the world.


I try to avoid killing any animals wherever possible that includes insects and rodents and other "vermin". You're free to do whatever your conscience tells you. I grasshopper burgers is not something that sounds appealing to me although I'm sure they can be made to taste nice with the seasoning.


----------



## UnderAnOpenSky (Jul 12, 2017)

Casually Red said:


> Im not fussed about being fair to any loons that believe we are mass murderers for eating a kebab . It's pretty insulting as well as completely stupid .
> 
> Here are some reasons .
> 
> Why All Humans Need to Eat Meat for Health



Except thats clearly bollocks as plenty of people manage just fine without meat. Humans are very adaptable creatures, which is why we've managed spread to most corners of the planet. There have been people living of a vegan diet in India for example for a long time it was even considered an option in the West.


----------



## xenon (Jul 12, 2017)

It is perfectly possible to live a healthy life style and enjoy good food with a vegan diet.  I mean sure, it takes a lot of effort. But that isn't why I don't do it.


----------



## xenon (Jul 12, 2017)

Actually, not quite true. I would eat less meat if therefore et cetera. But I would still eat meat.


----------



## Casually Red (Jul 12, 2017)

UnderAnOpenSky said:


> Except thats clearly bollocks as plenty of people manage just fine without meat. Humans are very adaptable creatures, which is why we've managed spread to most corners of the planet. There have been people living of a vegan diet in India for example for a long time *it was even considered an option in the West*.



By Hitler .

Long term vegetarian diet changes human DNA raising risk of cancer and heart disease

http://nypost.com/2015/11/04/my-vegan-diet-almost-killed-me/

Vegetarians are unhealthy and 'mentally disturbed', says new research


----------



## gentlegreen (Jul 12, 2017)

xenon said:


> It is perfectly possible to live a healthy life style and enjoy good food with a vegan diet.  I mean sure, it takes a lot of effort. But that isn't why I don't do it.


It takes zero effort to live a healthy lifestyle with a vegan diet.
I struggle to find a reason to eat mammal or bird meat from a health point of view.
EDIT :-
The longest-lived group of people are Adventist vegetarians and vegans.
The runners-up in Okinawa eat a bit of pork and fish, but it's not clear what they get from that - perhaps B12 ...


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jul 12, 2017)




----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jul 12, 2017)

gentlegreen said:


> It takes zero effort to live a healthy lifestyle with a vegan diet.
> I struggle to find a reason to eat mammal or bird meat from a health point of view.


Have you not read any of Casually Red's quickly googled links? Vegans and vegetarians are apparently as sick as fuck.


----------



## Nine Bob Note (Jul 12, 2017)

ash said:


> I love both potato and turnip raw, strange but true


----------



## xenon (Jul 12, 2017)

gentlegreen said:


> It takes zero effort to live a healthy lifestyle with a vegan diet.
> I struggle to find a reason to eat mammal or bird meat from a health point of view.




 No offence GG, honestly.  But I have read your posts about eating a kilo of sprouts and all that. No thank you very much.  So I won't be taking dietary advice from you. That said I have enjoyed good vegan meals from time to time.


----------



## UnderAnOpenSky (Jul 13, 2017)

The Hitler thing has also been shown to be bollocks. Eating meat more then very occasionally for most people in Europe would have been a far away dream.

As a meat eater I totally accept that its a valuable food source, but our modern very meat heavy diets are probably more alien to the way that much if humanity has lived then not eating it all.


----------



## gentlegreen (Jul 13, 2017)

xenon said:


> No offence GG, honestly.  But I have read your posts about eating a kilo of sprouts and all that. No thank you very much.  So I won't be taking dietary advice from you. That said I have enjoyed good vegan meals from time to time.


I simply researched optimal nutrition and found that cruciferous veggies are at the top of the list. Embarassingly it was news to me and I was 100 percent vegan for over 20 years ...
During my first omnivorous experiment (fish, dairy, eggs), I mistakenly believed that one could live 100 percent on fish ...


----------



## xenon (Jul 13, 2017)

Well.  You live and learn. Sometimes you learn by others mistakes.


----------



## Casually Red (Jul 13, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Have you not read any of Casually Red's quickly googled links? Vegans and vegetarians are apparently as sick as fuck.



And mentalists . As illustrated by those loony tune cartoons declaring an equivalence between human beings and sausages .


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jul 13, 2017)

UnderAnOpenSky said:


> The Hitler thing has also been shown to be bollocks. Eating meat more then very occasionally for most people in Europe would have been a far away dream.
> 
> As a meat eater I totally accept that its a valuable food source, but our modern very meat heavy diets are probably more alien to the way that much if humanity has lived then not eating it all.


They don't really care that the Hitler thing is bollocks. Some folks will try desperately to cling onto any old argument even lame and illogical ones, in order to excuse and justify their habits and completely ignore the wealth of evidence that supports diets free of animal products or at least reduced consumption. They really are digging their heels in, bless 'em.


----------



## Casually Red (Jul 13, 2017)

UnderAnOpenSky said:


> The Hitler thing has also been shown to be bollocks. Eating meat more then very occasionally for most people in Europe would have been a far away dream.
> 
> As a meat eater I totally accept that its a valuable food source, but our modern very meat heavy diets are probably more alien to the way that much if humanity has lived then not eating it all.



It hasn't been shown to be bollocks at all . His food tester confirmed it . 

I also take it that you've never heard of hunter gatherer human societies ...basically what all humans did everywhere . They weren't hunting sprouts or turnips . They were hunting meat . Nothing alien about it .


----------



## Casually Red (Jul 13, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> They don't really care that the Hitler thing is bollocks. Some folks will try desperately to cling onto any old argument even lame and illogical ones, in order to excuse and justify their habits and completely ignore the wealth of evidence that supports diets free of animal products or at least reduced consumption. They really are digging their heels in, bless 'em.



The hitler thing isn't bollocks at all . The nazis actively promoted vegetarianism .

Adolf Hitler and vegetarianism - Wikipedia

Animal welfare in Nazi Germany - Wikipedia


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jul 13, 2017)

Casually Red said:


> It hasn't been shown to be bollocks at all . His food tester confirmed it .
> 
> I also take it that you've never heard of hunter gatherer human societies ...basically what all humans did everywhere . They weren't hunting sprouts or turnips . They were hunting meat . Nothing alien about it .


Dude, you need to go away and do a bit more studying, you are clearly out of your depth. Quickly googling anything you can find that is critical of vegans isn't proper research. I would recommend some books to you but it would probably be a waste of time so I'm not going to bother and will save it for those genuinely interested.


----------



## xenon (Jul 13, 2017)

For balance. The whole Hitler was a vegetarian thing.  Humans have always hunted for meat.  Who fucking cares.   Eating   lasagna  isn't  expression of natural hunter gathering instinct.


----------



## Casually Red (Jul 13, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Dude, you need to go away and do a bit more studying, you are clearly out of your depth. Quickly googling anything you can find that is critical of vegans isn't proper research. I would recommend some books to you but it would probably be a waste of time so I'm not going to bother and will save it for those genuinely interested.



Books written by vegans !!

And I have been studying . I found these guys..and learned about "speciesism " which is a thing every bit as bad as racism apparently .


----------



## Calamity1971 (Jul 13, 2017)

Is dickheadism a thing CR? 
 
It's amazing the amount of fruit loops that have no relevance to a debate you can find if you search long enough


----------



## gentlegreen (Jul 13, 2017)

Casually Red said:


> I also take it that you've never heard of hunter gatherer human societies ...basically what all humans did everywhere . They weren't hunting sprouts or turnips . They were hunting meat . Nothing alien about it .


Are you volunteering to live like the Inuit on whale blubber ?
People used to live like that because they had no choice

This is a very comprehensive series debunking the paleo myths :-


----------



## veganomics (Jul 13, 2017)

Calamity1971 said:


> Is dickheadism a thing CR?
> View attachment 111252
> It's amazing the amount of fruit loops that have no relevance to a debate you can find if you search long enough
> View attachment 111253


Isn't it amazing the stuff you can find nowadays. Mr Red appears to be our very own home grown instant PHD Google scholar. Books? Who needs them.


----------



## phillm (Jul 13, 2017)

I bet that veggie loving mass murderer Hitler ate eggs and dairy products  from time to time and he was certainly angry , nay livid for most of it. Thank god he lost....

_An extended chapter of our talk was devoted by the Führer to the vegetarian question. He believes more than ever that meat-eating is harmful to humanity. Of course he knows that during the war we cannot completely upset our food system. After the war, however, he intends to tackle this problem also. Maybe he is right. Certainly the arguments that he adduces in favor of his standpoint are very compelling.[6]_


----------



## UnderAnOpenSky (Jul 13, 2017)

Casually Red said:


> It hasn't been shown to be bollocks at all . His food tester confirmed it .
> 
> I also take it that you've never heard of hunter gatherer human societies ...basically what all humans did everywhere . They weren't hunting sprouts or turnips . They were hunting meat . Nothing alien about it .



No, but they certainly gathered tubers, nuts and berries. Hunter gatherers are a brilliant example of how adaptable humans can be.


----------



## phillm (Jul 13, 2017)

Casually Red said:


> We all naturally take a dump . Doesn't mean we want to look at people doing it .
> 
> We aren't all Tory mps/ Germans .



You're talking shit.


----------



## antimata (Jul 13, 2017)

made it through 12 pages....

yes angry anyone that pushes their pretentious crap on me annoys.....


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jul 13, 2017)

So, in summary:

The idea that having to cook something before eating it shows that we shouldn't be eating it is absurd, anti-scientific, ahistorical crap.

The idea that we are not 'natural meat eaters' is similarly absurd, anti-scientific, ahistorical crap. 

Humans are flexible omnivores, able to thrive on a wide variety of diets, including a vegan one. 

Eating meat in industrialised societies is a choice.

Producing meat generally takes a lot more energy than producing the same amount of nutrition from plants, so potentially we can feed more people with less if none of us ate meat. 

Lots of meat in our diets generally isn't good for us, although there are exceptions (Inuit, for example) and you can't meaningfully separate diet from wider lifestyle issues such as exercise levels. Meat can form part of a perfectly healthy diet.

Many of the animals involved in industrialised farming live horrific lives, unable to express their natural behaviours. They suffer. 


Probably most of us agree with most of the above. But then we encounter the sharp point of division: 
Is eating meat in and of itself, where there is an option not to, morally wrong? 
And at that point, we start talking past one another.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 13, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Producing meat generally takes a lot more energy than producing the same amount of nutrition from plants, so potentially we can feed more people with less if none of us ate meat.


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Jul 13, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> So, in summary:
> 
> The idea that having to cook something before eating it shows that we shouldn't be eating it is absurd, anti-scientific, ahistorical crap.
> 
> ...


Less of this sense and reason on these threads thank you very much


----------



## gentlegreen (Jul 13, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Lots of meat in our diets generally isn't good for us, although there are exceptions (Inuit, for example)


disproved a long time ago - though eating the meat raw probably helped - and they got stored glycogen from the meat as carbs.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jul 13, 2017)

gentlegreen said:


> disproved a long time ago - though eating the meat raw probably helped - and they got stored glycogen from the meat as carbs.


Can't find it at the moment, but I linked on here before to a study comparing meat as a percentage of diet across different cultures. Inuit were off the scale compared to others, to an extent that conventional wisdom would say that they should be dropping dead from it, where in fact they were not at all, so I'm not quite sure what you mean by 'disproved'.


----------



## gentlegreen (Jul 13, 2017)

So you're saying they're not _*quite *_as short-lived as would be expected.
It's not a good reason to use it as justification for eating more than the minimum amount of meat to supply whatever nutrients that are deemed beneficial.

What they also suffered from was hellish constipation.

Matshishkapeu - Wikipedia


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jul 13, 2017)

I agree that it's not a justification for eating meat. I didn't present it as a justification for eating meat, merely an illustration of the flexibility of the human diet.

Generally speaking, humans need to have vegetables in our diets but we don't need meat.


----------



## mrs quoad (Jul 13, 2017)

veganomics said:


> Isn't it amazing the stuff you can find nowadays. Mr Red appears to be our very own home grown instant PHD Google scholar. Books? Who needs them.


That's far from the worst approach.

Books are invariably vastly out of date, and unless you're buying extortionately priced academic texts, are unlikely to have been peer reviewed.

Google scholar gives you an instant citation count (giving some measure of an article's impact / credibility), can be filtered for recent sources, and indexes most of the peer reviewed journals I need for my field.

Yeah, I might head towards a proper systematic search on databases that academics like to rub our thighs at the mere mention of, but - tbf - rarely.


----------



## antimata (Jul 13, 2017)

*


----------



## ddraig (Jul 13, 2017)




----------



## veganomics (Jul 13, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> So, in summary:
> 
> The idea that having to cook something before eating it shows that we shouldn't be eating it is absurd, anti-scientific, ahistorical crap.
> 
> The idea that we are not 'natural meat eaters' is similarly absurd, anti-scientific, ahistorical crap.


Wow, check out that tone.  ...and to think that one of the main (and imo rather petty) objections coming from the anti-vegans on this thread was to the use of the word "carnism".
Anyway, I DISAGREE.
Milton Mills covered this very well imo, and with plenty of science. Of course the closed minded "I ain't gonna watch your vegan crap, laa laa laaa I can't hear you" folks won't have seen any of it and are not the type that are prepared to entertain the possibility that there may be some merit in another viewpoint. Their loss.



littlebabyjesus said:


> Humans are flexible omnivores, able to thrive on a wide variety of diets, including a vegan one.


Partially AGREE. Humans can indeed eat a wide variety of "foods", HOWEVER it also depends on ones interpretation of the word "omnivore". Humans have demonstrated adaptability and have been able to use the tools and techniques developed over time in order to be able to eat stuff that they wouldn't have been able to before or would not be pleasant to eat. Does that really make humans omnivores?  imo it's NOT a straightfoward, clear cut yes/no. Here's an article that I have in my favourites discussing some of the key points in the "omnivore" debate...
Humans are natural plant-eaters -- in-depth article



littlebabyjesus said:


> Eating meat in industrialised societies is a choice.


AGREE. We do not have to eat meat to live healthily in industrial societies, but many choose to do so.



littlebabyjesus said:


> Producing meat generally takes a lot more energy than producing the same amount of nutrition from plants, so potentially we can feed more people with less if none of us ate meat.


AGREE, ...and also there is a heavy negative environmental and ecological impact resulting from our collective choice to eat meat when we don't really have to.



littlebabyjesus said:


> Lots of meat in our diets generally isn't good for us, although there are exceptions (Inuit, for example) and you can't meaningfully separate diet from wider lifestyle issues such as exercise levels. Meat can form part of a perfectly healthy diet.


AGREE...(sort of). Too much of anything is by definition too much. It is possible to live a healthy life with meat as part of the diet. It is also possible to live a healthy life without meat as well for most of us, and that is my preference when taking into account all the other negatives of meat eating.


littlebabyjesus said:


> Many of the animals involved in industrialised farming live horrific lives, unable to express their natural behaviours. They suffer.


AGREE...however, you appear to be ignoring what I consider to be the big elephant in the room, you know, that small thing called DEATH, which is the ultimate aim. I include the killing bit as part of the suffering. Of course no animal would choose to be poorly treated and crammed into industrialized farm factories, however even the ones that are "free" to roam and have their tummies tickled, would also not want or choose to be killed. Although there are some who would disagree with that...



Spoiler: Mercy Slaughter - Content Warning!










littlebabyjesus said:


> Probably most of us agree with most of the above. But then we encounter the sharp point of division:
> Is eating meat in and of itself, where there is an option not to, morally wrong?
> And at that point, we start talking past one another.


I don't think it's just that there is a difference of opinion, it is the tone in which the differences are expressed. Vegans are often accused of trying to force their beliefs on others, however this has not been my experience (of course I might be biased), and in this thread it has been the folks objecting to the idea of veganism who have been the ones on the whole getting upset when people don't agree with their point of view. "How dare you not agree with me, what are you some kind of fucking deluded loon?".

I'll keep repeating this until the cows come home (hopefully not to be butchered), I'm fine with people who have a different opinion. I have no wish to try and convert or persuade anybody. If you disagree with me that is ok, I'm not going to berate you or have a hissy fit because you have a different perspective.

I do believe that killing animals for food when there is no need to do so is unethical. It is also my view that one of the things that allows us to do that more readily is to see animals as lesser beings and not worthy of the right to life as humans are. Even though some here are uncomfortable with these sorts of comparisons, In my opinion it is this type of attitude which also makes it easier to disregard the welfare of any group of people that we don't get on with. All you need to do is de-humanise them and lower their status to that of animals (or even lower). Slavery was possible because of the widespread belief that certain people were "lesser" beings, a view that was supported by the writings of prominent thinkers and scientists.
The persecution of the jews by the nazis was possible because they viewed jews as "lesser" beings and therefore not subject to the same sort of rules of compassion and humanity and so treating them badly and killing them was no big deal. In my opinion animals deserve the same right to life as we do. It's that simple. Many people disagree with that point of view, but there's not a lot I can do about that. I'm always willing to consider any other views, however so far I haven't found the view that it is ok to kill animals to be a compelling one.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jul 13, 2017)

Aside perhaps from Casually Red, I don't see any 'anti-vegans' on this thread at all, unless you define 'anti-vegan' as anyone who isn't vegan.


----------



## ddraig (Jul 13, 2017)

Seriously veganomics don't waste your efforts on the righteous conceited fool LBJ
He does this on all kinds of topics and always about veganism
Just do a search of his posts on the subject


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jul 13, 2017)

btw that article is wrong about chimps. Many chimps regularly eat meat, although the article is right that it doesn't form the majority of their diets and they can survive without it. Bit like us. Here's an article about how in one area, chimps are hunting certain monkeys to the verge of extinction. 

It's also an odd distinction to say that insects somehow aren't meat. Insects have muscles made of similar proteins to the muscles of other animals. There's no good reason not to classify insects as meat.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jul 13, 2017)

The article's author has also clearly never eaten sashimi, which tastes better with dips, but is also lovely just on its own.



> *The next person you meet 					 head-on who claims meat is "tasty," stop him in his tracks 					 and insist that he eat a large plate of plain, unseasoned, 					 boiled beef or boiled chicken in front of you; note their 					 displeasure.  *


----------



## DotCommunist (Jul 13, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> btw that article is wrong about chimps. Many chimps regularly eat meat, although the article is right that it doesn't form the majority of their diets and they can survive without it. Bit like us. Here's an article about how in one area, chimps are hunting certain monkeys to the verge of extinction.
> 
> It's also an odd distinction to say that insects somehow aren't meat. Insects have muscles made of similar proteins to the muscles of other animals. There's no good reason not to classify insects as meat.


These Burgers Are Made of Flies and They Are Amazingly Nutritious


----------



## veganomics (Jul 13, 2017)

mrs quoad said:


> That's far from the worst approach.
> 
> Books are invariably vastly out of date, and unless you're buying extortionately priced academic texts, are unlikely to have been peer reviewed.


Vastly out of date? It depends on the subject matter. There is plenty of useful information to be found in books, and there are plenty of very good books around for those who care to look for them. There is also plenty of good information available online, it's not an either/or.



mrs quoad said:


> Google scholar gives you an instant citation count (giving some measure of an article's impact / credibility), can be filtered for recent sources, and indexes most of the peer reviewed journals I need for my field.


That may be the case, however I was not referring to the actual Google Scholar. It was CR's rather low quality attempts at rebuttal by hasty googling and becoming an instant expert..."here look at what I found".


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Jul 13, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> The article's author has also clearly never eaten sashimi, which tastes better with dips, but is also lovely just on its own.


The whole "oh it's not nice on it's own" argument is spectacularly stupid. It ignores a) the fact it isn't true and b) the whole concept/point of recipes and cooking meals


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jul 13, 2017)

As for not salivating at the prospect of a kill, I also don't salivate upon seeing a field of wheat. Doesn't stop me enjoying a slice of toast.


----------



## veganomics (Jul 13, 2017)

ddraig said:


> Seriously veganomics don't waste your efforts on the righteous conceited fool LBJ


As Douglas Adams might have written, he's "mostly harmless". I'm quite happy to post when I have the time to do so and if I'm in the mood. He hasn't really come up with anything new that I haven't seen or heard before so far and seems more intent in trying to pick holes and focus on side issues than on the underlying principle, and I guess that can be a bit tedious at times, but I'm good thanks.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jul 13, 2017)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> The whole "oh it's not nice on it's own" argument is spectacularly stupid. It ignores a) the fact it isn't true and b) the whole concept/point of recipes and cooking meals


Somehow the fact that we've discovered ways to enhance flavours and ease the digestion of various food stuffs is an aberration, against nature, as veganomics would appear to have it, rather than an ability with which we have co-evolved (lifelong lactase production among many humans  being a recent example of our co-evolution with our cultural inventions). 

This would appear to be even more strict than the idea that we should all be vegan - presumably the against nature argument would also preclude eating grain-based food as well.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Jul 13, 2017)

As far as nature goes we're definitely hunters...


----------



## mojo pixy (Jul 13, 2017)

Unseasoned, unadulterated meat "doesn't taste good" and apparently this is proved by the fact that a plate of plain boiled chicken or beef would be pretty rank. Boiling is arguably the worst way to cook most foods (maybe not eggs, rice or noodles) ... So why _boiled_? Did early humans first cook meat by boiling it? I bet they didn't, I bet they cooked it on a fire.

Also as mentioned, lifelong lactase production tells us we may choose to adopt a vegan diet but it's not technically _natural_ for anyone who isn't lactose intolerant. A huge swathe of humanity has quite naturally evolved to digest milk as adults. We can only pretend this isn't the case


----------



## gentlegreen (Jul 13, 2017)

mojo pixy said:


> A huge swathe of humanity has quite naturally evolved to digest milk as adults.


And enjoy the fat and cholesterol baggage that goes with it.

Why would you want to drink milk from a nutritional point of view ?


----------



## Yuwipi Woman (Jul 13, 2017)

DotCommunist said:


> These Burgers Are Made of Flies and They Are Amazingly Nutritious



and, more environmentally friendly than beef, I'm sure.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jul 13, 2017)

gentlegreen said:


> And enjoy the fat and cholesterol baggage that goes with it.
> 
> Why would you want to drink milk from a nutritional point of view ?


The point is, from my pov, that appeals to evolution are useless. There are enough evolved adaptations to meat/dairy eating to show that humans have evolved to be adaptable in our diets. We are not obligate omnivores but we are omnivores.

Also evolution is a funny, often messy, thing, because it can only work to change things from where they are - if you looked at the guts of a panda bear, you would be convinced it was mostly a carnivore. But no, it eats almost entirely bamboo shoots and leaves, most of which it fails to digest. Does that mean it's not a 'natural bamboo eater'? Not a bit of it - it even has an extra 'thumb' to hold bamboo with, and it has found for itself a niche with a low-energy lifestyle that allowed it to sit all day munching bamboo. Until humans came along and started chopping the bamboo down...


----------



## gentlegreen (Jul 13, 2017)

Of course the bottom line with evolution is that it only needs to get us to reproductive age + child nurturing.
Personally I want to be healthy into my 90s.


----------



## mrs quoad (Jul 13, 2017)

Idk what my raging hayfever is telling me about my natural proclivities towards veganism, but I didn't have anything like this much shit last time I snorted bacon!!!!!!!11111elevfb

www.instantrimshot.com


----------



## Casually Red (Jul 13, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> As for not salivating at the prospect of a kill, I also don't salivate upon seeing a field of wheat. Doesn't stop me enjoying a slice of toast.



If you put butter , dairy spread , cheese or even honey on that slice of toast ...much less dip it in an egg..you're complicit in a holocaust and have no right to live according to some of these people . Such as this intolerant vegan head the ball , taken down brilliantly by the flippin brilliant Maxim Bady . There are vegan activists out there who believe even their own family members deserve to be put to death for not joining in with this tiny dietary fad . It's insane !!


Eta..couple of pics of animal cruelty in that one so be advised .


----------



## ddraig (Jul 13, 2017)




----------



## Spymaster (Jul 13, 2017)

Casually Red said:


>



It's amusing but he has managed to find the biggest fucktwat of a vegan on the planet, tbf.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jul 13, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> It's amusing but he has managed to find the biggest fucktwat of a vegan on the planet, tbf.


It contains a theme that is common to a lot of this, though. If you eat meat, it must mean you haven't thought about this properly - again and again on these threads both you and I are accused of not having thought it through, or we're accused by the likes of ddraig of shitstirring or vegan-baiting, something I never do. The truth is rather the opposite - we turn up on these threads precisely because we do care about animal welfare, we just don't care about it in the _correct_ way. 

So, if you have thought about things properly and still eat meat, then you are evil. That's a common thread even to JeffRobinson's attitude - if you care about animals you should be vegan, implying that if you eat meat and are aware of the circumstances, then you don't care about animals. It's an absolute moral category, and carrying that category to its logical conclusion takes you to this place, where you think 99 per cent of your fellow humans are either ignorant or evil. It's fundamentalism.


----------



## Casually Red (Jul 13, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> It's amusing but he has managed to find the biggest fucktwat of a vegan on the planet, tbf.



Oh no he hasn't .


----------



## Spymaster (Jul 13, 2017)




----------



## Casually Red (Jul 13, 2017)

Spymaster said:


>



The short haired woman with glasses haranguing startled diners half way through this one is actually talking about a chicken .


----------



## Spymaster (Jul 13, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> It contains a theme that is common to a lot of this, though. If you eat meat, it must mean you haven't thought about this properly - again and again on these threads both you and I are accused of not having thought it through, or we're accused by the likes of ddraig of shitstirring or vegan-baiting, something I never do. The truth is rather the opposite - we turn up on these threads precisely because we do care about animal welfare, we just don't care about it in the _correct_ way.


Pah, ddraig doesn't count, he's just a blowhard sheep. I don't think I've ever seen him post anything actually worth reading relating to veganism or animal welfare. He's just a sideline sniper. Always has been. Truth be told, I have wound him up on occasions but there's also been worthwhile debate with one or two of the others but I tend to lose interest in sensible discussion and start taking the piss when they wheel out the hyperbole; murdering animals, secretion consuming, and shit like that. 

And of course, none of them, ever, have been able to explain what's morally bankrupt about eating animals.


----------



## mojo pixy (Jul 13, 2017)

gentlegreen said:


> And enjoy the fat and cholesterol baggage that goes with it.



Exercise makes all the difference though. 



gentlegreen said:


> Why would you want to drink milk from a nutritional point of view ?



From a nutritional point of view, why eat anything except perfectly-balanced astronaut food? Eating and drinking are about much more than just nutrition.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jul 13, 2017)

Casually Red said:


> Oh no he hasn't .



My local loon: Vegan activist says sorry for disrupting Armistice Day ceremony


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jul 13, 2017)

There's a big old debate to be had, for sure, regarding human impact on the planet. Setting aside the 'murder' of individual animals, we're wiping out whole species by the thousand at the moment. Reducing meat consumption and changing meat production processes needs to be a part of that discussion. Do animal rights fundamentalists help the process or hinder it? Given that we need broad agreement to make the system changes needed, my judgement is that they hinder it, with their refusal to even contemplate making common cause with meat-eaters who want to change things.


----------



## bimble (Jul 13, 2017)

I think it's just unrealistic to expect this conversation to ever be rational and logical really. Unless you are working from a resources and land use kind of perspective, if you're motivated by concern for the suffering of animals, its going to be more emotion than logic every time isn't it. Me for instance I won't eat octopuses since I happened to meet one and was really impressed, not going to pretend that makes sense though.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jul 13, 2017)

bimble said:


> I think it's just unrealistic to expect this conversation to ever be rational and logical really. Unless you are working from a resources and land use kind of perspective, if you're motivated by concern for the suffering of animals, its going to be more emotion than logic every time isn't it. Me for instance I won't eat octopuses since I happened to meet one and was really impressed, not going to pretend that makes sense though.



Where were you when you met Mr Pus?


----------



## bimble (Jul 13, 2017)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Where were you when you met Mr Pus?


I learned to dive last year ( in Bali). It was not like I just saw the octopus it really was a meeting of two creatures feeling, - it looked right back at me, went on for ages. Then it moved off really slow and I followed it, as it changed colour and shape and texture. Bloody amazing things, they are.


----------



## xenon (Jul 13, 2017)

gentlegreen said:


> And enjoy the fat and cholesterol baggage that goes with it.
> 
> Why would you want to drink milk from a nutritional point of view ?



Calcium
Protein
Vitamins


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jul 13, 2017)

bimble said:


> I learned to dive last year ( in Bali). It was not like I just saw the octopus it really was a meeting of two creatures feeling, - it looked right back at me, went on for ages. Then it moved off really slow and I followed it, as it changed colour and shape and texture. Bloody amazing things, they are.






They'll wrap themselves around your arm if you hold it out to them.


----------



## Spymaster (Jul 13, 2017)

Casually Red said:


> The short haired woman with glasses haranguing startled diners half way through this one is actually talking about a chicken .



PMSL   

Poor Snow!


----------



## Spymaster (Jul 13, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> There's a big old debate to be had, for sure, regarding human impact on the planet. Setting aside the 'murder' of individual animals, we're wiping out whole species by the thousand at the moment. Reducing meat consumption and changing meat production processes needs to be a part of that discussion. Do animal rights fundamentalists help the process or hinder it? Given that we need broad agreement to make the system changes needed, my judgement is that they hinder it, with their refusal to even contemplate making common cause with meat-eaters who want to change things.


Of course they hinder it because they don't allow for it. Meat is "murder". The end.


----------



## mojo pixy (Jul 13, 2017)

Re. Octopuses, I don't think relative intelligence should be an issue wrt animal rights. It's sentience that matters, ability to suffer. Discriminating by _intelligence _is a step down a very dodgy road.

/edited for grammar


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jul 13, 2017)

bimble said:


> I think it's just unrealistic to expect this conversation to ever be rational and logical really. Unless you are working from a resources and land use kind of perspective, if you're motivated by concern for the suffering of animals, its going to be more emotion than logic every time isn't it. Me for instance I won't eat octopuses since I happened to meet one and was really impressed, not going to pretend that makes sense though.


I agree, although we can't even agree on what is suffering. I think that's a big part of the problem. If an animal lives a decent life then one day has a bolt fired through its brain that knocks out its consciousness instantly, probably before it can even feel anything at all, did it suffer? My answer would be 'no', but those who would grant it a right to life would say 'yes' because it has had its life ended.


----------



## ddraig (Jul 13, 2017)

looks at all the experts!!
happy that you've shut this down with your pathetic postings??
like misogynists on feminist threads


----------



## bimble (Jul 13, 2017)

mojo pixy said:


> Re. Octopuses, I don't think relative intelligence should be an issue wrt animal rights. It's sentience that matters, ability to suffer. Discriminating by _intelligence _is a step down a very dodgy road.


Indeed. But I don't claim that my choice to not eat octopuses but continue eating shrimp or whatever makes sense, not claiming its right or reasonable.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jul 13, 2017)

mojo pixy said:


> Re. Octopuses, I don't think relative intelligence shouldn't even be an issue wrt animal rights. It's sentience that matters, ability to suffer. Discriminating by _intelligence _is a step down a very dodgy road.


I dunno about that. A fair few neuroscientists today don't dismiss the idea that insects are conscious. There seems little reason to think they're not and some reasons to think that they may be. The ability to suffer may very well be rather widespread. 

I do think this is a tricky subject, and my position is as illogical as any - I wouldn't eat a whale or an elephant, for instance, not that I've ever had the chance - but I'm not sure drawing a moral equivalence between all animals that can suffer is possible either.


----------



## Casually Red (Jul 13, 2017)

Fffs

It's octopi .

Murdering all these animals is no justification for murdering the Queens whilst one is at it .

Eta

Just checked  it and I'm wrong and you were right .

As you were .


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jul 13, 2017)

Octopodes or octopuses. Not octopi. Greek, not Latin.


----------



## bimble (Jul 13, 2017)

No its not its octopodes.


----------



## mojo pixy (Jul 13, 2017)

bimble said:


> Indeed. But I don't claim that my choice to not eat octopuses but continue eating shrimp or whatever makes sense, not claiming its right or reasonable,* just an irrational emotional choice on my part.*



I think this catches the whole argument about what we eat and why


----------



## mojo pixy (Jul 13, 2017)

But as it's now also an English word, Octopuses is fine.


----------



## Casually Red (Jul 13, 2017)

ddraig said:


> looks at all the experts!!
> happy that you've shut this down with your pathetic postings??
> like misogynists on feminist threads



This thread on angry vegans ?


----------



## Spymaster (Jul 13, 2017)

ddraig said:


> looks at all the experts!!
> happy that you've shut this down with your pathetic postings??
> like misogynists on feminist threads


Here he comes with all his wisdom!


----------



## UnderAnOpenSky (Jul 13, 2017)

mojo pixy said:


> Unseasoned, unadulterated meat "doesn't taste good" and apparently this is proved by the fact that a plate of plain boiled chicken or beef would be pretty rank. Boiling is arguably the worst way to cook most foods (maybe not eggs, rice or noodles) ... So why _boiled_? Did early humans first cook meat by boiling it? I bet they didn't, I bet they cooked it on a fire.
> 
> Also as mentioned, lifelong lactase production tells us we may choose to adopt a vegan diet but it's not technically _natural_ for anyone who isn't lactose intolerant. A huge swathe of humanity has quite naturally evolved to digest milk as adults. We can only pretend this isn't the case



Steak tastes pretty fine.


----------



## bimble (Jul 13, 2017)

Oysters though, they haven't even got a nervous system, let alone a face.


----------



## Spymaster (Jul 13, 2017)

Casually Red said:


> This thread on angry vegans ?


You couldn't make it up


----------



## mojo pixy (Jul 13, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> ... The ability to suffer may very well be rather widespread .. but I'm not sure drawing a moral equivalence between all animals that can suffer is possible either.



I go with a general assumption that all animals _can_ suffer and in our (inevitable) exploitation of them what we need to do is make sure that suffering is minimal and short. What else can we do? Expecting humanity to entirely stop exploiting the other animals on this planet is absurd.

Can I add that anyway I wouldn't be at all surprised if plants too, suffer. I just think since there's no way we can know what that might be like, we dismiss it as just not existing at all. But we don't know _for a fact_ that it's not the case.

I do think there are interesting discussions to be found inside concepts of animal suffering and animal rights, to do with how we choose to treat other living things, especially weak and vulnerable ones, and why. It gets drowned out by shouting a lot though.


----------



## gentlegreen (Jul 13, 2017)

xenon said:


> Calcium
> Protein
> Vitamins


The first two are better supplied via plants - "protein" is totally over-hyped - in the case of vitamins - possibly D - though you can now get that from UV-exposed mushrooms - and the reccomended dose now is so high you're better off buying pills ....... and you may get B12 because the cows are given B12 shots, and bonus iodine from the teet wash ...


----------



## mojo pixy (Jul 13, 2017)

UnderAnOpenSky said:


> Steak tastes pretty fine.



Some would argue that meat of all kinds tastes best cooked on a open flame. That this is probably how we (humanity) first encountered it is no doubt just a huge coincidence


----------



## Casually Red (Jul 13, 2017)

mojo pixy said:


> Some would argue that meat of all kinds tastes best cooked on a open flame. That this is probably how we (humanity) first encountered it is no doubt just a huge coincidence



And coincidentally that's how our ancestors then started to share left over meat with curious wolves , who eventually became domesticated as dogs . And we began to see animals as companions and not just food / enemies .


----------



## mojo pixy (Jul 13, 2017)

For anyone looking for a bit of human exceptionalism, cooking is a good one. I believe chimps can do it if we show them and give them the tools, but they don't do it in the wild. Yet.


----------



## peterkro (Jul 13, 2017)

bimble said:


> Indeed. But I don't claim that my choice to not eat octopuses but continue eating shrimp or whatever makes sense, not claiming its right or reasonable.


Of course pulling an octopus inside out then bashing its brain in against a rock is not the most efficient way to kill an amazing animal.I've seen them do this in Greece.Many vile methods are used around the world including using extremely strong bleach.Octopus are aware when caught and will do their best to escape back into the water.Strangely enough respect for the animal seems strongest in Asian countries.

Link added:http://www.cephsinaction.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/J.-Pereira-What-we-do-to-kill-an-octopus.pdf


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jul 13, 2017)

mojo pixy said:


> I go with a general assumption that all animals _can_ suffer and in our (inevitable) exploitation of them what we need to do is make sure that suffering is minimal and short. What else can we do? Expecting humanity to entirely stop exploiting the other animals on this planet is absurd.
> 
> Can I add that anyway I wouldn't be at all surprised if plants too, suffer. I just think since there's no way we can know what that might be like, we dismiss it as just not existing at all. But we don't know _for a fact_ that it's not the case.
> 
> I do think there are interesting discussions to be found inside concepts of animal suffering and animal rights, to do with how we choose to treat other living things, especially weak and vulnerable ones, and why. It gets drowned out by shouting a lot though.


Well one broad theme across science in the last hundred years or so is that it has consistently underestimated the abilities of other organisms. I would say that, in order to suffer, one must first be conscious. However, we really don't understand consciousness well enough yet to make definitive claims about where it exists.


----------



## mojo pixy (Jul 13, 2017)

...or does not.


----------



## Spymaster (Jul 13, 2017)

peterkro said:


> Of course pulling an octopus inside out then bashing its brain in against a rock is not the most efficient way to kill an amazing animal.


You think? Sounds to me that if done quickly, that's a pretty decisive way to kill the creature.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Jul 13, 2017)

What would aliens do??


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jul 13, 2017)

mojo pixy said:


> ...or does not.


I see a wide fuzzy line. On one side are rocks. Not conscious. On the other side are you and me, and cats and dogs and pigs and chickens and probably snakes and frogs and possibly even cockroaches. Nemotode worms? More doubtful but I wouldn't dismiss it. Things without any kind of nervous system? Maybe, but if so, it's based on a very different kind of system (which I don't rule out, but equally I can't think how it would work). 

One broad rule of thumb I would put forward that suggests consciousness is 'does the thing sleep'? If yes, then it's switching something off when it sleeps. What is that? Our best guess is that it is some kind of conscious representation - cos that's what we're doing when we sleep. Being conscious does appear to take such an effort that conscious organisms have to take regular breaks from it.


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Jul 13, 2017)

ddraig said:


> looks at all the experts!!
> happy that you've shut this down with your pathetic postings??
> like misogynists on feminist threads


It's posts like this that make people want to wind you up and take the piss.


----------



## bimble (Jul 13, 2017)

Shark steaks for you then lbj?


----------



## Spymaster (Jul 13, 2017)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> It's posts like this that make people want to wind you up and take the piss.


ALL of his posts are like that! It's all he does.


----------



## peterkro (Jul 13, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> You think? Sounds to me that if done quickly, that's a pretty decisive way to kill the creature.


The thing is it's usually not done quickly Octopus go into stress at the beginning of capture, they are exposed to predators and are dragged out of their environment and are fully engaged in trying to escape.They are usually stuck in a secure bag before their brains are dashed out some time later by the capturer.
I'm old I've seen a lot of vile things concerning animals,I grew up in NZ where slaughterhouses are as common as Tesco's.But after fifty years of being a vegetarian I'm pretty bored of vegetables/meat eaters debates.Do what you will there are wankers on both sides and fuck I don't really care what people shovel in their gobs.
By the way I worked in Bougainville in the sixties and a lot of the labour came from PNG believe me the "long pig" and cannibalism references are true.When I was there a local would get six months for murder or cannibalism and an expat life.Payback system and all that, chopping off a finger joint when a child died some men had fuck all fingers left and don't get me started on the treatment of women.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jul 13, 2017)

bimble said:


> Shark steaks for you then lbj?


I'd eat shark steaks. (have eaten them) But I also think sharks are almost certainly conscious beings. 'not being a conscious being' isn't the rule I use regarding what I'll eat.


----------



## bimble (Jul 13, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I'd eat shark steaks. (have eaten them) But I also think sharks are almost certainly conscious beings. 'not being a conscious being' isn't the rule I use regarding what I'll eat.


I get that, sharks just an outlier maybe in the it sleeps = it has consciousness rule you were suggesting.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jul 13, 2017)

bimble said:


> I get that, sharks just an outlier maybe in the it sleeps = it has consciousness rule you were suggesting.


Well, they have quiet periods, which may very well be analogous to sleep. Swimming animals that have to keep moving have to maintain a certain set of functions. Whales do it by sleeping half the brain at a time.


----------



## bimble (Jul 13, 2017)

Remember that nirvana song with the lyric in it that went "it's ok to eat fish cos they don't have any feelings"? 
I thought it said cos they don't have any feet.


----------



## xenon (Jul 13, 2017)

Trees sleep. Apparently. Though I don't eat trees. 

Sleep doesn't indicate consciousness persay. It's a fuzzy concept anyway.


----------



## mojo pixy (Jul 13, 2017)

xenon said:


> Trees sleep. Apparently. Though I don't eat trees.
> 
> Sleep doesn't indicate consciousness persay. It's a fuzzy concept anyway.



Apples, Pears, Cherries, Oranges, Lemons, Limes, Peaches, Plums etc etc .. all just bits of tree really 

Once while tripping I began to wonder if fruit trees might care how tasty their fruit is, because then more animals would eat it and its progeny would be more likely to spread than a dull-tasting tree's.


----------



## hipipol (Jul 13, 2017)

As I am not able to consume minerals directly from the rock, nor to create energy from sunlight, I  am therefor obliged to eat other living organism that can or can predate on those who can who can. Which implies existence based on prior levels of production
All who eat anything other than handfuls of rock are Fascist 
Nice


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jul 13, 2017)

bimble said:


> Oysters though, they haven't even got a nervous system, let alone a face.



There's really not much to separate an oyster from a plant in terms of awareness, sensitivity or cognition. The main reason I don't eat them is that (I assume) they taste fucking foul.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jul 13, 2017)

xenon said:


> Trees sleep. Apparently. Though I don't eat trees.
> 
> Sleep doesn't indicate consciousness persay. It's a fuzzy concept anyway.


Sleep indicates periods of reduced awareness, which suggests periods of increased awareness. I agree, however, that consciousness is a fuzzy concept. Is there something it is like to be something? Does it have a point of view? Or, perhaps more specifically, does it produce a set of images of itself in the world that constitutes experience and gives it a sense of 'me/not me'? They're not easy questions to answer, imo, although I'm very happy to assign conscious experience similar to that which I experience to a lot of non-human animals. I think it's hard to argue against it.


----------



## mrs quoad (Jul 13, 2017)

https://www.urban75.net/forums/threads/do-you-empathise-with-squirrels.350094/#post-14898235

#eversibleanalgland


----------



## veganomics (Jul 13, 2017)

littlebabyjesus it helps if you quote whatever you're responding to as it's not always clear who or what your reply is referring to, or if you are just talking out loud and not expecting a response.



littlebabyjesus said:


> Aside perhaps from Casually Red, I don't see any 'anti-vegans' on this thread at all, unless you define 'anti-vegan' as anyone who isn't vegan.


I was going to recommend a trip to Specsavers but thought that might be a bit too rude. You may not have noticed the many negative comments directed towards vegans in this thread, but honestly they are there. Apparently this is because vegans are fair game and it's ok to harass, mock and ridicule them because they refuse to acknowledge how totally wrong they are. You might be quibbling over the use of the term "anti-vegan" or claim that it is some kind of new fangled horrible slur and a victimisation of "normal" folk, so I'll suggest a few alternatives...vegan critics, vegan super haters, vegan assassins. Ok, I know, those were rather poor, but it's quite late and I'm tired.



littlebabyjesus said:


> btw that article is wrong about chimps. Many chimps regularly eat meat, although the article is right that it doesn't form the majority of their diets and they can survive without it. Bit like us. Here's an article about how in one area, chimps are hunting certain monkeys to the verge of extinction.


As with many of the discussion points, I don't believe that it is the clear cut absolute right or wrong that you appear to believe exists. There are others who have drawn different conclusions.



littlebabyjesus said:


> It's also an odd distinction to say that insects somehow aren't meat. Insects have muscles made of similar proteins to the muscles of other animals. There's no good reason not to classify insects as meat.


It's not something that I'd personally want to spend too much time quibbling about tbh, and I don't see anything particularly wrong with having a distinction between insects and meat.  If you think it's important enough then just amalgamate the figures. Job done.



littlebabyjesus said:


> As for not salivating at the prospect of a kill, I also don't salivate upon seeing a field of wheat. Doesn't stop me enjoying a slice of toast.


Which may indicate that the bloody entrails of dead animals and the fields of wheat that Theresa May was vandalising in her youth are not "peoplefood", ie foods that we could catch/eat/digest easily without the use of tools and heavy processing. That is one school of thought. Of course it is possible that you are not compatible with that kind of thinking but perhaps you can find it within yourself to allow others to entertain alternative possibilities.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jul 13, 2017)

veganomics said:


> I was going to recommend a trip to Specsavers but thought that might be a bit too rude. You may not have noticed the many negative comments directed towards vegans in this thread, but honestly they are there.


Wasn't bothered about a response. I was just addressing some of the issues in the link you provided. There are more issues with it, but tbh I can't be arsed. It's riddled with problems. 

As for the above, I think we're at crossed-purposes. Negative comment towards a poster who is vegan is not the same as 'anti-vegan' as I was using it. I've directed some negative comments towards a few posters on this thread because I had negative things to say about what they were saying. Plus at one point I lost patience with ddraig. But that really wasn't an anti-vegan comment, purely an anti-ddraig one.


----------



## veganomics (Jul 13, 2017)

mojo pixy said:


> I go with a general assumption that all animals _can_ suffer and in our (inevitable) exploitation of them what we need to do is make sure that suffering is minimal and short. What else can we do? Expecting humanity to entirely stop exploiting the other animals on this planet is absurd.


As with most principles, if it's important enough you do think is right and whatever you can within your sphere of influence. As I said earlier, for me the principle is that I believe it unethical to kill animals when it isn't necessary to do so. I don't expect humanity to stop doing what I think is unethical any time soon, perhaps not even for a good few generations, however just because I may be in an overwhelming minority, it doesn't stop me from doing what I believe to be the "right" thing.



mojo pixy said:


> Can I add that anyway I wouldn't be at all surprised if plants too, suffer. I just think since there's no way we can know what that might be like, we dismiss it as just not existing at all. But we don't know _for a fact_ that it's not the case.


The "but plants tho" argument appears to be very popular argument. Even if it were true that plants suffer and can feel pain, we would still require more of that "suffering" in order to feed the animals that we would eventually eat. Not very efficient. There is also another dimension. Fruit bearing trees. One of the more sophisticated plants bearing fruit for humans, one of the more sophisticated animals. Potentially a lot less "suffering". 



mojo pixy said:


> I do think there are interesting discussions to be found inside concepts of animal suffering and animal rights, to do with how we choose to treat other living things, especially weak and vulnerable ones, and why. It gets drowned out by shouting a lot though.


I agree it is possible to have interesting discussions, although probably not in this forum. There seems to be a concerted attempt to sabotage and spoil.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jul 13, 2017)

veganomics said:


> As with most principles, if it's important enough you do think is right and whatever you can within your sphere of influence. As I said earlier, for me the principle is that I believe it unethical to kill animals when it isn't necessary to do so. I don't expect humanity to stop doing what I think is unethical any time soon, perhaps not even for a good few generations, however just because I may be in an overwhelming minority, it doesn't stop me from doing what I believe to be the "right" thing.


Fair dos. 

And I may have confused you with another poster regarding arguments being made, but this position doesn't need an extra justification to be made that humans somehow are not natural meat-eaters. That we can live perfectly well without meat is surely sufficient, and avoids the need to make decidedly dodgy arguments.


----------



## xenon (Jul 13, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Sleep indicates periods of reduced awareness, which suggests periods of increased awareness. I agree, however, that consciousness is a fuzzy concept. Is there something it is like to be something? Does it have a point of view? Or, perhaps more specifically, does it produce a set of images of itself in the world that constitutes experience and gives it a sense of 'me/not me'? They're not easy questions to answer, imo, although I'm very happy to assign conscious experience similar to that which I experience to a lot of non-human animals. I think it's hard to argue against it.




    Why is an elephant different to a pig? Some extra level of consciousness?  Some extra recognition of self perceived by humans?   I might try a more coherent question tomorrow. But to me we do not eschew eating certain animals purely based on consciousness of course.  Cultural informed predilections.  Anthropomorphism  and so on. Speaking as one meat eater to another. Vegans will be horrified at this sort of discussion I suppose.   But it is interesting, what is it to be conscious. How does this relate between us and other creatures, AI.


----------



## xenon (Jul 13, 2017)

Can someone quote the anti-vegan posts then on this thread?


----------



## veganomics (Jul 13, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> And I may have confused you with another poster regarding arguments being made, but this position doesn't need an extra justification to be made that humans somehow are not natural meat-eaters. That we can live perfectly well without meat is surely sufficient, and avoids the need to make decidedly dodgy arguments.


tbh, I don't really feel I need to justify my beliefs or opinions to anybody. I'll express what I believe to be true and it's up to others whether they accept my opinions or not. I am open to listening to other viewpoints and will accept those that make sense to me and leave to one side those that don't. 

I personally don't much care for the sneering tone and mockery that seems to be fashionable, tolerated and even encouraged here, but I think I have a fairly thick skin and it doesn't particularly bother me. I just think that it's a shame that the negative tone tends to spoil what might otherwise be a good healthy discussion/debate.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jul 13, 2017)

xenon said:


> Why is an elephant different to a pig? Some extra level of consciousness?  Some extra recognition of self perceived by humans?   I might try a more coherent question tomorrow. But to me we do not eschew eating certain animals purely based on consciousness of course.  Cultural informed predilections.  Anthropomorphism  and so on. Speaking as one meat eater to another. Vegans will be horrified at this sort of discussion I suppose.   But it is interesting, what is it to be conscious. How does this relate between us and other creatures, AI.


It's not entirely rational, but elephants are clearly capable of a degree of abstract thought, reasoning and long-term thinking, and killing one elephant hurts all those other elephants who knew it. (Gruesomely, that's why during culls they now try to kill whole families. They used to leave youngsters out of a misguided compassion, but all they managed to do was produce new generations of fucked-up adults, not properly socialised and with lost knowledge about how to survive.) According to Carl Safina, in traditional Maasai beliefs, only humans and elephants have souls. Humans living near them have long noticed something special about elephants. Pigs are also pretty smart, mind. It doesn't stand up too well to close examination. 

But then I don't see how, even if were were all vegans, we could live on this planet without still killing other conscious animals that compete for the same resources. We all have to draw a line somewhere on that, regardless of what we eat, and at some point put humans first wrt taking and protecting the resources we need. That's why I have a problem with some animal rights activists' absolute moral categories on this stuff - I just don't think they stand up to scrutiny. 

I've killed chickens and not had a problem doing it. I've witnessed the slaughter of a pig and it wasn't pleasant - it knew exactly what was going on and squealed its head off. Was done very clumsily, which didn't help. I did stop eating pigs for a while, but not chickens or cows or sheep. That wasn't particularly rational either.


----------



## AnnaKarpik (Jul 14, 2017)

Somewhere up thread I believe reference was made to Seventh Day Adventist health studies, the claim being something along the lines they live forever because they are vegan/vegetarian. These studies are referenced all over the internet as proving a vegetarian/vegan diet is best for health/long life. (Health and long life tend to be conflated.)

I was just looking* at this Findings for AHS-2 | School of Public Health | Loma Linda University and find they have the strangest definitions of 'vegetarian'. Most of the study participants in this one (two-thirds!) actually eat dead things 

My two cents worth - angry vegans just irritate me, much the same as the fascist tendency down the pub; 'debate' to some people simply translates as 'listen to me' and the angrier they are the sillier they get. I happily agree with anyone who thinks we should take better care of ourselves and our planet, and be respectful of the many living things we share the Earth with, the devil as always is in the detail. And the moment anyone mentions 'secretions' or 'pus' I know that debate is not on the agenda.

*I was looking to check whether I really did read, in relation to SDA studies, that the 'vegetarian' group who eat some fish are showing the best health outcomes. I will be moving to the seaside before too long and won't have space to keep hens, so vastly reduced egg consumption for me but a world of food opportunity in the sea for me to wonder about.


----------



## editor (Jul 14, 2017)

I wonder how many "angry vegans" people have actually met or know. I've certainly met a couple who drone on far too much about their choice of diet - one often wears clothes emblazoned with the word VEGAN just in case anyone hasn't heard him, but in reality 99% of the vegans I've met/known never even  mention it. Compare that with the much, much higher percentage of meat eaters who feel strangely compelled to start shoving in their oar when they overhear me ordering veggie food.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jul 14, 2017)

editor said:


> I wonder how many "angry vegans" people have actually met or know. I've certainly met a couple who drone on far too much about their choice of diet - one often wears clothes emblazoned with the word VEGAN just in case anyone hasn't heard him, but in reality 99% of the vegans I've met/known never even  mention it. Compare that with the much, much higher percentage of meat eaters who feel strangely compelled to start shoving in their oar when they overhear me ordering veggie food.


This has also been my experience, nutrition experts suddenly pop out from nowhere. I'm beginning to suspect that this whole "angry vegan" thing is an urban myth.

Sure there are probably some vegans who are complete tools, but there are also "normal" people who are also complete tools, the fact that a complete tool might happen to be a vegan is irrelevant, except to those who are looking to find fault and will grab on tightly to any negative story they can find to tar all members of that group with the same brush and make it the defining feature of being a vegan. 

I can understand how some muslims must feel when somebody who just happens to call themselves a muslim does something horrible and they end up having to justify their existence to angry critics.


----------



## Spymaster (Jul 14, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> This has also been my experience, nutrition experts suddenly pop out from nowhere. I'm beginning to suspect that this whole "angry vegan" thing is an urban myth.
> 
> Sure there are probably some vegans who are complete tools, but there are also "normal" people who are also complete tools, the fact that a complete tool might happen to be a vegan is irrelevant, except to those who are looking to find fault and will grab on tightly to any negative story they can find to tar all members of that group with the same brush and make it the defining feature of being a vegan.
> 
> I can understand how some muslims must feel when somebody who just happens to call themselves a muslim does something horrible and they end up having to justify their existence to angry critics.


It's not just about people that we meet irl, though is it? The internet counts too and there are loads of tools that fly into one when veganism is even mentioned, let alone criticised (which rarely happens in reality unless someone's taking the piss or deliberately trolling). This thread, and pretty much every other one on the topic, is ample proof of that.

I don't know many vegans irl. I know plenty of veggies and pescetarians and they'll all completely sound. Of the handful of vegans that I have actually spent any time with, all but one of them have mentioned their diet and lifestyle choice without being asked. I have been in a burger restaurant in Sweden when a demo of 3 or 4 people in VEGAN t-shirts tried to smash the windows but it they were plate glass. The sticks they were using (hockey, I think) just kept bouncing off but it made a hell of a noise inside.

You haven't been abused or ridiculed on this thread and neither has Veganomics. Ddraig has copped a bit because he has masses of form and his posts here have been true to it.


----------



## AnnaKarpik (Jul 14, 2017)

editor said:


> I wonder how many "angry vegans" people have actually met or know. I've certainly met a couple who drone on far too much about their choice of diet - one often wears clothes emblazoned with the word VEGAN just in case anyone hasn't heard him, but in reality 99% of the vegans I've met/known never even  mention it. Compare that with the much, much higher percentage of meat eaters who feel strangely compelled to start shoving in their oar when they overhear me ordering veggie food.



There's that joke, 'How do you know if someone's vegan? Just wait, they'll tell you!' Hohoho.
I've encountered a few obstreperous vegans on the internet, but oddly never been harangued by meat eaters. I say oddly, because I don't currently eat meat, fish or dairy, yet I get vegans preaching bollocks and meat-eaters letting me get on with it. I don't know any vegans* in real life, but the meat-eaters still don't bother me. Anecdote is a fine thing.

*I do know four 'vegans at home' who will eat dairy when out if there is nothing else available, and eat eggs as a treat. They're not angry at all, but then they're not orthodox vegans, are they. All of us are just people living with themselves and their choices.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jul 14, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> It's not just about people that we meet irl, though is it? The internet counts too and there are loads of tools that fly into one when veganism is even mentioned, let alone criticised (which rarely happens in reality unless someone's taking the piss or deliberately trolling). This thread, and pretty much every other one on the topic, is ample proof of that.


I regard personal experience and interaction as FAR more reliable and realistic than interactions with people on the internet, imo it's not even close. The internet is a haven for cowardly trolls who are free to say whatever they want under the cover of anonymity, things that they would never say in that way in a face to face situation. 

It's ironic that you cite this very thread as your example of vegans behaving badly, lol. The bias is so strong. A proper unbiased audit of posts might give a more accurate and balanced picture. It would appear that whenever the topic is raised, that it is non vegans, who supposedly aren't particularly interested in the topic, but somehow manage to attach themselves like barnacles to the thread and swarm, sabotage and trash the threads with all sorts of rubbish and irrelevant diversions. (says he posting a long-ass reply). The "Who's replied" list for this thread is quite revealing. 

I think it would be fantastic if it were possible to have real proper discussion on this topic in this forum for those that are _genuinely_ interested,  but I'm not going to hold my breath waiting for that to happen. 



Spymaster said:


> I don't know many vegans irl. I know plenty of veggies and pescetarians and they'll all completely sound. Of the handful of vegans that I have actually spent any time with, all but one of them have mentioned their diet and lifestyle choice without being asked.


Yeah, if you say so, or to coin that well known internet phrase "pics or it didn't happen". The internet is a ripe breeding ground for exaggeration and fabrication. 

I have actually met many vegans in real life. I've been to various shows, talks, lectures, presentations and was one of the first members of the Fresh Network in the late nineties. I met Chrissie Hynde and Benjamin Z in Friends House in Holborn in the early noughties at a vegan festival, and myself and wife used to organise pot-lucks for the Fresh Network South West London area. I have even presented a talk myself at a Marcus Evans "Functional Foods" conference in Amsterdam 2007, it was a bit like a TED talk before TED became a thing. (and I was terrible, lol) I've met bare vegans. As far as I'm concerned that carries a lot more weight than interacting with anonymous and often obnoxious randoms on the internet. 

The number of alleged bad experiences reported by non vegans is at odds with my real life interactions which is why I'm assuming that a fair number of them are straight up lies or at best exaggerations and misrepresentations.



Spymaster said:


> I have been in a burger restaurant in Sweden when an AR demo of about 3 people tried to smash the window but it was plate glass. The stick they were using (a hockey stick I think) just kept bouncing off but it made a hell of a noise inside.


Wow, "dat sample size doh", lol. I'm not sure what you're trying to get at with these conveniently cherry picked anecdotes, but anyway seeing as you mentioned it, I also have an veggy anecdote of my own based in Stockholm where I worked for a couple of weeks on a project in December 2008. On my first day there I was invited to lunch with the team, they were going to a steakhouse which was apparently very good according to them. When lunchtime came and on the short walk to the eatery, one of the guys asked "you're not vegetarian are you?". "Actually, yes I am" I replied. "Yeah right", he said...and we carried on walking. I'm not sure what made him ask that question, but anyway when it was time to order, I had a plate of chips and an orange juice, and the dude that asked the question earlier, his jaw dropped. "So you really ARE vegetarian!". Apparently he didn't believe me and thought I was joking. He said I didn't look like a vegetarian (whatever one of those is supposed to look like).  

While I was there I definitely did not hit any plate glass windows with hockey sticks. I also remember some years previously working in Frankfurt and we had a team dinner in a some kind of meat place where it was literally only meat that was served, no side dishes, no potatoes, no salads, nada...just sizzling meat served on what looked like thick slabs of slate roof tiles. So I didn't eat anything and just had water or a soft drink. I have had so many REAL LIFE experiences and not just internet interactions, too many to mention including an attempt to order a salad in a snooty Paris restaurant during another team dinner and a leaving do at a Brazillian meat place in Plaza Mayor, Malaga. I won't bore you with any more.



Spymaster said:


> You haven't been abused on this thread and neither has Veganomics. Ddraig has copped a bit because he has masses of form and his posts here have been true to it.


I don't think I ever said that I have been abused, however I agree with veganomics that there does appear to be a rather unfriendly vibe. I have no idea about the history of beef in the forum between members, but regardless, imo it's a bit hypocritical to make such a big deal out of the use of the word "carnism" claiming that it's emotive, loaded and confrontational when the tone and language used and the relentless goading by those of your persuasion has been rather unfriendly. I don't really want to get into personalities here but I didn't think that anything that ddcraig posted in this thread merited some of the more ugly responses. It would probably be better for him if he was able to keep his cool and not rise to the taunts and sneers because it would appear that that's what the people trying to provoke want because then they can say "see look...proof right there...an angry vegan...told you so."


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jul 14, 2017)

Fuck me, that's a long post.

Trolling thread, taken seriously.


----------



## T & P (Jul 14, 2017)

Watermelon Man, where are thou? Come back man, well played indeed


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jul 15, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> I= I don't really want to get into personalities here but I didn't think that anything that ddcraig posted in this thread merited some of the more ugly responses. It would probably be better for him if he was able to keep his cool and not rise to the taunts and sneers because it would appear that that's what the people trying to provoke want because then they can say "see look...proof right there...an angry vegan...told you so."


This is waaaaay wide of the mark.


----------



## ddraig (Jul 15, 2017)

must be if lbj says it is! he is the expert as always 
thanks PaoloSanchez


----------



## MrSpikey (Jul 15, 2017)

Poot said:


> I've always thought it rather odd for people to be defined by what they don't do.



Perhaps it depends on how they don't do it?


----------



## Cheesypoof (Jul 15, 2017)

Vegans dont scare me, or upset me AT ALL. Because I have loads of dishes that I adore making which are vegan and I must say, vegans, meateaters and anyone who isnt a vegan adores .


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jul 15, 2017)

Watermelon Man said:


> OK, I'll get it out in the open. I'm vegan, pleased to meet you.
> 
> I'm vegan because I believe we should treat animals much better in this world, and the environment, and our own health.
> 
> ...



I'm not a vegan because I don't want to be a vegan. Whether one vegan yells in my face; or another one quietly hands me a pamphlet with a smile on her/his face, is not going to make a difference.

My not being a vegan is about me; it's not about vegans.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jul 15, 2017)

ddraig said:


> must be if lbj says it is! he is the expert as always
> thanks PaoloSanchez


His response seemed a little on the weak side, vague and non specific. It's best not to rise to any of the taunts and sly digs. It's the equivalent of "feeding the trolls". I'd be quite happy to have a civilised discussion with anyone who's up for that. When I get time later on I might explore the issue that appears causing irritation amongst some of the naysayers, ie that fundamentalist and thoroughly unreasonable nasty vegans refuse to accept that killing animals for no good reason is an ok thing to do. How bloody dare they, the scoundrels.


----------



## Spymaster (Jul 15, 2017)

Cheesypoof said:


> Vegans dont scare me, or upset me AT ALL. Because I have loads of dishes that I adore making which are vegan and I must say, vegans, meateaters and anyone who isnt a vegan adores .


 Let's see your favourite vegan recipe.


----------



## Spymaster (Jul 15, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> When I get time later on I might explore the issue that appears causing irritation amongst some of the naysayers, ie that fundamentalist and thoroughly unreasonable nasty vegans refuse to accept that killing animals for no good reason is an ok thing to do.


You mean the conversation that LBJ has been trying to have with you all along but that you've eschewed in favour of of passive aggression and snide comments? 

That'll be interesting


----------



## Spymaster (Jul 15, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> This is waaaaay wide of the mark.



It's like they're reading a different fucking thread!


----------



## mojo pixy (Jul 15, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> When I get time later on I might explore the issue that appears causing irritation amongst some of the naysayers, ie that fundamentalist and thoroughly unreasonable nasty vegans refuse to accept that killing animals for no good reason is an ok thing to do.



But we're not talking about killing animals for no good reason. We're talking about killing animals for food, which is a good reason.

The fact I or anyone else don't eat them myself is neither here nor there, or it's not a discussion, it's just advocacy.


----------



## Cheesypoof (Jul 15, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> Let's see your favourite vegan recipe.



I make a really good Cincinatti 3 bean chilli, served three ways (with three alternate toppings like cheese - vegan of course if it can be found - sundried tomatoes, jalapeno peppers, fried onions, oyster crackers...etc). I've made this for a group of vegans and veggies before and they loved it. Its all about the allspice, the fresh chilli, the cocoa powder,  smoked paprika, brown sugar, cinammon stick..... If you have non-vegans joining your table add cheese and sour cream 

Tofu pho - much the same ingredients as a chicken one but with different stock.


----------



## Casually Red (Jul 15, 2017)

AnnaKarpik said:


> There's that joke, 'How do you know if someone's vegan? Just wait, they'll tell you!' Hohoho.
> I've encountered a few obstreperous vegans on the internet, but oddly never been harangued by meat eaters. I say oddly, because I don't currently eat meat, fish or dairy, yet I get vegans preaching bollocks and meat-eaters letting me get on with it. I don't know any vegans* in real life, but the meat-eaters still don't bother me. Anecdote is a fine thing.
> 
> *I do know four 'vegans at home' who will eat dairy when out if there is nothing else available, and eat eggs as a treat. They're not angry at all, but then they're not orthodox vegans, are they. All of us are just people living with themselves and their choices.



YouTube is full of vegans giving out about angry vegans

This is what it would look like if normal people started acting like vegans



I hope that video isn't "inappropriate content " and I don't  get another warning for fuck all . Wouldn't want to piss a vegan off .


----------



## gentlegreen (Jul 15, 2017)

never seen that video before - oh no ...


----------



## bubblesmcgrath (Jul 15, 2017)

Cheesypoof said:


> I make a really good Cincinatti 3 bean chilli, served three ways (with three alternate toppings like cheese - vegan of course if it can be found - sundried tomatoes, jalapeno peppers, fried onions, oyster crackers...etc). I've made this for a group of vegans and veggies before and they loved it. Its all about the allspice, the fresh chilli, the cocoa powder,  smoked paprika, brown sugar, cinammon stick..... If you have non-vegans joining your table add cheese and sour cream
> 
> Tofu pho - same ingredients as a chicken one but with different stock.



That sounds really tasty... the mix of spices and cocoa and cinnamon is intriguing....


----------



## antimata (Jul 15, 2017)

to answer the question yes just yes.

23 pages and counting...


----------



## Casually Red (Jul 15, 2017)

phillm said:


> I bet that veggie loving mass murderer Hitler ate eggs and dairy products  from time to time and he was certainly angry , nay livid for most of it. Thank god he lost....
> 
> _An extended chapter of our talk was devoted by the Führer to the vegetarian question. He believes more than ever that meat-eating is harmful to humanity. Of course he knows that during the war we cannot completely upset our food system. After the war, however, he intends to tackle this problem also. Maybe he is right. Certainly the arguments that he adduces in favor of his standpoint are very compelling.[6]_



I'm not going to link to the video because it's a YouTube channel by a nazi wanker . Who must be a vegan as well . But if you type in " hitler on vegetarianism and raw veganism " there's a few with numerous lengthy quotes from the fuehrer on the topic of veganism . He's even giving out about feeding milk to children . So that makes him a vegan, and not a run of the mill vegetarian . Also seems to want his dog to be one as well .

Hitler was vegan . No doubt about it .

None

The ultimate angry vegan .


----------



## Sea Star (Jul 15, 2017)

but he ate meat.


----------



## Casual Observer (Jul 15, 2017)

Germans invented modern veganism in the late 19th/early 20th century as part of the naturmensch philosophy. They didn't like the growing industrialisation and nationalism in the cities and fucked off up to the mountains to get back to nature. One of them, Bill Pestor, emigrated to California where he influenced the Nature Boys of the 40s and 50s - proto hippies living al fresco in the Hollywood Hills who survived on foraged fruits, nuts and whatnot. The Nature Boys included eden ahbez (lower case please) who released the world's first psychedelic lounge record in the late 50s and Gypsy Boots, fitness guru and sometime actor/TV personality. They in turn influenced Jim Baker (aka Father Yod) who ran the world's best ever cult and released some gloriously demented heavy duty psychedelic albums in the early 70s. Prior to starting the cult, Jimbo had killed two men with his bare hands, had numerous affairs with other peoples wives, possibly robbed a few banks (could be just a rumour) and opened several health food restaurants. Jim tried hang gliding for the first time in 1975, promptly crashed into a hill and died shortly afterwards. What was the question again?


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jul 15, 2017)

mojo pixy said:


> But we're not talking about killing animals for no good reason. We're talking about killing animals for food, which is a good reason.


It's not a good reason imo if it's not necessary, and for most of the planet it isn't. It is therefore a choice, and in my opinion rather a poor choice in the modern world given all the well documented negatives associated with meat eating from a health and environmental standpoint. One of the sticking points appears to be the ethical aspect whereby the meat eating advocates contend that there isn't a moral issue, and my opinion is that it is unethical and that it isn't moral. Apparently the fact that I haven't as yet changed my opinion to agree that killing animals is ok, makes me some kind of fundamentalist. 



mojo pixy said:


> The fact I or anyone else don't eat them myself is neither here nor there, or it's not a discussion, it's just advocacy.


Not sure what you're trying to say there. Are advocacy and discussion mutually exclusive? As far as I'm concerned, I'm contributing to a discussion. Ideas, viewpoints and opinions are being exchanged, as they would be in a discussion. If you are not happy with the format or the protocol, then I'm open to any suggestions or ideas that you think might be better. I don't have a problem with people expressing their point of view for consideration regardless of whether I agree with them or not. What spoils if for me is the pettiness and the cop-outs based on nit picking technicalities and side issues and the trolls deliberately trashing the thread.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jul 15, 2017)

AuntiStella said:


> but he ate meat.


He is a piss-take poster, a bit of a joke and not to be taken too seriously.

For balance, here is another point of view which is a bit more coherent.
--------------
*Before we see the evidence that Hitler wasn't a vegetarian, it's important to look at where the argument that he was comes from, because it's an argument that's rarely made honestly.* People who insist that Hitler was a vegetarian usually just "heard it" somewhere, and immediately assumed it was true. And yet, if you tell them that Hitler wasn't actually a vegetarian, these same people who instantly believed in Hitler's vegetarianism _without question,_ will suddenly demand all manner of proof that he was _not._

*Why do they require such a high standard of evidence that Hitler was not a vegetarian, when they require no evidence at all that he was?  *Apparently many people _want_ to believe that Hitler was a vegetarian. Perhaps they're threatened by vegetarianism because it implies that they're doing something wrong.  But armed with the (mistaken) idea that the infamous Hitler himself was a veggie, that allows them to easily dismiss the whole concept of vegetarianism in one fell swoop.  "Hitler was a vegetarian, therefore vegetarianism itself must be flawed!"  Of course, that's a patently retarded argument.  But the point is, many people are eager to believe it, which is why they require no proof at all when they hear that Hitler was a veggie, and then suddenly demand reams of supporting evidence when someone suggests he wasn't.

*If you think I'm exaggerating about the importance that anti-veggies place on the idea that Hitler was a vegetarian, *look at this letter that someone wrote to award-winning author John Robbins, who has written several books promoting a meatless way of eating:

_You people who say that we would all be more peaceful if we ate a vegetarian diet always seem to forget that Adolph Hitler was a vegetarian. That pretty well destroys your belief system, doesn't it? (FoodRevolution.org)_​
*My god, take a look at that:* It _pretty well destroys your belief system_?!  That's how important Hitler's alleged vegetarianism is to many non-veggies.  Their belief is that if Hitler were a vegetarian, then vegetarianism itself is _completely invalidated._ Is it possible to be any more ridiculous than this?

*Thinking people will realize that it wouldn't matter even if Hitler had been a vegetarian.*  That is, it would _not_ "pretty well destroy [our] belief system".  Bad people occasionally make good choices.  This shouldn't be so difficult to understand.  Had Hitler actually chosen to be a vegetarian, that would simply have been one of the better choices he made.  If Hitler were fond of chess, that wouldn't invalidate chess.  In fact, one of the best players in the history of the game, Bobby Fischer, was a raving anti-Semite, but nobody stops playing chess because of that.

*And what if Hitler had been fond of chess?*  Would non-chess players taunt those who do play the game about that?  No, because people who don't play chess generally don't give a flying flip about whether other people play it or not.  They don't feel threatened by someone being a chess-player.  But once the issue is vegetarianism, it's a different story.  This should lay bare the motivations of those who champion the idea that Hitler didn't eat meat.

And of course, even if Hitler had been vegetarian, likely *every single other mass-murderer in history was not.*  If you were keeping score, that would be, *Vegetarian Mass Murderers: 1,* and then *Non-Vegetarian Mass Murderers:* 100's.

And now we come to a curious battle: *Hitler vs. Benjamin Franklin.*  Franklin was a vegetarian only for about a year, from the ages of 16 to 17 (ivu.org, 08016.com), but of course most people don't know that.  If a meat-eater is (mistakenly) told that Franklin was a vegetarian, they'll often demand to know whether he _ever_ ate meat, and if it's admitted that he did, well, then that's their "Aha!" moment.  They'll triumphantly exclaim, "So Franklin _wasn't_ really a vegetarian, was he?!"  I'm sad to have witnessed numerous conversations that actually went that way.

*That's important because the same people have much softer criteria for Hitler.* Franklin could have eaten meat once every four years and his vegetarianism would be dismissed as a fraud, but if Hitler ever ate a potato, then bang! He's vegetarian. This is important because there are numerous accounts of Hitler eating meat throughout his life, and incredibly this is just brushed off by those who say Hitler was a veggie. But the standard for Franklin is different: Franklin has to avoid meat _100% of the time, for his entire life, from the day he's born to the day he dies, unwaveingly,_ otherwise he's not really considered a vegetarian at all. It's like if Hitler ever had a meatless meal then he's a vegetarian while if Franklin ate fish once after sixty years meat-free then he's not.

(To be clear, as we said earlier, Franklin was a vegetarian only for about a year, but most people don't know that. I'm talking about how people have different standards for Hitler's vegetarianism vs. anyone else's.)

*So what constitutes being a vegetarian?* Most would agree that it's a deliberate decision to not eat meat, for whatever reason. By that criteria Franklin was a vegetarian for a about a year, and for the rest of the time he wasn't. For Hitler, there's no compelling evidence that he stuck with a real veggie diet for any appreciable length of time. Multiple sources document him as eating meat throughout the 1930's. (See below.) Shortly before his death (in 1941 and 1942) he _claimed_ to be vegetarian, and "Hitler was a vegetarian!" proponents have latched all over this. Because, _Hitler_ wouldn't ever lie, or even exaggerate, would he? I mean, this is _Hitler_ we're talking about, and who on Earth would ever question _Hitler's_ commitment to the truth? After all, if you can't trust _Hitler_, then whom can you trust? If you were going to pick one person in the whole world whose word you would definitely accept unquestioningly, that person would be Hitler, right? I mean, surely we can believe that _every word that ever came out of Hitler's mouth can safely be believed to be the absolute truth without any doubt at all,_ right?

*Rynn Berry adds, "To be sure, Hitler professed to be a vegetarian...,* but the primary sources that I have cited in my book show that while he paid lip service to vegetarianism, he was not consistent in his practice of the diet." (source)

*The fact is, many people use the word "vegetarian" to describe diets that aren't vegetarian at all, and Hitler's case is no exception.* An article from May 30, 1937, 'At Home With The Fuhrer' says, "It is well known that Hitler is a vegetarian and does not drink or smoke. His lunch and dinner consist, therefore, for the most part of soup, eggs, vegetables and mineral water, although *he occasionally relishes a slice of ham* and relieves the tediousness of his diet with such delicacies as caviar ..." (source) So when Hitler _says_ he's a vegetarian, he's almost certainly using it in this context: He's a "vegetarian" who eats meat. That's like someone saying, "I'm not a bank-robber! I only do it once a month."

*Still, for those who insist that we take Hitler at his word literally about his claiming to be a vegetarian in the 1940's, we have this gem from The Hitler Book, about Hitler's daily routine in 1944: *"After midnight [Eva] would direct that there should be another light snack of turtle soup, sandwiches, and sausages." (source)

*If Hitler was really a vegetarian, he was a sausage-eating one.

Hitler was not a vegetarian -- detailed article*


----------



## Casually Red (Jul 15, 2017)

Reading articles by vegan fanatics is about as reliable as reading articles written by the Phelps family . It's vegan propaganda . Hitler actively promoted veganism as a lifestyle  . him and his mates planned to make it compulsory as soon as the war was over .


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jul 15, 2017)

Yeah whateva...anyway, speaking of sausages, this morning I was listening to my current favourite broadcaster, Danny Baker who had the footballer Shay Given on as the celebrity guest for the world famous sausage sandwich game. Just before the question that gave the game its name, Louise Pepper, the shows co host made the fatal mistake of saying "...and we will accept a vegetarian sausage" which was quickly rebuffed by Danny. Then the first contestant revealed that he was a vegan, lol.

#TrueStory


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jul 16, 2017)

hitler was a vegetarian between meals.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jul 16, 2017)

...and when he was sleeping apparently.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jul 16, 2017)

[QUOTE="PaoloSanchez, post: 15151740, member: 73461"
*If you think I'm exaggerating about the importance that anti-veggies place on the idea that Hitler was a vegetarian, *look at this letter that someone wrote to award-winning author John Robbins, who has written several books promoting a meatless way of eating:

_You people who say that we would all be more peaceful if we ate a vegetarian diet always seem to forget that Adolph Hitler was a vegetarian. That pretty well destroys your belief system, doesn't it? (FoodRevolution.org)_[/QUOTE]

​


----------



## ddraig (Jul 16, 2017)




----------



## andysays (Jul 16, 2017)

Angry vegans make me laugh, mostly, so thanks to Watermelon Man and all the other contributors who have given me (intentionally or otherwise) such pleasure reading their posts.

Q: What do you call a vegan bun-fight?



Spoiler: Answer



A: It's not vegan, it's NON-CARNIST


----------



## mrs quoad (Jul 16, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> And now we come to a curious battle: *Hitler vs. Benjamin Franklin.*  Franklin was a vegetarian only for about a year, from the ages of 16 to 17 (ivu.org, 08016.com), but of course most people don't know that.  If a meat-eater is (mistakenly) told that Franklin was a vegetarian, they'll often demand to know whether he _ever_ ate meat, and if it's admitted that he did, well, then that's their "Aha!" moment.  They'll triumphantly exclaim, "So Franklin _wasn't_ really a vegetarian, was he?!"  I'm sad to have witnessed numerous conversations that actually went that way.


You have witnessed numerous discussion-battles about the comparative vegetarianism of Benjamin Franklin and Adolf Hitler?

I'm sort of impressed, and sort of confused, and surprised. Imfusprised, or sth. I clearly move in the wrong circles.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jul 16, 2017)

Johnny Canuck3 said:


> PaoloSanchez said:
> 
> 
> > *If you think I'm exaggerating about the importance that anti-veggies place on the idea that Hitler was a vegetarian, *look at this letter that someone wrote to award-winning author John Robbins, who has written several books promoting a meatless way of eating:
> ...



lol, you must have been reading my mind. I was going to post that video up earlier in the thread and made the apparently common mistake of searching for "One Bad Apple by the Jackson 5". (you messed up the quoting though )


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jul 16, 2017)

ddraig said:


>



lol, looks like CR is also a heckler on VeganSidekicks channel. Maybe we should have a competition in this thread for the most ridiculous argument. The same old ones appear to be being regularly recycled and presented as originals.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jul 16, 2017)

veganomics said:


> Isn't it amazing the stuff you can find nowadays. Mr Red appears to be our very own home grown instant PHD Google scholar. Books? Who needs them.


lol, he also has a Youtube doctorate, undoubtedly the forum sage.

Books are fantastic. Amazon is my best friend. 

The following books are the first two that I remember that piqued my interest in this sort of thing back in the day :-


The Rubbish on Our Plates by Fabien Perucca (4-Oct-1996) Paperback: Amazon.co.uk: Books






Diet for a New America: How Your Choices Affect Your Health, Happiness & the Future of Life on Earth: Amazon.co.uk: John Robbins: 9780915811816: Books

I have a lot of respect for John Robbins. It was his father that started the Baskin Robbins the worlds largest chain of speciality ice cream shops. He chose not to follow in his fathers footsteps partly due to what he witnessed in the ice cream supply chain and turned his back on the millions he would have inherited. Top top bloke.


----------



## Watermelon Man (Jul 16, 2017)

How did Hitler get into this thread?


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jul 16, 2017)

Watermelon Man said:


> How did Hitler get into this thread?


Cos some of the haters don't have any decent arguments.


----------



## Watermelon Man (Jul 16, 2017)

andysays said:


> Angry vegans make me laugh, mostly, so thanks to Watermelon Man and all the other contributors who have given me (intentionally or otherwise) such pleasure reading their posts.
> 
> Q: What do you call a vegan bun-fight?
> 
> ...



I saw a video about a slaughterhouse in London. Their chicken throat slitting machine had bust. They decide to boil the chickens alive as the most cost effective way. That lasted for 9 months. 

Things like that make some people angry. I just think it's totally unnecessary. Just my take!


----------



## alan_ (Jul 16, 2017)

Watermelon Man said:


> How did Hitler get into this thread?


Its what this thread is worse than


----------



## Watermelon Man (Jul 16, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Cos some of the haters don't have any decent arguments.



It seems to be talked about a lot re vegetarianism but I thought he ate dead animals? Anyway...
It's hardly the silver bullet is it? "Yeah but Hitler".... kind of irrelevant.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jul 16, 2017)

Watermelon Man said:


> It seems to be talked about a lot re vegetarianism but I thought he ate dead animals? Anyway...
> It's hardly the silver bullet is it? "Yeah but Hitler".... kind of irrelevant.


Some of the more ignorant haters appear to believe it to be their best argument against vegetarians/vegans. They appear to not see how ridiculous it is, bless 'em.


----------



## mojo pixy (Jul 16, 2017)

Doing a j'accuse on veggies because of Hitler is like saying, Gengiz Khan rode a horse so all horse riders are murderous tyrants. Pol Pot enjoyed curries, the emperor Tiberius drank wine!


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jul 16, 2017)

mojo pixy said:


> Doing a j'accuse on veggies because of Hitler is like saying, Gengiz Khan rode a horse so all horse riders are murderous tyrants. Pol Pot enjoyed curries, the emperor Tiberius drank wine!


According to Mr Red, that kind of talk is just vegan propaganda.


----------



## andysays (Jul 16, 2017)

Watermelon Man said:


> I saw a video about a slaughterhouse in London. Their chicken throat slitting machine had bust. They decide to boil the chickens alive as the most cost effective way. That lasted for 9 months.
> 
> Things like that make some people angry. I just think it's totally unnecessary. Just my take!



But here's the thing: You don't need to be a vegan to be angry at examples of cruelty to animals such as the one in your example, and just because I and others choose to include meat and/or other animal products in our diet does not make us personally responsible for all the (undoubted) sins of the food industry.

The sort of 'Vegan Anger' that leads people to label others "carnists" is more comical than anything, IMO, so thanks again for starting this thread and inadvertantly giving me a few chuckles at the absurdity of some of the things people have posted


----------



## Casually Red (Jul 16, 2017)

mojo pixy said:


> Doing a j'accuse on veggies because of Hitler is like saying, Gengiz Khan rode a horse so all horse riders are murderous tyrants. Pol Pot enjoyed curries, the emperor Tiberius drank wine!



Not if veganism is a lifestyle actively promoted by both hitler and even some nazis today . Not if they want to make it compulsory for normal people too . And not if they're equating the frozen food section in Lidl to Auschwitz , and saying " carnists " should be killed .


----------



## ddraig (Jul 16, 2017)

andysays said:


> But here's the thing: You don't need to be a vegan to be angry at examples of cruelty to animals such as the one in your example, and just because I and others choose to include meat and/or other animal products in our diet does not make us personally responsible for all the (undoubted) sins of the food industry.
> 
> The sort of 'Vegan Anger' that leads people to label others "carnists" is more comical than anything, IMO, so thanks again for starting this thread and inadvertantly giving me a few chuckles at the absurdity of some of the things people have posted


why does it have to be "vegan anger" to label meat eaters carnists??  as mentioned, it's a good enough descriptor, the fact that some meat eaters don't like being called that is neither here nor there


----------



## Casually Red (Jul 16, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> According to Mr Red, that kind of talk is just vegan propaganda.



No, vegan propaganda is all those bloody books ..written by vegan activists...you keep demanding everyone reads . And insisting they debunk everything said about vegans . Vegan propaganda is also the stuff hitler , goebbells and various nazi publications said about veganism when they were promoting it . Some of which is hosted on YouTube by full on nutjob nazis . 

I'll not be remotely surprised if there's a recipe for tofu chicken burgers in mein kampf


----------



## Spymaster (Jul 16, 2017)




----------



## pengaleng (Jul 16, 2017)

24 pages on vegans when none of em are even remotely interesting. shameful.


----------



## Spymaster (Jul 16, 2017)

pengaleng said:


> 24 pages on vegans when none of em are even remotely interesting. shameful.


The pages or the vegans?


----------



## Watermelon Man (Jul 16, 2017)

andysays said:


> and just because I and others choose to include meat and/or other animal products in our diet does not make us personally responsible for all the (undoubted) sins of the food industry.



Of course not. You are only responsible for the death or suffering of/from the animal/animal product you are consuming.  And I hear it's really bad for the environment too... 

The carnist thing? <shrugs shoulders>


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jul 16, 2017)

Casually Red said:


> No, vegan propaganda is all those bloody books ..written by vegan activists...you keep demanding everyone reads . And insisting they debunk everything said about vegans . Vegan propaganda is also the stuff hitler , goebbells and various nazi publications said about veganism when they were promoting it . Some of which is hosted on YouTube by full on nutjob nazis .
> 
> I'll not be remotely surprised if there's a recipe for tofu chicken burgers in mein kampf


lol, yeah right, I soooo "demanded". Somehow I doubt that you can even read so it's not something that I would ever suggest to illiterate haters like yourself. Your argument is laughable and ridiculous. but whatever keeps your little brain a chucklin'. 

Next you'll be picking on coca-cola drinkers and volkswagen drivers.



Volkswagen: From the Third Reich to emissions scandal - BBC News


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jul 16, 2017)

Watermelon Man said:


> Of course not. You are only responsible for the death or suffering of/from the animal/animal product you are consuming.  And I hear it's really bad for the environment too...
> 
> The carnist thing? <shrugs shoulders>


They homing in on the "carnist" thing because the have nothing else left in the tank except petty technicalities and "hitler tho".


----------



## Casually Red (Jul 16, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> According to Mr Red, that kind of talk is just vegan propaganda.



This is vegan propaganda too . I'm sure you know who this cunt is .


----------



## A380 (Jul 16, 2017)

mojo pixy said:


> Doing a j'accuse on veggies because of Hitler is like saying, Gengiz Khan rode a horse so all horse riders are murderous tyrants. ...





mojo pixy said:


> Doing a j'accuse on veggies because of Hitler is like saying, Gengiz Khan rode a horse so all horse riders are murderous tyrants....



But they are. Equestrian wankers.


----------



## Spymaster (Jul 16, 2017)

A380 said:


> But they are. Equestrian wankers.


Worse than cyclists


----------



## Casually Red (Jul 16, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> They homing in on the "carnist" thing because the have nothing else left in the tank except petty technicalities and "hitler tho".



Is ken okeefe an angry vegan ? Or just talking common sense in a loud voice ?

Sorry for pressing you on this but it's my little brains fault . It can't keep up .


----------



## Casually Red (Jul 16, 2017)

Paulo ???

Oi...Paolo ??

Where did you go all of a sudden ?


----------



## Casually Red (Jul 16, 2017)

Paulo ?

That's odd . Paolo Sanchez was strutting about the board there delivering beat downs to the carnistas left right and centre..like Jackie chan picking a fight in an OAPs home...thwack..thwack..hiyaaaa...

And now hes suddenly buggered off . Like zebedee . How odd ?

Was it something I said Paolo ?


----------



## Casually Red (Jul 16, 2017)

Why'd that ken okeefe video make him go so suddenly quiet ?

Hmmmm


----------



## Casually Red (Jul 16, 2017)

pengaleng said:


> 24 pages on vegans when none of em are even remotely interesting. shameful.



It might get interesting . You never know .


----------



## A380 (Jul 16, 2017)

Casually Red said:


> It might get interesting . You never know .


I think we all know that it won't.


----------



## Casually Red (Jul 16, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> They homing in on the "carnist" thing because the have nothing else left in the tank except petty technicalities and "hitler tho".



How long have you actually been a vegan for ?


----------



## AnnaKarpik (Jul 16, 2017)

Watermelon Man said:


> I saw a video about a slaughterhouse in London. Their chicken throat slitting machine had bust. They decide to boil the chickens alive as the most cost effective way. That lasted for 9 months.
> 
> Things like that make some people angry. I just think it's totally unnecessary. Just my take!



Things like that make most people angry. It is totally unnecessary. In fact behaviour like that is generally deemed so awful that the law even forbids it, and punishes it.

I've just tried looking for this story, as you describe it; nine months of boiling chickens instead of cutting their throats, boiling all of the chickens because it was the cheapest option. Do you recall the name of the slaughterhouse?


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jul 16, 2017)

Watermelon Man said:


> How did Hitler get into this thread?



Some vegan left the farm gate open.


----------



## Casually Red (Jul 16, 2017)

Paolo come on mate . This sudden coyness strikes me as very out of character . Why are you playing hard to get .

I feel like Alan partridge shouting at Dan here . It's undignified..for both of us .


----------



## gentlegreen (Jul 16, 2017)

AnnaKarpik said:


> Things like that make most people angry. It is totally unnecessary. In fact behaviour like that is generally deemed so awful that the law even forbids it, and punishes it.
> 
> I've just tried looking for this story, as you describe it; nine months of boiling chickens instead of cutting their throats, boiling all of the chickens because it was the cheapest option. Do you recall the name of the slaughterhouse?



unfortunately it has "halal" baggage ...

halal chickens boiled alive - Google Search


----------



## Casually Red (Jul 16, 2017)

ddraig said:


> why does it have to be "vegan anger" to label meat eaters carnists??  as mentioned, it's a good enough descriptor, the fact that some meat eaters don't like being called that is neither here nor there



Have you any idea why your mate paolo Sanchez went un characteristically silent all of a sudden ? He could talk the back legs off a donkey . A handier skill for a Portugese abattoir worker than a vegan I admit but still. His lengthy eloquence seems to have evaporated .

Is anything wrong ?


----------



## UnderAnOpenSky (Jul 16, 2017)

Casually Red said:


> Have you any idea why your mate paolo Sanchez went un characteristically silent all of a sudden ? He could talk the back legs off a donkey . A handier skill for a Portugese abattoir worker than a vegan I admit but still. His lengthy eloquence seems to have evaporated .



He might be enjoying the sunshine?


----------



## Casually Red (Jul 16, 2017)

UnderAnOpenSky said:


> He might be enjoying the sunshine?



That'll be handy for additional vitamins .

Eta

It's the sudden timing of his departure has me curious . Because his last post was at 2:51 . And I replied to him at 2:52 . And he seems to have scarpered . I'm just worried I might have upset him or something .


----------



## Watermelon Man (Jul 16, 2017)

AnnaKarpik said:


> Things like that make most people angry. It is totally unnecessary. In fact behaviour like that is generally deemed so awful that the law even forbids it, and punishes it.
> 
> I've just tried looking for this story, as you describe it; nine months of boiling chickens instead of cutting their throats, boiling all of the chickens because it was the cheapest option. Do you recall the name of the slaughterhouse?



It wasn't in London.  My mistake. It was in Suffolk. They were fined, but really is that significant punishment?  Perhaps a large sticker on each supermarket chicken they supply saying...this chicken may have been boiled alive to save costs.  Maybe some consumers wouldn't care but I'm sure some would.


----------



## NoXion (Jul 16, 2017)

Hitler may or may not have been a vegetarian, but he most certainly ate sugar. In fact I hear he was a bit of a sweet tooth.


----------



## AnnaKarpik (Jul 16, 2017)

gentlegreen said:


> unfortunately it has "halal" baggage ...
> 
> halal chickens boiled alive - Google Search





Watermelon Man said:


> It wasn't in London.  My mistake. It was in Suffolk. They were fined, but really is that significant punishment?  Perhaps a large sticker on each supermarket chicken they supply saying...this chicken may have been boiled alive to save costs.  Maybe some consumers wouldn't care but I'm sure some would.



This can't be the same story. That outfit in Suffolk boiled alive up to 81 chickens. Your original post on this implied that, for nine months, this slaughterhouse boiled alive all the chickens that came through because it was cheaper than fixing the throat-cutting machine. The story is quite horrible enough without it being distorted beyond recognition, but the worst thing is that distortion of the facts means that the message about animal welfare is so easy to dismiss.


----------



## Casually Red (Jul 16, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> According to Mr Red, that kind of talk is just vegan propaganda.



Yes . Bloody vegan bloody propaganda . Here's an example of another bloody vegan propagandist telling us all to read bloody crackpot vegan books All the time . Telling us how many vegan books he has . Blatant propagandising .

https://www.urban75.net/forums/threads/veganuary.349296/page-3#post-14851627

Thank fuck he was banned ....for nazi type stuff I think . I'd hate to think what this thread would be like if there were 2 bloody vegan bloody propagandists on it .

Although oddly there currently appears to be none .


----------



## Casually Red (Jul 16, 2017)

I hope btw nobody mixes Paolo up with that other deranged vegan . Who lives in Spain . Just because Paolo Sanchez sounds a bit Spanish as a username . That'd be like saying because hitler was a vegan some vegans admire hitler .


----------



## peterkro (Jul 16, 2017)

More fuel for the fire,I have no idea if this is a pisstake or not (it's in Florida and the fisherman is called Bob Hope so anything is possible):


Vegan Activists Confront Family Fishing For Dinner At Florida Lake | HuffPost


----------



## Watermelon Man (Jul 16, 2017)

AnnaKarpik said:


> This can't be the same story. That outfit in Suffolk boiled alive up to 81 chickens. Your original post on this implied that, for nine months, this slaughterhouse boiled alive all the chickens that came through because it was cheaper than fixing the throat-cutting machine. The story is quite horrible enough without it being distorted beyond recognition, but the worst thing is that distortion of the facts means that the message about animal welfare is so easy to dismiss.



Chickens were being boiled at the premises for 9 months.  I should imagine if you had chicken from a supermarket in that area during that time, the chicken would have been boiled alive. 

I guess, 81 chickens is what they said in court...

Whatever your belief is, we are all agreed that chickens were boiled alive.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jul 16, 2017)

Watermelon Man said:


> Chickens were being boiled at the premises for 9 months.  I should imagine if you had chicken from a supermarket in that area during that time, the chicken would have been boiled alive.
> 
> I guess, 81 chickens is what they said in court...
> 
> Whatever your belief is, we are all agreed that chickens were boiled alive.


If you're trying to show that all meat-eating is unethical, you need to point not to worst practices but to best ones. Otherwise, all you do is produce broad agreement that bad farming practices are bad. 

In this regard, Jeff Robinson is on stronger ground, as he does this - he attacks the practices that take place in farms labelled free-range and organic. 

So, here, for example, is a dairy and beef farm where calves are left with their mothers for several months (dairy cows have been selectively bred to produce more milk than they need to, so there's still plenty left over to be milked). They live good open lives until the day when they are slaughtered, which they all are still - this is a working farm. 

Seems to me pretty much the best practice a meat farm can employ.


----------



## ddraig (Jul 16, 2017)

Casually Red said:


> Have you any idea why your mate paolo Sanchez went un characteristically silent all of a sudden ? He could talk the back legs off a donkey . A handier skill for a Portugese abattoir worker than a vegan I admit but still. His lengthy eloquence seems to have evaporated .
> 
> Is anything wrong ?


Grow the fuck up

Maybe they went to do something else, maybe they're tired of your shite etc etc


----------



## Casually Red (Jul 16, 2017)

ddraig said:


> Grow the fuck up
> 
> Maybe they went to do something else, maybe they're tired of your shite etc etc



They ?

Is there 2 of them ?


----------



## ddraig (Jul 16, 2017)

They them they are
All perfectly fine in meaning 1 person


----------



## Casually Red (Jul 16, 2017)

ddraig said:


> They them they are
> All perfectly fine in meaning 1 person



Not in any English exam/ homework I've ever done . I'm pretty sure it's plural.


----------



## Wookey (Jul 16, 2017)

Casually Red said:


> Not in any English exam/ homework I've ever done . I'm pretty sure it's plural.



No, usage has officially changed to include first person pronoun using gender neutral 'they' etc. Actually.!


----------



## Casually Red (Jul 16, 2017)

Wookey said:


> No, usage has officially changed to include first person pronoun using gender neutral 'they' etc. Actually.!



When did that happen ?


----------



## ddraig (Jul 16, 2017)




----------



## Watermelon Man (Jul 16, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> If you're trying to show that all meat-eating is unethical, you need to point not to worst practices but to best ones. Otherwise, all you do is produce broad agreement that bad farming practices are bad.
> 
> In this regard, Jeff Robinson is on stronger ground, as he does this - he attacks the practices that take place in farms labelled free-range and organic.
> 
> ...



Some vegans do this. But I can't support unnecessary taking of a life.


----------



## Sea Star (Jul 16, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> Worse than cyclists


You'd have hated me in the early 90s


----------



## Sea Star (Jul 16, 2017)

editor said:


> I wonder how many "angry vegans" people have actually met or know. I've certainly met a couple who drone on far too much about their choice of diet - one often wears clothes emblazoned with the word VEGAN just in case anyone hasn't heard him, but in reality 99% of the vegans I've met/known never even  mention it. Compare that with the much, much higher percentage of meat eaters who feel strangely compelled to start shoving in their oar when they overhear me ordering veggie food.


When I was vegan I used to get very frustrated about everyone making judgements about me from what I didn't eat. So maybe I lost my temper a few times...


----------



## UnderAnOpenSky (Jul 16, 2017)

Casually Red said:


> When did that happen ?



For quite a long time  

Singular they - Wikipedia


----------



## Sea Star (Jul 16, 2017)

UnderAnOpenSky said:


> For quite a long time
> 
> Singular they - Wikipedia


There are still many who don't accept it even though it's in Chaucer and Shakespeare. But we use it anyway. Tough.


----------



## gentlegreen (Jul 16, 2017)

I use it a lot when trying to avoid mentioning the gender of the person concerned.


----------



## Casually Red (Jul 16, 2017)

Well I'm not going to use it . Pretty sure the queen wouldn't approve either . And anyway ddraig wasn't using it right . He got it wrong .


----------



## xenon (Jul 16, 2017)

Casually Red said:


> When did that happen ?



At least since the 80s.


----------



## xenon (Jul 16, 2017)

Casually Red said:


> Well I'm not going to use it . Pretty sure the queen wouldn't approve either . And anyway ddraig wasn't using it right . He got it wrong .



Bollocks to the queen. tm


----------



## Casually Red (Jul 16, 2017)

xenon said:


> At least since the 80s.



The very decade I last did any English homework . 

" cosmic " was a popular word back in the 80s too, thanks to the Trotter brothers .


----------



## xenon (Jul 16, 2017)

Triffic. 

People still say safe. Bit 90s that one.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jul 16, 2017)

Watermelon Man said:


> Some vegans do this. But I can't support unnecessary taking of a life.


And that's a consistent position. You're not adding to your argument by pointing at shit farming practices, though, if your position is that all meat farming is shit by definition as it involves killing animals.

But this argument goes in circles really. I have no problem with the kind of farming outlined on that farm's website. More than that, I applaud it. So there's never going to be common ground, sadly.


----------



## ddraig (Jul 16, 2017)

Casually Red said:


> Well I'm not going to use it . Pretty sure the queen wouldn't approve either . And anyway ddraig wasn't using it right . He got it wrong .


How did I get it wrong??

I use it for gender neutral reasons too
They/them rather than she/he


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 16, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Sleep indicates periods of reduced awareness, which suggests periods of increased awareness. I agree, however, that consciousness is a fuzzy concept.


sleep famously a period of unconsciousness


----------



## Casually Red (Jul 16, 2017)

ddraig said:


> How did I get it wrong??
> 
> I use it for gender neutral reasons too
> They/them rather than she/he



You were supposed to indicate beforehand you were referring to one person as opposed to multiple persons . That's the etiquette and precedence cited clearly in the example . You failed to observe it . Ergo..you got it wrong .


----------



## ddraig (Jul 16, 2017)

Casually Red said:


> You were supposed to indicate beforehand you were referring to one person as opposed to multiple persons . That's the etiquette and precedence cited clearly in the example . You failed to observe it . Ergo..you got it wrong .


Nope, try again
Sorry you're behind the times and didn't get it


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 16, 2017)

ddraig said:


> must be if lbj says it is! he is the expert as always
> thanks PaoloSanchez


He thinks he is the expert...

He rarely knows as much as he thinks he knows


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 16, 2017)

Casually Red said:


> You were supposed to indicate beforehand you were referring to one person as opposed to multiple persons . That's the etiquette and precedence cited clearly in the example . You failed to observe it . Ergo..you got it wrong .


Not sure you've really got to grips with this pedantry thing


----------



## pengaleng (Jul 16, 2017)

yer all cunts


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jul 16, 2017)

Following me around again, pickman's? You sad cunt.


----------



## Casually Red (Jul 16, 2017)

ddraig said:


> Nope, try again
> Sorry you're behind the times and didn't get it



Don't be calling me behind the times when you can't even work Wikipedia .

Singular they - Wikipedia

It states quite clearly " it typically occurs with an antecedent of indeterminate gender " . Something you most definitely failed to observe . Meaning I'm right and you're wrong . I've scientifically proven it .


----------



## pengaleng (Jul 16, 2017)

ddraig said:


> They them they are
> All perfectly fine in meaning 1 person




it blows my fuckin mind how people are confused by this cus it aint something I ever suffered from.


----------



## pengaleng (Jul 16, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Following me around again, pickman's? You sad cunt.




cunty cunt


----------



## Casually Red (Jul 16, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> Not sure you've really got to grips with this pedantry thing



I think you'll find I was perfectly correct .


----------



## pengaleng (Jul 16, 2017)

Casually Red said:


> *Well I'm not going to use it* . Pretty sure the queen wouldn't approve either . And anyway ddraig wasn't using it right . He got it wrong .




major cunt


----------



## ddraig (Jul 16, 2017)

Casually Red said:


> Don't be calling me behind the times when you can't even work Wikipedia .
> 
> Singular they - Wikipedia
> 
> It states quite clearly " it typically occurs with an antecedent of indeterminate gender " . Something you most definitely failed to observe . Meaning I'm right and you're wrong . I've scientifically proven it .


Wrong wrong and so wrong

What is wrong with referring to someone as them? Or "they're the boss" rather than "she is the boss"
Or "they'll be back later" rather than "she'll be back later"??
Or "they said" rather than "she said"??


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 16, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Following me around again, pickman's? You sad cunt.


Yeh you never have liked having your shite pointed out have you. Sleep a period of reduced awareness? You must be permanently akip then.


----------



## pengaleng (Jul 16, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> Yeh you never have liked having your shite pointed out have you. Sleep a period of reduced awareness? You must be permanently akip then.



pedantic cunt


----------



## pengaleng (Jul 16, 2017)

a safari of cunts.


----------



## Watermelon Man (Jul 16, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> And that's a consistent position. You're not adding to your argument by pointing at shit farming practices, though, if your position is that all meat farming is shit by definition as it involves killing animals.
> 
> But this argument goes in circles really. I have no problem with the kind of farming outlined on that farm's website. More than that, I applaud it. So there's never going to be common ground, sadly.



Maybe you have no problem with boiling chickens alive? Would you bother checking where your chickens are unnecessarily slaughtered? Would you buy chickens from the boiling slaughterhouse?  As a former meat eater I didn't give a shit. I didn't fully trust the process with all the bs they give the animals etc... If I was fine with animals being killed/mistreated only for financial purposes then I would still be eating meat/dairy etc


----------



## pengaleng (Jul 16, 2017)

still, cunt?


----------



## andysays (Jul 16, 2017)

For a thread ostensibly about veganism, there certainly seems to be plenty of beef going on...


----------



## Watermelon Man (Jul 16, 2017)

Fuck me...the carnists are kicking off. 

Chill out carnists. Have some mung beans. X


----------



## pengaleng (Jul 16, 2017)

andysays said:


> For a thread ostensibly about veganism, there certainly seems to be plenty of beef going on...




which just proves that the vegan cunts will never ever win.


----------



## Spymaster (Jul 16, 2017)

pengaleng said:


> cunty cunt


You called?


----------



## pengaleng (Jul 16, 2017)

Watermelon Man said:


> Fuck me...the carnists are kicking off.
> 
> Chill out carnists. Have some mung beans. X




nah yer just thick as shit m8, ye think mink is polar bear lol


----------



## pengaleng (Jul 16, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> You called?




you wanna get called a cunt an all??


----------



## AnnaKarpik (Jul 16, 2017)

Watermelon Man said:


> Chickens were being boiled at the premises for 9 months.  I should imagine if you had chicken from a supermarket in that area during that time, the chicken would have been boiled alive.
> 
> I guess, 81 chickens is what they said in court...
> 
> Whatever your belief is, we are all agreed that chickens were boiled alive.



No, I' m not having this. You have deliberately twisted a true story to try and gain support and fabricate evidence for your point of view, ie killing things for food is wrong. If you have ever actually seen any video of a chicken slaughtering operation, or used your intelligence to wonder what it might be like, you would know that thousands of chickens are killed every day. If there were evidence of the systematic ignoring of animal welfare laws over a period of nine months, why didn't that get to court? Are you or your friends keeping evidence of criminality hidden? What sort of fucking creep can show that cruelty to animals takes place and doesn't share it with a court judging a case of animal cruelty?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jul 16, 2017)

Watermelon Man said:


> Maybe you have no problem with boiling chickens alive? Would you bother checking where your chickens are unnecessarily slaughtered? Would you buy chickens from the boiling slaughterhouse?  As a former meat eater I didn't give a shit. I didn't fully trust the process with all the bs they give the animals etc... If I was fine with animals being killed/mistreated only for financial purposes then I would still be eating meat/dairy etc


I have no problem with raising and killing animals for food. I am inconsistent wrt my meat-buying habits. Could certainly do better. But, and I know this is going to sound like a cop-out, changing farming practices takes more than individuals making different purchasing choices, particularly where the more ethical choices are a lot more expensive (often a lot more expensive than they should be, because shops know they can get that price from the small group of people who buy it). It takes collective action to change laws and systems, the kind of action this group, CIWF, does.


----------



## pengaleng (Jul 16, 2017)

these arguments are well 1992


----------



## ddraig (Jul 16, 2017)

It is a cop out
You don't think a number of individuals, growing at that, making different choices and changes farming and other practices??
You think the farmers would spend more time and money ensuring higher welfare off their own back???

Get a fucking clue


----------



## xenon (Jul 16, 2017)

Casually Red said:


> Don't be calling me behind the times when you can't even work Wikipedia .
> 
> Singular they - Wikipedia
> 
> It states quite clearly " it typically occurs with an antecedent of indeterminate gender " . Something you most definitely failed to observe . Meaning I'm right and you're wrong . I've scientifically proven it .



Hitler was a stickler for grammer. 

Just sayin'


----------



## Watermelon Man (Jul 16, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I have no problem with raising and killing animals for food. I am inconsistent wrt my meat-buying habits. Could certainly do better. But, and I know this is going to sound like a cop-out, changing farming practices takes more than individuals making different purchasing choices, particularly where the more ethical choices are a lot more expensive. It takes collective action to change laws and systems, the kind of action this group, CIWF, does.



More ethically killed? It's hard to get my head around that argument?  From the footage I've the seen the animals look like they know their time is up. It's horrible seeing cows try and escape their certain death. All for what? Making people money and appealing to people's tastebuds. 

I can't understand the ethics from killing animals?


----------



## pengaleng (Jul 16, 2017)

its animals fault for being well delicious tbh, maybe they shoulda evolved to taste like shit, thats on them.

like if nature itself didnt think eating other things flesh was alright then it'd have never been invented. science m8. cant really argue against it.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jul 16, 2017)

Watermelon Man said:


> More ethically killed? It's hard to get my head around that argument?  From the footage I've the seen the animals look like they know their time is up. It's horrible seeing cows try and escape their certain death. All for what? Making people money and appealing to people's tastebuds.
> 
> I can't understand the ethics from killing animals?


Temple Grandin has written extensively about her work improving slaughter practices. She is of the opinion that humane slaughter is possible, and works to change practices so that animals are not terrified prior to death. There's also no doubt that there is a lot of very bad practice out there - Grandin makes it clear that there is, hence her work.


----------



## ddraig (Jul 16, 2017)

"Humane slaughter is possible"
Have a proper think about that, go on



littlebabyjesus said:


> Temple Grandin has written extensively about her work improving slaughter practices. She is of the opinion that humane slaughter is possible, and works to change practices so that animals are not terrified prior to death. There's also no doubt that there is a lot of very bad practice out there - Grandin makes it clear that there is, hence her work.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jul 16, 2017)

ddraig said:


> "Humane slaughter is possible"
> Have a proper think about that, go on


That website discusses the measures slaughterhouses need to employ in order to keep animals calm. Right up to the instant when they are killed. 

You, and some others on this thread, think 'humane slaughter' is an oxymoron. I don't.


----------



## ddraig (Jul 16, 2017)

Why bother if it's ok to kill animals for your plate/tastebuds?? 
What purpose does it serve other than to alleviate the carnist fragility of people like you who on the one hand say they care about animal cruelty/welfare and on the other saying they've no issues with animals being unnecessarily slaughtered for food!?????
They'd be much calmer (and alive) if they weren't in the slaughter house to start with


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jul 16, 2017)

Why bother doing anything? Why not just treat everything and everyone like shit? They're going to die anyway. 

That's just teenage nihilism.


----------



## ddraig (Jul 16, 2017)

no, you can easily survive and eat without causing cruelty to animals
that is your choice as you've said yourself

just more twisting from you as per


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jul 16, 2017)

Done properly, I don't think it is cruelty necessarily.

I know you do, but you seem unable or unwilling to even try to understand why others might not agree.


----------



## AnnaKarpik (Jul 16, 2017)

Oh "carnist fragility" again. How many times has this phrase cropped up on this thread to dismiss what meat eaters are saying? Want a debate? Like fuck you do. Want to parade around in your holier-than-thou non-animal knickers? Fuck yeah!


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 16, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> That website discusses the measures slaughterhouses need to employ in order to keep animals calm. Right up to the instant when they are killed.
> 
> You, and some others on this thread, think 'humane slaughter' is an oxymoron. I don't.


If humane slaughter marked by measures taken to keep victims calm to the moment of death then auschwitz humane.


----------



## mrs quoad (Jul 16, 2017)

ddraig said:


> Why bother if it's ok to kill animals for your plate/tastebuds??
> What purpose does it serve other than to alleviate the carnist fragility of people like you who on the one hand say they care about animal cruelty/welfare and on the other saying they've no issues with animals being unnecessarily slaughtered for food!?????
> They'd be much calmer (and alive) if they weren't in the slaughter house to start with


You can't have unnecessary death without unnecessary life. You seem to fetishise death in quite an absolute way.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jul 16, 2017)

It appears that what ddraig wants is for meat eaters either to say that they don't give a fuck or to admit that they're hypocrites. If you give a fuck, you should be a vegan - that's what Jeff Robinson said straight out. So the position 'gives a fuck and still eats meat' simply doesn't exist, except in someone who is somehow weak or conflicted, hence the 'fragility' bit. Or we must just not have thought about it properly - the patronising option, which seems quite popular.


----------



## dylanredefined (Jul 16, 2017)

Meat tastes great and I don't care about animals. If I could afford to I'd happily hunt and butcher my own meat.


----------



## pengaleng (Jul 16, 2017)

meat is the best invention ever

I got meself a nice sirloin today from m&s, you might think it's slaughter, but it's m&s slaughter, top quality slaughter.

forgot to get chestnut mushrooms tho


----------



## Casually Red (Jul 16, 2017)

ddraig said:


> no, you can easily survive and eat without causing cruelty to animals
> that is your choice as you've said yourself
> 
> just more twisting from you as per



Are you one of those nudists too ?


----------



## Casually Red (Jul 16, 2017)

ddraig said:


> Wrong wrong and so wrong
> 
> What is wrong with referring to someone as them? Or "they're the boss" rather than "she is the boss"
> Or "they'll be back later" rather than "she'll be back later"??
> Or "they said" rather than "she said"??



Cos it sounds like you're talking about more than one person . It does . There's no getting away from it .


----------



## pengaleng (Jul 16, 2017)

Casually Red said:


> Cos it sounds like you're talking about more than one person . It does . There's no getting away from it .




no one really cares what you think. yer just showing yer hand.


----------



## Casually Red (Jul 16, 2017)

xenon said:


> Hitler was a stickler for grammer.
> 
> Just sayin'



A grammar nazi


----------



## mojo pixy (Jul 16, 2017)

pengaleng said:


> these arguments are well 1992



_FOURHUNDREDANDFIFTYMILLIONANIMALSAREMURDEREDINBRITAINEVERYYEAR, TOBESHOVEDDOWNYOURTHROATANDSHATOUTOFYOURARSE. MUURRDAAARGH!!_


----------



## pengaleng (Jul 16, 2017)




----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jul 16, 2017)

mrs quoad said:


> You can't have unnecessary death without unnecessary life. You seem to fetishise death in quite an absolute way.


Yes, I've been avoiding that issue, but those particular individuals only exist because they are going to be killed. 

I do think there's a wider issue to do with habitat destruction and resource use/abuse, which is a powerful argument for the reform of farming. But that's not an absolute argument against all meat.

Allan Savory has a controversial theory regarding desertification and the benefits of managed grazing by livestock. His ted talk is here.


----------



## ddraig (Jul 16, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Done properly, I don't think it is cruelty necessarily.
> 
> I know you do, but you seem unable or unwilling to even try to understand why others might not agree.


You don't think killing an animal is cruel??? That's some twisted logic right there!


----------



## gentlegreen (Jul 16, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Allan Savory has a controversial theory regarding desertification and the benefits of managed grazing by livestock. His ted talk is here.


Sounds too good to be true - I saw that video appear but haven't watched it. I've been googling around to see if he's known to be deluded or not - there's masses of bullshit "science" around at the moment and it makes my brain hurt to watch dodgy videos.

Allan Savory debunked - Google Search


----------



## ddraig (Jul 16, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Done properly, I don't think it is cruelty necessarily.
> 
> I know you do, but you seem unable or unwilling to even try to understand why others might not agree.


http://yourveganfallacyis.com/files/fallacy/media/tumblr_n6mw5nykef1tzue9go1_1280.jpg


----------



## sleaterkinney (Jul 16, 2017)

This they know "they're about to die" is misleading. Put animals around humans and they will be worried and trying to escape, they're prey - that's what they do. I've been to modern slaughterhouses and it is quick and painless, no cruelty involved at all.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jul 16, 2017)

gentlegreen said:


> Sounds too good to be true - I saw that video appear but haven't watched it. I've been googling around to see if he's known to be deluded or not - there's masses of bullshit "science" around at the moment and it makes my brain hurt to watch dodgy videos.
> 
> Allan Savory debunked - Google Search


You also have to follow the debunking links to see if they've been debunked.  Monbiot isn't impressed. This is a good line:



> He began by comparing himself to Galileo, which is never a good sign, and it went downhill from there.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jul 16, 2017)

SpookyFrank said:


> There's really not much to separate an oyster from a plant in terms of awareness, sensitivity or cognition. The main reason I don't eat them is that (I assume) they taste fucking foul.



Not if you cook 'em.  Back when they were working class fare, we cooked 'em.  usually in pies, but sometimes slow-fried.  Very nice.  aw though, with a twist of lemon juice, they taste like phlob.


----------



## ddraig (Jul 16, 2017)

AnnaKarpik said:


> Oh "carnist fragility" again. How many times has this phrase cropped up on this thread to dismiss what meat eaters are saying? Want a debate? Like fuck you do. Want to parade around in your holier-than-thou non-animal knickers? Fuck yeah!


What debate do you want??


----------



## ddraig (Jul 16, 2017)

sleaterkinney said:


> This they know "they're about to die" is misleading. Put animals around humans and they will be worried and trying to escape, they're prey - that's what they do. I've been to modern slaughterhouses and it is quick and painless, no cruelty involved at all.


Thread over, nothing to see here, no cruelty involved in slaughter houses or killing something, it's all done with love these days!


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jul 16, 2017)

I went to a funding event in Birmingham yesterday.  The food served was "Mexican wraps", Vegan and gluten-free.  Tasty, but I wouldn't choose to eat something with that many pulses in every day, as my digestion is fucked enough as it is.


----------



## gentlegreen (Jul 16, 2017)

ViolentPanda said:


> I wouldn't choose to eat something with that many pulses in every day, as my digestion is fucked enough as it is.


you could try sprouting 'em


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Jul 16, 2017)

ddraig said:


> Why bother if it's ok to kill animals for your plate/tastebuds??
> What purpose does it serve other than to alleviate the carnist fragility of people like you who on the one hand say they care about animal cruelty/welfare and on the other saying they've no issues with animals being unnecessarily slaughtered for food!?????
> They'd be much calmer (and alive) if they weren't in the slaughter house to start with


"_And all those exclamation marks, you notice? Five? A sure sign of someone who wears his underpants on his head_" - Terry Pratchett


----------



## UnderAnOpenSky (Jul 16, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Done properly, I don't think it is cruelty necessarily.
> 
> I know you do, but you seem unable or unwilling to even try to understand why others might not agree.



Sure, but if all your meat is cruelty free your probably much richer then I am.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jul 16, 2017)

Casually Red said:


> Is ken okeefe an angry vegan ? Or just talking common sense in a loud voice ?
> 
> Sorry for pressing you on this but it's my little brains fault . It can't keep up .





Casually Red said:


> Paulo ???
> 
> Oi...Paolo ??
> 
> Where did you go all of a sudden ?





Casually Red said:


> Paulo ?
> 
> That's odd . Paolo Sanchez was strutting about the board there delivering beat downs to the carnistas left right and centre..like Jackie chan picking a fight in an OAPs home...thwack..thwack..hiyaaaa...
> 
> ...





Casually Red said:


> Why'd that ken okeefe video make him go so suddenly quiet ?
> 
> Hmmmm


hahahahahhaaaaa!!! What a numpty. This dude has completely lost the plot, like a madly obsessed psycho. 
Dude you're an intellectually bankrupt trick pony. I have no idea what you're yakkin' on about and frankly you sound like a bit of an idiot not worth bothering with any more. If you're gonna chat shit, don't @ me.


----------



## pengaleng (Jul 16, 2017)

real beef


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jul 17, 2017)

ddraig said:


> http://yourveganfallacyis.com/files/fallacy/media/tumblr_n6mw5nykef1tzue9go1_1280.jpg


That little cartoon does quite succinctly illustrate why we talk past one another. For you, if someone wouldn't want you to kill their dog, how can they justify killing other animals?

To take the example of the farm I linked to earlier, which farms in a way that I think is a good way, the animals on that farm are killed when their usefulness is over, or they're killed because that is their usefulness. It is necessarily using the animals instrumentally - the animals are its business. Being killed is a part of the deal the farmer has made for them, without their consent or knowledge, to be alive in the first place, at which point they are replaced by the next generation of cows or pigs or chickens, for whom the same deal applies.

Is this humans lording it over other animals? Clearly it is. Do we have different relationships with different species? Again, yes. And with a pet dog, we enter into a very different deal, as we would with a pet pig.

For you, entering into that deal of death in the first place is morally wrong. For me, it isn't necessarily. For me, how we treat those animals for whom the deal is ultimate death matters.

And with that, perhaps we can talk past one another for a while again. Maybe you can post up another little cartoon.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jul 17, 2017)

It's quite a challenge trying to sort the wheat from the chaff. I leave the computer for the afternoon and all of a sudden the thread explodes with and gets filled mostly with CR's high pitch low quality heckling and screeching. I'm sure there are a few good posts hidden in there somewhere but I can't be arsed to sift through all the dross right now and I still haven't caught up with today's tennis and cricket. I might take a fresh look tomorrow to see if there's anything worth replying to, in the meantime here's a fitting musical interlude :-


----------



## Calamity1971 (Jul 17, 2017)

Casually Red said:


> Paulo ???
> 
> Oi...Paolo ??
> 
> Where did you go all of a sudden ?





Casually Red said:


> Have you any idea why your mate paolo Sanchez went un characteristically silent all of a sudden ? He could talk the back legs off a donkey . A handier skill for a Portugese abattoir worker than a vegan I admit but still. His lengthy eloquence seems to have evaporated .
> 
> Is anything wrong ?





Casually Red said:


> Well I'm not going to use it . Pretty sure the queen wouldn't approve either . And anyway ddraig wasn't using it right . He got it wrong .





littlebabyjesus said:


> Following me around again, pickman's? You sad cunt.





cupid_stunt said:


> Some vegan left the farm gate open.


----------



## Casually Red (Jul 17, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> hahahahahhaaaaa!!! What a numpty. This dude has completely lost the plot, like a madly obsessed psycho.
> Dude you're an intellectually bankrupt trick pony. I have no idea what you're yakkin' on about and frankly you sound like a bit of an idiot not worth bothering with any more. If you're gonna chat shit, don't @ me.




Are there any good books you could recommend ?


----------



## xenon (Jul 17, 2017)

I am too busy to read the rest of your posts. I am however, pretty sure they   all match my preconceptions I  Will now  post a YouTube video.


----------



## xenon (Jul 17, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> It's quite a challenge trying to sort the wheat from the chaff. I leave the computer for the afternoon and all of a sudden the thread explodes with and gets filled mostly with CR's high pitch low quality heckling and screeching. I'm sure there are a few good posts hidden in there somewhere but I can't be arsed to sift through all the dross right now and I still haven't caught up with today's tennis and cricket. I might take a fresh look tomorrow to see if there's anything worth replying to, in the meantime here's a fitting musical interlude :-




 Maybe I was a bit mean. No one's taking CR that seriously. 

 Carcass are a great band though, you should listen.  A highpoint of the genre.


----------



## veganomics (Jul 17, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> I regard personal experience and interaction as FAR more reliable and realistic than interactions with people on the internet, imo it's not even close. The internet is a haven for cowardly trolls who are free to say whatever they want under the cover of anonymity, things that they would never say in that way in a face to face situation.
> 
> It's ironic that you cite this very thread as your example of vegans behaving badly, lol. The bias is so strong. A proper unbiased audit of posts might give a more accurate and balanced picture. It would appear that whenever the topic is raised, that it is non vegans, who supposedly aren't particularly interested in the topic, but somehow manage to attach themselves like barnacles to the thread and swarm, sabotage and trash the threads with all sorts of rubbish and irrelevant diversions. (says he posting a long-ass reply). The "Who's replied" list for this thread is quite revealing.
> 
> ...


That was literally a "long ass" post, you weren't joking. I have not had the time to read all of it but from some of the things you've said our paths may have crossed at some point.  I'll try to give it a proper read later. 

My last post was on Thursday on page 22 (number 639). Since then there have been 170+ replies with very few (if any) proper "angry vegans" to be seen. My hunch is that all this "angry vegan" stuff stereotypical myth that some meat eaters desperately want to be true.  A rather large helping of confirmation bias might be involved here. I will try to respond to some of the more decent posts sometime, hopefully there won't be as much "noise" and thread pollution from the "nutters"  to wade through.


----------



## mrs quoad (Jul 17, 2017)

veganomics said:


> I will try to respond to some of the more decent posts sometime, hopefully there won't be as much "noise" and thread pollution from the "nutters"  to wade through.





PaoloSanchez said:


> I'm sure there are a few good posts hidden in there somewhere but I can't be arsed to sift through all the dross right now and I still haven't caught up with today's tennis and cricket. I might take a fresh look tomorrow to see if there's anything worth replying to, in the meantime here's a fitting musical interlude :-


_Gracious _vegans_ _


----------



## ddraig (Jul 17, 2017)

At a festival a while ago


----------



## IC3D (Jul 17, 2017)

Morning Vegans, have a blessed Monday.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jul 17, 2017)

xenon said:


> Maybe I was a bit mean. No one's taking CR that seriously.


What meanness did I miss? I haven't fully caught up with backlog. As far as CR is concerned, even the meatheads appear to be distancing themselves from him. The problem is that he appears to be one of those people who just gets in your face and sets up camp whether you want him to or not.



xenon said:


> Carcass are a great band though, you should listen.  A highpoint of the genre.


Oooh, not my cup of tea at all I'm afraid. I don't mind a bit of Deep Purple, Led Zep, Guns and Roses, ZZ Top and Eye of the tiger. That's about as metal as I get. Not feeling this thrash metal thing at all (if that's what the genre is called). Some of the band names and imagery don't help either, lol...


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jul 17, 2017)

veganomics said:


> That was literally a "long ass" post, you weren't joking. I have not had the time to read all of it but from some of the things you've said our paths may have crossed at some point.  I'll try to give it a proper read later.


Don't worry about it, you are not obliged to read or respond, although any quality replies would be gratefully received.



veganomics said:


> My last post was on Thursday on page 22 (number 639). Since then there have been 170+ replies with very few (if any) proper "angry vegans" to be seen. My hunch is that all this "angry vegan" stuff stereotypical myth that some meat eaters desperately want to be true.  A rather large helping of confirmation bias might be involved here. I will try to respond to some of the more decent posts sometime, hopefully there won't be as much "noise" and thread pollution from the "nutters"  to wade through.


Hahahaa, dude I was away from my pute for a few hours yesterday and CR appeared to have some kind of vegan induced fit. He's surely completely off his rocker, poor thing.

I agree with you about the mythical "angry vegan".  They don't really exist in real life. Unfortunately some here believe youtube IS real life, lol.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jul 17, 2017)

IC3D said:


> Morning Vegans, have a blessed Monday.



lol, I was actually going to post that very video. Macka B should change his name to Macka BEAST! because he's a lyrical titan.



He doesn't mention food that much in this one but it's still a boom tune.


----------



## pengaleng (Jul 17, 2017)

ddraig said:


> At a festival a while agoView attachment 111470




wanker notice.


----------



## Casually Red (Jul 17, 2017)

xenon said:


> I am too busy to read the rest of your posts. I am however, pretty sure they   all match my preconceptions I  Will now  post a YouTube video.




Exactly how...in the name of all that's holy....are you supposed to get a lady friend up for a dance with that sort of shite ? It's atrocious .


----------



## Casually Red (Jul 18, 2017)

pengaleng said:


> major cunt



Shut it you cunt


----------



## Casually Red (Jul 18, 2017)

No offence 2 anyone but I reckon vegans are a bunch of mentalists . Honestly...when you think about it, and look around ..it's impossible to escape the thought that says ..." what a bunch of wankers " .


----------



## NoXion (Jul 18, 2017)

Casually Red said:


> Exactly how...in the name of all that's holy....are you supposed to get a lady friend up for a dance with that sort of shite ?



Like so:


----------



## ddraig (Jul 18, 2017)

Casually Red said:


> No offence 2 anyone but I reckon vegans are a bunch of mentalists . Honestly...when you think about it, and look around ..it's impossible to escape the thought that says ..." what a bunch of wankers " .


well argued!


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jul 18, 2017)

ddraig said:


> well argued!


I'm assuming that there is consumption of alcohol involved in his replies, or maybe he's on drugs or something. Obsessively unhinged, not worth taking seriously, and I don't think many of his fellow meatheads to take him seriously. Comedy value only.


----------



## Spymaster (Jul 18, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> I'm assuming that there is consumption of alcohol involved in his replies, or maybe he's on drugs or something. Obsessively unhinged, not worth taking seriously, and I don't think many of his fellow meatheads to take him seriously. Comedy value only.


Did you used to post here as Cosmic?


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jul 18, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> Did you used to post here as Cosmic?


What? Is this another one of those strategically placed irrelevant distractions that you lot pull out of the bag when you don't really have anything useful left to post?


----------



## Spymaster (Jul 18, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> What? Is this another one of those strategically placed irrelevant distractions that you lot pull out of the bag when you don't really have anything useful left to post?


No, it's a question.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jul 18, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> No, it's a question.


An irrelevant and diversionary question it would appear.  Any chance of actually sticking to the and not going off on wild meaningless tangents?


----------



## NoXion (Jul 18, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> No, it's a question.



Would you believe them if they said no?


----------



## Spymaster (Jul 18, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> An irrelevant and diversionary question it would appear.  Any chance of actually sticking to the and not going off on wild meaningless tangents?


Not really, this thread is done and dusted as far as discussion is concerned. As it was from the beginning really. Lbj has been trying to engage you and the other vegheads sensibly for ages and just been met with the usual pish and nonsense. Everyone's just taking the piss now. 

So, are you the poster formerly known as Cosmic? You have a similar posting style.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jul 18, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> Not really, this thread is done and dusted as far as discussion is concerned. As it was from the beginning really. Lbj has been trying to engage you and the other vegheads sensibly for ages and just been met with the usual pish and nonsense. Everyone's just taking the piss now.


Yet another unbalanced and biased account. Both yourself and lbj, who are seem to be amongst the more sane contributors, appear to believe that unless somebody agrees with your proposal then they are unreasonable and so you throw your toys out of the pram and start complaining about terrible blood curdling words like the dreaded "carnist". The piss taking was there right from the beginning but your heavily blinkered vision appears to have stopped you from seeing anything wrong with the conduct of your fellow meatheads who have been the ones chiefly responsible for bombarded the thread with nonsense. 



Spymaster said:


> So, are you the poster formerly known as Cosmic? You have a similar posting style.


No!!!



You'll need another diversion now I suppose.


----------



## sealion (Jul 18, 2017)

Teenager Arrested For Selling Lettuce to Desperate Vegans on Hove Street Corner


----------



## Spymaster (Jul 18, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Yet another unbalanced and biased account. Both yourself and lbj, who are seem to be amongst the more sane contributors, appear to believe that unless somebody agrees with your proposal then they are unreasonable and so you throw your toys out of the pram and start complaining about terrible blood curdling words like the dreaded "carnist". The piss taking was there right from the beginning but your heavily blinkered vision appears to have stopped you from seeing anything wrong with the conduct of your fellow meatheads who have been the ones chiefly responsible for bombarded the thread with nonsense.


I haven't seen any toys being chucked, just piss taking out of sillyness. This thread was always nonsense. CR just notched it up a level.


> You'll need another diversion now I suppose


From what? Nothing going on here.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jul 18, 2017)

sealion said:


> Teenager Arrested For Selling Lettuce to Desperate Vegans on Hove Street Corner


----------



## Spymaster (Jul 18, 2017)

sealion said:


> Teenager Arrested For Selling Lettuce to Desperate Vegans on Hove Street Corner


"Kids use that park"!


----------



## sealion (Jul 18, 2017)

Brighton Mourns as City’s Last Gluten Tolerant Resident Dies aged 85


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jul 18, 2017)

(((gluten-intolerant vegans)))


----------



## ddraig (Jul 18, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> (((gluten-intolerant vegans)))


sneering prick


----------



## Spymaster (Jul 18, 2017)




----------



## Spymaster (Jul 18, 2017)

sealion said:


> Teenager Arrested For Selling Lettuce to Desperate Vegans on Hove Street Corner


Some of the comments are mildly amusing


> They probably do the hard stuff (carrots, parsnips) in Brighton but this is “Hove Actually” and more refined





> I drove through there yesterday and saw them making pipes out of carrots and smoking sage through them.
> Some where even going as far as opening up tea bags for a stronger hit.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jul 18, 2017)

ddraig said:


> sneering prick


no cartoon stick men?


----------



## Spymaster (Jul 18, 2017)




----------



## gentlegreen (Jul 18, 2017)

Out of interest, what do meat eaters consider "normal" in terms of pooing / frequency of constipation ?
(not that meat eating necessarily means a lack of veggies / fibre in the diet ...)


----------



## sealion (Jul 18, 2017)

gentlegreen said:


> Out of interest, what do meat eaters consider "normal" in terms of pooing / frequency of constipation ?
> (not that meat eating necessarily means a lack of veggies / fibre in the diet ...)


This would all depend on the amount of exercise one takes and what time you eat and how big or small the meal might be. I used to go vegan for periods when i was training and didn't notice a different pattern from when i ate meat.


----------



## Spymaster (Jul 18, 2017)

I had to look up _malzoan
_


> *malzoan*
> Meaning : Malzoan (n.) A person who condones, promotes, or actively engages in non-human animal exploitation, enslavement, rape, torture, _murder,_ consumption, or commodification.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jul 18, 2017)

Oh, fucking hell,


----------



## mrs quoad (Jul 18, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Both yourself and lbj, who are seem to be amongst the more sane contributors, appear to believe that unless somebody agrees with your proposal then they are unreasonable and so you throw your toys out of the pram and start complaining about terrible blood curdling words like the dreaded "carnist".


Tbf, I've seen lbj identify the point at which discussions go no further, which seems pretty accurate to me. I missed the bit where that turned into calling your assumptions "unreasonable," as opposed to pointing out that your vs e.g. my assumptions, and where they differ, and the specific fetishisation of death, are where further dialogue appear to become impossible.


----------



## Spymaster (Jul 18, 2017)

mrs quoad said:


> Tbf, I've seen lbj identify the point at which discussions go no further, which seems pretty accurate to me. I missed the bit where that turned into calling your assumptions "unreasonable," as opposed to pointing out that your vs e.g. my assumptions, and where they differ, and the specific fetishisation of death, are where further dialogue appear to become impossible.


Lbj was even exceptionally patient with ddraigo the other night!

Tbf, when you're dealing with people who can't comprehend that people who are fond of animals can be meat eaters too; who talk about _murdering_ animals, post jaunty slogans, and make up funny words for people they don't agree with, you're _never_ going to have a reasoned debate. It's like arguing with conspiracy theorists. Might as well skip straight to the piss-taking. Casually Red had the right idea.


----------



## honkeymonkey (Jul 19, 2017)

I think I just don't care that much. Because I can definitely understand their feeling, so we have to respect each other.


----------



## Watermelon Man (Jul 19, 2017)

honkeymonkey said:


> I think I just don't care that much. Because I can definitely understand their feeling, so we have to respect each other.



What don't you care about?


----------



## A380 (Jul 20, 2017)

Watermelon Man said:


> What don't you care about?


disasters, fires, floods and killer bees
the NASA shuttle falling in the sea
starvation and the food that Live Aid bought
the gamblers and the pushers and the freaks
the people who live on the street
the welfare of all the boys and girls.


----------



## veganomics (Jul 20, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Don't worry about it, you are not obliged to read or respond, although any quality replies would be gratefully received.


Unfortunately I'm quite busy at the moment with work and real life and therefore cannot really spare the time to wade through all the timewasting nonsense in this thread, most of it coming from the vegan opposition party, It's fairly low on my priority list, even though this is my topic of choice, the clue being right there in my member name.



PaoloSanchez said:


> Hahahaa, dude I was away from my pute for a few hours yesterday and CR appeared to have some kind of vegan induced fit. He's surely completely off his rocker, poor thing.
> 
> I agree with you about the mythical "angry vegan".  They don't really exist in real life. Unfortunately some here believe youtube IS real life, lol.


I don't take CR seriously at all and mostly ignore his nonsense, he seems to be one of the VOP right wing extremists nutjobs. Do you like the new acronym, VOP? I just made it up off the top of my head and I'm quite pleased with it, although I think it's just the sort of thing that appears to raise VOP heckles, minting new words and terms that accurately describe them. They don't appear to like that at all.

I believe that the "angry vegan" is a mythical VOP caricature that is at best an exaggeration of what happens in real life. This mythical creature, who by their own admission, mostly exists on youtube, that well known haven of credibility, and the unholy VOP alliance use their belief in this caricature as a lever to justify their behaviour, because the VOP can't really argue their points using logic and reason and so have to resort to mockery, sneers, taunts and just general self confessed "sillyness".

Nearly all of the pillars of the traditional arguments VOPs tend to use are built on very shaky foundations and some of those pillars have collapsed in a heap. So now, under the guidance of the de-facto VOP leader and messiah, lbj, they have formed a defensive circle around one of the few remaining pillars, a bit like Cutlers last stand.  Strange as it may seem, they are fighting on the morality ticket. It is the contention of the VOP messiah that there is absolutely nothing morally wrong with killing animals for food, as long as you take care of them properly and give them lots of cuddles, and that somehow, killing them is definitely not cruel or inhumane because we are much better than them and they are beneath us, stupid animals.

Apparently there is some forum history/beef that I don't know about (or really care tbh), which gives lbj the right to declare the argument to be over right at start of the thread due to the unwillingness of those unreasonable  "angry vegans" who refuse to accept the perfectly reasonable notion that killing animals when there is absolutely no need to do so is definitely not immoral or cruel. What's wrong with these radical vegan terrorists? How dare they not accept this obvious truth. It is this intransigence from unreasonable vegans has been the catalyst for VOP activism and pre-emptive strikes. They feel entitled to sabotage and bombard this thread with "sillyness" because those "angry vegans" deserve it. Right?

That's all I have time for. For those interested there are a number of reasonable debates that go into detail and cover nearly all the aspects of the subject. For those that are a bit more open minded and don't do the "I'm not listening to your crap" instant dismissal, you might learn a thing or two. One of the more recent series of vlogger spats was triggered by Roaming Millenials recent The Problem With Vegans video and there have been some pretty good responses.


----------



## xenon (Jul 20, 2017)

What?   circling the wagons, leaders... No one's arsed  having a go at vegans. CR  he's just doing his thing. Seriously if you think this thread counts as some kind of angry opposition, you need to read some others around here.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jul 20, 2017)

veganomics said:


> Unfortunately I'm quite busy at the moment with work and real life and therefore cannot really spare the time to wade through all the timewasting nonsense in this thread, most of it coming from the vegan opposition party, It's fairly low on my priority list, even though this is my topic of choice, the clue being right there in my member name.
> 
> 
> I don't take CR seriously at all and mostly ignore his nonsense, he seems to be one of the VOP right wing extremists nutjobs. Do you like the new acronym, VOP? I just made it up off the top of my head and I'm quite pleased with it, although I think it's just the sort of thing that appears to raise VOP heckles, minting new words and terms that accurately describe them. They don't appear to like that at all.
> ...



lol

The only 'obvious truth' I would ask you to accept is that others don't share your belief that killing animals for food is immoral. I've merely tried, and clearly failed, to explain why I don't consider it to be immoral. Your final paragraph betrays your own fundamentalism on this - in reality, you're projecting when you think I'm trying to get you to accept an 'obvious truth'.


----------



## Spymaster (Jul 20, 2017)

It's the passive aggression and pretence at _lack of argument_ that makes me grin. Like he's made some knock-out case to which there's no reasonable response.


----------



## antimata (Jul 20, 2017)

reponce is always necessary...


----------



## Idris2002 (Jul 20, 2017)




----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Jul 20, 2017)

veganomics said:


> Unfortunately I'm quite busy at the moment with work and real life and therefore cannot really spare the time to wade through all the timewasting nonsense in this thread, most of it coming from the vegan opposition party, It's fairly low on my priority list, even though this is my topic of choice, the clue being right there in my member name.
> 
> 
> I don't take CR seriously at all and mostly ignore his nonsense, he seems to be one of the VOP right wing extremists nutjobs. Do you like the new acronym, VOP? I just made it up off the top of my head and I'm quite pleased with it, although I think it's just the sort of thing that appears to raise VOP heckles, minting new words and terms that accurately describe them. They don't appear to like that at all.
> ...



Wow


----------



## AnnaKarpik (Jul 20, 2017)

I'm coming to the conclusion that absolutely nothing on earth* could persuade me to call myself vegan, regardless of what I do or don't eat.

*if someone wanted to offer money though, I'm open to negotiations.


----------



## tonysingh (Jul 20, 2017)

AnnaKarpik said:


> I'm coming to the conclusion that absolutely nothing on earth* could persuade me to call myself vegan, regardless of what I do or don't eat.
> 
> *if someone wanted to offer money though, I'm open to negotiations.



i offer 27p.


----------



## A380 (Jul 20, 2017)

tonysingh said:


> i offer 27p.


I'll chip in 12p and a 1 Euro coin I found in my coat pocket.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jul 20, 2017)

veganomics said:


> Unfortunately I'm quite busy at the moment with work and real life and therefore cannot really spare the time to wade through all the timewasting nonsense in this thread, most of it coming from the vegan opposition party,


I also have not had as much time recently. I've been helping an 89 old lady who's struggling to look after herself and husband with little support. As a country we could look after our old people a bit better. Anyway, I've digressed. Yes, indeed there is an awful lot of nonsense posts and people have a go, a sly dig here and there not much of any substance because they've decided to try and drown out anything sensible that might have emerged. For people that don't much care for veganism, they've invested quite a lot of time and energy to "have a go" and are currently dominating the leaderboard.


Now that's some dedication for folks that claim that they "ain't bovvered" by vegan talk. 



veganomics said:


> I don't take CR seriously at all and mostly ignore his nonsense, he seems to be one of the VOP right wing extremists nutjobs. Do you like the new acronym, VOP? I just made it up off the top of my head and I'm quite pleased with it, although I think it's just the sort of thing that appears to raise VOP heckles, minting new words and terms that accurately describe them. They don't appear to like that at all.
> 
> I believe that the "angry vegan" is a mythical VOP caricature that is at best an exaggeration of what happens in real life. This mythical creature, who by their own admission, mostly exists on youtube, that well known haven of credibility, and the unholy VOP alliance use their belief in this caricature as a lever to justify their behaviour, because the VOP can't really argue their points using logic and reason and so have to resort to mockery, sneers, taunts and just general self confessed "sillyness".
> 
> ...



VOP eh? Not bad. Or how about CC? No not the dieselgate Volkswagen Passat derivative, it's the Carnist Coalition.  Maybe we need some marketing advice from Saatchi and Saatchi. 
I've not heard of the roaming millenial stuff. I'll get round to it eventually. These videos are usually on the long side and I have to be in the mood and have the time, but there is a lot of good stuff out there (and also a lot of rubbish). Here's one that I saw last week which I thought was alright...


----------



## pengaleng (Jul 20, 2017)

'suff-folk'


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jul 20, 2017)

xenon said:


> What?   circling the wagons, leaders... No one's arsed  having a go at vegans. CR  he's just doing his thing. Seriously if you think this thread counts as some kind of angry opposition, you need to read some others around here.


Indeed, "no one's arsed". That's why they've set up camp in this thread, lol. 
"Look at my face...am I bovvered tho?..."


----------



## Spymaster (Jul 20, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> I also have not had as much time recently. I've been helping an 89 old lady who's struggling to look after herself and husband with little support.


Absolutely priceless!!!


----------



## pengaleng (Jul 20, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> Absolutely priceless!!!




virtue signalling all over


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jul 20, 2017)

oops, I've posted again.


----------



## Spymaster (Jul 20, 2017)

Carnists hate old ladies.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jul 20, 2017)

Carnists eat old ladies.


----------



## mojo pixy (Jul 20, 2017)

Carnists have better carnal knowledge though.


----------



## mojo pixy (Jul 20, 2017)

I mean, if we're being consistent in our use of _carn-_
??
lol


----------



## AnnaKarpik (Jul 20, 2017)

tonysingh said:


> i offer 27p.


OK guys, negotiations start at four figures. And that's four before the decimal point with no leading zeros.

Over to you.


----------



## Yuwipi Woman (Jul 20, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> View attachment 111747



You're seriously bitchin' about 17 posts on a 30 page thread?  

oops!  18 now!


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jul 20, 2017)

AnnaKarpik said:


> OK guys, negotiations start at four figures. And that's four before the decimal point with no leading zeros.
> 
> Over to you.



1000 Zimbabwe dollars. 

* £2.15


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Jul 20, 2017)

I don't think so. There's plenty of annoying meat eaters and that doesn't put me off a decent rare fillet.


----------



## NoXion (Jul 21, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> I also have not had as much time recently. I've been helping an 89 old lady who's struggling to look after herself and husband with little support. As a country we could look after our old people a bit better. Anyway, I've digressed. Yes, indeed there is an awful lot of nonsense posts and people have a go, a sly dig here and there not much of any substance because they've decided to try and drown out anything sensible that might have emerged. For people that don't much care for veganism, they've invested quite a lot of time and energy to "have a go" and are currently dominating the leaderboard.
> 
> View attachment 111747
> Now that's some dedication for folks that claim that they "ain't bovvered" by vegan talk.
> ...


I reckon this thread was started as a trolling attempt in the first instance, so as far as I'm concerned the only way was up from there. Speaking as one of those horrible malzoan carnists, if I really was that bothered about veganism, I'd be doing a hell of a lot more than just ribbing it over the internet. As long as the vegetablists don't try to put the force of the State behind their views, my relatively laissez-faire attitude will remain that way.


----------



## ddraig (Jul 21, 2017)

apt


----------



## mrs quoad (Jul 21, 2017)

mrs quoad said:


> Tbf, I've seen lbj identify the point at which discussions go no further, which seems pretty accurate to me. I missed the bit where that turned into calling your assumptions "unreasonable," as opposed to pointing out that your vs e.g. my assumptions, and where they differ, and the specific fetishisation of death, are where further dialogue appear to become impossible.


veganomics PaoloSanchez


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Jul 22, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> That little cartoon does quite succinctly illustrate why we talk past one another. For you, if someone wouldn't want you to kill their dog, how can they justify killing other animals?
> 
> To take the example of the farm I linked to earlier, which farms in a way that I think is a good way, the animals on that farm are killed when their usefulness is over, or they're killed because that is their usefulness. It is necessarily using the animals instrumentally - the animals are its business. Being killed is a part of the deal the farmer has made for them, without their consent or knowledge, to be alive in the first place, at which point they are replaced by the next generation of cows or pigs or chickens, for whom the same deal applies.
> 
> ...



So, would you say it's fair to sum up your ethical position as this: if we give animals a good life then this compensates them for the premature death we inflict upon, and thereby makes it morally permissible (all else equal)?

If this is your position, does it mean that you're opposed to fresh water fishing and hunting where we do not give animals anything - all we do is deprive them of life?

Are you also opposed to egg and dairy production that involve the killing of male offspring shortly after birth because they are economically worthless? The short, sad lives of these poor creatures cannot be described as good in any sense after all.

If you do think these practices are acceptable then the basis for your ethical justification outlined above does not explain why. If that is the case, could you spell out what your wider position is?

Would you have any qualms with somebody sending their pet dog to a premature death in an industrial slaughterhouse so that they could be turned into a fur coat? Assuming that they gave these dogs a good life then how could you object on your own terms? (n.b, you need to do better than just appeal to 'different relationships' - that's both begging the question [because the basis for those relationships is what is being challenged] and an appeal to tradition fallacy [traditions themselves are not inherently morally good after all].

Also - what you are defending here is, on your own account, a relationship of betrayal and exploitation of individuals who are vulnerable, innocent and are entirely at our mercy. In normal circumstances that would be regarded as a deeply immoral enterprise. What is it about them being non-human animals that makes it acceptable? I would appreciate it if you were specific here - name the difference that you think makes something that would otherwise be profoundly wrong something to be perfectly fine.

A final thing, you claim that you are against factory farming, but have repeatedly admitted that you regularly consume its products. Why do you think that is? I assure you that you are not alone in this hypocrisy. Every supposed advocate of happy meat that I've ever known in fact takes very little care over the sourcing of their animal products (and I used to be exactly the same when I held this position btw). (I would recommend reading part 2 of this insightful essay, which I think provides a plausible hypothesis as to why this might be the case: Why "Happy Meat" Is Always Wrong, an Ebook by Magnus Vinding). Here's a question for you: given that we both agree that factory farming is evil, doesn't the fact that humane meat advocates consistently support it in practice whereas vegans do not make a strong consequentialist case in favour of veganism for that reason alone?


----------



## Riklet (Jul 22, 2017)

Some individualistic lifestyle facebook rambling makes me hate a few vegan types but in general I respect the decision and think it's very principled.

If it was organised by 'us' 'society' etc in a concious drive to avoid environmental catastrophe in a post-capitalist world of course I'd be keen.

At the moment though, currently, a few eggs and some delish honey is not going to make any difference whatsover. So what puts me off aside from liking animal products is not reallly the smugness.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jul 22, 2017)

mrs quoad said:


> veganomics PaoloSanchez


Not sure why you tagged me after quoting yourself. I'm not sure what you were trying to get at tbh. Fetishisation of death? wtf is that? 

lbf gave himself an "out" right at the start of this thread, with his unilateral declaration that there is nothing more to discuss on this matter, even though he's in the top two posters in this thread has been pushed to the front as the meat eaters spokesperson and chief advocate.  He has attached himself to the moral argument which he apparently believes to a compelling one, and I don't believe is a very good argument. Of course there is no way to prove whether it is moral or immoral to kill animals for food when we don't need to, however there is still plenty of talking points imo. For starters lbj has not offered any real explanation as to why it's not wrong and immoral, he simply declares that it just isn't as if it's a given, and that vegans just don't get this. He rather conveniently ignores the other fairly sound reasons people decide to stop consuming animal products, presumably because most of those reasons are on fairly solid ground and make good sense from a health, environmental and economic perspective, and so are harder to argue against.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jul 22, 2017)

ddraig said:


> apt


VeganSidekick nails it again.


----------



## NoXion (Jul 23, 2017)

I've no problem in principle with eating dogs, although I've heard their meat can be a bit stringy. I'd certainly give it a try though. Same thing with horse, assuming it was actually intended for eating when it was reared, rather than being from some old nag that was stuffed with Cthulhu knows what throughout its life in order to win races.


----------



## xenon (Jul 23, 2017)

Jeff Robinson said:


> So, would you say it's fair to sum up your ethical position as this: if we give animals a good life then this compensates them for the premature death we inflict upon, and thereby makes it morally permissible (all else equal)?
> 
> If this is your position, does it mean that you're opposed to fresh water fishing and hunting where we do not give animals anything - all we do is deprive them of life?
> 
> ...




 This is an excellent post.

 Personally, I have nothing to counter it offhand.  Other than suffice to say, rationality is unevenly applied.


----------



## Casually Red (Jul 23, 2017)

Jeff Robinson said:


> So, would you say it's fair to sum up your ethical position as this: if we give animals a good life then this compensates them for the premature death we inflict upon, and thereby makes it morally permissible (all else equal)?
> 
> If this is your position, does it mean that you're opposed to fresh water fishing and hunting where we do not give animals anything - all we do is deprive them of life?
> 
> ...



We ..in the west..don't eat dogs purely for cultural reasons , same with horses and insects ..actually that's more a British thing, most of Europe will happily scoff a horse . But make no mistake about it we are about 6 or 7 square meals away from saying " fuck it...fidos for the pot " . we would if we were hungry enough . And fido would eat us too and have not an ounce of remorse . 
The Swiss eat dogs , so do many people in Asia . It's nothing more than a cultural taste . You might as well be talking about coconut oil or curry powder . A matter of taste and nothing else .


----------



## Casually Red (Jul 23, 2017)

Trying the Hadza hunter-gatherer berry and porcupine diet - BBC News

Malzoan carnists eating the poor little animals .


----------



## A380 (Jul 23, 2017)

Casually Red said:


> We ..in the west..don't eat dogs purely for cultural reasons , same with horses and insects ..actually that's more a British thing, most of Europe will happily scoff a horse . But make no mistake about it we are about 6 or 7 square meals away from saying " fuck it...fidos for the pot " . we would if we were hungry enough . And fido would eat us too and have not an ounce of remorse .
> The Swiss eat dogs , so do many people in Asia . It's nothing more than a cultural taste . You might as well be talking about coconut oil or curry powder . A matter of taste and nothing else .



And you know that however much you love your cat it would eat your face if you were still for mor than 12 hours.


----------



## Casually Red (Jul 23, 2017)

A380 said:


> And you know that however much you love your cat it would eat your face if you were still for mor than 12 hours.



With zero remorse . It wouldn't pine, it'd eat you .


----------



## A380 (Jul 23, 2017)

Casually Red said:


> With zero remorse . It wouldn't pine, it'd eat you .


Mine would get all their feline mates in for a party.


----------



## Watermelon Man (Jul 23, 2017)

What people can't deny is that they have been brainwashed/programmed into eating dead animals and drinking cows milk.  It goes on today. Schools telling children that dairy is "essential" in their diet.  This is of course programming. Industry led programming. 

The main reasons you eat dead animals is because you've been programmed to do so.  Yes, you might like the taste but the main reason is for you to give money to the meat industry and possibly the pharmaceutical industry too.


----------



## Casually Red (Jul 23, 2017)

Watermelon Man said:


> What people can't deny is that they have been brainwashed/programmed into eating dead animals and drinking cows milk.  It goes on today. Schools telling children that dairy is "essential" in their diet.  This is of course programming. Industry led programming.
> 
> The main reasons you eat dead animals is because you've been programmed to do so.  Yes, you might like the taste but the main reason is for you to give money to the meat industry and possibly the pharmaceutical industry too.



We eat dead animals because eating live ones make too much noise and mess . They put up much less of a struggle once theyre dead . It's also easier to get them onto the plate .


----------



## A380 (Jul 23, 2017)

Watermelon Man said:


> What people can't deny is that they have been brainwashed/programmed into eating dead animals and drinking cows milk.  It goes on today. Schools telling children that dairy is "essential" in their diet.  This is of course programming. Industry led programming.
> 
> The main reasons you eat dead animals is because you've been programmed to do so.  Yes, you might like the taste but the main reason is for you to give money to the meat industry and possibly the pharmaceutical industry too.



Yes, you are right I have no free will. 

But thankfully you have now drawn the blinds from my previously sheeple like eyes.


----------



## Watermelon Man (Jul 23, 2017)

A380 said:


> Yes, you are right I have no free will.
> 
> But thankfully you have now drawn the blinds from my previously sheeple like eyes.



You have been programmed to eat meat and dairy. It's as simple as that. From day one! You are basically, the meat and dairy industries bitch.


----------



## Casually Red (Jul 23, 2017)

Watermelon Man said:


> You are basically, the meat and dairy industries bitch.


----------



## Watermelon Man (Jul 23, 2017)

word!

Edited to add. Those people got paid by the meat and dairy industry for sure!


----------



## A380 (Jul 23, 2017)

Watermelon Man said:


> You have been programmed to eat meat and dairy. It's as simple as that. From day one! You are basically, the meat and dairy industries bitch.


I know. They downloaded their bile onto the tabula rassa of my mind. 

I don't even believe that 9 11 was an inside job either. 

Please provide more insights, now that you have opened my mind  I feel like the main character  at the end of the Truman Show. I can't remember his name?


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Jul 23, 2017)

Watermelon Man said:


> What people can't deny is that they have been brainwashed/programmed into eating dead animals and drinking cows milk.  It goes on today. Schools telling children that dairy is "essential" in their diet.  This is of course programming. Industry led programming.
> 
> The main reasons you eat dead animals is because you've been programmed to do so.  Yes, you might like the taste but the main reason is for you to give money to the meat industry and possibly the pharmaceutical industry too.


What utter bollocks 

Hate to break this to you, but humans have been consuming both meat and dairy for quite a long time.


----------



## Watermelon Man (Jul 23, 2017)

A380 said:


> I know. They downloaded their bile onto the tabula rassa of my mind.
> 
> I don't even believe that 9 11 was an inside job either.
> 
> Please provide more insights, now that you have opened my mind  I feel like the main character  at the end of the Truman Show. I can't remember his name?



My point is already in your mind. There's no need for me to elaborate. The truth is out. It's up to you to set it free.


----------



## Watermelon Man (Jul 23, 2017)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> What utter bollocks
> 
> Hate to break this to you, but humans have been consuming both meat and dairy for quite a long time.



Sometimes the truth hurts. We are not talking about people 1000s of years ago. We are talking about you.


----------



## Casually Red (Jul 23, 2017)

If you're vegan you probably have wankers like this for mates . No thanks .


----------



## Watermelon Man (Jul 23, 2017)

More meat and dairy industry corruption for sure...  

I'm off to eat dead animals, cheese, cows milk...get fat, clog up my arteries and go on tablets for the rest of my life.  Because. Because of her! 

You have been conned.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jul 23, 2017)

Jeff Robinson said:


> Would you have any qualms with somebody sending their pet dog to a premature death in an industrial slaughterhouse so that they could be turned into a fur coat?



It would have to be a fucking big dog to turn into coat.


----------



## Celyn (Jul 23, 2017)

cupid_stunt said:


> It would have to be a fucking big dog to turn into coat.


Possibly lots of dogs. Wasn't that the Cruella de Ville plan in "101 Dalmatians"?  

Oh no, I now foresee an afternoon of Goggling for, and rediscovering, kiddy books ahead of me.


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Jul 23, 2017)

Watermelon Man said:


> I'm off to eat dead animals, cheese, cows milk...get fat, clog up my arteries and go on tablets for the rest of my life.


Yep. Every person who eats meat is unhealthy. Definitely that.


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Jul 23, 2017)

Watermelon Man said:


> Sometimes the truth hurts. We are not talking about people 1000s of years ago. We are talking about you.


Indeed. With my body that seems perfectly designed for consuming a mix of meat, dairy and vegetables.

I guess those pesky marketeers are just taking advatage of that.


----------



## extra dry (Jul 23, 2017)

Not so much angry ones. I do work work with a vegan and he has the same lunch and dinner everyday, soybean curd and rice, a big tupperware bowl everyday. He looks so unhappy eating it, just so depressed.


----------



## Watermelon Man (Jul 23, 2017)

extra dry said:


> Not so much angry ones. I do work work with a vegan and he has the same lunch and dinner everyday, soybean curd and rice, a big tupperware bowl everyday. He looks so unhappy eating it, just so depressed.



Seriously?  That sounds more like an eating disorder to me.  I don't think I've had the same lunch in over two years?


----------



## Watermelon Man (Jul 23, 2017)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> Yep. Every person who eats meat is unhealthy. Definitely that.



Ah, you got me. You are right... It's true. Look at America. They consume loads of meat and dairy and they are all healthy as fuck. All very healthy. No obesity crisis. No heart disease. No cancer. No diabetes epidemic.  Just goes to prove that bodies are designed to eat meat and dairy. yeah.


----------



## rubbershoes (Jul 23, 2017)

Watermelon Man said:


> My point is already in your mind. There's no need for me to elaborate. The truth is out. It's up to you to set it free.



2/1 Firky
3/1 Ninj 
10/1 Ern
500/1 PB Man


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jul 23, 2017)

Watermelon Man said:


> Seriously?  That sounds more like an eating disorder to me.  I don't think I've had the same lunch in over two years?


No it's definitely because they are vegan. Didn't you know that vegans eat the same thing everyday. I thought everyone knew that.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jul 23, 2017)

...and not only that, didn't you know that you are 8 square meals away from eating your neighbour. Hunger can be such a bitch.


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Jul 23, 2017)

Watermelon Man said:


> Ah, you got me. You are right... It's true. Look at America. They consume loads of meat and dairy and they are all healthy as fuck. All very healthy. No obesity crisis. No heart disease. No cancer. No diabetes epidemic.  Just goes to prove that bodies are designed to eat meat and dairy. yeah.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jul 23, 2017)




----------



## cupid_stunt (Jul 23, 2017)

Watermelon Man said:


> Ah, you got me. You are right... It's true. Look at America. They consume loads of meat and dairy and they are all healthy as fuck. All very healthy. No obesity crisis. No heart disease. No cancer. No diabetes epidemic.  Just goes to prove that bodies are designed to eat meat and dairy. yeah.



You are a complete twat.


----------



## gentlegreen (Jul 23, 2017)

extra dry said:


> Not so much angry ones. I do work work with a vegan and he has the same lunch and dinner everyday, soybean curd and rice, a big tupperware bowl everyday. He looks so unhappy eating it, just so depressed.


I eat more or less exactly the same food every day - have done for years - and I look forward to eating the most nutrients for the least money prepared in the least time.


----------



## Watermelon Man (Jul 23, 2017)

gentlegreen said:


> I eat more or less exactly the same food every day - have done for years - and I look forward to eating the most nutrients for the least money prepared in the least time.



Most nutrients for the least money.  I like the sound of that. Lentils, oats, potatoes, vegetables.  All cheap as.  You can get really cheap fruit in some places too!


----------



## gentlegreen (Jul 23, 2017)

My current evening meal is an onion, two cloves of garlic,  head of broccoli, a punnet of vitamin D mushrooms,  a pointy red pepper, a couple of grated carrots, half a pound of home grown mung sprouts ... I confess I also abuse whole wheat cereal and unsweetened soy milk.


----------



## gentlegreen (Jul 23, 2017)

Perhaps a diversion, but I encountered yet another know-it-all (vegan) personal trainer who has just called me a weirdo and Monsanto shill in his latest video for questioning his unscientific views on GM food.
It this new video he compounded his error by saying that microwaves are also evil and carrots are best eaten raw.


----------



## Watermelon Man (Jul 23, 2017)

gentlegreen said:


> Perhaps a diversion, but I encountered yet another know-it-all (vegan) personal trainer who has just called me a weirdo and Monsanto shill in his latest video for questioning his unscientific views on GM food.
> It this new video he compounded his error by saying that microwaves are also evil and carrots are best eaten raw.




The raw thing.... hmmm.  I admit, I feel shit loads better if I have a fully raw day but I don't get the raw vegan crowd telling everyone that raw veganism can basically make you a super hero and bullet proof...


----------



## Shirl (Jul 23, 2017)

Missed this thread 'til now. I know a lot of vegans but none of them are angry. Do I have to read the whole thread to find out why some vegans are angry? 
I have been vegan twice. Neither time lasted longer than a year. I like the idea of being vegan but I'm just too shallow.


----------



## Watermelon Man (Jul 23, 2017)

Shirl said:


> Missed this thread 'til now. I know a lot of vegans but none of them are angry. Do I have to read the whole thread to find out why some vegans are angry?
> I have been vegan twice. Neither time lasted longer than a year. I like the idea of being vegan but I'm just too shallow.



What do you mean too shallow?


----------



## Shirl (Jul 23, 2017)

Watermelon Man said:


> What do you mean too shallow?


I don't have the commitment. I really think that eating animals or killing animals for food or skin or whatever is wrong but I just lack the commitment. I've had spells of being veggie for up to eight years and vegan just for up to a year but my lack of willpower lets me down and I just switch off from caring.
*I'm not proud of myself 
eta, I rarely eat dairy because I think that is the cruelest of all


----------



## Watermelon Man (Jul 23, 2017)

Shirl said:


> I don't have the commitment. I really think that eating animals or killing animals for food or skin or whatever is wrong but I just lack the commitment. I've had spells of being veggie for up to eight years and vegan just for up to a year but my lack of willpower lets me down and I just switch off from caring.
> *I'm not proud of myself
> eta, I rarely eat dairy because I think that is the cruelest of all



I guess you have to know the reasons why you want to be vegan. Understanding the health part really well or as well as you possibly can is also a good way to stay vegan.  One area where many struggle is at social events.  Eating out even drinking alcohol! Some of it has fish bladder in.  It can be difficult.  

I have a little network of vegans these days.  That definitely helps as well.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jul 23, 2017)

Jeff Robinson said:


> So, would you say it's fair to sum up your ethical position as this: if we give animals a good life then this compensates them for the premature death we inflict upon, and thereby makes it morally permissible (all else equal)?



Not quite, no. There's no intention to imply compensation. We're using them for our purposes - I've been clear about that. My position then would simply be that we should not torture them nor give them miserable lives. In fact, more than that, we should be going out of our way not to abuse them. This applies to wider issues of keeping animals in captivity as well. 



Jeff Robinson said:


> If this is your position, does it mean that you're opposed to fresh water fishing and hunting where we do not give animals anything - all we do is deprive them of life?



Given that it's not really my position, no. 



Jeff Robinson said:


> Are you also opposed to egg and dairy production that involve the killing of male offspring shortly after birth because they are economically worthless? The short, sad lives of these poor creatures cannot be described as good in any sense after all.



I linked earlier to a dairy farm that allows calves to suckle for three to five months before they're taken away. Such places do exist, although they are a tiny minority. I linked to that farm because it conducts its affairs in a way that I consider to be ethical. And yes, many of the dairy and egg farms (including free-range ones) whose produce I consume don't live up to those standards. It's a big discussion we as a society need to have imo. 




Jeff Robinson said:


> Would you have any qualms with somebody sending their pet dog to a premature death in an industrial slaughterhouse so that they could be turned into a fur coat? Assuming that they gave these dogs a good life then how could you object on your own terms? (n.b, you need to do better than just appeal to 'different relationships' - that's both begging the question [because the basis for those relationships is what is being challenged] and an appeal to tradition fallacy [traditions themselves are not inherently morally good after all].



Well, here we disagree. I don't see 'different relationships' as such a terrible justification. However, like a lot of this, there isn't as firm a basis for that as you seem to want. 



Jeff Robinson said:


> A final thing, you claim that you are against factory farming, but have repeatedly admitted that you regularly consume its products. Why do you think that is? I assure you that you are not alone in this hypocrisy. Every supposed advocate of happy meat that I've ever known in fact takes very little care over the sourcing of their animal products (and I used to be exactly the same when I held this position btw). (I would recommend reading part 2 of this insightful essay, which I think provides a plausible hypothesis as to why this might be the case: Why "Happy Meat" Is Always Wrong, an Ebook by Magnus Vinding). Here's a question for you: given that we both agree that factory farming is evil, doesn't the fact that humane meat advocates consistently support it in practice whereas vegans do not make a strong consequentialist case in favour of veganism for that reason alone?



'consistently support it in practice' is rather loaded. I would say that I very inconsistently 'support' it. I also 'support' many other kinds of exploitation in my consumption - of other humans and of the environment, including practices that kill or lead never to exist countless animals (coffee plantations, for instance - nobody needs to drink coffee). We all do unless we're monks - we're embedded in this society, not another one, and we also need to change things at a higher level than just looking at consumer choice regarding many aspects of industrialised living. You and I seem to disagree as to the extent of the individual's moral responsibility for the practices of her society. That said, I'm also not a saint and have at no point claimed to be one - and I could do better.


----------



## Shirl (Jul 23, 2017)

Watermelon Man said:


> I guess you have to know the reasons why you want to be vegan. Understanding the health part really well or as well as you possibly can is also a good way to stay vegan.  One area where many struggle is at social events.  Eating out even drinking alcohol! Some of it has fish bladder in.  It can be difficult.
> 
> I have a little network of vegans these days.  That definitely helps as well.


Understanding the health part would be the very last reason for me to become vegan again. I drink too much alcohol. I sometimes do drugs. I smoke the odd cigarette and I have been bulimic in the past. The only reason I could ever stick to being vegan is to stop being so hedonistic and thinking only of myself having fun  See, I told you I was shallow


----------



## Casually Red (Jul 23, 2017)

cupid_stunt said:


> It would have to be a fucking big dog to turn into coat.



Speaking of fucking big dogs...some people take this animal loving business too seriously . I'm well distrustful of people who think animals are just like humans .




I'm not saying all vegans are into that but...you never really know with some of them .


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jul 23, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Not sure why you tagged me after quoting yourself. I'm not sure what you were trying to get at tbh. Fetishisation of death? wtf is that?
> 
> lbf gave himself an "out" right at the start of this thread, with his unilateral declaration that there is nothing more to discuss on this matter, even though he's in the top two posters in this thread has been pushed to the front as the meat eaters spokesperson and chief advocate.  He has attached himself to the moral argument which he apparently believes to a compelling one, and I don't believe is a very good argument. Of course there is no way to prove whether it is moral or immoral to kill animals for food when we don't need to, however there is still plenty of talking points imo. For starters lbj has not offered any real explanation as to why it's not wrong and immoral, he simply declares that it just isn't as if it's a given, and that vegans just don't get this. He rather conveniently ignores the other fairly sound reasons people decide to stop consuming animal products, presumably because most of those reasons are on fairly solid ground and make good sense from a health, environmental and economic perspective, and so are harder to argue against.



I've addressed moral arguments because they're there to be addressed, and also because in a debate, you need to address the other side's strongest arguments, not merely their weakest. You and one or two others have consistently misrepresented what I've said on this thread, and often just made shit up that you presume I've said when I have not. I'll not engage further.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jul 23, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I've addressed moral arguments because they're there to be addressed, and also because in a debate, you need to address the other side's strongest arguments, not merely their weakest.


Except you haven't really addressed the moral argument, you've simply declared that it isn't wrong to kill and eat animals for no reason and everyone is supposed to just accept it. The moral reason for not eating meat is not an isolated reason to be singled out, it is linked to all the other reasons, cruelty is just one of them. Even if, as you appear to believe, killing an animal unnecessarily is not an act of cruelty, the other reasons contribute to its wrongness. The fact that our current insatiable appetite for animal flesh has such a negative impact in so many different well documented ways is good enough reason even if you leave aside the moral issue. 



littlebabyjesus said:


> You and one or two others have consistently misrepresented what I've said on this thread, and often just made shit up that you presume I've said when I have not.


You appear not to be able to smell your own shit and your own misrepresentations and those of your "colleagues". I don't believe I have misrepresented you, well not on purpose anyway, and if even I had, you could always correct you believe the misrepresentation was instead of whining about it.



littlebabyjesus said:


> I'll not engage further.


Hasta la pasta, baby.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jul 23, 2017)




----------



## coley (Jul 23, 2017)

cupid_stunt said:


> It would have to be a fucking big dog to turn into coat.


Remember those rabbit fur coats in the 80s?  half the daft buggers wearing them didn't know what a 'coney ' was


----------



## coley (Jul 23, 2017)

Been a vegetarian for over thirty years, have had the odd bit of meat or fish when there was no practicable alternative early on in my ' vegetarian life'  TBH I've had more flack from vegans than from other people "how can you eat something resembling a beef burger"?? Etc.
But extreme Veganism? More a point scoring exercise in ascending the 'moral high ground'  than real concern for animal welfare, IMHE


----------



## coley (Jul 23, 2017)

Casually Red said:


> We ..in the west..don't eat dogs purely for cultural reasons , same with horses and insects ..actually that's more a British thing, most of Europe will happily scoff a horse . But make no mistake about it we are about 6 or 7 square meals away from saying " fuck it...fidos for the pot " . we would if we were hungry enough . And fido would eat us too and have not an ounce of remorse .
> The Swiss eat dogs , so do many people in Asia . It's nothing more than a cultural taste . You might as well be talking about coconut oil or curry powder . A matter of taste and nothing else .



Or 9/10 meals away from eating each other eating meat, or choosing not to, is funnily enough a result of our  relatively decent standard of living.
50 years ago most of the WC regarded a decent lump of meat as a luxury, to be eked out over the course of a week.
Now we are quite blasé about wrecking the planet as long as we can stuff our faces with pulled pork  (WETFTI) and chicken nuggets, etc.
I'm no rabid vegetarian/vegan, but a bit of though as to our lifestyles, would go a long way to making sure future generations had something to eat?


----------



## coley (Jul 23, 2017)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> Indeed. With my body that seems perfectly designed for consuming a mix of meat, dairy and vegetables.
> 
> I guess those pesky marketeers are just taking advatage of that.


Insofar as they market meat and meat derivatives far more than say, brussell sprouts ? Then yes they are


----------



## coley (Jul 24, 2017)

Bugger, just put out the evening feed for the hedgehog pack, dried mealworms!! Now I'm never going to get to sleep wondering how many transgressions I have committed in this particular argument!
Please note, I do not intend to eat the hedgehogs I am feeding, but were these mealworms humanely killed?
Not taking the piss, but there needs to be a line drawn, or a sensible argument engaged in.


----------



## Casually Red (Jul 24, 2017)

coley said:


> Or 9/10 meals away from eating each other eating meat, or choosing not to, is funnily enough a result of our  relatively decent standard of living.
> 50 years ago most of the WC regarded a decent lump of meat as a luxury, to be eked out over the course of a week.
> Now we are quite blasé about wrecking the planet as long as we can stuff our faces with pulled pork  (WETFTI) and chicken nuggets, etc.
> I'm no rabid vegetarian/vegan, but a bit of though as to our lifestyles, would go a long way to making sure future generations had something to eat?



Vegetable , tubor and rice farming wipes out ecosystems and kills a hell of a lot more animals than meat farming . Eg it'd take a human a full year to eat a single entire cow . Combine harvesters and tractors used in arable farming kill animals in their thousands . As do pesticides and poisons . rice farming creates vast amounts of methane . I'm not buying into this saving the planet business for a second . Monsanto are one of the most evil companies on the planet .
We can I suppose get by without eating meat , but it's meat eating that gave us the large brains that are able to process this ethical stuff in the first place . Had humans been vegans then we'd all be stupid small brained idiots . 
And as regards vegetarians being ethical Hitler , Pol pot and Charles Manson are a few examples of ethics gone badly awry .


----------



## Casually Red (Jul 24, 2017)

Meat smells and tastes bloody gorgeous . If we weren't supposed to eat it it wouldn't be so flipping delish to us in the first place . It makes me salivate when I smell it cooking . Mmmmmmmmm

Being averse to that just can't be right . Which makes you all wrong Uns by default .


----------



## coley (Jul 24, 2017)

Casually Red said:


> Vegetable , tubor and rice farming wipes out ecosystems and kills a hell of a lot more animals than meat farming . Eg it'd take a human a full year to eat a single entire cow . Combine harvesters and tractors used in arable farming kill animals in their thousands . As do pesticides and poisons . rice farming creates vast amounts of methane . I'm not buying into this saving the planet business for a second . Monsanto are one of the most evil companies on the planet .
> We can I suppose get by without eating meat , but it's meat eating that gave us the large brains that are able to process this ethical stuff in the first place . Had humans been vegans then we'd all be stupid small brained idiots .
> And as regards vegetarians being ethical Hitler , Pol pot and Charles Manson are a few examples of ethics gone badly awry .



"but it's meat eating that gave us the large brains" 

Never realised you are such a fanatical vegan!!, still live and learn


----------



## coley (Jul 24, 2017)

Casually Red said:


> Meat smells and tastes bloody gorgeous . If we weren't supposed to eat it it wouldn't be so flipping delish to us in the first place . It makes me salivate when I smell it cooking . Mmmmmmmmm
> 
> Being averse to that just can't be right . Which makes you all wrong Uns by default .


Leave it in the sun for a couple of hours then repeat your assertion


----------



## Casually Red (Jul 24, 2017)

coley said:


> "but it's meat eating that gave us the large brains"
> 
> Never realised you are such a fanatical vegan!!, still live and learn



You can have a large brain and still be bloody stupid . Take dolphins for instance...rapey bastards too stupid to just jump over the flipping net . And whales. How the fuck can they be so stupid to try and swim up a beach . Daft bastards the lot of them .


----------



## NoXion (Jul 24, 2017)

Watermelon Man said:


> What people can't deny is that they have been brainwashed/programmed into eating dead animals and drinking cows milk.  It goes on today. Schools telling children that dairy is "essential" in their diet.  This is of course programming. Industry led programming.
> 
> The main reasons you eat dead animals is because you've been programmed to do so.  Yes, you might like the taste but the main reason is for you to give money to the meat industry and possibly the pharmaceutical industry too.


Lactase persistence is part of an industry conspiracy stretching thousands of years before the industrialization of agriculture? I think this proves that you're a trolling shitcunt. Vegetablists, Mr Watermelon is not your friend.


----------



## NoXion (Jul 24, 2017)

coley said:


> Leave it in the sun for a couple of hours then repeat your assertion


 Leave pretty much any foodstuffs in the sun for a couple of hours and it will either go bad or some creature will have a go at it.  
Besides, I'm not sure what "my preferred foods won't go bad as quickly if stored in sub-optimal conditions and are not as quick to be raided by passing animals" is supposed to prove.


----------



## peterkro (Jul 24, 2017)

I'm not getting involved in the meat/no meat debate but just read this article, it shows clearly how insane Capitalism is.Nearly all bacon in NZ comes from Spain (mainly),Finland,Canada or the U.S. Now as most people know NZ has a huge meat farming industry and it has many pig farms of its own yet nearly all bacon is imported from the other side of the world and sold with the label "manufactured in NZ".
The same sort of thing goes on with Britain and Denmark but the distances involved in the NZ case are huge:

Do you know where your bacon comes from? (It's probably Spain)

Reminds me of a article I read about Scottish milk, it's taken by road in tankers to Southampton where it is packaged in Tetrapaks then put on refrigerated lorries and taken back to Scotland.


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Jul 24, 2017)

peterkro said:


> I'm not getting involved in the meat/no meat debate but just read this article, it shows clearly how insane Capitalism is


Now on that point, I think we can all agree


----------



## pengaleng (Jul 24, 2017)

if meat was so wrong then why did herbs evolve to be so tasty with it.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jul 24, 2017)




----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jul 24, 2017)

Yes Iyah...


----------



## Watermelon Man (Jul 24, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


>


 
Very true. Angry idiots.


----------



## Watermelon Man (Jul 24, 2017)

Casually Red said:


> Meat smells and tastes bloody gorgeous . If we weren't supposed to eat it it wouldn't be so flipping delish to us in the first place . It makes me salivate when I smell it cooking . Mmmmmmmmm
> 
> Being averse to that just can't be right . Which makes you all wrong Uns by default .



I salivate when I see vegan food.  I love my food more than I ever have done before.


----------



## Yuwipi Woman (Jul 24, 2017)

cupid_stunt said:


> It would have to be a fucking big dog to turn into coat.



They'd use more than one, as they do with nearly every other fur animal:

How many minks make a full mink coat?

Please excuse the Yahoo link.  I couldn't find a single article that didn't have an agenda on one side or the other.


----------



## mrs quoad (Jul 24, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


>





Watermelon Man said:


> Very true. Angry idiots.


Ooo.

Vegan pie!

Do you know the one thing that is guaranteed to improve vegan pie?


----------



## editor (Jul 24, 2017)

I love the ridiculous premise of this argument: "You know, I was just about to turn vegan, but then I met an angry vegan _so it's meat all the way for me forever!"_.


----------



## mrs quoad (Jul 24, 2017)

editor said:


> but then I met an angry vegan


Past tense of meet. 

#trufax


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jul 24, 2017)

Watermelon Man said:


> Very true. Angry idiots.


Do angry idiots put you off becoming an idiot?


----------



## T & P (Jul 24, 2017)

editor said:


> I love the ridiculous premise of this argument: "You know, I was just about to turn vegan, but then I met an angry vegan _so it's meat all the way for me forever!"_.


Oh I would think it's been long understood by all sides of the argument that the OP was a wind-up.


----------



## editor (Jul 24, 2017)

T & P said:


> Oh I would think it's been long understood by all sides of the argument that the OP was a wind-up.


I was going to turn vegan until you said that.


----------



## A380 (Jul 24, 2017)

Casually Red said:


> You can have a large brain and still be bloody stupid . Take dolphins for instance...rapey bastards too stupid to just jump over the flipping net . And whales. How the fuck can they be so stupid to try and swim up a beach . Daft bastards the lot of them .



Yeah, filter feeding fuckers, 'oh I'm so big, look at my mighty flukes', piss off you oil headed wanker.

And as for Dolphins: if they are so clever why don't they steal one of those little golf buggy things I'm sure they have at SeaWorld* and bugger off back to the Ocean? Its not like they need to change gear or anything, they have a simple two pedal mechanism. Its pure squeaky / clicky voiced laziness.


* I've never actually been**, but its America so I assume they have golf buggies.


** Mainly because they don't serve veal in their on site cafeterias.


----------



## coley (Jul 25, 2017)

Food is food, and personally I can't be bothered with the more rabid carnivores on here. 
But, why do fast food outlets insist on serving salad with their burgers/kebabs etc,  knowing their greasy fingered munchkin customers are only going to deposit it on the street?


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jul 25, 2017)

T & P said:


> Oh I would think it's been long understood by all sides of the argument that the OP was a wind-up.


I'm not sure that it was, perhaps the melon fella can speak for himself, however it doesn't really matter either way what his intent was when the thread was created, it still generated responses and even though there was a lot of rubbish, there's also some decent stuff. The question really only applies to shallow people or those already set in their ways and not prepared to explore. Balanced and sensible folks considering the possibility of going vegan imo should be doing so based on the points in favour of it rather than the behaviour of the odd personality who just happens to be vegan.

It's a shame that Lyndon B has rage quit and left the building, I was looking forward to more of those attempts at moral justifications for killing and eating animals when we are not obligated to do so, just to see if perhaps I'm missing something. I guess I'll never find out now.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jul 25, 2017)

coley said:


> Food is food, and personally I can't be bothered with the more rabid carnivores on here.
> But, why do fast food outlets insist on serving salad with their burgers/kebabs etc,  knowing their greasy fingered munchkin customers are only going to deposit it on the street?


You might want to use the word "omnivore" in future otherwise the carcass crunchers might get a bit upset. Some of them can get a bit touchy if you use the wrong terminology even if it accurately describes their practices.


----------



## mrs quoad (Jul 25, 2017)

mrs quoad said:


> Ooo.
> 
> Vegan pie!
> 
> Do you know the one thing that is guaranteed to improve vegan pie?


Consideration of alternative forms of data presentation, that's what. That's a classic example of a piss poor pie chart. A nice bar would've done the job whilst retaining far better granularity.


----------



## coley (Jul 25, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> You might want to use the word "omnivore" in future otherwise the carcass crunchers might get a bit upset. Some of them can get a bit touchy if you use the wrong terminology even if it accurately describes their practices.



Doubt it, I suspect a few on here haven't got the teeth to crunch a carcass, but let's not let things get out of hand I'm a vegetarian by choice, others make their own 'choices'  
The people across the world who are starving? Their problems worry me more than the well known habits of the 'carcass crunchers' on here.
Got to admit, I do like that term


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jul 25, 2017)

coley said:


> Doubt it, I suspect a few on here haven't got the teeth to crunch a carcass, but let's not let things get out of hand I'm a vegetarian by choice, others make their own 'choices'
> The people across the world who are starving? Their problems worry me more than the well known habits of the 'carcass crunchers' on here.
> Got to admit, I do like that term


Speaking of carcass, I'm not into metal however the two leading members band Carcass referred to by one of the posters in this thread are vegetarians. They're getting everywhere. If that trend continued it could actually help to end world hunger.


Source


----------



## mojo pixy (Jul 25, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> They're getting everywhere.



Yeah, no. Carcass were explicitly vegan / veggie since their first album in 1988. Their shtick was, _look at the meat counter at the shop .. now look at all these cut up and burned human bodies. That's what you're eating._

Here's the gatefold image of their second album, Symphonies of Sickness (1989).



Spoiler: because some people will find it grim












They're not _getting everywhere_, they've been and gone and the joke's been done


----------



## Casually Red (Jul 25, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Speaking of carcass, I'm not into metal however the two leading members band Carcass referred to by one of the posters in this thread are vegetarians. They're getting everywhere. If that trend continued it could actually help to end world hunger.
> 
> View attachment 112090
> Source



Yeah..he looks like one . And they're shite . And if the trend continues I'll just have to play more Demi's roussos and eat more bacon .

You lot will NEVER WIN .


----------



## mojo pixy (Jul 25, 2017)

nvm. 






but Carcass were fucking great tho.

[meh they put out a new album a couple of years ago and it was pretty good, but for now I'm still considering them a nostalgia act and using past tense]



fucking ninja edit. Casually Red that was cheeky.
anyway.

nvm.


----------



## fishfinger (Jul 25, 2017)

mojo pixy said:


> Here's the gatefold image of their second album, Symphonies of Sickness (1989).
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: because some people will find it grim


Judging by the number of eyeballs, that must be the sausage mix.


----------



## bluescreen (Jul 25, 2017)

Where are the bodies for dinner?.. Your momma told you never to eat your friends with your fingers and hands. BTW, Grace Slick is vegetarian these days.


----------



## NoXion (Jul 26, 2017)

coley said:


> Food is food, and personally I can't be bothered with the more rabid carnivores on here.
> But, why do fast food outlets insist on serving salad with their burgers/kebabs etc,  knowing their greasy fingered munchkin customers are only going to deposit it on the street?


 Can't speak for anyone else, but I always eat the salad in my kebab. If I didn't want it then I'd tell the proprietor of the kebab outlet to hold off on putting it on.


----------



## dylanredefined (Jul 26, 2017)

Watermelon Man said:


> I salivate when I see vegan food.  I love my food more than I ever have done before.



What do you eat? Can't think of many vegan meals that would do that for me.


----------



## mrs quoad (Jul 26, 2017)

dylanredefined said:


> What do you eat? Can't think of many vegan meals that would do that for me.


This is _mostly _vegan. Apart from a bit of cheese. On ¼ of the dishes.

  

I would say vegan cheese could've been substituted. But I'm not that daft.


----------



## A380 (Jul 26, 2017)

mrs quoad said:


> This is _mostly _vegan. Apart from a bit of cheese. On ¼ of the dishes.
> 
> View attachment 112097 View attachment 112098 View attachment 112099
> 
> I would say vegan cheese could've been substituted. But I'm not that daft.



No such thing as mostly vegan. 

See,  you have been so programmed that you don't realise that the cheese makes your ,lovely looking, spread the moral equivalent of eating a dolphin stuffed with live kittens. You blood soaked bastard.


----------



## gentlegreen (Jul 26, 2017)

*Not Lovin’ It – Life-long vegetarian sick after bungling McDonald’s staff give her chicken*

I can think of plenty of other reasons not to eat at McDonalds ...

Not Lovin’ It – Life-long vegetarian sick after bungling McDonald’s staff give her chicken


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jul 26, 2017)

It's all about dates I don't mean the 7th of June
Dates are a fruit that people consume
Nothing to do with calendar
Dates are on the Vegan agenda

When you're on a date you have to be full of charm
Sweet up the person make them feel calm
And the dates that you eat sweet love how dem a gwaan
Delicious fruit of the tree called the Palm

Dates are a very good snack
Minerals vitamins dates got a lot
A nuff fibre inna that
And you need some fibre inna your diet ,what

Helps your digestive tract
Protect your colon keep it intact,what
Energy boost and you don't get the crash
A healthier sweetener that is a fact

A few a day can give you benefit
It even has a lot of iron inna it
Constipation dates can fix it
You soon give the toilet a visit

Good for many things even your skin
Antioxidant anti-aging
Some important dates I have round here
And I’m not talking months nor year
It's all about dates I don't mean the 7th of June
Dates are a fruit that people consume

Yes Iyah


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jul 26, 2017)

mojo pixy said:


> Yeah, no. Carcass were explicitly vegan / veggie since their first album in 1988.
> 
> They're not _getting everywhere_, they've been and gone and the joke's been done


I wasn't talking about the band getting everywhere, it's those damn vegans. How very dare they. We need to stop that shit. Perhaps this dude is the one to do it :-


Spoiler: Yum yum...








"STOP THE VEGAN AGENDA!"

(We may have just discovered CR's true identity)


----------



## Yossarian (Jul 26, 2017)

dylanredefined said:


> What do you eat? Can't think of many vegan meals that would do that for me.


----------



## Spymaster (Jul 26, 2017)

gentlegreen said:


> View attachment 112100
> 
> 
> 
> ...



If someone's potentially going to react that violently to meat, should they be in McDonalds at all?

Chances are that even if it were a vegetarian burger, it's been manufactured, prepared, or cooked alongside their meat products anyway.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jul 26, 2017)

ffs 'staff member makes error on order'

Really? And she went to the press over it? Fuck her.


----------



## ddraig (Jul 26, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> ffs 'staff member makes error on order'
> 
> Really? And she went to the press over it? Fuck her.


looks who's back with their utter contempt for people different to them!
fuck you if you think that kind of error is acceptable
not that veggies should be going to mcshite in the first place!


----------



## Spymaster (Jul 26, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> And she went to the press over it?


_After_ she accepted their apology and another meal.


> ... the restaurant team apologised and offered a replacement meal which was accepted at the time.


She obviously stopped being "constantly sick" in time to eat the replacement food.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jul 26, 2017)

ddraig said:


> looks who's back with their utter contempt for people different to them!
> fuck you if you think that kind of error is acceptable
> not that veggies should be going to mcshite in the first place!


People make mistakes. In this case, a staff member at McD's, who this person tried to get into trouble. It has nothing whatever to do with contempt for people different from me, you nob.

But this subject matter turns you into a Tory for some reason.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jul 26, 2017)

gentlegreen said:


> View attachment 112100
> 
> 
> 
> ...


A life long vegetarian going to McDonalds? Hmm...sounds legit. My "fast food" establishment of choice was Red Veg on Dean St (and occasionally Brighton) before the building got knocked down to make way for CrossRail.


----------



## Monkeygrinder's Organ (Jul 26, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> A life long vegetarian going to McDonalds? Hmm...sounds legit. My "fast food" establishment of choice was Red Veg on Dean St (and occasionally Brighton) before the building got knocked down to make way for CrossRail.



I'm guessing Arnold, Notts, is probably not overrun with places like that tbh.


----------



## ddraig (Jul 26, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> People make mistakes. In this case, a staff member at McD's, who this person tried to get into trouble. It has nothing whatever to do with contempt for people different from me, you nob.


it's a serious mistake no?? well of course you won't agree
thought you were gone off this thread after you'd run out of bile and your shite arguments, condescending tone and self implied knowledge shown up for what they are (again, like many other topics)

tried any of the new vegan cheeses quoady?? very different these days

dylanredefined 
vegan food - Google Search


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jul 26, 2017)

ddraig said:


> it's a serious mistake no?? well of course you won't agree
> thought you were gone off this thread after you'd run out of bile and your shite arguments, condescending tone and self implied knowledge shown up for what they are (again, like many other topics)


Again, wtf are you on about? I left one poster alone because they consistently failed to understand my point and misrepresented it. You have done the same thing and continue to do so. You're a right prat on this subject. A reactionary prat at that.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jul 26, 2017)

Monkeygrinder's Organ said:


> I'm guessing Arnold, Notts, is probably not overrun with places like that tbh.


Seek and ye shall find...
On the commie theme..."Revolucion de Cuba" Market St Nottingham.

tbh I'm not one for eating out much anyway, but even if I was Maccy D's would be the last place I'd go (unless I needed to visit the loo).


----------



## Spymaster (Jul 26, 2017)

ddraig said:


> fuck you if you think that kind of error is acceptable


Mistakes get made in restaurants. Who hasn't been given the wrong food at some point?

They apologised and replaced her meal. No more or less than you'd expect. To then go to the newspaper is a cunt's trick.


----------



## Spymaster (Jul 26, 2017)

ddraig said:


> it's a serious mistake no??


Not really. It happens all the time.

If it's that serious _for her_, she should either check what she's eating before she puts it in her mouth or stick to restaurants who's output is not 90% meat related.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jul 26, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> Not really. It happens all the time.
> 
> If it's that serious _for her_, she should either check what she's eating before she puts it in her mouth or stick to restaurants who's output is not 90% meat related.


I'm in agreement on this one. Avoid places like McDonalds, Burger King, KFC, or Angus Steakhouse if you're a veggie.


----------



## mojo pixy (Jul 26, 2017)

Or if you're not.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jul 26, 2017)

mojo pixy said:


> Or if you're not.


Ideally yes, but some folks apparently like that kind of stuff.


----------



## gentlegreen (Jul 26, 2017)

I'm not anticipating eating out much when I move to France - even as a seagan (vegan plus fish) - though dairy intolerance is probably fairly widely accepted.


----------



## Spymaster (Jul 26, 2017)

gentlegreen said:


> ... seagan (vegan plus fish)...


That's bollocks, isn't it?


----------



## pengaleng (Jul 26, 2017)

LOLOLOL SEAGAN 

the seagan that ate semen in a vauxhall zafira - book idea*


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jul 26, 2017)

gentlegreen said:


> I'm not anticipating eating out much when I move to France - even as a seagan (vegan plus fish) - though dairy intolerance is probably fairly widely accepted.


I worked in Paris for 10 months back in 2007/8 and hardly ate out, apart from a few team meals and leaving do's. At that time, regular restaurants simply didn't get it at all and in my experience were not very veg friendly at all.
I found the Happy Cow webisite quite useful back in those days when I needed to find places that were veg friendly in Europe. I imagine that it's a lot easier nowadays.


Vegan & Vegetarian Restaurants in Paris, France


----------



## gentlegreen (Jul 26, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> That's bollocks, isn't it?


Nope.

I was vegan for 20 years, then deviated into fish, cheese and eggs - I'm currently vegan.

My main priority is health and I can just about justify oily fish as a healthy source of Omega3, B12 and D - omega 3 especially is a challenge on a vegan diet.

There is also what I'm prepared to catch and kill myself - which is only fish - I've done it 3 times now - two pollack and a mackerel - and even then I may find I can't do it when I try fishing again after a 12 year break.
To be honest I have more problem with the bait.

I probably won't eat fish again until I'm able to catch it myself - and not until my weight is back to where it should be.


----------



## Spymaster (Jul 26, 2017)

gentlegreen said:


> Nope.
> 
> I was vegan for 20 years, then deviated into fish, cheese and eggs - I'm currently vegan.
> 
> ...


You really don't sound like a vegan to me.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jul 26, 2017)

gg's working out a system that works for him. Doesn't really matter what you call it.


----------



## pengaleng (Jul 26, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> gg's working out a system that works for him. Doesn't really matter what you call it.




a diet???


----------



## gentlegreen (Jul 26, 2017)

It's simply that I want no part of the dairy and meat industry for a variety of reasons - including moral.
... or for that matter, fish that are hauled out of the sea and allowed to die of asphyxiation - or worse.
I'm a gardener who tries to avoid hurting snails.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jul 26, 2017)

gentlegreen said:


> Nope.
> 
> I was vegan for 20 years, then deviated into fish, cheese and eggs - I'm currently vegan.
> 
> ...


Isn't it funny how quickly people jump in with the mockery trying to discredit and pick holes in whatever they don't like with jibes and sneers.
I'm not a fish eater now but I was 20 years ago when I considered myself "vegetarian" and used to have "filet-o-fish" at McDonalds as a student (the shame). I now don't believe that there's anything I need from fish that can't be got from other sources that are less damaging to the environment, however I'm not going to knock those who continue to do so.


----------



## mojo pixy (Jul 26, 2017)

I still eat fish because my little boy likes it, and till he's old enough to decide for himself that vegetarianism is for him, he gets access to everything** as and when he wants it. Even peperoni pizza, which he loves (and I won't eat)

**edit to add: within reason, obvs. For example, I'm more concerned with his sugar consumption than with his animal consumption.


----------



## Spymaster (Jul 26, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> gg's working out a system that works for him. Doesn't really matter what you call it.


Good luck to him if that's what he wants to eat, but to call it "vegan plus fish" is nonsense. 

I'm a megan. That's vegan plus meat.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jul 26, 2017)

gentlegreen said:


> I'm a gardener who tries to avoid hurting snails.



But, snails are something you can catch & kill yourself.


----------



## pengaleng (Jul 26, 2017)

I dont eat dairy, just cus it's fucking rank and wrong.


----------



## gentlegreen (Jul 26, 2017)

cupid_stunt said:


> But, snails are something you can catch & kill yourself.


I know.

And I reminded one of my regular snails of that yesterday when I found him on my broccoli in the middle of the room.
(I mark their shells with tippex)


----------



## gentlegreen (Jul 26, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> Good luck to him if that's what he wants to eat, but to call it "vegan plus fish" is nonsense.
> 
> I'm a megan. That's vegan plus meat.


.. and dairy ... and eggs presumably ?


----------



## Spymaster (Jul 26, 2017)

gentlegreen said:


> .. and dairy ... and eggs presumably ?


Good point. I'm a medagan. Vegan plus meat and diary.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jul 26, 2017)

gentlegreen said:


> .. and dairy ... and eggs presumably ?


Seriously, I really don't understand the terminology fixation. You can call yourself whatever you like, it's nobody else's business. If you want to call yourself a sealion or whatever, so be it. Some people have nothing better to do.


----------



## Teaboy (Jul 26, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Seriously, I really don't understand the terminology fixation. You can call yourself whatever you like, it's nobody else's business. If you want to call yourself a sealion or whatever, so be it. Some people have nothing better to do.



Good point.  I don't know why we even bother having definitions for words.  People should just be able to make any sound they want and for it to mean what they like. No one elses business.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jul 26, 2017)

Teaboy said:


> Good point.  I don't know why we even bother having definitions for words.  People should just be able to make any sound they want and for it to mean what they like. No one elses business.


If gg wants to call himself a seagan and feels it accurately describes his choices, then yes, that is his business and nobody else's. Language is dynamic constantly evolving, new words and terms come into fashion and some words go off the radar. Seagan has nearly 60,000 results in google and so is a legit word, which gg is free to use and should not be mocked for using it imo.

seagan - Google Search


----------



## Teaboy (Jul 26, 2017)

Serious biz.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jul 26, 2017)

Innit doh


----------



## dylanredefined (Jul 26, 2017)

mrs quoad said:


> This is _mostly _vegan. Apart from a bit of cheese. On ¼ of the dishes.
> 
> View attachment 112097 View attachment 112098 View attachment 112099
> 
> I would say vegan cheese could've been substituted. But I'm not that daft.





Yossarian said:


> View attachment 112103
> 
> View attachment 112104



 It looks edible nothing that mouth watering though. IMHO.
Impossible Foods  While this actually appeals to me.


----------



## Sirena (Jul 26, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> If gg wants to call himself a seagan and feels it accurately describes his choices, then yes, that is his business and nobody else's. Language is dynamic constantly evolving, new words and terms come into fashion and some words go off the radar. Seagan has nearly 60,000 results in google and so is a legit word, which gg is free to use and should not be mocked for using it imo.
> 
> seagan - Google Search


Ethically, I wold only eat fish if it was roadkill...


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jul 26, 2017)

Sirena said:


> Ethically, I wold only eat fish if it was roadkill...


Run over by those underwater cars and trucks in Atlantis?


----------



## lazythursday (Jul 26, 2017)

I'm also a 'seagan'. I'm aware that it falls far short of the vegan ideal but it's what works for me health-wise, and it means I'm radically reducing both the environmental footprint and animal suffering caused by my diet. I don't really see that it should be any less ethical than being a vegetarian, given that the dairy industry reeks of death and cruelty.


----------



## A380 (Jul 26, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> Mistakes get made in restaurants. Who hasn't been given the wrong food at some point?
> 
> They apologised and replaced her meal. No more or less than you'd expect. To then go to the newspaper is a cunt's trick.


Yes,the etiquette is that  you just quietly and politely draw the waiters attention to the error and allow them to replace it with the correct item. You then politely thank them for the new dish when it is bought out. You don't speak of the mistake again.

Then you go back to the restaurant a week later at about 3 in the morning and torch the fucker.


----------



## Sirena (Jul 26, 2017)




----------



## Yuwipi Woman (Jul 26, 2017)

Sirena said:


> View attachment 112115



I actually had something similar happen on a homesteading forum.  I registered for the forum, and got a message from the mod saying they'd looked at my Facebook likes, and that maybe the forum wasn't for me.  I didn't even post a single post on the forum before I was booted.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jul 26, 2017)

Sirena said:


> View attachment 112115


----------



## mrs quoad (Jul 26, 2017)

ddraig said:


> looks who's back with their utter contempt for people different to them!


#poeslaw #apparentlypostedinallseriousness #nomirrorsinthathouse


----------



## gentlegreen (Jul 26, 2017)

My


Yuwipi Woman said:


> I actually had something similar happen on a homesteading forum.  I registered for the forum, and got a message from the mod saying they'd looked at my Facebook likes, and that maybe the forum wasn't for me.  I didn't even post a single post on the forum before I was booted.


Homesteading has an unhealthy overlap with "preppers" I find.


----------



## Yuwipi Woman (Jul 26, 2017)

gentlegreen said:


> My
> 
> Homesteading has an unhealthy overlap with "preppers" I find.



Even more worrying, is a small over lap with white supremacy.  Tuning in and dropping out isn't just for hippies any more.  I've been to a sustainable Ag conference in Kansas a couple of times, and you see the whole variety of people.  You'll see someone in Amish dress walk by, followed by tie-dye and sandals, followed by someone in army green and carrying a knife.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Jul 26, 2017)

ItWillNeverWork said:


> You learn something new every day. Well as long as it doesn't make my pint smell fishy I guess I'm ok with it.


It is only used in cask conditioned beer. The bog standard stuff is pressure filtered, then has CO2 blasted into it.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jul 26, 2017)

Sasaferrato said:


> It is only used in cask conditioned beer. The bog standard stuff is pressure filtered, then has CO2 blasted into it.



Blimey, that was back on page 1, you have another 34 pages of nonsense to go.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Jul 26, 2017)

cupid_stunt said:


> Blimey, that was back on page 1, you have another 34 pages of nonsense to go.


I had already moved on when your reply popped up.


----------



## pengaleng (Jul 26, 2017)

Sirena said:


> View attachment 112115




haha that is quality


----------



## William of Walworth (Jul 28, 2017)

gentlegreen said:


> I'm not anticipating eating out much when I move to France



Can't get beyond this part of gentlegreen 's post 

Vegan/mostly-vegan/whatever and you're planning to move to *France*? 

You must be insane ....


----------



## Celyn (Jul 28, 2017)

In Seine.


----------



## pengaleng (Jul 28, 2017)

sans le cerveau


----------



## Casually Red (Jul 28, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Seriously, I really don't understand the terminology fixation. You can call yourself whatever you like, it's nobody else's business. If you want to call yourself a sealion or whatever, so be it. Some people have nothing better to do.



Are we now into veganism as an identity as opposed to a diet/ eating disorder ? 

Anyway...hold on a fucking minute . You were giving it large ..and so were a load of others...about hitler not being a vegan because he'd supposedly eaten some chicken livers in 1937 . Different story now one of your mob has been exposed as a vegan Rachel Dolezal . lay off the mung beans mate . They're making your head spin .


----------



## Casually Red (Jul 28, 2017)

gentlegreen said:


> View attachment 112100
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I had a face on me like that once when an inexperienced bartender tried to give me an alcohol free version of erdinger . Didn't go to the newspapers over it though . Although a stern letter to the Times did cross my mind .


----------



## editor (Jul 28, 2017)

Casually Red said:


> Are we now into veganism as an identity as opposed to a diet/ eating disorder ?
> 
> Anyway...hold on a fucking minute . You were giving it large ..and so were a load of others...about hitler not being a vegan because he'd supposedly eaten some chicken livers in 1937 . Different story now one of your mob has been exposed as a vegan Rachel Dolezal . lay off the mung beans mate . They're making your head spin .


"Exposed as a vegan"? Oooookay.


----------



## Watermelon Man (Jul 28, 2017)

FFS Hitler again????????


----------



## gentlegreen (Jul 28, 2017)

Watermelon Man said:


> FFS Hitler again????????


There was a time when that would have sent a thread to the bin - or perhaps anyone playing that joker should be banned from a thread ?


----------



## Watermelon Man (Jul 28, 2017)

gentlegreen said:


> Nope.
> 
> I was vegan for 20 years, then deviated into fish, cheese and eggs - I'm currently vegan.
> 
> ...



B12 is easy. Either pick your arse and eat it  or nutritional yeast or b12 tabs.  Omega 3 is easy. Flaxseed ground.  Vitamin D? drops.  There's also the iron issue for women (sorted with decent iron tabs). Iodine deficiency can be a problem but a few decent kelp tablets sort that out.  There's a debate about long chain fatty acids for vegans.  Depending what side you believe - you can take EPA DHA tablets.

Health should be a priority and a vegan diet can be great for that.  I'm arguably in my greatest health, eating the most amount of calories and my diet is pretty unhealthy. Beer, chips, crisps, biscuits, chocolate, pizzas, junk food, booze etc.

Before I went vegan I was fat, classed as obese, constantly sick, tired and feeling angry, miserable and like a sack of shit.   These days there is a difference.  I'm loads happier, less angry but have my moments.  I rarely get ill or even feel below par.  All this on a pretty unhealthy vegan diet.  I can't really get my head around eating fish.  All that pollution, mercury etc.


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Jul 28, 2017)

Any diet requiring you take to tablets/drops/supplements is - pretty much by definition - awful.

I'll stick with a normal, healthy, balanced variety of food thanks.


----------



## ddraig (Jul 28, 2017)

there's that "normal" again! 
how about you do what the fuck you want and not have a go at others for doing what they want with diet and ethical choices


----------



## gentlegreen (Jul 28, 2017)

Since watching Michael Greger's video the year before last I have been stuffing flaxseed like there's no tomorrow - both whole and ground and am now sprouting omega3-rich seeds and the tablespoon full of cooking oil I use daily is rapeseed. (I also have an enlarged prostate - another reason for eating flaxseed)
Unfortunately I have a serious tahini habit that skews the balance towards omega6 ...

Sadly I didn't know enough about nutrition for the 20 years I was vegan before ...

B12 is as cheap as chips and mostly fed to farm animals so I have little problem with it .. I get my D from UV-treated fungi as well as getting more sunlight than most - and will be growing my own in retirement - when I plan to eat a lot of seaweed both directly and through using it as fertiliser ...
Perhaps one day I will learn to grow the right sort of algae ...

Unfortunately one whiff of the sea and I understand why a group of mammals grew fishy tails 


It could be that learning to dive will kill any enthusiasm for fishing ... or at least remove the magic and mystery..


----------



## Watermelon Man (Jul 28, 2017)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> Any diet requiring you take to tablets/drops/supplements is - pretty much by definition - awful.
> 
> I'll stick with a normal, healthy, balanced variety of food thanks.



No. You misunderstand. You do not have to take supplements on a vegan diet. B12 can be found in food (and your arse). Vit D can be found in fortified soy/almond milk and fortified tofu. 

Iodine - seaweed
Iron - combine iron rich food with vitamin c. 

If planned out right, it's all there.


----------



## gentlegreen (Jul 28, 2017)

Watermelon Man said:


> No. You misunderstand. You do not have to take supplements on a vegan diet


Shockingly bad advice.


----------



## gentlegreen (Jul 28, 2017)

I hope to retire to the land in a country where veganism is almost defined as a mental illness so will almost certainly be making my own soy milk / tofu and tempeh ... I may even grow my own soy beans or use an alternative.

So I will be eating a wholefood diet from the ground up - I plan to emulate the Okinawan diet - they certainly don't eat their own poo - and probably get their B12 from small amounts of pork - perhaps fish.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jul 28, 2017)

William of Walworth said:


> Can't get beyond this part of gentlegreen 's post
> 
> Vegan/mostly-vegan/whatever and you're planning to move to *France*?
> 
> You must be insane ....


I've had two spells working in France, in 3 months 2005 in Angers in the Loire valley and 10 months in 2007/8 working in Paris, and tbh I didn't find it that difficult. The Happy Cow website helped a lot, even though smartphones weren't around at the time and google maps didn't exist. I was able to print off a list of vegetarian/vegan  friendly establishments and that was enough for me, they usually weren't that difficult to find once I had the address.
It is so much easier now, with so many helpful resources available.

The few times I did have to go to French restaurants I found that they were on the whole quite hostile and not at all welcoming to veg*ns, and so I mostly avoided them. On the other hand in the farmers markets it was quite easy to find truly excellent quality produce, which you could buy without having to tell anybody what your eating preferences were.

Since I was last in France I believe things have moved on quite a bit and more people are waking up. The UK still appears to be a lot more veg*n friendly, but the frogs are on the march, so I don't think Mr Green should have too many problems, even in the most remote and backward corners of France.

France develops taste for vegetarian cuisine

French turning away from meat towards vegetarianism

https://bonjourparis.com/food-and-drink/vegetarian-france/

How to Survive France As A Vegan

The 13 Worst Countries To Visit As A Vegan | HuffPost


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jul 28, 2017)

editor said:


> "Exposed as a vegan"? Oooookay.





gentlegreen said:


> There was a time when that would have sent a thread to the bin - or perhaps anyone playing that joker should be banned from a thread ?


It was probably another session of drunken numptiness. I have learned to mostly ignore his nonsensical rubbish. Not a good enough reason to throw the whole thread away in the bin, although I think that's what may of the antagonists would love to see.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jul 28, 2017)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> Any diet requiring you take to tablets/drops/supplements is - pretty much by definition - awful.
> 
> I'll stick with a normal, healthy, balanced variety of food thanks.


What some of the most strident meatheads don't seem to realise is that the only reason that most of them get their B12 is because the animals that they feed on need B12 injections. Now isn't that "awful", lol. B12 comes from bacteria and because modern life means that nearly all food, water gets cleaned and anti-bacteria treatment, B12 deficiency has become more of an issue and supplementation recommended, even among the non-obligate "omnivores".


----------



## andysays (Jul 28, 2017)

ddraig said:


> how about you do what the fuck you want and not have a go at others for doing what they want with diet and ethical choices


----------



## gentlegreen (Jul 28, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Since I was last in France I believe things have moved on quite a bit and more people are waking up.


I reckon I will get away with using the excuse "conseil du médecin"  (doctor's advice) - the French are big on health - to the extent that I'm tempted to grow excess gourmet salad to sell in the market ...

And where I'm heading even has a Lidl - and you can get soya milk in Carrefour - though it's the posh stuff ..

http://www.carrefour.fr/search/site/soja/31?sort=1199

All has to be "bio" - the yoghurt looks suspiciously dairy .. 

But socialising will be a challenge - I may have to hire a caterer for my "pendaison _de_ crémaillère"  (housewarming).
I plan to ingratiate myself with as many locals as possible right from the start.

I will make sure I learn to make vegan buckwheat crêpes - since I'm aiming for Brittany.


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Jul 28, 2017)

ddraig said:


> there's that "normal" again!
> how about you do what the fuck you want and not have a go at others for doing what they want with diet and ethical choices


----------



## lazythursday (Jul 28, 2017)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> Any diet requiring you take to tablets/drops/supplements is - pretty much by definition - awful.


We all take supplements through our food - B12 injections are given to cattle as mentioned above, and also flour is heavily fortified with vitamins and minerals. One of the main reasons a gluten free diet is sometimes thought of as less healthy is because it lacks these added supplements. You take supplements, they are just hidden in your food.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jul 28, 2017)

lazythursday said:


> We all take supplements through our food - B12 injections are given to cattle as mentioned above, and also flour is heavily fortified with vitamins and minerals. One of the main reasons a gluten free diet is sometimes thought of as less healthy is because it lacks these added supplements. You take supplements, they are just hidden in your food.


Exactly. I often wonder how those that are critical of veg*ns conveniently overlook this. Unless you are living out in nature, there is a high chance that your diet will have or require some kind of supplementation, either directly or indirectly.


----------



## antimata (Jul 28, 2017)

another simple yes....

the reasons are obvious.

a preaching twat is a preaching twat regardless wot they is preaching bout...fuck up for gods sake.

yes tatq.


----------



## peterkro (Jul 28, 2017)

lazythursday said:


> We all take supplements through our food - B12 injections are given to cattle as mentioned above, and also flour is heavily fortified with vitamins and minerals. One of the main reasons a gluten free diet is sometimes thought of as less healthy is because it lacks these added supplements. You take supplements, they are just hidden in your food.


One reason the Brits are tad shy at adding bit D to foodstuffs (something the yanks are not shy of at all) is they added via D to baby food in the fifties and way way to much, kids were getting vit D overdose symptoms.It a shame really as to get into a overdose situation with Vit D you'd need to eat industrial amounts over a period of months, most of the UK population is either deficient or not optimal .Although research is a bit thin on the ground latest ideas show via D could protect you against a wide range of diseases.
PS I wouldn't worry about getting  an overdose if you take a supplement and then spend long hours in the sun, one you have a optimal level of it your skin just stops absorbing it.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jul 28, 2017)

gentlegreen said:


> I reckon I will get away with using the excuse "conseil du médecin"  (doctor's advice) - the French are big on health - to the extent that I'm tempted to grow excess gourmet salad to sell in the market ...
> 
> And where I'm heading even has a Lidl - and you can get soya milk in Carrefour - though it's the posh stuff ..
> 
> http://www.carrefour.fr/search/site/soja/31?sort=1199


Carrefour is like the Tesco of Europe and they have them everywhere. As with nearly all modern supermarkets, even the likes of Aldi and Lidl, you can find nearly any kind of food you want. I used to try and seek out the smaller independent stores, however I think they are a dying breed and are getting squeezed out by the supermarkets and Holland and Barrett type shops. In the late nineties I had to make a special trip to Westbourne Grove to Planet Organic which was at the time the only organic supermarket in the UK (or so they said), now they're all over the place, now you've got As Nature Intended, WholeFoolds, Grape Trees, all over the shop, so there has been a lot of progress and long may it continue.  I believe the same thing will eventually happen in France and other "backward" countries.



gentlegreen said:


> But socialising will be a challenge - I may have to hire a caterer for my "pendaison _de_ crémaillère"  (housewarming).
> I plan to ingratiate myself with as many locals as possible right from the start.
> 
> I will make sure I learn to make vegan buckwheat crêpes - since I'm aiming for Brittany.


tbh, I haven't found socialising to be too much of a problem but then I don't hang out with too many people and quite like my own company. It's a bit like going to the pub with friends when you don't drink alcohol, it appears to be more of an issue for the drinkers and meateaters than it is for me ("b...b...but why don't you drink, why don't you eat meat, what's wrong with you?"). They're more often than not the ones feeling unnecessarily awkward on my behalf. If I can get away with it, and depending on the situation I try to avoid mentioning it, but that can be quite hard because people start asking questions based on what they see you ordering.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jul 28, 2017)

beesonthewhatnow said:


>


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Jul 28, 2017)

Fresh


----------



## mrs quoad (Jul 28, 2017)

Is this the world's hottest vegan? Student goes from ribby to RIPPED after switching to a plant-based diet (and his acne's gone too)


----------



## Yuwipi Woman (Jul 28, 2017)

mrs quoad said:


> Is this the world's hottest vegan? Student goes from ribby to RIPPED after switching to a plant-based diet (and his acne's gone too)



Naw, he's really not that hot.  Vegan bodybuilding is a "thing" right now. 

14 Vegan Bodybuilders That Will Make You Re-Think Meat


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jul 28, 2017)

mrs quoad said:


> Is this the world's hottest vegan? Student goes from ribby to RIPPED after switching to a plant-based diet (and his acne's gone too)




Comments:


----------



## Watermelon Man (Jul 28, 2017)

mrs quoad said:


> Is this the world's hottest vegan? Student goes from ribby to RIPPED after switching to a plant-based diet (and his acne's gone too)



Why is this even news? I know it's that rag...and it shouldn't be taken seriously. But the facts are that meat is laden with fat, eggs are full of cholesterol and dairy is puss filled fatty minging nonsense.  Of course your spots are going to go. Of course you are going to get lean.  Eat less saturated fat get shredded.


----------



## NoXion (Jul 28, 2017)

Yeah, dairy is just filled with pus. Just like how wheat is filled with bird and rodent shit as well as insect parts.


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Jul 28, 2017)

Watermelon Man said:


> the facts are that meat is laden with fat, eggs are full of cholesterol and dairy is puss filled fatty minging nonsense.


FACTS


----------



## Watermelon Man (Jul 28, 2017)

NoXion said:


> Yeah, dairy is just filled with pus. Just like how wheat is filled with bird and rodent shit as well as insect parts.



Legally companies are allowed a certain amount of pus in dairy. Can't remember the exact amount.


----------



## Watermelon Man (Jul 28, 2017)

Cow's milk can legally contain up to *400 million* pus cells/litre.  You are what you eat.


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Jul 28, 2017)

Watermelon Man said:


> Cow's milk can legally contain up to *400 million* pus cells/litre.  You are what you eat.


Yet amazingly millions of people drink it with no taste issues or side effects whatsoever. It's almost as if it's utterly irrelevant.


----------



## Yuwipi Woman (Jul 28, 2017)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> Yet amazingly millions of people drink it with no taste issues or side effects whatsoever. It's almost as if it's utterly irrelevant.



I beg to differ on the taste issues.  I've tasted raw milk and it tastes better than pasteurized.  As does cheese made from it.  Pasteurization kills the taste of milk (and the pathogens), but we really couldn't do raw milk on a large scale because of the illness that would result.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jul 28, 2017)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Comments:
> 
> View attachment 112314


Blatant vegan propaganda...

http://inourishgently.com/reasons-vegan-men-do-it-better/


----------



## Watermelon Man (Jul 28, 2017)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> Yet amazingly millions of people drink it with no taste issues or side effects whatsoever. It's almost as if it's utterly irrelevant.



No side effects whatsoever? Science says otherwise...


Dairy associated with increased risk of a wide-ranging group of ailments including accelerated aging, being overweight, kidney stones, childhood asthma, constipation, prediabetes and diabetes, prostate and other cancers, heart disease, imbalanced hormones, Parkinson’s disease, rheumatoid arthritis, rising blood pressure, skin wrinkling, sudden infant death syndrome, ulcerative colitis, bacterial vaginosis and multiple sclerosis. 


High in saturated fat, low in antioxidants and fibre. Contains cholesterol, trans fats, endotoxins and choline and may raise the risk of inflamation, heart disease, diabetes and certain cancers. 


May promote acne and contribute risk of breast cancer, prostate cancer, other hormone dependent cancers, declining sperm counts and heart disease.


----------



## IC3D (Jul 28, 2017)

Going on a big family holiday in couple of weeks with my vegan partner. Lots of 'ribbing' in the whatsapp group about veggie shopping ...aaaand the bulshit around burning a bit of meat on a BBQ is so ridiculous you'd think they clubbed a fucking bear to death with their flaccid cocks and ripped the fur off  with their teeth. I never bring up what I eat for banter, however last year I knocked out an awesome vegan meal for 14, which went down a storm. Except the cock that got up and bbqed a steak for himself as if to show he was the most committed BBQ cook.


----------



## NoXion (Jul 28, 2017)

Watermelon Man said:


> Legally companies are allowed a certain amount of pus in dairy. Can't remember the exact amount.


I think you'll find that the amounts are minute, like with contamination with animal shit and insect parts. As arguments for veganism go it's really shit because it applies to pretty much any food. There are much better arguments for not eating meat, which is why I think you're stirring shit.


----------



## NoXion (Jul 28, 2017)

Watermelon Man said:


> Cow's milk can legally contain up to *400 million* pus cells/litre.  You are what you eat.


So that means you're rat shit?


----------



## mrs quoad (Jul 28, 2017)

I remember back in the days when this thread looked as if there might be some dialogue. Fair play to you for giving up any pretence, mind, WM  You kept it up for a good two or three pages. (Well, tbf, you were away for about twenty pages, but the principle holds  )


----------



## mrs quoad (Jul 28, 2017)

Yuwipi Woman said:


> Naw, he's really not that hot.  Vegan bodybuilding is a "thing" right now.
> 
> 14 Vegan Bodybuilders That Will Make You Re-Think Meat


14 anecdotes is _definitely _data  That must be, what? Seventy-five percent of the world's bodybuilders right there :coolthumbs:


----------



## Yuwipi Woman (Jul 28, 2017)

mrs quoad said:


> 14 anecdotes is _definitely _data  That must be, what? Seventy-five percent of the world's bodybuilders right there :coolthumbs:


----------



## NoXion (Jul 28, 2017)

Also, the cells in pus are mostly dead (and a significant portion of them will be white blood cells, not bacteria), so the tiny amounts to be found in milk are not a concern unless one is severely immunocompromised.


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Jul 28, 2017)

Watermelon Man said:


> No side effects whatsoever? Science says otherwise...
> 
> 
> Dairy associated with increased risk of a wide-ranging group of ailments including accelerated aging, being overweight, kidney stones, childhood asthma, constipation, prediabetes and diabetes, prostate and other cancers, heart disease, imbalanced hormones, Parkinson’s disease, rheumatoid arthritis, rising blood pressure, skin wrinkling, sudden infant death syndrome, ulcerative colitis, bacterial vaginosis and multiple sclerosis.
> ...


Millions of people must be practically dead and just not know it


----------



## NoXion (Jul 28, 2017)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> Millions of people must be practically dead and just not know it


 They're dead on the inside, on account of all those animal souls haunting their meat-clogged guts.


----------



## Watermelon Man (Jul 28, 2017)

NoXion said:


> They're dead on the inside, on account of all those animal souls haunting their meat-clogged guts.



You are what you eat...


----------



## NoXion (Jul 28, 2017)

Watermelon Man said:


> You are what you eat...


Indeed, Birdshit Man.


----------



## rubbershoes (Jul 28, 2017)

Watermelon Man said:


> You are what you eat...



So that makes you a vegetable? 
Cliches have their limitations


----------



## rubbershoes (Jul 28, 2017)

So how many of us meat eaters are better disposed to vegans and veganism after the arguments they've put forward on this thread? 
Form an orderly queue...


----------



## Yuwipi Woman (Jul 28, 2017)

rubbershoes said:


> So how many of us meat eaters are better disposed to vegans and veganism after the arguments they've put forward on this thread?
> Form an orderly queue...



Probably about the same number of vegans who are better disposed to meat eaters after this thread.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jul 28, 2017)

Yuwipi Woman said:


> Probably about the same number of vegans who are better disposed to meat eaters after this thread.


Perhaps that's true, perhaps not.  Non-obligate "omnis" outnumber vogons by several orders of magnitude and yet a significant number of them appear to feel threatened by the idea of an animal product free lifestyle. That may explain why most of the bitchiness and bad mouthing in this thread has been on the side of the meat eaters (although not scientifically proven).


----------



## NoXion (Jul 28, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Perhaps that's true, perhaps not.  Non-obligate "omnis" outnumber vogons by several orders of magnitude and yet a significant number of them appear to feel threatened by the idea of an animal product free lifestyle. That may explain why most of the bitchiness and bad mouthing in this thread has been on the side of the meat eaters (although not scientifically proven).


 Vogons? Spare us the poetry in that case.


----------



## AnnaKarpik (Jul 28, 2017)

Watermelon Man said:


> No side effects whatsoever? Science says otherwise...
> 
> 
> Dairy associated with increased risk of a wide-ranging group of ailments including accelerated aging, being overweight, kidney stones, childhood asthma, constipation, prediabetes and diabetes, prostate and other cancers, heart disease, imbalanced hormones, Parkinson’s disease, rheumatoid arthritis, rising blood pressure, skin wrinkling, sudden infant death syndrome, ulcerative colitis, bacterial vaginosis and multiple sclerosis.



I followed a couple of the links above and they did not take me to articles associating dairy with the ailments suggested; the word 'may' is notable in its frequency.
It's almost as though the people writing those articles know perfectly well that science says a whole load of stuff, often contradicting other things science has said previously.




> High in saturated fat, low in antioxidants and fibre. Contains cholesterol, trans fats, endotoxins and choline and may raise the risk of inflamation, heart disease, diabetes and certain cancers.



Science now says that saturated fat is not a health risk factor, there is no reason for milk to contain antioxidants that I can think of, ditto fibre. Cholesterol is vital to mammalian life, no idea where the man-made fats come from other than over-processing, which is not a problem confined to milk products, endotoxins will generally be removed by pasteurisation (I think) and choline is, like cholesterol, vital to life. All kinds of thing may raise disease risks and there is a lot of excited research around diet and life-style, I am sure, but until we come across a group of people who are immune to the ills you list, solely because of their diet, this is just talk.




> May promote acne and contribute risk of breast cancer, prostate cancer, other hormone dependent cancers, declining sperm counts and heart disease.



Are these not things that have also been laid at the door of soy consumption?


----------



## gentlegreen (Jul 28, 2017)

Cholesterol is vital to life but we make all that we need.
Soy *reduces* prostate and breast cancer risk.


----------



## AnnaKarpik (Jul 28, 2017)

gentlegreen said:


> Cholesterol is vital to life but we make all that we need.
> Soy *reduces* prostate and breast cancer risk.



Cholesterol - the point I am failing to make is that cholesterol is not a bad or dangerous thing in food. Science used to think so but has changed its mind.
Soy and cancer - I am clearly not reading the same information that you are, however this does demonstrate my point that appealing to science rarely if ever provides the killer proof that some of us are hoping for.


----------



## gentlegreen (Jul 28, 2017)

AnnaKarpik said:


> Cholesterol - the point I am failing to make is that cholesterol is not a bad or dangerous thing in food. Science used to think so but has changed its mind.


Only in the Paleo world ...

It's still standard advice in medicine.

EDIT :

OK - less important than saturated fat ...

Lower your cholesterol - Live Well - NHS Choices


----------



## NoXion (Jul 28, 2017)

Pretty sure that around the time that fat was declared to be the dietary Devil, plenty of people were smoking like chimneys while the tobacco industry was suppressing data that fingered smoking as a factor in heart disease. Slowly but surely science is coming round to the notion that it's sugar, particularly refined sucrose, which is an ingredient of concern. Especially since it gets added to food which has had most of the fat sucked out of it, which without sugar would taste like shit.


----------



## mrs quoad (Jul 28, 2017)

So, anyone else teetotal?


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jul 28, 2017)

NoXion said:


> Vogons? Spare us the poetry in that case.


Hmmm ...well if it helps to keep some of the more rabid crunchers at bay, it may be a very good and useful deterrent :-

_Oh freddled gruntbuggly,
Thy micturations are to me
As plurdled gabbleblotchits
On a lurgid bee.
Groop, I implore thee, my foonting turlingdromes
And hooptiously drangle me
With crinkly bindlewurdles,
Or I will rend thee in the gobberwarts with my blurglecruncheon,
See if I don’t!_


----------



## NoXion (Jul 28, 2017)

Nope. Don't get the point. Not drinking to excess is one thing, but avoiding alcohol entirely?


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Jul 28, 2017)

Worth just posting part of the wikipedia entry on the relationship between saturated fat and cardiovascular disease: 



> The scientific consensus is that saturated fat is a risk factor for cardiovascular disease, having been endorsed by many medical, scientific, heart-health, governmental and intergovernmental, and professional authorities, such as the World Health Organization,[1] the Food and Nutrition Board of the National Academy of Medicine,[2] the American Dietetic Association,[3] the Dietitians of Canada,[3] the British Dietetic Association,[4] American Heart Association,[5] the British Heart Foundation,[6] the Heart and Stroke Foundation of Canada,[7] the World Heart Federation,[8] the British National Health Service,[9] the United States Food and Drug Administration,[10] and the European Food Safety Authority.[11] All of these scientific and health organizations advise that saturated fat is a risk factor for cardiovascular disease, and recommend dietary limits on saturated fats as one means of reducing that risk. However, some meta-analyses of clinical trials and cohort studies have provided evidence against the consensus or significantly qualifying it,[12][13][14][15][16] and some health journalists[17] and scientists,[18] and trade associations[19] continue to reject it.



That's a pretty formidable consensus so to say that 'Science now says that saturated fat is not a health risk factor' is more than a little misleading to say the least.


----------



## AnnaKarpik (Jul 28, 2017)

mrs quoad said:


> So, anyone else teetotal?



No way; I've given up the dead things and the milky things, no way am I stepping away from my neurotoxic birthright as well!


----------



## Watermelon Man (Jul 28, 2017)

Is sperm vegan? 
Vegan single mum drinks sperm smoothies every morning for her health | Metro News


----------



## AnnaKarpik (Jul 28, 2017)

Jeff Robinson said:


> Worth just posting part of the wikipedia entry on the relationship between saturated fat and cardiovascular disease:
> 
> 
> 
> That's a pretty formidable consensus so to say that 'Science now says that saturated fat is not a health risk factor' is more than a little misleading to say the least.



Oh god, yeah you're right, silly me.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jul 28, 2017)

More vogon poetry...

Car-not-ivore
_Today. I enjoyed a vegan meal--
sautéed cabbage,
roasted tomatoes,
and a Caesar salad, 
with a side of veal.

Wait

Oh, never mind.
_
Vegan Blowjob
_She told him to put it in a hot dog bun_
_*"Kinky he thought,*_​_
Licking It up and down she grinned seductively _
_*"Do you like my meat baby,*_​_
"No I'm a Vegan so I'll never swallow meat juices,_

Vegan Thanksgiving
_no dead birds in the oven
no innards in the stuffing
nor fatty drippings to be scraped and poured

the smell of roasted veggies
wafts through  the wintry air
pumpkin and sweet potatoes
marshmallows  green beans  lentils
turnips  & collard greens
hashed browns & black-eyed peas
quinoa  sorghum cuscus hummus
carrots  leak  broccoli Romanescu
gumbo in southern regions
wild rice dishes in the north
tastily spiced with turmeric 
cumin and baked paprika
Indian curry  soy sauce  chipotle
as well as with the usual suspects
of garlic  salt  and pepper
and whatever fits the taste of hosts

in short
a venerable feast to demonstrate
how nature feeds us a large cornucopia
of plants for our delight and sustenance

in short
no need to kill a bird
_
Soy Chorizo
_Means
"I am sausage"
in Spanish

Vegan poems on Hello Poetry_


----------



## mr steev (Jul 28, 2017)

mrs quoad said:


> So, anyone else teetotal?



I'm teetotal.... apart from at the weekends, and occasional weekday evenings


----------



## mrs quoad (Jul 28, 2017)

AnnaKarpik said:


> No way; I've given up the dead things and the milky things, no way am I stepping away from my neurotoxic birthright as well!


Alcivores :/


----------



## A380 (Jul 28, 2017)

Watermelon Man said:


> Is sperm vegan?
> Vegan single mum drinks sperm smoothies every morning for her health | Metro News


This is about as believable as many of your claims...


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jul 28, 2017)

Jeff Robinson said:


> Worth just posting part of the wikipedia entry on the relationship between saturated fat and cardiovascular disease:
> 
> 
> 
> That's a pretty formidable consensus so to say that 'Science now says that saturated fat is not a health risk factor' is more than a little misleading to say the least.


If you want to continue to feel good about consuming saturated fat then it's worth clinging on to any "science" that says that there's nowt wrong with lots of saturated fat and ignore the wealth of data suggesting otherwise.


----------



## Yuwipi Woman (Jul 28, 2017)

Watermelon Man said:


> Is sperm vegan?
> Vegan single mum drinks sperm smoothies every morning for her health | Metro News



Technically speaking sperm is not vegan.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jul 28, 2017)

Oh god, not this nonsense again. 

Waits for mothers milk to make an appearance.


----------



## hash tag (Jul 28, 2017)

I've checked back 5 or s0 pages and find no mention of the ASA saying this is fine. The farmers are up in arms though....Vegan advert claiming 'Humane milk is a myth' cleared by ASA - BBC News


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Jul 28, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Perhaps that's true, perhaps not.  Non-obligate "omnis" outnumber vogons by several orders of magnitude and yet a significant number of them appear to feel threatened by the idea of an animal product free lifestyle. That may explain why most of the bitchiness and bad mouthing in this thread has been on the side of the meat eaters (although not scientifically proven).


Again with this "feeling threatened" bollocks.

I'm not threatened in the slightest by a meat free diet, _I simply don't want one for myself and never will._


----------



## Yuwipi Woman (Jul 28, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Oh god, not this nonsense again.
> 
> Waits for mothers milk to make an appearance.



I'll will grant that sperm is cruelty free.


----------



## UnderAnOpenSky (Jul 28, 2017)

rubbershoes said:


> So how many of us meat eaters are better disposed to vegans and veganism after the arguments they've put forward on this thread?
> Form an orderly queue...



Not on this thread, but one like it some years ago I stopped making cheap jokes about vegans when I realised it was the meat eaters who were acting in a far more childish way then the vegans. Although that one wasn't started by a vegan I admit. 

Despite reading all this thread and many others like it,  I don't have any decent reasons to continue to eat meat other then I like the taste and convenience. Which are pretty strong sadly.


----------



## lazythursday (Jul 28, 2017)

Yuwipi Woman said:


> I'll will grant that sperm is cruelty free.


Agribusinesses could farm men and milk the sperm via aggressive prostate massage. That would add the cruelty element for our carnivores.


----------



## NoXion (Jul 28, 2017)

hash tag said:


> I've checked back 5 or s0 pages and find no mention of the ASA saying this is fine. The farmers are up in arms though....Vegan advert claiming 'Humane milk is a myth' cleared by ASA - BBC News
> 
> View attachment 112340


It depends on how exactly one defines "humane", which is likely to be contentious in this context. I'm guessing that the ASA went with the vegans' definition because that's who is responsible for the poster in question. Remember that this is the same organisation that will happily allow companies to claim that their products "help" with various things in that they don't actually hinder them.


----------



## Spymaster (Jul 28, 2017)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> Again with this "feeling threatened" bollocks.
> 
> I'm not threatened in the slightest by a meat free diet .._._


Nobody is. PS doesn't believe that either. It's an odd way of arguing that seems common among vegheads.

(See also _carnist fragility_).

They like to pretend that meat eaters suffer crisis' of conscience every time they sniff a steak!


----------



## gentlegreen (Jul 28, 2017)

At the end of the day, it's about living longer and healthier lives - and after smoking, coronary artery disease is the biggest killer in the west. And you don't get it eating broccoli.


----------



## IC3D (Jul 28, 2017)

Are any women posting on this thread cos the meat eaters seem very masculine and posturing? The vegans or undefined more or less folks like me just fielding a lot of fragile egos.
A bit like the difference between josling for top position on the BBQ and cooperatively making some nice dishes in the kitchen.
Is veganism inherently persieved as feminine and threatening?


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Jul 28, 2017)

gentlegreen said:


> At the end of the day, it's about living longer and healthier lives


It's about having a fun, enjoyable life full of as many experiences as possible, not simply racking up as many years as you can.


----------



## Spymaster (Jul 28, 2017)

IC3D said:


> ... fragile egos ... threatening


Here we go again!


----------



## pengaleng (Jul 28, 2017)

if men like meat then they are a real man
if women like meat then they are a fucking slut


----------



## IC3D (Jul 28, 2017)

I don't think my diet detracts from a fun enjoyable life beesonthewhatnow I also consider my life to be more than just having fun too. What brought you onto a thread about veganism?


----------



## IC3D (Jul 28, 2017)

How often is a woman in charge of a BBQ as opposed to a man? Roughly pengaleng


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jul 28, 2017)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> Again with this "feeling threatened" bollocks.
> 
> I'm not threatened in the slightest by a meat free diet, _I simply don't want one for myself and never will._


Yeah right, course your not. 
Isn't it funny how whenever this subject comes up there's a hardcore of "anti" folks who have no real interest in the subject and just show up to have a little dig here and there and spoil the party. Course you lot don't feel threatened, but I don't believe you. The message is getting out there and more people are becoming aware and are at least thinking about it, which has created a bit of resistance and backlash ("resistance is useless"). The fact that so many "meatheads" congregate and persist in veg*n threads, a subject they claim to have no particular interest in, is most revealing.


----------



## Celyn (Jul 28, 2017)

Quite fortuitously, I now learn that vegan beerfests happen. Glasgow – Vegan Beer Fest UK

I didn't know that.

Hmm, but food I associate with beer festivals would tend to involve, ok, some veggie things, but quite a lot of nicely unhealthy food like pies. And lots of cheeses.


----------



## pengaleng (Jul 28, 2017)

IC3D said:


> How often is a woman in charge of a BBQ as opposed to a man? Roughly pengaleng




I am reckoning 0.01% of all bbq's and thats only cus the man cant use his hands cus he punched a wall.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jul 28, 2017)

IC3D said:


> How often is a woman in charge of a BBQ as opposed to a man?



That has fuck-all do with meat, and everything about controlling fire.


----------



## pengaleng (Jul 28, 2017)

lol 

I got the meat thing off tobjug's facts so it must be true


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Jul 28, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Yeah right, course your not.
> Isn't it funny how whenever this subject comes up there's a hardcore of "anti" folks who have no real interest in the subject and just show up to have a little dig here and there and spoil the party. Course you lot don't feel threatened, but I don't believe you. The message is getting out there and more people are becoming aware and are at least thinking about it, which has created a bit of resistance and backlash ("resistance is useless"). The fact that so many "meatheads" congregate and persist veg*n threads, a subject they claim to have no particular interest in, is most revealing.


This entire thread is aimed at meat eaters


----------



## UnderAnOpenSky (Jul 28, 2017)

Few. But normally done much better. It's not exactly rocket science to make a fire and cook meat on it. Doing it well involves far more serious effort and preparation.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jul 28, 2017)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> This entire thread is aimed at meat eaters


Er...no it wasn't, and even if that was the case, the pattern is the same in all the other threads on this subject.


----------



## pengaleng (Jul 28, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Er...no it wasn't, and even if that was the case, the pattern is the same in all the other threads on this subject.


 

fuck off, cheesegrater


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jul 28, 2017)

pengaleng said:


> fuck off, cheesegrater


_Bleem miserable venchit! Bleem forever mestinglish asunder frapt.
Gashee morphousite, thou expungiest quoopisk!
Fripping lyshus wimbgunts, awhilst moongrovenly kormzibs.
Gerond withoutitude form into formless bloit, why not then? Moose._


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Jul 28, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Er...no it wasn't, and even if that was the case, the pattern is the same in all the other threads on this subject.


"Do angry vegans turn you against going vegan"

So it's aimed at people who are not vegan. Which would include meat eaters.

So to then whine when the very people the thread was targeting actually turn up and post makes you look kinda silly.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jul 28, 2017)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> "Do angry vegans turn you against going vegan"
> 
> So it's aimed at people who are not vegan. Which would include meat eaters.
> 
> So to then whine when the very people the thread was targeting actually turn up and post makes you look kinda silly.


Er, no it doesn't. First of all you've conveniently changed your tune from "this entire thread is aimed at meat eaters", to "would include meat eaters". It also includes vegetarians and vegans that may be embarrassed by the alleged behaviour of horrible vegans. Secondly, regardless of what is actually being discussed, the more rabid and dedicated crunchers invariably take the opportunity and use it as an excuse to have a go. So no, not whining at all, just accurate observation of predictable meathead behaviour.


----------



## UnderAnOpenSky (Jul 28, 2017)

Have we had this posted recently?


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jul 28, 2017)

UnderAnOpenSky said:


> Have we had this posted recently?



I'll see that and raise it with this...


----------



## bluescreen (Jul 28, 2017)

Colonel Sanders at the Pearly Gates, according to Larson


----------



## NoXion (Jul 28, 2017)

IC3D said:


> Is veganism inherently persieved as feminine and threatening?


 Maybe among alt-right shitheads that's the case, but I suspect for most people it's the implication - real or perceived - that vegans are superior beings that gets their eyes rolling.


----------



## ddraig (Jul 28, 2017)

perfect video for this thread popped up earlier!  


*lights touchpaper


----------



## Celyn (Jul 28, 2017)

Oh hell no!    I could not face watching all of it, but is the idea that everyone seeing the video will immediately say "fine, absolutely I shall be completely vegan henceforth as long as you agree to shut up and go away at once, you speaking-Barbie scary plastic woman"?


----------



## ddraig (Jul 28, 2017)

plastic?? "Shut up" nice response! 
disappointing!


----------



## UnderAnOpenSky (Jul 28, 2017)

Celyn said:


> Oh hell no!    I could not face watching all of it, but is the idea that everyone seeing the video will immediately say "fine, absolutely I shall be completely vegan henceforth as long as you agree to shut up and go away at once, you speaking-Barbie scary plastic woman"?



Yeah. I had some bit of sympathy for what was posted on until I saw her.


----------



## Celyn (Jul 28, 2017)

ddraig said:


> plastic?? "Shut up" nice response!
> disappointing!


Well, I'm sorry, and I had no idea dragons were so sensitive, but that woman, wonderful and perfect though she may be, just had me wanting her to shut right up at once. It's the way of things - perhaps 80% of people like a presenter and 20% do not. Can't be helped. 

If "plastic" is the word that annoyed you, well, it wasn't a carefully carefully phrased reaction, as I was doing other stuff at same time, but it was in reference to the whole false eyelashes, much make-up style of thing.

(And this is where I find out that the nice well-meaning presenter is in fact the sister or wife of ddraig, and that I must hide and run for the hills)


----------



## mojo pixy (Jul 28, 2017)

_Look at your perfect hair, makeup, everything. You obviously care very much how you appear to other people. And yes, I am judging you._


----------



## Celyn (Jul 28, 2017)

The chickeny videos reminded me of this rather old one. Not chickens.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jul 28, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> They like to pretend that meat eaters suffer crisis' of conscience every time they sniff a steak!


Yeah right, and there was lbj was complaining about being misrepresented. That statement is inaccurate. It's not merely sniffing a steak that causes pause for thought amongst non obligate omnis, it is the mostly hidden events that leading up to it becoming a steak that many find disturbing, when they finally see what goes on "behind closed doors" and when they are exposed to the scale of the cruelty, and it is this that is often the catalyst which causes some people to reconsider and change their ways. Of course there are the defiant ones (savages?) who dig their heels in and make a point of saying that they will never stop eating meat no matter what anybody says, a bit like those crazy NRA gun nuts, those avid bonecrushers may be beyond help, however I believe the momentum is slowly shifting and I have already seen a lot of progress made in the last 30 years.

Using Corbzy (also vegan) as a parallel example, we were told that he had zero chance of becoming leader of the Labour party, but enough people saw through the bs and he got elected against overwhelming odds. His enemies then tried to oust him with an engineered leadership challenge, and won that with a stronger mandate. Then came the General Election which many respected commentators predicted would be a complete disaster. Labour didn't win the election, but gave the Tories a bloody nose and far exceeded expectations.

Likewise,  vegans are a tiny minority and overwhelming underdogs with huge opposition from people who either lack awareness or are obstinate and set in their ways or are wilfully ignorant, however the principles for which vegans stand are sound (at least they believe so) and when people are exposed those principles a growing number of them find the arguments compelling and are willing to at least consider the possibility of adopting a vegan lifestyle.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jul 28, 2017)

ddraig said:


> perfect video for this thread popped up earlier!
> 
> 
> *lights touchpaper



tbh I didn't particularly like that video, and couldn't watch the whole thing. Her style of presentation did not resonate with me, and I don't like music playing in those kinds of videos I find it irritating. Having said all that, fair plays to her. I mostly agree with the core of the message although am a bit uncomfortable with the whole judging thing. Of course vegans believe that what they are doing is right and some of them are prepared to confront and hold a mirror up to the "wrongdoers". My preference is for a less overtly confrontational style, however if a bonecrusher gets in my face and starts talking bs up in my grill, I reserve the right to defend my position with bare logic.


----------



## twentythreedom (Jul 28, 2017)

Different people in doing things differently shock horror 

/thread


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jul 28, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Yeah right, and there was lbj was complaining about being misrepresented. That statement is inaccurate. It's not merely sniffing a steak that causes pause for thought amongst non obligate omnis, it is the mostly hidden events that leading up to it becoming a steak that many find disturbing, when they finally see what goes on "behind closed doors" and when they are exposed to the scale of the cruelty, and it is this that is often the catalyst which causes some people to reconsider and change their ways. Of course there are the defiant ones (savages?) who dig their heels in and make a point of saying that they will never stop eating meat no matter what anybody says, a bit like those crazy NRA gun nuts, those avid bonecrushers may be beyond help, however I believe the momentum is slowly shifting and I have already seen a lot of progress made in the last 30 years.
> 
> Using Corbzy (also vegan) as a parallel example, we were told that he had zero chance of becoming leader of the Labour party, but enough people saw through the bs and he got elected against overwhelming odds. His enemies then tried to oust him with an engineered leadership challenge, and won that with a stronger mandate. Then came the General Election which many respected commentators predicted would be a complete disaster. Labour didn't win the election, but gave the Tories a bloody nose and far exceeded expectations.
> 
> Likewise,  vegans are a tiny minority and overwhelming underdogs with huge opposition from people who either lack awareness or are obstinate and set in their ways or are wilfully ignorant, however the principles for which vegans stand are sound (at least they believe so) and when people are exposed those principles a growing number of them find the arguments compelling and are willing to at least consider the possibility of adopting a vegan lifestyle.


So those are the options you present : lacking in self awareness, obstinate or wilfully ignorant. 

Nothing condescending or superior about that. Oh no. Not judging non - vegans in the slightest. 

And it's meat - eaters who are the patronising ones?


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jul 29, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> So those are the options you present : lacking in self awareness, obstinate or wilfully ignorant.
> 
> Nothing condescending or superior about that. Oh no. Not judging non - vegans in the slightest.
> 
> And it's meat - eaters who are the patronising ones?


lol, couldn't stay away huh?  I didn't say "lacking in self awareness". Misrepresenting again, eh?
Yeah you keep banging on about being "condescending" which sounds like nonsense to me, I'm not sure why you persist with that but it's probably because you're a bit frustrated by your lack of progress in convincing folks that killing animals is somehow not cruel at all and is in fact "humane", lol. 

I make no apology for believing that veganism is a better lifestyle choice and philosophy, regardless of whether you agree or not, in the same way that I believe that aparthied is bollocks and that racial equality and harmony is a superior philosophy. If racists found that point of view patronising then tough titties. Similarly if bonecrushers find vegan beliefs patronising, that's just too bad. 

I never said that meatheads are patronising so I'm not sure why you've just made that up. Meatheads in this thread have been the ones that have more often than not been the hostile and unfriendly ones looking to provoke, mock and sneer or just post distracting diversionary rubbish. I don't mind because I can stick up for myself and the more the meatheads talk the more their arguments (or lack thereof) are exposed to close scrutiny...so keep talking and give us more material to work with.


----------



## AnnaKarpik (Jul 29, 2017)

gentlegreen said:


> At the end of the day, it's about living longer and healthier lives - and after smoking, coronary artery disease is the biggest killer in the west. And you don't get it eating broccoli.
> 
> View attachment 112347



What you eat is not the be all and end all of a long and healthy life though; inheriting the wrong genes and finding yourself underneath a falling piano could all play a part.


----------



## gentlegreen (Jul 29, 2017)

AnnaKarpik said:


> What you eat is not the be all and end all of a long and healthy life though;* inheriting the wrong genes* and finding yourself underneath a falling piano could all play a part.



Eliminating 90% of Heart Disease Risk | NutritionFacts.org

Dr Greger puts it at much less than 1 percent.

I saw a video the other day which annoyingly I've lost track of, which covered a study of autopsies on US army recruits in WW2, Korea and Vietnam which showed a massive prevalence of early stage atherosclerosis - a bit like the malnutrition found in WW1 soldiers ...
A subsequent study shows it's much reduced - though we're now talking about career soldiers - and of course far fewer of them now smoke.

One in 12 in military has clogged heart arteries

For myself, based on relatives, I have been lucky with my genes, but even luckier with my lifestyle choices I made at 21 (diet) and 27 (exercise) - and also of course not to smoke -  or to drink recreationally.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jul 29, 2017)

AnnaKarpik said:


> What you eat is not the be all and end all of a long and healthy life though; inheriting the wrong genes and finding yourself underneath a falling piano could all play a part.


The "why bother with what you eat, you're wasting your time, we're all going to die anyway, might as well enjoy ourselves while we're here" refrain, not heard that one before. 
Lifestyle choices are the biggest contributor to health or lack of health (way above genetics and accidents), and what you eat is the major factor. Somehow a lot of people equate attempts to eat healthily with being boring, "ooh a salad...are you trying to be healthy now", which to this day I've never understood. At the same time stupid things like smoking and drinking alcohol are seen as being cool and sexy, even though they are clearly ridiculous and have so many negatives.


----------



## mrs quoad (Jul 29, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> At the same time stupid things like smoking and drinking alcohol are seen as being cool and sexy, even though they are clearly ridiculous and have so many negatives.


I suspect a robust statistical analysis of associations between coolness and life-preserving common sense would find, at best, a loose correlation. 

"I am totally going to drive my twin airbag Volvo 3mph below the national speed limit to pick up my actuarially-chosen date in scientifically approved loose fitting underwear, which improve my chances of longer life fertility, for an evening of self-improving activities."

I mean, obvs great in many ways, but that's not what cool historically was. (Until this generation of young people, who appear _a bit wholesome_. If national datasets are to be trusted.)


----------



## AnnaKarpik (Jul 29, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> The "why bother with what you eat, you're wasting your time, we're all going to die anyway, might as well enjoy ourselves while we're here" refrain, not heard that one before.
> Lifestyle choices are the biggest contributor to health or lack of health (way above genetics and accidents), and what you eat is the major factor. Somehow a lot of people equate attempts to eat healthily with being boring, "ooh a salad...are you trying to be healthy now", which to this day I've never understood. At the same time stupid things like smoking and drinking alcohol are seen as being cool and sexy, even though they are clearly ridiculous and have so many negatives.



Don't try and put words in my mouth - you sound like a teenager trying to score giggles at a sixth-form debate. 

Back on topic, and assuming we're talking about Westerners, yes lifestyle choices contribute to health (as does access to medical treatment which may be more to the point for some of us). I take issue with the belief that food is the single most important factor though, and with the belief that some people are healthier than others simply because of what they eat. Fiddling about with diet to promote health has been a kind of holy grail of medics (and quacks) since god knows when and, having spent what, three thousand years, experimenting on ourselves we still don't have any definitive answer. There are studies that show eating x and avoiding y are good for you and other studies that show the opposite. Off the top of my head I think the only ones I've heard of that are consistent in the direction of advice are those warning off stuff prepared by corporations (ready meals, refined carbs, sugary shit) and those promoting eating your greens; neatly summarised by Michael Pollen - Eat food. Not too much, mostly vegetables. 

You mention 'healthy' food being equated with boring food. The dieting industry has accomplished that for us and the food industry as a whole couldn't be happier. The profit to be had out of persuading people that this or that thing is 'healthy' and selling it a thousand over-processed, over-packaged versions must be immense. And of course, any food can be boring; it rarely absolutely has to be and being properly hungry helps get most things down.


----------



## gentlegreen (Jul 29, 2017)

Have we had the standard Urban comment yet that healthy eating is a luxury available only to the well-off ?

i.e a class issue ...


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jul 29, 2017)

AnnaKarpik said:


> Don't try and put words in my mouth - you sound like a teenager trying to score giggles at a sixth-form debate.


What nonsense is this? If you believe I have misrepresented your position you can easily correct it. Alternatively you can whine about me putting words into your mouth (as if that was possible). Anyway, I don't think I was that far off if at all...



AnnaKarpik said:


> Back on topic, and assuming we're talking about Westerners, yes lifestyle choices contribute to health (as does access to medical treatment which may be more to the point for some of us). I take issue with the belief that food is the single most important factor though, and with the belief that some people are healthier than others simply because of what they eat. Fiddling about with diet to promote health has been a kind of holy grail of medics (and quacks) since god knows when and, having spent what, three thousand years, experimenting on ourselves we still don't have any definitive answer. There are studies that show eating x and avoiding y are good for you and other studies that show the opposite. Off the top of my head I think the only ones I've heard of that are consistent in the direction of advice are those warning off stuff prepared by corporations (ready meals, refined carbs, sugary shit) and those promoting eating your greens; neatly summarised by Michael Pollen - Eat food. Not too much, mostly vegetables.


Fine, if you don't believe that what you eat is important then behave accordingly and eat what the hell you like. If others believe that diet as an important part of their health regimen (and I certainly do), then that's their business. Why should you be taking issue with that others believe? Get on with your own shit and leave them alone. You may believe that there isn't any "definitive answer" and that's possibly true because of the amount of variables involved, however the principles are well known even if a lot of people don't follow them. An abundance of fresh, whole, ripe, mostly plant real proper food is a good foundation to build on, and if you disagree with that, good luck to you.



AnnaKarpik said:


> You mention 'healthy' food being equated with boring food. The dieting industry has accomplished that for us and the food industry as a whole couldn't be happier. The profit to be had out of persuading people that this or that thing is 'healthy' and selling it a thousand over-processed, over-packaged versions must be immense. And of course, any food can be boring; it rarely absolutely has to be and being properly hungry helps get most things down.


You appear to be jumping all over the place. I personally don't equate 'healthy' food to being boring and don't equate over-packaged, over processed food as real food at all. As I said earlier, fresh unprocessed produce grown in good soil without chemicals is a good base to build on in my opinion.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jul 29, 2017)

gentlegreen said:


> Have we had the standard Urban comment yet that healthy eating is a luxury available only to the well-off ?
> 
> i.e a class issue ...


I don't remember seeing it in this thread but I might have missed it. The "not everyone can afford to by organic food from Wholefoods" malarky.


----------



## innit (Jul 29, 2017)

mrs quoad said:


> So, anyone else teetotal?


I've been pregnant and/or breastfeeding for over 3 years now and as a result stopped enjoying drinking and am very close to teetotal (I will very occasionally drink a beer with an ABV as high as 2% if it's good enough to be worth the bother - I do drink very low alcohol <1% beer regularly). I also abstained from cow's dairy for a year of that as my son was cow's milk protein intolerant.

I'd like to be vegan in the long term (mostly environmental concerns which frankly anyone with children should share, but also cruelty concerns re dairy) but am a bit concerned that teetotal + vegan may = no friends.


----------



## mojo pixy (Jul 29, 2017)

gentlegreen said:


> Have we had the standard Urban comment yet that healthy eating is a luxury available only to the well-off ?
> 
> i.e a class issue ...



Yes we have, and we've also had the point made that vegetarian and vegan food doesn't need to cost a lot or be bought from overpriced elitist hippy shops .. and if we haven't then I'm making it now. I'd add that given the price of decent meat these days, vegetarianism is actually a good idea for anyone who doesn't have a lot of money.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jul 29, 2017)

innit said:


> I'd like to be vegan in the long term (mostly environmental concerns which frankly anyone with children should share, but also cruelty concerns re dairy) but am a bit concerned that teetotal + vegan may = no friends.


Does teetotal + vegan = no friends? I suppose it's possible. It really depends on your situation and your personality and the personality of your friends. If you have friends that understand what you're about and are ok with it and can happily accommodate you then I think you should be fine. 

I haven't found that not drinking alcohol and being vegan to be much of a hindrance or social impediment, but then again my personality may be very different to yours. If there was no one around I'd be quite happy and comfortable with my own company and with my family around me. Other people need to have umpteen people around them all the time and like to fit in with the norms of their friends circle. My wife is a lot more social than I am and is super friendly even to complete strangers. Being a vegan teetotal hasn't stopped her at all. Like many other things, your circle of friends can be affected by several things, having children, moving house, children changing school, moving to a new country, changing jobs etc, all of those can result in you losing some friends and gaining new friends. If you have decent friends then it shouldn't be an issue that you are vegan or teetotal (unless you're embarrassed about either of those).


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jul 29, 2017)

mojo pixy said:


> Yes we have, and we've also had the point made that vegetarian and vegan food doesn't need to cost a lot or be bought from overpriced elitist hippy shops .. and if we haven't then I'm making it now. I'd add that given the price of decent meat these days, vegetarianism is actually a good idea for anyone who doesn't have a lot of money.


That's a good point, it doesn't have to be expensive, but it can be for inexperienced people who don't know the ropes, not sure what to eat and so end up buying lots of Linda McCartney sausages and burgers. Not that I'm knocking that type of "food" at all if that's what you're into, however it is easily possible to have an abundance of vegan friendly food without having to break the bank.


----------



## gentlegreen (Jul 29, 2017)

I eat the same every day which makes it easy ...

Having plugged it into Cron-o-meter, it ticks all the boxes ...


In an effort to get my calories down from over 3,000 to my ideal of 2800, and to try this "fasting" thing, I skip breakfast - I suspect in the future I may start the day with green smoothies.

lunch - wholemeal vegan pasty - £1.24
flapjack 99p

onion - 20p ?
Broccoli - 48p
mushrooms £1 - for vitamin D+
red pepper - 48p
two grated carrots - 15p
beans - 50p ?  (I actually use DIY sprouted beans)

£5.04 per day ....

soy sauce, tahini, Aldi plum stirfry sauce ...

There are a few bits and bobs I left out - I eat masses of home-sprouted beans and seeds that would cost over £2 a day if I bought them ready-grown .. ..  B12 pills ...

Indulgences / excesses (apart from my lunchtime flapjack) - cheap generic wholegrain cereal / oats, unsweetened soy milk, fruit ...
jam, bread mix, the odd pot of hummus / biscuits ... tea, 1 bottle of wine per week.

So perhaps £8 per day ?


----------



## rubbershoes (Jul 29, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> I make no apology for believing that veganism is a better lifestyle choice and philosophy, regardless of whether you agree or not, in the same way that I believe that aparthied is bollocks and that racial equality and harmony is a superior philosophy. If racists found that point of view patronising then tough titties. Similarly if bonecrushers find vegan beliefs patronising, that's just too bad.
> 
> I never said that meatheads are patronising so I'm not sure why you've just made that up. Meatheads in this thread have been the ones that have more often than not been the hostile and unfriendly ones looking to provoke, mock and sneer or just post distracting diversionary rubbish. I don't mind because I can stick up for myself and the more the meatheads talk the more their arguments (or lack thereof) are exposed to close scrutiny...so keep talking and give us more material to work with.



This post goes to the heart of it .  We do not say eating meat is better than veganism, or makes us better people than vegans. It's  the vegans who are claiming the moral highground.  

 Why would meat eaters, or as you charmingly call us,  bonecrushers and meatheads,  be patronising. We're not making a moral point at all.   It's not a question of morals or justification for us. It's just food. We don't need to put up arguments for your scrutiny .


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jul 29, 2017)

rubbershoes said:


> This post goes to the heart of it .  We do not say eating meat is better than veganism, or makes us better people than vegans. It's  the vegans who are claiming the moral highground.


Another bit of selective vision going on here. From a vegan perspective, I have had meatheads making derogatory remarks and being dismissive of vegans countless times, and yet apparently that never happens. Yeah right. I haven't looked at all the threads in this forum on this subject but I'm willing to bet that most of the flak has been incoming towards the veg*ns. That's ok, I don't mind because I can spit some bars back if required and I am very comfortable with my choices, however it would appear that some of the more thin skinned meatheads can quite happily dish it out but whine and complain when some of it comes back with interest.

Of course I'm going to believe that my dietary choice is "better" than some of the other available choices, that's why I chose it, duh. The bit about it making vegans better people is an exaggeration and misrepresentation. People who happen to be vegan can be dicks just like people who are not vegan. I have never claimed that I am better than anyone else be they meathead or veghead, but I am very happy with my choice of lifestyle and make no apology for believing it to be "best of breed". If some people don't like that and feel patronised by my choices then as I said earlier, that's just too bad.



rubbershoes said:


> Why would meat eaters, or as you charmingly call us,  bonecrushers and meatheads,  be patronising. We're not making a moral point at all.   It's not a question of morals or justification for us. It's just food. We don't need to put up arguments for your scrutiny .


First of all, nowhere did I say that meatheads were patronising. Secondly of course for you it's not a question of morals because you are happy with your decision to participate in the kiling and eating of animals when there is absolutely NO NEED TO DO SO. Most vegans find that attitude to be immoral, except apparently we're supposed to keep our mouths shut and not say anything about it. Using racial segregation as an analogy again, I presume that many of those that benefited from racial segregation and thought that there was absolutely nothing morally wrong with it because it's obvious that black people are "lesser" humans and didn't want to hear any of this morality nonsense from silly left wing anti-racists.

The choice is between not killing animals unnecessarily and killing animals when there's no need to. I make no absolutely apology for believing that one of those positions is "better" and morally superior to the other, just as an anti-racists position is morally superior to that of a racist imo.


----------



## UnderAnOpenSky (Jul 29, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> That's a good point, it doesn't have to be expensive, but it can be for inexperienced people who don't know the ropes, not sure what to eat and so end up buying lots of Linda McCartney sausages and burgers. Not that I'm knocking that type of "food" at all if that's what you're into, however it is easily possible to have an abundance of vegan friendly food without having to break the bank.




You do need to be able to cook to work with that lot though and they would still be bland as fuck without spices etc. Not quite sure what he was going to suggest doing with that whole wheat pasta. Eat it by itself?


----------



## gentlegreen (Jul 29, 2017)

He was a bit out of date with the "combining protein" business too ...
Yes I would have scrubbed the pasta - never eat it myself these days.
A distinct shortage of tinned tomatoes etc ... though they're rather expensive these days...

As to "cooking skills" - all I've ever needed was a pressure cooker, a wok and a microwave - of late not even the pressure cooker.

I'm probably a bit weird but one of the reasons I no longer cook up loads of brown rice these days is because I can easily knock it back with just soy sauce, tahini and perhaps some chutney - ditto yellow split peas or chickpeas ...


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jul 29, 2017)

UnderAnOpenSky said:


> You do need to be able to cook to work with that lot though and they would still be bland as fuck without spices etc. Not quite sure what he was going to suggest doing with that whole wheat pasta. Eat it by itself?


Yeah, I put that up as an example of the sorts of things you can buy for not a lot of money from a regular common or garden supermarket, it wasn't intended to be a a step by step guide.
I don't consider myself to be a chef but surely it's relatively easy to knock something up even for total kitchen newbs. Having said that I do know some people who are literally completely lost in a kitchen without a recipe and specific instructions and measurements. I tend to wing it most of the time and almost never use a recipe.

Cheap Lazy Vegan has loads of content on her youtube channel which might work for some people. I personally don't really follow any of these guides myself and tend to just wing it in the kitchen, but for beginners they can give a bit of an insight as to what can be done.

Anyway here is another example, with actual cookery taking place...


----------



## UnderAnOpenSky (Jul 29, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Yeah, I put that up as an example of the sorts of things you can buy for not a lot of money from a regular common or garden supermarket, it wasn't intended to be a a step by step guide.
> I don't consider myself to be a chef but surely it's relatively easy to knock something up even for total kitchen newbs. Having said that I do know some people who are literally completely lost in a kitchen without a recipe and specific instructions and measurements. I tend to wing it most of the time and almost never use a recipe.
> 
> Cheap Lazy Vegan has loads of content on her youtube channel which might work for some people. I personally don't really follow any of these guides myself and tend to just wing it in the kitchen, but for beginners they can give a bit of an insight as to what can be done.
> ...




I'm not actually having a pop, but I think you do need to be a decent cook to make tasty vegan food (I can do a passable job) . I guess it's what your pallet is used to. I know bacon is always used by meat meat eaters as to why they couldn't give up meat (and vegans must crave) but it's a highly concentrated flavour that requires few cooking skills. 

I love recipes, but more as a starting point to new ideas for food rather then something to be slavishly followed.


----------



## UnderAnOpenSky (Jul 29, 2017)

Her food looks shit tbf.


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Jul 29, 2017)

gentlegreen said:


> I eat the same every day which makes it easy ...
> 
> Having plugged it into Cron-o-meter, it ticks all the boxes ...
> 
> ...


The idea of eating the same thing every day is utterly miserable to me. The joy of food and shared meals with others is one of life's great pleasures.


----------



## gentlegreen (Jul 29, 2017)

I wear the same clothes every day too.
like to keep my life simple


----------



## gentlegreen (Jul 29, 2017)

I grew up in a household where we had bread and jam for tea.


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Jul 29, 2017)

gentlegreen said:


> I grew up in a household where we had bread and jam for tea.


----------



## gentlegreen (Jul 29, 2017)

I'm probably something of a supertaster - I've never liked curry and chilli - I like earthy flavours.
I appreciate good wine though and never compromise with tea or coffee.


----------



## Spymaster (Jul 29, 2017)

gentlegreen said:


> In an effort to get my calories down from over 3,000 to my ideal of 2800, and to try this "fasting" thing, I skip breakfast - I suspect in the future I may start the day with green smoothies.
> 
> lunch - wholemeal vegan pasty - £1.24
> flapjack 99p
> ...



Dinner at your place sounds unmissable.


----------



## ddraig (Jul 29, 2017)

gg's not even a vegan ffs
I eat different stuff each day unless well nice and loads left over fwiw


----------



## coley (Jul 29, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> tbh I didn't particularly like that video, and couldn't watch the whole thing. Her style of presentation did not resonate with me, and I don't like music playing in those kinds of videos I find it irritating. Having said all that, fair plays to her. I mostly agree with the core of the message although am a bit uncomfortable with the whole judging thing. Of course vegans believe that what they are doing is right and some of them are prepared to confront and hold a mirror up to the "wrongdoers". My preference is for a less overtly confrontational style, however if a bonecrusher gets in my face and starts talking bs up in my grill, I reserve the right to defend my position with bare logic.



"Wrongdoers" "bonecrushers" your PoV comes  across as balanced and reasonable, until you let the auld hyperbole creep in, just a thought.


----------



## coley (Jul 29, 2017)

gentlegreen said:


> I grew up in a household where we had bread and jam for tea.


You did!!? Jammy bugger, we got sugar n bread, if we were lucky it included Stork margarine, or condensed milk sandwiches, later, as the 'economic situation'  improved, Tomato sauce sandwiches!!
But we were lucky, the really poor buggers had to suffer 'echo margarine'


----------



## mrs quoad (Jul 29, 2017)

ddraig said:


> gg's not even a vegan ffs





PaoloSanchez said:


> Seriously, I really don't understand the terminology fixation. You can call yourself whatever you like, it's nobody else's business. If you want to call yourself a sealion or whatever, so be it. Some people have nothing better to do.


----------



## coley (Jul 29, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Ideally yes, but some folks apparently like that kind of stuff.


Some people haven't learnt to use knives and forks


----------



## coley (Jul 29, 2017)

gentlegreen said:


> I'm not anticipating eating out much when I move to France - even as a seagan (vegan plus fish) - though dairy intolerance is probably fairly widely accepted.


"Seagan, vegan plus fish" ? A vegan that eats fish??


----------



## coley (Jul 29, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> gg's working out a system that works for him. Doesn't really matter what you call it.


Thats fair comment, but while sympathising with him,you can't claim too be a vegan while acting fish?


----------



## coley (Jul 29, 2017)

gentlegreen said:


> It's simply that I want no part of the dairy and meat industry for a variety of reasons - including moral.
> ... or for that matter, fish that are hauled out of the sea and allowed to die of asphyxiation - or worse.
> I'm a gardener who tries to avoid hurting snails.


The guilt of the late evening 'crunch'  know what you mean


----------



## coley (Jul 29, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Seriously, I really don't understand the terminology fixation. You can call yourself whatever you like, it's nobody else's business. If you want to call yourself a sealion or whatever, so be it. Some people have nothing better to do.



It's a bit of the old 'moral high ground'  competitiveness, I'm convinced some vegans, strict  vegetarians types are only doing it in order to sneer at us 'lesser mortals' I like my vegetarian options to be as fuss free as possible, yet ( as mentioned earlier) some sneer because it looks like a burger or in a pie, or comes as a mince substitute.
McCartneys has brought out a 'pulled pork' quorn burger, friggin delish!
Though it's that long since I had pork, much less 'pulled pork' (a few years ago *that* would never have appeared as 'food item')  that I can't comment on an honest comparison, but decidedly tasty.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jul 29, 2017)

UnderAnOpenSky said:


> I'm not actually having a pop, but I think you do need to be a decent cook to make tasty vegan food (I can do a passable job) . I guess it's what your pallet is used to. I know bacon is always used by meat meat eaters as to why they couldn't give up meat (and vegans must crave) but it's a highly concentrated flavour that requires few cooking skills.


I'm trying to be objective here, however I don't see why it should be any harder to make tasty vegan food than to make tasty any other food, and I don't think you need to be particularly skilled either. I manage to make meals that stuff that people like (at least they say the like it but they could be lying) and I don't claim to be all that in the kitchen. My understanding is that there are multiple ways of duplicating almost any taste or texture. The use of herbs and spices is what gives most cooked food it's flavour. Fruits don't really need anything doing to them if they are ripe and in season, and organic salads, proper tomatoes, lettuce, avocado, spinach, spring onions etc don't really need much assistance, maybe a decent dressing. 



UnderAnOpenSky said:


> I love recipes, but more as a starting point to new ideas for food rather then something to be slavishly followed.


I have recipe books but I don't think I've ever used them. Like you said it's for ideas and they've seen more action on the bookshelf and coffee table than in the kitchen.



UnderAnOpenSky said:


> Her food looks shit tbf.


How it tastes is probably more important than how it looks, but regardless, taste like music is subjective. Some people think death metal is shit while others think it is the shit. Horses for courses. I haven't tried any of them myself but they looked ok from what I saw. Remembering that the theme of her channel is eating on a budget


----------



## UnderAnOpenSky (Jul 29, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> I'm trying to be objective here, however I don't see why it should be any harder to make tasty vegan food than to make tasty any other food, and I don't think you need to be particularly skilled either. I manage to make meals that stuff that people like (at least they say the like it but they could be lying) and I don't claim to be all that in the kitchen. My understanding is that there are multiple ways of duplicating almost any taste or texture. The use of herbs and spices is what gives most cooked food it's flavour. Fruits don't really need anything doing to them if they are ripe and in season, and organic salads, proper tomatoes, lettuce, avocado, spinach, spring onions etc don't really need much assistance, maybe a decent dressing.
> 
> 
> I have recipe books but I don't think I've ever used them. Like you said it's for ideas and they've seen more action on the bookshelf and coffee table than in the kitchen.
> ...



The use of herbs and spices is what gives veggie food its flavours. It's important in all cooking, but for me, more so here. I used the example of bacon as it's a complete flavour. Steak is also similar. You can cook them and just serve them with something. I'm not trying to be awkward here, just pointing out why meat appeals when you could just veggies. Texture is another intresting one. Some meat is inherently bland and does need flavouring, I'm thinking things like chicken breast, but has texture that is very hard to replicate otherwise. All especially good of course when served with a decent salad made with organic veg. 

Her food looked shit, even on a budget. At least your man before used fresh kale, rather then frozen, but there are plenty of budget fresh veg about.


----------



## coley (Jul 29, 2017)

Watermelon Man said:


> B12 is easy. Either pick your arse and eat it  or nutritional yeast or b12 tabs.  Omega 3 is easy. Flaxseed ground.  Vitamin D? drops.  There's also the iron issue for women (sorted with decent iron tabs). Iodine deficiency can be a problem but a few decent kelp tablets sort that out.  There's a debate about long chain fatty acids for vegans.  Depending what side you believe - you can take EPA DHA tablets.
> 
> Health should be a priority and a vegan diet can be great for that.  I'm arguably in my greatest health, eating the most amount of calories and my diet is pretty unhealthy. Beer, chips, crisps, biscuits, chocolate, pizzas, junk food, booze etc.
> 
> Before I went vegan I was fat, classed as obese, constantly sick, tired and feeling angry, miserable and like a sack of shit.   These days there is a difference.  I'm loads happier, less angry but have my moments.  I rarely get ill or even feel below par.  All this on a pretty unhealthy vegan diet.  I can't really get my head around eating fish.  All that pollution, mercury etc.



Baked beans, straight out of the tin, with a yarking big glass of NZ Chardonnay, followed by a couple of handfuls of mixed nuts and some tinned fruit, being vegan or vegetarian doesn't have to be 'complicated'


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jul 29, 2017)

coley said:


> It's a bit of the old 'moral high ground'  competitiveness, I'm convinced some vegans, strict  vegetarians types are only doing it in order to sneer at us 'lesser mortals' I like my vegetarian options to be as fuss free as possible, yet ( as mentioned earlier) some sneer because it looks like a burger or in a pie, or comes as a mince substitute.


I have never seen this, and I've been around the block a few times. A bit like the "angry vegans" referred to in the OP, I don't believe that it's a big issue and is likely a gross exaggeration that hardly ever happens. As I said previously, I make no apology for believing that eating food that causes less harm and death is more moral than choosing to eat food which causes more death unnecessarily. I don't feel the need to proselytize, however if I'm asked or challenged I will defend my corner.

Similarly I don't like too much fuss either and will often go out of my way to avoid it in social situations, short of compromising my core beliefs and principles, similar to the way that a jewish or muslim person doesn't eat pork for example. Some "normal" folks would regard anyone making those kinds of dietary preferences to be "fussy eaters".



coley said:


> McCartneys has brought out a 'pulled pork' quorn burger, friggin delish!
> Though it's that long since I had pork, much less 'pulled pork' (a few years ago *that* would never have appeared as 'food item')  that I can't comment on an honest comparison, but decidedly tasty.


I think we've moved on quite a bit from the plain old tvp days, and there's all manner of fake imitation animal products and I'm sure I would find some of them really tasty. I tend not to go for that sort of food and keep things quite simple.


----------



## coley (Jul 29, 2017)

mrs quoad said:


> Is this the world's hottest vegan? Student goes from ribby to RIPPED after switching to a plant-based diet (and his acne's gone too)


Thon dog looks seriously worried!


----------



## coley (Jul 29, 2017)

Watermelon Man said:


> Why is this even news? I know it's that rag...and it shouldn't be taken seriously. But the facts are that meat is laden with fat, eggs are full of cholesterol and dairy is puss filled fatty minging nonsense.  Of course your spots are going to go. Of course you are going to get lean.  Eat less saturated fat get shredded.



Bugger, what about my allotment produce, fertilised with horse manure!


----------



## coley (Jul 29, 2017)

Watermelon Man said:


> Cow's milk can legally contain up to *400 million* pus cells/litre.  You are what you eat.



Eh? WTF are you on about?


----------



## gentlegreen (Jul 29, 2017)

coley said:


> "Seagan, vegan plus fish" ? A vegan that eats fish??


I was 100 % vegan in my 20s and 30s ... after a detour into fish and cheese I've been 100% plant-based for the past couple of years..
My focus over recent times might make me more of a "nutritarian" - with green veggies at the top and everything making up my 3,000 calories has to earn its keep - so I don't even have grains with my main meal - just as many veggies as I can get down my neck.
I wouldn't hesitate to catch and eat fish if I was starving, mammal meat simply isn't food to me after 36 years - simply revolting - like taking up tobacco smoking - ... dairy beyond the pale - not least for health reasons.

As I said earlier, I don't foresee eating fish for several years yet - and plan to be catching them myself so they get treated as well as possible and I don't yet know if I'll actually be able to go through with it ...


----------



## coley (Jul 29, 2017)

mrs quoad said:


> 14 anecdotes is _definitely _data  That must be, what? Seventy-five percent of the world's bodybuilders right there :coolthumbs:


Always wondered about those great big tins of 'body building supplements' to be found in most health food shops?


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jul 29, 2017)

UnderAnOpenSky said:


> The use of herbs and spices is what gives veggie food its flavours.


Not necessarily. There are plenty of "veggie foods" that have their own good flavour and don't really need "enhancements". One might need a bit of knowledge and a bit of nous to know where to find flavourful stuff but it's not as difficult as some appear to believe in my opinion, which is why I don't really buy the whole "vegan food is boring and difficult" business. Sure if you're tastebuds are accustomed to certain flavours I suppose it may take some time to adjust and some may find that "taste realignment" a bit of a challenge, but having myself graduated from being a meathead to vegetarian to vegan I can honestly say that there's nothing I miss from my previous life and I don't have any cravings or desire to go back. The only reason I can see myself doing so was if my life was in danger and the only way to prevent my certain and imminent demise was to eat a Maccy D's, in that case I'd be straight to McDonalds, but I can't see that happening tbh. (but you never know)



UnderAnOpenSky said:


> Her food looked shit, even on a budget. At least your man before used fresh kale, rather then frozen, but there are plenty of budget fresh veg about.


I can't really comment on this too much, I haven't seen all of her videos, but I'm sure I'd find at least one thing that I like amongst them.


----------



## coley (Jul 29, 2017)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> Millions of people must be practically dead and just not know it


C'mon,  leave Trump voters and Obamacare repeal out of this


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jul 29, 2017)

coley said:


> ...being vegan or vegetarian doesn't have to be 'complicated'


Precisely, but for some reason a lot of people seem to believe that it's some kind of massive undertaking. I've found the eating side of it less complicated than so called "normal" food. (when eating at home that is). The challenging bit comes more from interacting with people who either don't understand or are hostile to the idea, but thankfully I have that mostly under control.


----------



## coley (Jul 29, 2017)

Yuwipi Woman said:


> Probably about the same number of vegans who are better disposed to meat eaters after this thread.


No change, they want to continue eating meat at obviously unsustainable rates? Their choice, in fact they have the better chance of survival when armeggedon hits, in the short term,  there will be vast amounts of carrion available.


----------



## coley (Jul 30, 2017)

mrs quoad said:


> So, anyone else teetotal?



God (or any unexplained belief) forbid, no


----------



## coley (Jul 30, 2017)

UnderAnOpenSky said:


> Not on this thread, but one like it some years ago I stopped making cheap jokes about vegans when I realised it was the meat eaters who were acting in a far more childish way then the vegans. Although that one wasn't started by a vegan I admit.
> 
> Despite reading all this thread and many others like it,  I don't have any decent reasons to continue to eat meat other then I like the taste and convenience. Which are pretty strong sadly.


Most honest and common sense post on here.


----------



## Watermelon Man (Jul 30, 2017)

UnderAnOpenSky said:


> Not on this thread, but one like it some years ago I stopped making cheap jokes about vegans when I realised it was the meat eaters who were acting in a far more childish way then the vegans. Although that one wasn't started by a vegan I admit.
> 
> Despite reading all this thread and many others like it,  I don't have any decent reasons to continue to eat meat other then I like the taste and convenience. Which are pretty strong sadly.



I missed this with all the meat eating posts about Hitler and that...  I said a while back that the only reasons to eat dead animals are taste and to make money for the meat and dairy industry (which comes under programming).  The meat and dairy industry spend BILLIONS on programming (or marketing) humans to continue to eat meat.  Convenience is a myth. Beans out of a tin? Cooking beans? Tofu? (ok tofu needs some serious dressing up -I admit). It's good that some dead animal eaters like yourself can partly see through the programming.


----------



## Sphinxminx (Jul 30, 2017)

Nothing about the socio economic effects of the cessation of meat and dairy farming on the last few  pages I read. Vegans will understandably and genuinely  for them say it's a moral thing - the end justifies the means ( hello Marxist dialectic - nothing wrong with that but that is what it is). Any experience of farming? Maybe some and fair do's in that case. I do eat meat  although a lot less than I was brought up on and do take action and make choices against factory farming. I was brought up on farms and live in a rural farming community. so what's the plan for moving away from a meat based diet (which I actually think is happeming anyway so maybe just slow transition). Have my own chickens so no issues there. I'd miss the cattle munching away happily ( as they do) and the sheep dotting the hillsides. No meat/ milk no moo cows. Don't fancy the idea of massive prairies of GM cereals, the livestock going - along with hedgerows, coppices and associated biodiversity . Nicotinoids and no bees anyone? Good luck with fresh fruit and veg then folks.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jul 30, 2017)

Sphinxminx said:


> Nothing about the socio economic effects of the cessation of meat and dairy farming on the last few  pages I read. Vegans will understandably and genuinely  for them say it's a moral thing - the end justifies the means ( hello Marxist dialectic - nothing wrong with that but that is what it is). Any experience of farming? Maybe some and fair do's in that case. I do eat meat  although a lot less than I was brought up on and do take action and make choices against factory farming. I was brought up on farms and live in a rural farming community. so what's the plan for moving away from a meat based diet (which I actually think is happeming anyway so maybe just slow transition). Have my own chickens so no issues there. I'd miss the cattle munching away happily ( as they do) and the sheep dotting the hillsides. No meat/ milk no moo cows. Don't fancy the idea of massive prairies of GM cereals, the livestock going - along with hedgerows, coppices and associated biodiversity . Nicotinoids and no bees anyone? Good luck with fresh fruit and veg then folks.



tbf, globally many of those massive prairies are currently growing crops to be fed to livestock - for some the worst excesses of factory farming such as feedlot cattle rearing. 

I'm also not so sure I see evidence that we're moving away from meat. In the rich world, without checking the figures, I'd be surprised if meat consumption isn't considerably up over the last 50 years. In China, meat consumption has grown enormously: according to the report mentioned here, up five-fold from 125 to 691 calories per day between 1971 and 2011. There are govt plans in China to reduce meat consumption, but it hasn't happened yet. 

I'd also take issue with the idea of meat-based diets, aside from the odd tiny exception such as the Inuit. Most meat-eaters take in much less than 50 per cent of their calories as meat. This page gives a breakdown of calorie intake by country. If anything, globally our diets are more grain-based than anything, with meat/dairy/eggs less than 25 per cent combined.


----------



## Casually Red (Jul 30, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> They like to pretend that meat eaters suffer crisis' of conscience every time they sniff a steak!



I'm not seeing an ounce of conscience here , just absolutely delicious food and very ..very..happy eaters . Plus a woman running the place who's in her 80s and somehow managed to not die .



Anyone who'd even try and ban this .......


----------



## NoXion (Jul 30, 2017)

Yeah, the people who think that the future will involve veganism becoming mainstream are simply deluding themselves. I can easily see "traditional" meat reared in the conventional manner from live animals becoming more expensive, but that doesn't mean that people will become vegans out of some principled choice, but rather because economic conditions don't give them many options. In any case by that time I would expect that growing meat in vitro would have taken leaps and strides, which would thankfully mean that we wouldn't have gone backwards to the times when poor people could hardly afford meat at all. The development of in vitro meat would also enable vegans to enjoy meat, since it would never have been an entire living being. Assuming of course that veganism is based on ethical concerns rather than some weird quasi-religious objection to consuming animal protein.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jul 30, 2017)

Will be interesting to see if cultured meat takes off. I could see somewhere like China adopting it on a large scale. If it does take off, it won't be due to loads of people thinking that killing animals for meat is wrong, though. In fact, I would anticipate a fair bit of resistance towards it until it becomes cheap. I'd like to see us eating more insects for our protein (growing insects is a pretty efficient way of making protein) but that's going to be resisted too. 

This UN doc mentions a few intriguing possibilities for insects, including feeding them on shit - and then feeding them to livestock, mind, to reduce livestock's environmental impact. That's another possibility for the future, that producing meat through livestock could become much less environmentally damaging through things like insect farming. 

It's been mentioned much earlier in the thread, but the cultural traditions associated with our eating habits may be hard to change, and we shouldn't underestimate how much people value them.


----------



## UnderAnOpenSky (Jul 30, 2017)

Watermelon Man said:


> I missed this with all the meat eating posts about Hitler and that...  I said a while back that the only reasons to eat dead animals are taste and to make money for the meat and dairy industry (which comes under programming).  The meat and dairy industry spend BILLIONS on programming (or marketing) humans to continue to eat meat.  Convenience is a myth. Beans out of a tin? Cooking beans? Tofu? (ok tofu needs some serious dressing up -I admit). It's good that some dead animal eaters like yourself can partly see through the programming.



I think I'd dispute your language, but yeah, humans are creatures that of habit and unless you have a strong reason to do so, it's pretty hard to break. Taste and texture are heavily conditioned things. 

For your arguments  I think there would be value in seperating the heavy marketing of processed foods (and I have a total weekness for fast food, despite know how awful it is on many levels) and people's eating habits. I think most of those billions are spent on eating their version of meat and dairy. Beans out of a tin are fantastic and I've just ordered a pressure cooker to take to the next level. And yet I'm working away for a week with no refrigerator and a single gas hob and my main meal is packet rice, tinned beans, veg and few slices of chorizo. I'm also aware that that modern veganism is the result of a privaliged food distribution network. Seasonality and locally grown is a bitch if you live in the UK. My GFs job/business is growing/sourcing organic veg. Imagine no food miles from outside the UK in winter? Lucky we do have this luxury, but boy do I get told of buying veg at this time of year 

So yeah I'm seeing through the "program" but dispute conspiracy. Eating habits are hard things to break without feeling like you are missing our. Especially if you like food as much as me.


----------



## UnderAnOpenSky (Jul 30, 2017)

NoXion said:


> Yeah, the people who think that the future will involve veganism becoming mainstream are simply deluding themselves. I can easily see "traditional" meat reared in the conventional manner from live animals becoming more expensive, but that doesn't mean that people will become vegans out of some principled choice, but rather because economic conditions don't give them many options. In any case by that time I would expect that growing meat in vitro would have taken leaps and strides, which would thankfully mean that we wouldn't have gone backwards to the times when poor people could hardly afford meat at all. The development of in vitro meat would also enable vegans to enjoy meat, since it would never have been an entire living being. Assuming of course that veganism is based on ethical concerns rather than some weird quasi-religious objection to consuming animal protein.



In a proper distopian future (poet Brexit) it just makes sense. Its cheap and nutritious compared to shit meat products if we discount the ethics. I'm away from home way to much and travelling about. If I could be served hot dahl and rice over McDonald's, quickly and in a way that left you full, kinda like your travelling around India, then fuck yeah. I'll probably eat vat grown meat when it comes across, but can't imagine it being great for us.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jul 30, 2017)

Pah, there's no conspiracy. Lots of people around the world eat little meat because they cannot afford it, and generally speaking, the richer people get the more meat they eat - because they can afford it. No hard sell required.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jul 30, 2017)

UnderAnOpenSky said:


> In a proper distopian future (poet Brexit) it just makes sense. Its cheap and nutritious compared to shit meat products if we discount the ethics. I'm away from home way to much and travelling about. *If I could be served hot dahl and rice over McDonald's, quickly and in a way that left you full, kinda like your travelling around India, then fuck yeah.* I'll probably eat vat grown meat when it comes across, but can't imagine it being great for us.


Me too. I often eat crap food because that's the only thing in front of me at that moment. I'd love our food culture to change and give me other options, and those other options would definitely mean me eating less meat.


----------



## UnderAnOpenSky (Jul 30, 2017)

Sphinxminx said:


> Nothing about the socio economic effects of the cessation of meat and dairy farming on the last few  pages I read. Vegans will understandably and genuinely  for them say it's a moral thing - the end justifies the means ( hello Marxist dialectic - nothing wrong with that but that is what it is). Any experience of farming? Maybe some and fair do's in that case. I do eat meat  although a lot less than I was brought up on and do take action and make choices against factory farming. I was brought up on farms and live in a rural farming community. so what's the plan for moving away from a meat based diet (which I actually think is happeming anyway so maybe just slow transition). Have my own chickens so no issues there. I'd miss the cattle munching away happily ( as they do) and the sheep dotting the hillsides. No meat/ milk no moo cows. Don't fancy the idea of massive prairies of GM cereals, the livestock going - along with hedgerows, coppices and associated biodiversity . Nicotinoids and no bees anyone? Good luck with fresh fruit and veg then folks.



I do 

Farming is fucked in the UK. We have loads of land that is massively under utilised. Aging farmers. Supermarkets that made it uneconomic to produce various food stuffs. All well and good when we can afford import what we need, but we all know how great capatalsim is at looking after people right? This is even before we get in to the oil we eat (getting of the subject I know). So animal rights aside we have massive issues with food sovereignty and food miles. Massively dependent on fossil fuels. The idea we should eat meat with every meal is fucked. 

So the plan? Where you can graze cows you can generally get 10 times the food produce if we grow vegetables. It will of course mean changing the way we eat and live. 

I'm not going to give up eating meat, but think we could all do better for our own health and that of environment if we all eat less of it. So I'm going to continue to pay attention to the vegans. Because in between everything there is some tasty shit to be had.


----------



## UnderAnOpenSky (Jul 30, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Me too. I often eat crap food because that's the only thing in front of me at that moment. I'd love our food culture to change and give me other options, and those other options would definitely mean me eating less meat.



Let's redifien this then. The more people shun eating awful processed meat then the more options we have.

Falfal over a Big Mac. Fuck Yeah. But not at hipster prices.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jul 30, 2017)

UnderAnOpenSky said:


> Let's redifien this then. The more people shun eating awful processed meat then the more options we have.
> 
> Falfal over a Big Mac. Fuck Yeah. But not at hipster prices.


Falafel is a great example of cheap food that is now being rebranded to be sold as much pricier food. I used to be fortunate that I worked by a place that did falafel wraps for £2.50. Was my lunch about twice a week. Now a few chains are springing up doing basically the same thing for five or six quid. Now _that's_ your marketing folk in action.


----------



## mojo pixy (Jul 30, 2017)

There's one in Bristol I've stopped eating at. They've hiked their large/small prices from £5/£3.50 to £7/£5 in the last 2 years. So at least someone's had a decent pay rise recently.


----------



## UnderAnOpenSky (Jul 30, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Falafel is a great example of cheap food that is now being rebranded to be sold as much pricier food. I used to be fortunate that I worked by a place that did falafel wraps for £2.50. Was my lunch about twice a week. Now a few chains are springing up doing basically the same thing for five or six quid. Now _that's_ your marketing folk in action.



See cheap as I know it is to make,  I'd still probably pay that tomorrow if it was proper hearty and was served quick. I'll be finishing 5 days physical work and then have a good few hours drive and will be starving and not want to faf on my home. My average spend in McDs at this point will be £7.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jul 30, 2017)

mojo pixy said:


> There's one in Bristol I've stopped eating at. They've hiked their large/small prices from £5/£3.50 to £7/£5 in the last 2 years. So at least someone's had a decent pay rise recently.


Ironically enough they've basically made it the same price as a meat equivalent. In the cheap place I used to get my lunch from, which was run by Turks, they also did meat wraps, but for about a pound more. If you're fortunate enough to have Turkish-run or similar places near you, you tend to get such things at the kind of price they think it should be, ie cheap.

Veggie alternatives becoming more mainstream may not mean them becoming cheaper. It can mean them becoming more expensive.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jul 30, 2017)

UnderAnOpenSky said:


> See cheap as I know it is to make,  I'd still probably pay that tomorrow if it was proper hearty and was served quick. I'll be finishing 5 days physical work and then have a good few hours drive and will be starving and not want to faf on my home. My average spend in McDs at this point will be £7.


I almost never eat in McD's/Burger King (my drunken shit food of choice is normally something like a doner kebab), but when I do go in, I'm always struck by how expensive such places are. Whenever I see a Burger King at a service station, I often think about having something then shuffle off to find the Greggs.


----------



## mojo pixy (Jul 30, 2017)

Same in curry houses. The ''vegetable'' curries 9 times out of 10 are basically bog standard frozen veg chucked in the same curry sauce as the meat (which won't be vegan anyway as cooked in ghee), for maybe £1 - £1.50 less than the meat ones. There are fully veg things usually on the starters menu, but it's rare to see properly made, meant-to-be veg mains on an Indian menu, unless it's an actual dedicated veg place.

Chinese? Worse still, generally. But as I understand it, in China vegetarianism and especially veganism are rare and hard to keep to strictly. Unlike in India, where it's common and easy to be veggie.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jul 30, 2017)

I really like food cooked in ghee. 

I'm also quite fond of MSG.


----------



## mojo pixy (Jul 30, 2017)

Fish sauce is vile stuff but at the end of the day it's the magic ingredient that makes Thai food so gorgeous.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jul 30, 2017)

mojo pixy said:


> Fish sauce is vile stuff but at the end of the day it's the magic ingredient that makes Thai food so gorgeous.


This is the thing with quite a lot of cuisines. One of my favourite Spanish dishes is chickpea stew. It's rich and gorgeous... and cooked with a ham bone to add flavour.


----------



## UnderAnOpenSky (Jul 30, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Ironically enough they've basically made it the same price as a meat equivalent. In the cheap place I used to get my lunch from, which was run by Turks, they also did meat wraps, but for about a pound more. If you're fortunate enough to have Turkish-run or similar places near you, you tend to get such things at the kind of price they think it should be, ie cheap.
> 
> Veggie alternatives becoming more mainstream may not mean them becoming cheaper. It can mean them becoming more expensive.



There is no reason that prepared veggie foods need to be much cheaper if they are done well as compared to to some shit option that involves low quality meat. You can pay a tenner for burger and chips. I generally wouldn't but I think as a social we are a bit more intrested in food then we used to be and hipster or whatever that's not a bad thing. 

I'm not sure I like the term programing for various reasons,  but I understand it. Our food tastes are quite ingrained. For me fast food is something I eat on the road when I don't have access to my kitchen. I've been away for a bit and craving some chickpea cooked in coca nut milk with some dahl and brown rice. And some chicken tandoori I've had marinading all day. 



littlebabyjesus said:


> I almost never eat in McD's/Burger King (my drunken shit food of choice is normally something like a doner kebab), but when I do go in, I'm always struck by how expensive such places are. Whenever I see a Burger King at a service station, I often think about having something then shuffle off to find the Greggs.



Yeah. Burger King inflate their prices in service stations by a few quid where as McDonald's have a fixed price and the "quality" is more consistent.


----------



## UnderAnOpenSky (Jul 30, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I really like food cooked in ghee.
> 
> I'm also quite fond of MSG.



Turns out that saturated fats for frying aren't as bad as we've been told so you don't need to feel so guilty. Ghee makes awesome dahl. Google smoke points.

MSG is also amazing for making simple meals taste better. That Aromat stuff is great.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jul 30, 2017)

I make a good chickpea stew. It's hard to get hold of ham bones, but I've done it with bones from previous meals, and it definitely adds to the flavour. My veggie-friendly version is good. But my veggie-unfriendly version is better.


----------



## mojo pixy (Jul 30, 2017)

Once in Israel I was served up so-called vegetarian Cholent that it turned out had been cooked with a bone in it. I didn't care much because it was extremely nice and tbf arguing with strangers on Shabat in their own home would have been rather a faux pas. Even in Israel.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jul 30, 2017)

UnderAnOpenSky said:


> Yeah. Burger King inflate their prices in service stations by a few quid where as McDonald's have a fixed price and the "quality" is more consistent.


I think subconsciously my point of reference is Wetherspoons. If it's more expensive than a spoons, that's kind of wrong.


----------



## Sphinxminx (Jul 31, 2017)

mojo pixy said:


> Fish sauce is vile stuff but at the end of the day it's the magic ingredient that makes Thai food so gorgeous.


and shrimp paste


----------



## gentlegreen (Jul 31, 2017)

My (currently vegan) armpits smell of spices - probably the garlic in my stir-fry, or whatever's in the plum sauce I'm indulging in at the moment.


----------



## Sphinxminx (Jul 31, 2017)

UnderAnOpenSky said:


> I do
> 
> Farming is fucked in the UK. We have loads of land that is massively under utilised. Aging farmers. Supermarkets that made it uneconomic to produce various food stuffs. All well and good when we can afford import what we need, but we all know how great capatalsim is at looking after people right? This is even before we get in to the oil we eat (getting of the subject I know). So animal rights aside we have massive issues with food sovereignty and food miles. Massively dependent on fossil fuels. The idea we should eat meat with every meal is fucked.
> 
> ...


Glad you mentioned the food miles/ fossil fuels issue as that's an issue across the range. And farming practices. Rice? Don't  know enough about rice growing etc to say. As I said I am tending to eat less meat anyway and can see that happening more ( which is all I was saying about meat based diets, just me and what I've seen of general increased awareness not a global comparison). I don't have an issue listening and eating more healthily with animal welfare in mind. I do object to being harangued by people who maintain a moral high ground on the basis of what is often inaccurate information and sweeping generalisations. Do they wear cotton I wonder?  Another topic but causes massive environmental damage according to a BBC radio documentary I heard. Don't start me on palm oil.....


----------



## NoXion (Jul 31, 2017)

I expect any attempt to market insects directly as a foodstuff will meet a lot of consumer resistance. I think it's more likely that insects will be used as fodder for livestock.


----------



## gentlegreen (Jul 31, 2017)

NoXion said:


> I expect any attempt to market insects directly as a foodstuff will meet a lot of consumer resistance. I think it's more likely that insects will be used as fodder for livestock.



I wonder how this would work.

It's all about ghost acreages.

Just lately as I investigate hydroponic food production, even after eliminating the obvious bullshit of vertical farms with LED lighting, I encountered massive enthusiasm for "aquaponics" - but even if you ignore the iffyness of keeping fish in tanks, the proponents aren't factoring-in the fish food - which, like animal feed, tends to be krill and "trash fish" (sic) harvested from distant seas ...

What will the insects be fed on ?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jul 31, 2017)

Insects can be fed on all kinds of waste, including shit! I linked to a UN report that gives some details.

Agree about fish farming. The fish have miserable lives, their meat is poor quality due to those miserable lives, and something like a third of the entire worldwide catch goes to make fishmeal to be fed to farmed fish. Most of that fishmeal is perfectly good to be eaten directly by us. Fishmeal is even fed to basically vegetarian fish like tilapia, which is the height of folly. We really do do some fucking stupid things.


----------



## xenon (Jul 31, 2017)

mojo pixy said:


> There's one in Bristol I've stopped eating at. They've hiked their large/small prices from £5/£3.50 to £7/£5 in the last 2 years. So at least someone's had a decent pay rise recently.



 Which one is that? 

 I haven't had one in town for ages. Sometimes get one from the local kebabs shop


----------



## mojo pixy (Jul 31, 2017)

It's Biblos. I bought falafel wraps from there regularly till one day I went in and a £5 wrap was suddenly £6 for no obvious reason and with no warning. Since then it's all gone up even more, though there are no new branches and none of the ones that exist are any bigger.


----------



## AnnaKarpik (Jul 31, 2017)

UnderAnOpenSky said:


> I do
> 
> Farming is fucked in the UK. We have loads of land that is massively under utilised. Aging farmers. Supermarkets that made it uneconomic to produce various food stuffs. All well and good when we can afford import what we need, but we all know how great capatalsim is at looking after people right? This is even before we get in to the oil we eat (getting of the subject I know). So animal rights aside we have massive issues with food sovereignty and food miles. Massively dependent on fossil fuels. The idea we should eat meat with every meal is fucked.
> 
> ...



Thing is, even assuming that this pasture isn't going to wash away into a river as soon as you start digging it, you won't keep getting ten times the food for very long unless you throw in artificial fertilisers. Less meat = better-cared for natural environment seems less and less obvious the more I think about it.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jul 31, 2017)

AnnaKarpik said:


> Thing is, even assuming that this pasture isn't going to wash away into a river as soon as you start digging it, you won't keep getting ten times the food for very long unless you throw in artificial fertilisers. Less meat = better-cared for natural environment seems less and less obvious the more I think about it.


It's interesting to me how many people here seem to assume that giving up meat would automatically lead to better environmental practices. The current most destructive practices are driven first and foremost by the destructive forces of capitalism. These are what need tackling and overthrowing. For me, a lot of the arguments are aimed at the wrong targets.


----------



## NoXion (Jul 31, 2017)

gentlegreen said:


> I wonder how this would work.
> 
> It's all about ghost acreages.
> 
> ...


 As LBJ pointed out, bugs aren't exactly fussy eaters. Using bugs would also make aquaponics more sustainable. As for vertical farming, as long as the energy used to run it is plentiful and carbon neutral, such as from nuclear or renewables, then I don't see how it being energy intensive is a problem.


----------



## gentlegreen (Jul 31, 2017)

NoXion said:


> As for vertical farming, as long as the energy used to run it is plentiful and carbon neutral, such as from nuclear or renewables, then I don't see how it being energy intensive is a problem.



This guy grows veggies in space and has done the sums :-


----------



## Yuwipi Woman (Jul 31, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> tbf, globally many of those massive prairies are currently growing crops to be fed to livestock - for some the worst excesses of factory farming such as feedlot cattle rearing.
> 
> I'm also not so sure I see evidence that we're moving away from meat. In the rich world, without checking the figures, I'd be surprised if meat consumption isn't considerably up over the last 50 years. In China, meat consumption has grown enormously: according to the report mentioned here, up five-fold from 125 to 691 calories per day between 1971 and 2011. There are govt plans in China to reduce meat consumption, but it hasn't happened yet.
> 
> I'd also take issue with the idea of meat-based diets, aside from the odd tiny exception such as the Inuit. Most meat-eaters take in much less than 50 per cent of their calories as meat. This page gives a breakdown of calorie intake by country. If anything, globally our diets are more grain-based than anything, with meat/dairy/eggs less than 25 per cent combined.



I don't see evidence that the developing world is eating less meat, China in particular.  (It should be noted that their meat consumption has been far lower than the US.)  They're very busy buying major hog confinement operations in the Midwest US, or starting new ones.  That doesn't indicate that they plan to lower meat consumption to me.  I also noted that they've building high-tech hog confinement options like this:



> Hog barns—stacked eight stories high. The photos from Iowa Secretary of Agriculture Bill Northey traveled around the Twitter-verse lightning fast, raising eyebrows and slackening jaws of U.S. producers and industry leaders. We all want to know: “How do you manage that manure?”
> 
> Northey, on a trade mission with the Iowa Soybean Association in Guangxi, in south-central China, says the buildings were part of an expansion project with Chinese feed mill and pork producer Guangxi Yangxiang Co. (Click here for the company website. Translate the site to English at the top right.)
> 
> ...



China's High-rise Hog Hotel

In the West, there is some evidence that meat consumption is going down, from its freakishly high levels.  Overall, though world-wide meat consumption is going up.  It's getting cheap enough that every larger numbers of people can afford it.  I do wonder if the planet can afford it.  The US alone has 93 million cattle.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jul 31, 2017)

gentlegreen said:


> This guy grows veggies in space and has done the sums :-



Any chance of a quick summary?


----------



## A380 (Jul 31, 2017)

As an aside:  Why do people call vegetables 'veggies'? 

It's almost as anoying as people who call their dogs 'fur babies ' on FB. 

Veggies is an acceptable short form for vegetarian, but surly not for vegetables?


----------



## eoin_k (Jul 31, 2017)

In Europe, it's easier to imagine what a more sustainable system of food production would look like with livestock than without them. Beef farming would be reduced to a level much closer to that needed to complement sustainable crop rotation on prime arable land. Sheep farming makes sense on marginal land that isn't much use for anything else (hill farms, marshland etc.). Small scale pig farming could be integrated into market gardens, orchards and small holdings. Mass poultry farming would make less sense, but chickens would be more common in people's allotments and kitchen gardens.

Less meat would probably be produced than is now the case, but it seems to make sense to integrate livestock into food production in this sort of climate in terms of maintaining soil fertility, and minimising energy inputs and the use of petrochemicals.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jul 31, 2017)

eoin_k said:


> In Europe, it's easier to imagine what a more sustainable system of food production would look like with livestock than without them. Beef farming would be reduced to a level much closer to that needed to complement sustainable crop rotation on prime arable land. Sheep farming makes sense on marginal land that isn't much use for anything else (hill farms, marshland etc.). Small scale pig farming could be integrated into market gardens, orchards and small holdings. Mass poultry farming would make less sense, but chickens would be more common in people's allotments and kitchen gardens.
> 
> Less meat would probably be produced than is now the case, but it seems to make sense to integrate livestock into food production in this sort of climate in terms of maintaining soil fertility, and minimising energy inputs and the use of petrochemicals.


Yep, in other words, mostly going back to good practices from the past. Pig farming could be located at the edges of cities, the pigs eating our food waste.


----------



## gentlegreen (Jul 31, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Any chance of a quick summary?


Stacked floors Of LED lighting - incident solar radiation 1KW psm, solar panels very inefficient as are LEDs - so the skyscraper would need an acre of solar panels.
Transport costs aren't THAT expensive ...

The only schemes in operation are growing insanely expensive salad for the wealthy.


----------



## Spymaster (Jul 31, 2017)

A380 said:


> As an aside:  Why do people call vegetables 'veggies'?
> 
> It's almost as anoying as people who call their dogs 'fur babies ' on FB.
> 
> Veggies is an acceptable short form for vegetarian, but surly not for vegetables?


Veggies are vegetables for under 7 year olds.


----------



## gentlegreen (Jul 31, 2017)

Apparently vegetarians are called vegos in Australia.
ve-ge-t-a-b-les is a lot of syllables and glottal stops ...

I believe "meat" used to mean "food" ...

"meat and two veg" implies veggies other than spuds as more of a garnish ...



I must be eating 5 times that every evening ...


----------



## UnderAnOpenSky (Jul 31, 2017)

AnnaKarpik said:


> Thing is, even assuming that this pasture isn't going to wash away into a river as soon as you start digging it, you won't keep getting ten times the food for very long unless you throw in artificial fertilisers. Less meat = better-cared for natural environment seems less and less obvious the more I think about it.



That's clearly not true. You can get high yields in an organic system. It is more labour intensive but by practicing crop rotation and using green fertilisers it's perfectly possible. I know a little of what I speak as my other half farms and I do the odd days work there.


----------



## UnderAnOpenSky (Jul 31, 2017)

Of course meat can be raised in an sustainable and ethical fashion. It's just most of us couldn't afford to consume the quantity of it that we currently do.


----------



## NoXion (Jul 31, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Yep, in other words, mostly going back to good practices from the past. Pig farming could be located at the edges of cities, the pigs eating our food waste.


 Maybe we could bring back serfdom and trials for witchcraft too. I'm not convinced that the dilemma between current agricultural practice and going backwards to rural idiocy is a real one.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jul 31, 2017)

NoXion said:


> Maybe we could bring back serfdom and trials for witchcraft too. I'm not convinced that the dilemma between current agricultural practice and going backwards to rural idiocy is a real one.


Good practices like mixed farming, I meant. And feeding pigs our food waste is a solid idea. If you rummage through the CIWF website, they have stuff on how it can be done safely - it's mostly banned at the moment.

That's a puzzling post, tbh. 'rural idiocy', or accumulated knowledge over thousands of years that has often been discarded in favour of industrialised practices?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 31, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Good practices like mixed farming, I meant. And feeding pigs our food waste is a solid idea.


but is it a good idea? should we be forcing pigs to eat among other things bacon and pork chops?


----------



## NoXion (Jul 31, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Good practices like mixed farming, I meant. And feeding pigs our food waste is a solid idea. If you rummage through the CIWF website, they have stuff on how it can be done safely - it's mostly banned at the moment.


 Well that in itself sounds like a better idea than just tossing it into a landfill, although I suspect that composting of some kind might be easier to achieve logistically. And if we're moving away from fossil fuels at the same time then collecting the methane gas thus produced would seem to be a good idea.


----------



## UnderAnOpenSky (Jul 31, 2017)

NoXion said:


> Maybe we could bring back serfdom and trials for witchcraft too. I'm not convinced that the dilemma between current agricultural practice and going backwards to rural idiocy is a real one.



If we run out of oil then that may not be a choice. What happened in Cuba is an example of how we may have to manage.


----------



## NoXion (Jul 31, 2017)

UnderAnOpenSky said:


> If we run out of oil then that may not be a choice. What happened in Cuba is an example of how we may have to manage.


 Funny, I was once told that the Saudis had enough oil to give them a century of profits. Which tallies with how that Peak Oil nonsense, which was popular among internet survivalists around the turn of the century, turned out not to mean that shopping for petrol now carries a significant risk that one would get their throat slit. The oil is not going to run out this century, although the quality of newly discovered deposits has certainly gone down the drain, as can be seen with the fact that fracking is now considered commercially viable (sort of - market fluctuations seem to be a risk for fracking operations). No, the real risk with oil and fossil fuels in general is their adding to the carbon content of the atmosphere, which is already on course to cause significant disruption to civilisation this century.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 31, 2017)

NoXion said:


> Funny, I was once told that the Saudis had enough oil to give them a century of profits. Which tallies with how that Peak Oil nonsense, which was popular among internet survivalists around the turn of the century, turned out not to mean that shopping for petrol now carries a significant risk that one would get their throat slit. The oil is not going to run out this century, although the quality of newly discovered deposits has certainly gone down the drain, as can be seen with the fact that fracking is considered commercially viable. No, the real risk with oil and fossil fuels in general is their adding to the carbon content of the atmosphere, which is already on course to cause significant disruption to civilisation this century.


less petrol and more plastic


----------



## mr steev (Jul 31, 2017)

gentlegreen said:


> Apparently vegetarians are called vegos in Australia.
> ve-ge-t-a-b-les is a lot of syllables and glottal stops ...
> 
> I believe "meat" used to mean "food" ...
> ...



WTF has have they done to that broccoli? It looks gross


----------



## gentlegreen (Jul 31, 2017)

mr steev said:


> WTF has have they done to that broccoli? It looks gross


indeed.
And the notion that that ever qualified as one fifth of one's daily requirement of veggies is bonkers - even if the rest of one's calories came from wholegrain and beans.


----------



## UnderAnOpenSky (Jul 31, 2017)

NoXion said:


> Funny, I was once told that the Saudis had enough oil to give them a century of profits. Which tallies with how that Peak Oil nonsense, which was popular among internet survivalists around the turn of the century, turned out not to mean that shopping for petrol now carries a significant risk that one would get their throat slit. The oil is not going to run out this century, although the quality of newly discovered deposits has certainly gone down the drain, as can be seen with the fact that fracking is considered commercially viable. No, the real risk with oil and fossil fuels in general is their adding to the carbon content of the atmosphere, which is already on course to cause significant disruption to civilisation this century.



Well quite. Fracking is only viable with high energy prices which comes from diminishing supply and increasing global demand. Vast amounts of energy are used every year to make fertiliser. And yes climate change and water shortages will also bring their own pressures.


----------



## Yuwipi Woman (Jul 31, 2017)

No matter if we continue to eat meat or not, we do need to better manage our soils.



> About three times the carbon currently in the atmosphere is stored in the Earth’s soil—up to 2.4 trillion metric tons, or roughly 240 times the amount of carbon dioxide emitted by burning fossil fuels annually.
> 
> Much of that is locked up in land used for agriculture. Cropland soil stores atmospheric carbon in organic matter such as manure, roots, fallen leaves and and other pieces of decomposing plants. It doesn’t remain there permanently. It takes decades for the organic matter in the soil to decompose, and the carbon stored within is eventually emitted back into the atmosphere as gas. Soil is responsible for 37 percent of global agricultural greenhouse gas emissions, according to the paper.
> 
> ...



Farmland Could Help Combat Climate Change


----------



## Yuwipi Woman (Jul 31, 2017)

> Great civilisations have fallen because they failed to prevent the degradation of the soils on which they were founded. The modern world could suffer the same fate.
> 
> This is according to Professor Mary Scholes and Dr Bob Scholes who have published a paper in the journal, _Science_, which describes how the productivity of many lands has been dramatically reduced as a result of soil erosion, accumulation of salinity, and nutrient depletion.
> 
> ...



Civilizations rise and fall on the quality of their soil

Sorry about the large cut and pastes.  Soil use and fertility, by chance, is what I chose as a reading topic this summer.


----------



## twentythreedom (Jul 31, 2017)

What 'on earth' are you on about?


----------



## Yuwipi Woman (Jul 31, 2017)

twentythreedom said:


> What 'on earth' are you on about?



Just going with the 'organic' flow of the thread.


----------



## NoXion (Jul 31, 2017)

twentythreedom said:


> What 'on earth' are you on about?


 Isn't it obvious? I don't think that modern civilisation will necessarily share the same fate as those far more agrarian and more technologically and organisationally limited societies that came before, but it's hardly crazy considering that we still grow almost all of our food outside in the dirt.


----------



## twentythreedom (Jul 31, 2017)

NoXion said:


> Isn't it obvious? I don't think that modern civilisation will necessarily share the same fate as those far more agrarian and more technologically and organisationally limited societies that came before, but it's hardly crazy considering that we still grow almost all of our food outside in the dirt.


Apologies. It was a bad attempt at a pun. 'on earth' ie YW saying about studying soil.

The best jokes are the ones you have to explain

I'm here all week btw 

Crap punning


----------



## Yuwipi Woman (Jul 31, 2017)

twentythreedom said:


> Apologies. It was a bad attempt at a pun. 'on earth' ie YW saying about studying soil.
> 
> The best jokes are the ones you have to explain
> 
> ...



Perhaps people here only appreciate more earthy humor?


----------



## twentythreedom (Jul 31, 2017)

Yuwipi Woman said:


> Perhaps people here only appreciate more earthy humor?


Eat my dirt


----------



## Casually Red (Jul 31, 2017)

A380 said:


> As an aside:  Why do people call vegetables 'veggies'?
> 
> It's almost as anoying as people who call their dogs 'fur babies ' on FB.
> 
> Veggies is an acceptable short form for vegetarian, but surly not for vegetables?



I'm honestly not joking here. I even find it annoying when it's used to describe vegetarians . Like its " fun " or " wacky " or something . Forced hilarity at the the point of a parsnip is what it is . I think the words annoying no matter what the context .


----------



## mojo pixy (Jul 31, 2017)

I first heard _Veges _used to mean vegetables in NZ. I've always assumed it's just normal NZ and maybe aussie slang.


----------



## coley (Jul 31, 2017)

NoXion said:


> Yeah, the people who think that the future will involve veganism becoming mainstream are simply deluding themselves. I can easily see "traditional" meat reared in the conventional manner from live animals becoming more expensive, but that doesn't mean that people will become vegans out of some principled choice, but rather because economic conditions don't give them many options. In any case by that time I would expect that growing meat in vitro would have taken leaps and strides, which would thankfully mean that we wouldn't have gone backwards to the times when poor people could hardly afford meat at all. The development of in vitro meat would also enable vegans to enjoy meat, since it would never have been an entire living being. Assuming of course that veganism is based on ethical concerns rather than some weird quasi-religious objection to consuming animal protein.


Naw,don't fancy a steak, much less a one grown in a Petri dish


----------



## NoXion (Jul 31, 2017)

coley said:


> Naw,don't fancy a steak, much less a one grown in a Petri dish


Your loss. A good steak is the king of meats.


----------



## coley (Jul 31, 2017)

UnderAnOpenSky said:


> I think I'd dispute your language, but yeah, humans are creatures that of habit and unless you have a strong reason to do so, it's pretty hard to break. Taste and texture are heavily conditioned things.
> 
> For your arguments  I think there would be value in seperating the heavy marketing of processed foods (and I have a total weekness for fast food, despite know how awful it is on many levels) and people's eating habits. I think most of those billions are spent on eating their version of meat and dairy. Beans out of a tin are fantastic and I've just ordered a pressure cooker to take to the next level. And yet I'm working away for a week with no refrigerator and a single gas hob and my main meal is packet rice, tinned beans, veg and few slices of chorizo. I'm also aware that that modern veganism is the result of a privaliged food distribution network. Seasonality and locally grown is a bitch if you live in the UK. My GFs job/business is growing/sourcing organic veg. Imagine no food miles from outside the UK in winter? Lucky we do have this luxury, but boy do I get told of buying veg at this time of year
> 
> So yeah I'm seeing through the "program" but dispute conspiracy. Eating habits are hard things to break without feeling like you are missing our. Especially if you like food as much as me.



"I'm also aware that that modern veganism is the result of a privaliged food distribution network"

In some cases yes, for those who want a huge variety of choice to 'enable' their vegetarian/vegan lifestyle, but for those that regard food simply as 'fuel' everything you need to subsist can be grown and stored on a reasonably sized allotment, tetties with everything sort of diet


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jul 31, 2017)

coley said:


> "I'm also aware that that modern veganism is the result of a privaliged food distribution network"
> 
> In some cases yes, for those who want a huge variety of choice to 'enable' their vegetarian/vegan lifestyle, but for those that regard food simply as 'fuel' everything you need to subsist can be grown and stored on a reasonably sized allotment, tetties with everything sort of diet


As bees, I think it was, said earlier, for many people, food is one of life's enormous pleasures, and a huge and rich variety of cuisines have grown up around the world reflecting the pleasure people get from food and the effort they are prepared to go to in order to produce delicious flavours. I would rank culinary achievements beside art and music.

A monotonous diet of bland shit would of course be bearable, as would a life with no music, but it would be removing a pleasure, removing a source of joy, especially when sharing it with others. Cooking food for other people and seeing their pleasure at eating it is something that gives me a huge amount of pleasure.


----------



## coley (Jul 31, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Falafel is a great example of cheap food that is now being rebranded to be sold as much pricier food. I used to be fortunate that I worked by a place that did falafel wraps for £2.50. Was my lunch about twice a week. Now a few chains are springing up doing basically the same thing for five or six quid. Now _that's_ your marketing folk in action.



Cor, I'm going to open a FF franchise selling fresh bread (baked by me SiL)  and lentil soup made by wor lass, 
Just need a catchy hipster name for marketing purposes


----------



## Casually Red (Jul 31, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> As bees, I think it was, said earlier, for many people, food is one of life's enormous pleasures, and a huge and rich variety of cuisines have grown up around the world reflecting the pleasure people get from food and the effort they are prepared to go to in order to produce delicious flavours. I would rank culinary achievements beside art and music.
> 
> A monotonous diet of bland shit would of course be bearable, as would a life with no music, but it would be removing a pleasure, removing a source of joy, especially when sharing it with others. Cooking food for other people and seeing their pleasure at eating it is something that gives me a huge amount of pleasure.



No sense explaining this to him . His best mates are a gang of hedgehogs .


----------



## coley (Jul 31, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Ironically enough they've basically made it the same price as a meat equivalent. In the cheap place I used to get my lunch from, which was run by Turks, they also did meat wraps, but for about a pound more. If you're fortunate enough to have Turkish-run or similar places near you, you tend to get such things at the kind of price they think it should be, ie cheap.
> 
> Veggie alternatives becoming more mainstream may not mean them becoming cheaper. It can mean them becoming more expensive.



Same with the upcoming EV revolution, HTF can a car without an engine, drivetrain, exhaust and cooling system, etc etc,  cost considerably more than one with all those expensive bits? Off topic, sorry but it's all about capitalism raking in the dosh from every move the consumer makes!


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jul 31, 2017)

Casually Red said:


> No sense explaining this to him . His best mates are a gang of hedgehogs .


I've known people for whom eating is a chore, a couple of people I can think of, both of whom suffered from eating disorders at one point in their lives. They both said the same thing: Wouldn't it be great if we didn't have to eat? Just didn't have to bother with it. All I could say was 'no way!' Another, who lost her sense of taste and smell in a head injury, also found eating hard work, had to force herself to do it.


----------



## Casually Red (Jul 31, 2017)

coley said:


> Cor, I'm going to open a FF franchise selling fresh bread (baked by me SiL)  and lentil soup made by wor lass,
> Just need a catchy hipster name for marketing purposes



"The old git"


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jul 31, 2017)

coley said:


> Cor, I'm going to open a FF franchise selling fresh bread (baked by me SiL)  and lentil soup made by wor lass,
> Just need a catchy hipster name for marketing purposes


If she can make daal rather than soup, you might be in business. A big bowl of rice and daal with a bit of nice bread to mop it up with is quite often exactly what I want.


----------



## coley (Jul 31, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> This is the thing with quite a lot of cuisines. One of my favourite Spanish dishes is chickpea stew. It's rich and gorgeous... and cooked with a ham bone to add flavour.


Broth, a staple from my childhood, it was fairly common for the hambone used in the first 'boiling' to be given to a hard up neighbour.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jul 31, 2017)

coley said:


> Broth, a staple from my childhood, it was fairly common for the hambone used in the first 'boiling' to be given to a hard up neighbour.


For want of a better phrase, it's peasant food, something there is still a tradition for in places like Spain and France, but not so much here any more. Rationing is partly to blame - it damaged our cooking culture.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jul 31, 2017)

NoXion said:


> Yeah, the people who think that the future will involve veganism becoming mainstream are simply deluding themselves. I can easily see "traditional" meat reared in the conventional manner from live animals becoming more expensive, but that doesn't mean that people will become vegans out of some principled choice, but rather because economic conditions don't give them many options.


lol @ delusional vegans. Well as Mark Twain is reported to have said "it is never wrong to do the right thing", and I completely agree with that quote. Even if it is seemingly an impossibly lofty ideal, the "right thing" is still imo something worth working towards and striving for and not delusional at all. It may not happen in my lifetime, however I have seen enough progress in the last 30 years to be optimistic. It is already on the verge of becoming mainstream as we speak, and the fact that this thread is so well attended is an indication that there's something going on. Most of the metrics that I've seen indicate a steady increase in numbers and a lot of interest, so I disagree with the idea that those people are deluding themselves.



NoXion said:


> In any case by that time I would expect that growing meat in vitro would have taken leaps and strides, which would thankfully mean that we wouldn't have gone backwards to the times when poor people could hardly afford meat at all. The development of in vitro meat would also enable vegans to enjoy meat, since it would never have been an entire living being. Assuming of course that veganism is based on ethical concerns rather than some weird quasi-religious objection to consuming animal protein.


I think this is more wishful thinking than reality tbh, and it appears to be something that meateaters assume that vegans would be ok with. In vitro "meat" is not the kind of frankenstien "food" that I find in any way appealing. I'm quite happy with the incredible variety of plant foods that are available, I don't have any sort of desperate craving for cultured meat, and consider it to be a bit of a waste of time.


----------



## ManchesterBeth (Jul 31, 2017)

veggie sausages are just awful tho innit.

Plus I shudder to think about veggie sujuk.


----------



## coley (Jul 31, 2017)

gentlegreen said:


> My (currently vegan) armpits smell of spices - probably the garlic in my stir-fry, or whatever's in the plum sauce I'm indulging in at the moment.



When I worked 'doon the pit' me marras  were always complaining  about my garlic flavoured sweatiness, though I was expected to accept their noxious burger/kebab flavoured farts without complaint


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jul 31, 2017)

I like cauldron lincolnshire sausages. Also quite like quorn. My cat used to go mad for quorn. 

Linda Mac stuff is awful crap, though.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jul 31, 2017)

Sphinxminx said:


> Nothing about the socio economic effects of the cessation of meat and dairy farming on the last few  pages I read. Vegans will understandably and genuinely  for them say it's a moral thing - the end justifies the means ( hello Marxist dialectic - nothing wrong with that but that is what it is).


All major changes have socio economic effects, does that mean that we shouldn't change anything? I understand that change is scary for many people and a lot of folks like the apparent (and perhaps illusionary) feeling of comfort and security in things staying the same as they always have been, "just like in the good old days". imo the reality is that change is inevitable and I think that we'd be better off if we learned how to adapt and embrace change rather than run away from it and try to cling on to old and outdated practices because we're frightened of the unknown.



Sphinxminx said:


> Any experience of farming? Maybe some and fair do's in that case.


tbh, I'm not sure how relevant it is that consumers have experience of farming. I don't think it's necessary to be a farmer to recognise that much of our current food is produced using methods that are damaging and not sustainable. A gradual move away from livestock and poultry farming would help to at least slow down and maybe even reverse the damage that has already been done.



Sphinxminx said:


> I do eat meat  although a lot less than I was brought up on and do take action and make choices against factory farming. I was brought up on farms and live in a rural farming community. so what's the plan for moving away from a meat based diet (which I actually think is happeming anyway so maybe just slow transition).


Well, imo the best action against factory farming is to not buy the products that come from such a system. Vegans already have that covered. A tiny minority of meat eaters (based on sales) are prepared to pay the extra for more "humane" meat however the majority of meateaters appear to not really give a shit as long as they get their meat at a reasonable price. Ignorance is bliss I suppose. You might have missed the suggestion made in this thread that vegans should stop aiming for the "impossible" meat free future and instead form some sort of coalition with the grass-fed "humane slaughter" folk (a bit like the Tory/DUP coalition, lol). The belief being that this union would stand a better chance of reducing the suffering of livestock when compared to the seemingly unrealistic aims of vegans.  I personally don't believe that to be a workable plan, vegans have enough of a challenge reaching agreement amongst themselves so I can't see them ever joining with folk who still believe that it's not morally wrong to kill and eat animals, one of the core tenets that nearly all vegans agree on.



Sphinxminx said:


> Have my own chickens so no issues there. I'd miss the cattle munching away happily ( as they do) and the sheep dotting the hillsides. No meat/ milk no moo cows. Don't fancy the idea of massive prairies of GM cereals, the livestock going - along with hedgerows, coppices and associated biodiversity . Nicotinoids and no bees anyone? Good luck with fresh fruit and veg then folks.


I'm not sure that's an accurate picture you're painting there of what would happen if people stopped eating meat. Less biodiversity? Really? That's not my understanding at all, in fact it is our current meat and dairy gluttony that is having an enormous environmental impact and destruction of habitats in order to satisfy the insatiable demand.


----------



## coley (Jul 31, 2017)

NoXion said:


> I expect any attempt to market insects directly as a foodstuff will meet a lot of consumer resistance. I think it's more likely that insects will be used as fodder for livestock.


Been feeding me tribe of hedgehogs on dried mealworms, just noticed they are imported from China! sign of things to come?


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jul 31, 2017)

coley said:


> "Wrongdoers" "bonecrushers" your PoV comes  across as balanced and reasonable, until you let the auld hyperbole creep in, just a thought.


Yeah maybe, but it's just a bit of fun. I'm not sure what you've seen in this thread prior to your brief concentrated burst of posting however in the context of this thread and the interventions on other threads wherever this topic is raised, I think my choice of words is quite mild and harmless, especially given that vegans are more often than not on the receiving end of ridicule and mockery. 

I'm not expecting every to like my choice of words of my even my style of posting, but I'm quite happy with it and do believe it to be logical, balanced and reasonable. Some people will of course disagree with that, and I don't have a problem with that at all, you can't please everyone, and people who find my content objectionable are not being forced to read or engage.


----------



## coley (Jul 31, 2017)

gentlegreen said:


> I wonder how this would work.
> 
> It's all about ghost acreages.
> 
> ...


In a rational/logical world,  us, expired humans


----------



## ManchesterBeth (Jul 31, 2017)

also how can you not like feta, thats criminal.

i could do vegetarian but vegan is just nah.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jul 31, 2017)

dialectician said:


> also how can you not like feta, thats criminal.
> 
> i could do vegetarian but vegan is just nah.


I do love cheese in all its wonderful forms. If I had to choose between cheese and meat, I might have to plump for the cheese, I think.

To those who recoil at the idea of eating cow 'secretions', I present a slice of aged gouda. Milk can be turned into culinary delights.


----------



## coley (Jul 31, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> It's interesting to me how many people here seem to assume that giving up meat would automatically lead to better environmental practices. The current most destructive practices are driven first and foremost by the destructive forces of capitalism. These are what need tackling and overthrowing. For me, a lot of the arguments are aimed at the wrong targets.



Fair point, but it's inescapable that huge acerages of rainforest are being destroyed in the rush to provide more land for cattle grazing or arable production to provide grain for animal feed stuffs.
Not a problem, if your unconvinced not bothered RE; AGW.


----------



## coley (Jul 31, 2017)

Yuwipi Woman said:


> In the West, there is some evidence that meat consumption is going down, from its freakishly high levels. Overall, though world-wide meat consumption is going up. It's getting cheap enough that every larger numbers of people can afford it. I do wonder if the planet can afford it.
> 
> "The US alone has 93 million cattle"
> Currently being pursued by Trumps 'illegal voters commission'


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jul 31, 2017)

coley said:


> Fair point, but it's inescapable that huge acerages of rainforest are being destroyed in the rush to provide more land for cattle grazing or arable production to provide grain for animal feed stuffs.
> Not a problem, if your unconvinced not bothered RE; AGW.


Yes, not just rainforests. Something like a third of all farmland in Argentina is now turned over to soya to feed to cattle that are kept in sheds all their lives. It's perverse. But its perversity is a product of capitalist forces: better to destroy the soil and viability over 50 years and produce a good return than to produce less, or the same but with greater labour costs, indefinitely. Capital doesn't care about the long term. Its logic allows it, indeed compels it, to destroy and move on. Except that one day there will be nowhere to move on to.

Those same destructive forces would be in operation in a meat-free world. Seitan, anyone? That takes a lot of energy to produce. It's not not eating meat on its own that changes the systems, it's a concern for conservation and sustainability. 

It saddens me somewhat when various people on this thread disallow the possibility of joining forces with non-vegans who want to change these systems. Surely we should be on the same side in this, change would be far more easily achieved if we were.


----------



## Corax (Jul 31, 2017)

I keep skim reading the thread title as "Do Angry Vegans Turn You On?" and it conjures some really quite disturbing imagery...


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jul 31, 2017)

coley said:


> Fair point, but it's inescapable that huge acerages of rainforest are being destroyed in the rush to provide more land for cattle grazing or arable production to provide grain for animal feed stuffs.
> Not a problem, if your unconvinced not bothered RE; AGW.


I don't know how it would be possible for there not to be some sort of improvement or at very least a lessening of the massively negative environmental impact associated with livestock and poultry farming that would result from a gradual reduction in the consumption of meat and chicken.


----------



## coley (Jul 31, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Yep, in other words, mostly going back to good practices from the past. Pig farming could be located at the edges of cities, the pigs eating our food waste.


Pigs eating our food waste!!


NoXion said:


> Maybe we could bring back serfdom and trials for witchcraft too. I'm not convinced that the dilemma between current agricultural practice and going backwards to rural idiocy is a real one.



"Rural idiocy"?   have you any idea of how much perfectly good food is sent to landfill every day? Feeding it to pigs alongside other food waste is a perfectly good idea.


----------



## coley (Aug 1, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> but is it a good idea? should we be forcing pigs to eat among other things bacon and pork chops?


They wouldn't mind one bit


----------



## Sphinxminx (Aug 1, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> All major changes have socio economic effects, does that mean that we shouldn't change anything? I understand that change is scary for many people and a lot of folks like the apparent (and perhaps illusionary) feeling of comfort and security in things staying the same as they always have been, "just like in the good old days". imo the reality is that change is inevitable and I think that we'd be better off if we learned how to adapt and embrace change rather than run away from it and try to cling on to old and outdated practices because we're frightened of the unknown.
> 
> tbh, I'm not sure how relevant it is that consumers have experience of farming. I don't think it's necessary to be a farmer to recognise that much of our current food is produced using methods that are damaging and not sustainable. A gradual move away from livestock and poultry farming would help to at least slow down and maybe even reverse the damage that has already been done.
> 
> ...



I'm not saying don't change nor that only farmers can comment. There isn't much on the thread about viable alternatives or the plan to get there (which is similar to what you say).  So the classic British small field and hedgerows ( not factory or large scale agri) are destruction of habitats? I don't think so (as you say). It's the loss of hedgerows and coppices that is doing that as well as drainage of wetlands and the huge depletion of riverine woodland which has happened over the last couple of centuries.  I am talking about the UK countryside as that's what I know about. Not convinced by the majority of arguments on this thread from what come across as oh so self righteous vegans, which are not at all persuasive. What I do think is that just being harangued and told off by some of the posts on this thread is not an effective way to change behaviours. Going back to a previous post I don't agree it's a bit of fun or that people don't have to engage so it's ok. You could say that about any form of inappropriate language or abuse - doesn't make it ok. Also to say it's fair as that's what vegans usually get is not a good reason to reflect negative behaviours or then everyone just ends up having a slanging match.


----------



## coley (Aug 1, 2017)

NoXion said:


> Funny, I was once told that the Saudis had enough oil to give them a century of profits. Which tallies with how that Peak Oil nonsense, which was popular among internet survivalists around the turn of the century, turned out not to mean that shopping for petrol now carries a significant risk that one would get their throat slit. The oil is not going to run out this century, although the quality of newly discovered deposits has certainly gone down the drain, as can be seen with the fact that fracking is now considered commercially viable (sort of - market fluctuations seem to be a risk for fracking operations). No, the real risk with oil and fossil fuels in general is their adding to the carbon content of the atmosphere, which is already on course to cause significant disruption to civilisation this century.


Coals dead, oils next, the CEO of Shell is in the market for an EV(though doubt he has a Nissan Leaf in mind)


----------



## coley (Aug 1, 2017)

NoXion said:


> Funny, I was once told that the Saudis had enough oil to give them a century of profits. Which tallies with how that Peak Oil nonsense, which was popular among internet survivalists around the turn of the century, turned out not to mean that shopping for petrol now carries a significant risk that one would get their throat slit. The oil is not going to run out this century, although the quality of newly discovered deposits has certainly gone down the drain, as can be seen with the fact that fracking is now considered commercially viable (sort of - market fluctuations seem to be a risk for fracking operations). No, the real risk with oil and fossil fuels in general is their adding to the carbon content of the atmosphere, which is already on course to cause significant disruption to civilisation this century.



"The stone age didn't end because of a shortage of stones".....@the Saudi oil minister, can't be bothered to link his name.


----------



## coley (Aug 1, 2017)

Yuwipi Woman said:


> No matter if we continue to eat meat or not, we do need to better manage our soils.
> 
> 
> 
> Farmland Could Help Combat Climate Change


Zero/minimal till is a big step in the right direction.


----------



## coley (Aug 1, 2017)

NoXion said:


> Your loss. A good steak is the king of meats.



No problem, been there, done that, rare, very rare used to be my preference, now? A bowl of lentil soup and a wedge of home baked bread. Meat? Let those that need it crack on, just leave the beer and whisky producers alone


----------



## Sphinxminx (Aug 1, 2017)

To answer the original question and subject of this thread- yes.


----------



## coley (Aug 1, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I like cauldron lincolnshire sausages. Also quite like quorn. My cat used to go mad for quorn.
> 
> Linda Mac stuff is awful crap, though.



Horses for courses, esp so if you a liking a a bit of 'beef'


----------



## Casually Red (Aug 1, 2017)

coley said:


> Been feeding me tribe of hedgehogs on dried mealworms, just noticed they are imported from China! sign of things to come?



Why do you have to get your hedgehogs from china ?


----------



## Casually Red (Aug 1, 2017)

coley said:


> Fair point, but it's inescapable that huge acerages of rainforest are being destroyed in the rush to provide more land for cattle grazing or arable production to provide grain for animal feed stuffs.
> Not a problem, if your unconvinced not bothered RE; AGW.



Actually a massive problem these days is the planting of soy and the like for use in bio fuels .


----------



## Casually Red (Aug 1, 2017)

coley said:


> "The stone age didn't end because of a shortage of stones".....@the Saudi oil minister, can't be bothered to link his name.



It didn't end in Saudi at all


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Aug 1, 2017)

Earlier this year I attended a vigil at Tulip slaughterhouse in Manchester, which gasses pigs before slitting their throats. This slaughterhouse is compliant with the UK's animal welfare legislation and is 'RSPCA-assured higher welfare'.

I already knew before attending that I was unequivocally opposed to this pointless killing of intelligent, sensitive creatures merely for the fleeting gustatory pleasure of consumers, but the experience reaffirmed this with a visceral intensity and sense of urgency that I was not prepared for.

Seeing these individuals through the vents on the sides of the truck was a deeply harrowing experience. They looked so innocent, so vulnerable and so full of sadness and fear. I looked directly into the eyes of one of the pigs and he stared helplessly back. I didn't see an 'animal': I saw another individual just like me. Somebody who no more chose to be a pig than I chose to be human. An individual who felt emotions just like I do and wanted to be free from pain and suffering just like I do. Why should his basic interests be ignored or discounted simply because of factors over which he has no control over? What tyrannous thinking to believe so.



I was overwhelmed by the injustice I was witnessing. It was particularly horrible knowing the fate that was about to befall these individuals and being powerless to stop it. Every week on my facebook newsfeed I see live feed from these demos of pigs arriving at the slaughterhouses with lesions, tumours, cuts, bruises, prolapses, foaming at the mouth from overheating and other forms of horrific suffering.

That was not even the worst bit. Round the back of the slaughterhouse you could hear the sound of the pigs shrieking and screaming when they were forced into the gas chambers. It was chilling. That sound will be etched into my memory forever:



I ask: how can this be justified? How dare we treat our fellow earthlings with such callousness and brutality? How dare we be indifferent to their plight? How dare we be complicit in this massacre and think that our palate preferences and convenience negate any moral consideration of the agony that animals must endure? It's absolutely outrageous.

There are lots of problems with the world and the solutions to them are often very complex. But the solution to the suffering of "food" animals is astonishingly simple: boycott these products, and encourage as many people as possible to boycott them. If there is no demand there are no factory farms and no slaughterhouses. In the UK alone it would spare about 1 billion land animals a year being put through this ordeal.

I am angry that easily avoidable pain, suffering and oppression persists on such a huge scale. Just as I am angry about global economic inequality, racism and gender violence. If you are not angry about these things then I suggest you are not paying enough attention.

I am an angry vegan. Sue me.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 1, 2017)

Sphinxminx said:


> I'm not saying don't change nor that only farmers can comment. There isn't much on the thread about viable alternatives or the plan to get there (which is similar to what you say).  So the classic British small field and hedgerows ( not factory or large scale agri) are destruction of habitats? I don't think so (as you say). It's the loss of hedgerows and coppices that is doing that as well as drainage of wetlands and the huge depletion of riverine woodland which has happened over the last couple of centuries.  I am talking about the UK as that's what I know about.


??? I'm not sure what you're saying there tbh. Viable alternatives to what? Why would a reduction in the consumption of meat and poultry lead to the loss of hedgerows and coppices etc? If that's already happening with the current high meat and dairy consumption why would it increase if less was consumed? 



Sphinxminx said:


> Not convinced by the majority of arguments on this thread from what come across as oh so self righteous vegans, which are not at all persuasive. What I do think is that just being harangued and told off by some of the posts on this thread is not an effective way to change behaviours.


??? Again that paragraph wasn't very clear but I think I get the giste. Some people already have their minds made up and are digging their heels in even in the face of fairly compelling arguments. People quite often don't like change. As Shopenheur said "all truth passes through three stages. First it is ridiculed. Second it is violently opposed. Third it is accepted as being self evident". The people who already have their minds made up are quite often hostile to the idea and are not likely to change their behaviours anyway, and may already be a lost cause. There are growing numbers of people who are willing to look at the available evidence and make up their own minds, as can be seen from the increasing interest in the subject (in the west at least). I don't see it as my job to persuade reluctant individuals to convert. Not sure who you believe has been "harangued" and told off, but anyway if you're happy with what you're doing there's no reason for you to change.


----------



## coley (Aug 1, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I've known people for whom eating is a chore, a couple of people I can think of, both of whom suffered from eating disorders at one point in their lives. They both said the same thing: Wouldn't it be great if we didn't have to eat? Just didn't have to bother with it. All I could say was 'no way!' Another, who lost her sense of taste and smell in a head injury, also found eating hard work, had to force herself to do it.



It is a chore to some, I can think of half a dozen things I'd rather be doing than preparing food, but that's me, you like cooking? Crack on, me I'll be walking the dogs on the beach, with an apple and a handful of nuts in me 'poachers pocket'
Afor bed, a yarking glass of nondescript white wine and a lump of blue cheese.
In the morn? A banana and a slice of toast, midday meal, usually cereal, oats or shredded wheat or a sandwich.
Main meal? Whatever wor lass serves up, this evening? Aldis vegetarian spring rolls with new tetties and salad.
Like I've said, food is fuel, the foodie affectation of recent years? If it floats yer boat, crack on.


----------



## coley (Aug 1, 2017)

Casually Red said:


> Why do you have to get your hedgehogs from china ?


Just going with the current flow bonnie lad


----------



## NoXion (Aug 1, 2017)

Nope, fuck doing this shit on a smartphone.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 1, 2017)

Jeff Robinson said:


> Earlier this year I attended a vigil at Tulip slaughterhouse in Manchester, which gasses pigs before slitting their throats. This slaughterhouse is compliant with the UK's animal welfare legislation and is 'RSPCA-assured higher welfare'.
> 
> I already knew before attending that I was unequivocally opposed to this pointless killing of intelligent, sensitive creatures merely for the fleeting gustatory pleasure of consumers, but the experience reaffirmed this with a visceral intensity and sense of urgency that I was not prepared for.
> 
> ...



Pigs are lesser beings and therefore apparently shouldn't expect the same level of care and respect that us wonderful humans deserve. We can do whatever we want with them because we be top of the food chain. 

Oh yeah...and their meat tastes really sweet, and that's a good justification.


----------



## coley (Aug 1, 2017)

Casually Red said:


> Actually a massive problem these days is the planting of soy and the like for use in bio fuels .


Soy is usually for animal and/or human consumption, mebbes your thinking of corn being used for ethanol production?


----------



## coley (Aug 1, 2017)

Casually Red said:


> It didn't end in Saudi at all



Clever, you still occasionally surprise me, chip off the auld block


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 1, 2017)

NoXion said:


> A slight rise in the number of folks professing veganism is not the same thing as it becoming mainstream. Nobody I know in real life as opposed to Urban is vegetarian, let alone vegan. Chicken shops and similar establishments continue to do brisk business in my town.


I believe it's a bit more than "slight". I suppose one can quibble over what constitutes "mainstream", but I don't think supermarkets would bother selling vegan products to all those non existent customers, yet they all now do. 30 years ago I would have had to go to specialist independent wholefood stores. But now they're all at it. Tescos, Sainsbury's, Asda, Morrisons, Waitrose, M&S. I don't think they'd be doing that for only a "slight" rise. Supply follows demand.

_"Veganism no longer feels like a niche choice: plant-based living is becoming more visible. You can see this growth on social media, but also on the high street too, with more shops and restaurant catering to a growing vegan audience. Here’s our pick of 10 key stats that prove veganism is only set to get bigger."
_
10 Inspiring Stats That Prove Veganism Is Going Mainstream

Your anecdote that nobody you know is even vegetarian isn't that useful tbh. Sample size issues. The growth in interest and uptake is there regardless of whether you can see it or not. China has almost as many vegetarians as the whole of the UK population, and that's not seen as a particularly vegetarian friendly country.


----------



## NoXion (Aug 1, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> I believe it's a bit more than "slight". I suppose one can quibble over what constitutes "mainstream", but I don't think supermarkets would be bother selling vegan products to all those non existent customers, yet they all now do. 30 years ago I would have had to go to specialist independent wholefood stores. But now they're all at it. Tescos, Sainsbury's, Asda, Morrisons, Waitrose, M&S. I don't think they'd be doing that for only a "slight" rise. Supply follows demand.
> 
> _"Veganism no longer feels like a niche choice: plant-based living is becoming more visible. You can see this growth on social media, but also on the high street too, with more shops and restaurant catering to a growing vegan audience. Here’s our pick of 10 key stats that prove veganism is only set to get bigger."
> _
> ...


 Supermarkets also cater to those following Halal. Doesn't mean Halal is mainstream in the UK.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 1, 2017)

NoXion said:


> Supermarkets also cater to those following Halal. Doesn't mean Halal is mainstream in the UK.


What is your definition of mainstream?


----------



## Casually Red (Aug 1, 2017)

Corax said:


> I keep skim reading the thread title as "Do Angry Vegans Turn You On?" and it conjures some really quite disturbing imagery...



Feel free to add this to your mental bank ..not sure if it counts as NSFW but it's definitely as disturbing as it is offensive .


----------



## NoXion (Aug 1, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> What is your definition of mainstream?


Most people do it.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 1, 2017)

NoXion said:


> Most people do it.


Well clearly most people don't "do it", but then that is not the definition that I would use. 
Easily accessible and visible to a large chunk of the population. More people know about it and people have easy access to vegan food products, and the number of establishments offering vegan products and the supermarket shelf space is growing from being almost non existent when I started.


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Aug 1, 2017)

The International vegan flag has launched

Will make you angry fuckers easier to spot I guess


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 1, 2017)

Jeff Robinson said:


> Earlier this year I attended a vigil at Tulip slaughterhouse in Manchester, which gasses pigs before slitting their throats. This slaughterhouse is compliant with the UK's animal welfare legislation and is 'RSPCA-assured higher welfare'.
> 
> I already knew before attending that I was unequivocally opposed to this pointless killing of intelligent, sensitive creatures merely for the fleeting gustatory pleasure of consumers, but the experience reaffirmed this with a visceral intensity and sense of urgency that I was not prepared for.
> 
> ...



Thanks for posting that. It is chilling. And no it's not acceptable.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 1, 2017)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> The International vegan flag has launched
> 
> Will make you angry fuckers easier to spot I guess


Was going to post about that yesterday but was busy. Some folks have complained about it but I agree with ModVegan's summary...


----------



## cupid_stunt (Aug 1, 2017)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> The International vegan flag has launched
> 
> Will make you angry fuckers easier to spot I guess



What a load of bullshit.


----------



## OzT (Aug 1, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> but is it a good idea? should we be forcing pigs to eat among other things bacon and pork chops?


 
Well back home pigs, along with foxes and dogs, kills an average of between 5-10% of the stock on a station, specially lambs. Pigs have no probelm eating meat, as they're also know to scavange on their own dead, so I don't think that is a problem.

I believe it was the making herbivours eat feed containing meat, specially brain matter, that caused the BSE problem

ps this was in direct reply to the above quoted post, not adding or subtraction to the general debate


----------



## Sphinxminx (Aug 1, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> ??? I'm not sure what you're saying there tbh. Viable alternatives to what? Why would a reduction in the consumption of meat and poultry lead to the loss of hedgerows and coppices etc? If that's already happening with the current high meat and dairy consumption why would it increase if less was consumed?
> 
> 
> ??? Again that paragraph wasn't very clear but I think I get the giste. Some people already have their minds made up and are digging their heels in even in the face of fairly compelling arguments. People quite often don't like change. As Shopenheur said "all truth passes through three stages. First it is ridiculed. Second it is violently opposed. Third it is accepted as being self evident". The people who already have their minds made up are quite often hostile to the idea and are not likely to change their behaviours anyway, and may already be a lost cause. There are growing numbers of people who are willing to look at the available evidence and make up their own minds, as can be seen from the increasing interest in the subject (in the west at least). I don't see it as my job to persuade reluctant individuals to convert. Not sure who you believe has been "harangued" and told off, but anyway if you're happy with what you're doing there's no reason for you to change.[/





PaoloSanchez said:


> ??? I'm not sure what you're saying there tbh. Viable alternatives to what? Why would a reduction in the consumption of meat and poultry lead to the loss of hedgerows and coppices etc? If that's already happening with the current high meat and dairy consumption why would it increase if less was consumed?
> 
> 
> ??? Again that paragraph wasn't very clear but I think I get the giste. Some people already have their minds made up and are digging their heels in even in the face of fairly compelling arguments. People quite often don't like change. As Shopenheur said "all truth passes through three stages. First it is ridiculed. Second it is violently opposed. Third it is accepted as being self evident". The people who already have their minds made up are quite often hostile to the idea and are not likely to change their behaviours anyway, and may already be a lost cause. There are growing numbers of people who are willing to look at the available evidence and make up their own minds, as can be seen from the increasing interest in the subject (in the west at least). I don't see it as my job to persuade reluctant individuals to convert. Not sure who you believe has been "harangued" and told off, but anyway if you're happy with what you're doing there's no reason for you to change.


Hum. Looks like you are trying quite hard to not follow the points I am making, several of which echo some of your own views but you don't seem to want to recognise that. Not sure why although citing Schopenhauer at this time of the morning can't be good for anyone ( light hearted remark). BTW familiar with the concept of dialectic ta.You might find his analysis of free will and determinism interesting as you last remark could be said to reflect this although I reckon that his argument is good but flawed. Viable alternative to current farming methods, factory farming etc which are achievable with some sort of cohesive strategy to move towards less meat and poultry consumption is what I meant. Seems to me you are eliding and obfuscating the points I'm making so as to dismiss them. My fear is reduction of old fashioned small pasture farming would have the effect I'm talking about. Just a simple and specific point really as the alternatives could affect this type of landscape . The one I live in and try to preserve mixed wildlife friendly habitat. I agree about increasing awareness etc and have myself adapted my diet over time to include less meat and dairy. The video post of the judging you person mentioned above is a good eg of haranguing and telling off and the terminology in some of the posts above as already mentioned by several others.


----------



## Sphinxminx (Aug 1, 2017)

Jeff Robinson said:


> Earlier this year I attended a vigil at Tulip slaughterhouse in Manchester, which gasses pigs before slitting their throats. This slaughterhouse is compliant with the UK's animal welfare legislation and is 'RSPCA-assured higher welfare'.
> 
> I already knew before attending that I was unequivocally opposed to this pointless killing of intelligent, sensitive creatures merely for the fleeting gustatory pleasure of consumers, but the experience reaffirmed this with a visceral intensity and sense of urgency that I was not prepared for.
> 
> ...



No. I respect you and your passion and commitment Your post doesn't have the effect a lot of the other pro vegan ones on this thread have , it doesn't make me turn against going vegan, it makes me think.


----------



## ddraig (Aug 1, 2017)




----------



## OzT (Aug 1, 2017)

I liked the above cartoon, elements of truth in it. Though no doubt there's the other picture with a vegan lambasting others about their eating habits and preching their morals. Great thing about these type of debates, makes for an interesting read as neither side will really sway the other, for the majority,  imho


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 1, 2017)

Sphinxminx said:


> Hum. Looks like you are trying quite hard to not follow the points I am making, several of which echo some of your own views but you don't seem to want to recognise that.


tbh, I found it quite hard to understand the points you were trying to make and had to read it several times over. Not trying to be funny but it might be worth at least minimal proof reading before you post. Maybe it's because you are posting on a phone, I don't know but your post barely made sense to me so it wouldn't be surprising if I misinterpreted what you were trying to say.



Sphinxminx said:


> Not sure why although citing Schopenhauer at this time of the morning can't be good for anyone ( light hearted remark). BTW familiar with the concept of dialectic ta.You might find his analysis of free will and determinism interesting as you last remark could be said to reflect this although I reckon that his argument is good but flawed.


Sorry but I'm finding your writing style quite hard to read. Anyway, it was late last night when I posted it. There probably isn't a "perfect quote" that suits every situation, but the Schopenhauer one seems appropriate in this thread and I'm happy with it.



Sphinxminx said:


> Viable alternative to current farming methods, factory farming etc which are achievable with some sort of cohesive strategy to move towards less meat and poultry consumption is what I meant. Seems to me you are eliding and obfuscating the points I'm making so as to dismiss them. My fear is reduction of old fashioned small pasture farming would have the effect I'm talking about. Just a simple and specific point really as the alternatives could affect this type of landscape . The one I live in and try to preserve mixed wildlife friendly habitat. I agree about increasing awareness etc and have myself adapted my diet over time to include less meat and dairy.


I don't believe I am obfuscating or dismissing your points, but whatever.
I'm not sure of the technicalities involved in preserving the landscape but what I don't get is the idea that somehow if more people stopped eating meat and poultry it would have a detrimental or some kind of catastrophic effect on the environment and biodiversity. That is counter intuitive to me and I would have thought that the opposite would be the case. Maybe the landscape might not look exactly like it does now, perhaps there might be more forested areas, I don't know I'm not an ecologist, but I can't see how the increase in vegans would lead to a decrease in biodiversity.



Sphinxminx said:


> The video post of the judging you person mentioned above is a good eg of haranguing and telling off and the terminology in some of the posts above as already mentioned by several others.


It's funny how one sided this is. Vegans have been taking a hammering of mockery and ridicule for the longest time as evidenced in this and other threads and out in the real world, and yet somehow meateaters don't see that at all but home in with laser precision on the "bad" vegans and cite them as the reason that they will continue to eat meat.  Talk about blinkered vision, lol. If you're that easily swayed by a single youtube video and the posting style of a single individual on a forum then I'm not sure that you were ever really up for it in the first place.


----------



## OzT (Aug 1, 2017)

Looks like bad vegans are the same as bad cyclists, as are bad motorists, bad whatever.

Quoting the Osmonds here, One bad apple don't spoil the whole bunch . . . .


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 1, 2017)

OzT said:


> Looks like bad vegans are the same as bad cyclists, as are bad motorists, bad whatever.
> 
> Quoting the Osmonds here, One bad apple don't spoil the whole bunch . . . .


Exactly...or bad BMW drivers, Volvo drivers, Range Rover drivers...etc

"I'm never going to drive a BMW because one cut me up on the motorway 3 years ago and I haven't forgotten it to this day..." 

Are people really that fickle?


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 1, 2017)

Definitely not going mainstream...


----------



## Sphinxminx (Aug 1, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> tbh, I found it quite hard to understand the points you were trying to make and had to read it several times over. Not trying to be funny but it might be worth at least minimal proof reading before you post. Maybe it's because you are posting on a phone, I don't know but your post barely made sense to me so it wouldn't be surprising if I misinterpreted what you were trying to say.
> 
> 
> Sorry but I'm finding your writing style quite hard to read. Anyway, it was late last night when I posted it. There probably isn't a "perfect quote" that suits every situation, but the Schopenhauer one seems appropriate in this thread and I'm happy with it.
> ...


Eerrm that's not what I'm saying at all. You asked for an eg and I gave you one. I haven't said oooh she's horrid cos she's criticising me so I'll keep eating meat. I've also remarked earlier in the thread that slagging off either side isn't much use. LOL at yr comment re lack of clarity and proof reading - hee hee given what I do. I'm not understanding what I'm not up for in the first place. I know from experience haranguing isn't a good way to influence people's behaviours. No idea why you don't understand what I'm saying. I am linking  several ideas and referring back to other earlier ones so maybe that's it. Don't know. Looks like we are never going to communicate effectively and that's just the way it is tbf.


----------



## NoXion (Aug 1, 2017)

Apparently professional athletes are now representative of the general population. Who knew.


----------



## mojo pixy (Aug 1, 2017)

I'm surprised money was wasted on a new design for a V-flag, since a perfectly appropriate one already exists elsewhere.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 1, 2017)

NoXion said:


> Apparently professional athletes are now representative of the general population. Who knew.


Hmmm...I wonder how many people actually said that? Precisely zero I believe, ain't that something. Ms Derbyshire is pretty damn mainstream though.

Full video here...



I have a personal anecdote related to this tv appearance which is fairly longish so feel free to switch channels. Our family appeared on mainstream tv quite a few years ago, and also had somebody from Kings College talking nonsense like the ginger lady on the Victoria Derbyshire show. I was a bit reluctant to appear because I was afraid that we would be portrayed as freaks and weirdos, but it was ok. A cameraman and the health correspondent came to our house and spent about 3 hours filming and interviewing which was eventually condensed to about 2 minutes of tv time aired about a week later with a section from a doctor from Kings College edited in, I presume that there's some kind of editorial/legal obligation to provide "balance". Anyway he was saying the same sort of thing that the "expert" Sophie Medlin was saying. You need to be careful, you might miss out on nutrients etc, lol.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 1, 2017)

mojo pixy said:


> I'm surprised money was wasted on a new design for a V-flag, since a perfectly appropriate one already exists elsewhere.


People spend a lot of time on marketing and branding. It's not an area that I am familiar with however I prefer the veganflag logo to that black and red one. As with many things design related, you're never going to please everybody and there will always be people who complain, like the referendum over the kiwi flag. 

So I do a quick google on the New Zealand flag referendum and one of the designs is a down under variation of the new vegan flag, lol...





New Zealand flag referendums, 2015–16 - Wikipedia

You learn something new everyday.


----------



## gentlegreen (Aug 1, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Hmmm...I wonder how many people actually said that? Precisely zero I believe, ain't that something. Ms Derbyshire is pretty damn mainstream though.
> 
> Full video here...
> 
> 45GgPYBsw70


A vegan couple who have been vegan for 12 days, another for a few months, a recent athlete convert and a clueless nutritionist.
I wonder what SHE eats ...

And when they complain that people might miss out on nutrients, I wonder how inexpert vegans compare with the general public.


----------



## UnderAnOpenSky (Aug 1, 2017)

changgrover said:


> On my vegetarians need to be treated by a psychologist



On your what?


----------



## cupid_stunt (Aug 1, 2017)

Judging by the new member's odd posts so far, I can't help thinking it's a bot.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 1, 2017)

gentlegreen said:


> A vegan couple who have been vegan for 12 days, another for a few months, a recent athlete convert and a clueless nutritionist.
> I wonder what SHE eats ...
> 
> And when they complain that people might miss out on nutrients, I wonder how inexpert vegans compare with the general public.


This was the reason that I was initially reluctant when we were asked if we would like to appear on tv. The way they frame the questions and unsympathetic editing can give the completely wrong impression. We were not in a studio situation so we didn't have to rush our answers, but on these types of shows with the time constraints they have it's quite hard to come across well and to express yourself properly. I'm not sure how the researchers select the panelists but I didn't think the lineup wasn't that balanced tbh. Mostly new and inexperienced vegans and a couple of nutritionists. I thought the newbie vegans did ok in the circumstances. I'm trying to find something positive to say about the nutritionists but imo they weren't great, especially Sophie's appeal to authority. The woman, the nutrition science manager was a bit better imo, but they both made it sound like veganism was some kind of black art that was very difficult to get right.


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Aug 1, 2017)

So, due to being caught in a downpour today I found myself in a seemingly vegan cafe. I ordered a coffee (soy milk) and a bit of cake. Atmosphere was lovely, nobody was angry at all, so far so good.

However, if anyone thinks these are "just as good" as the real thing I can only offer sympathy, you poor deluded fools


----------



## gentlegreen (Aug 1, 2017)

You have (any kind of) milk in coffee ?


----------



## Wilf (Aug 1, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Was going to post about that yesterday but was busy. Some folks have complained about it but I agree with ModVegan's summary...


As a vegan, does it mean I have to look out for this flag when I'm looking for some oven chips at Morrisons, or will it just be on quinoa bearing produce?


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Aug 1, 2017)

gentlegreen said:


> You have (any kind of) milk in coffee ?


Depends on my mood. Once I realised I was in a vegan establishment I felt the need to give the other side a go, in the name of scientific endeavour


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 1, 2017)

Wilf said:


> As a vegan, does it mean I have to look out for this flag when I'm looking for some oven chips at Morrisons, or will it just be on quinoa bearing produce?


I have no idea. It's all a bit new and the ink has barely dried. I didn't get the impression that it was meant for food labelling but more of a "unifying brand". I believe that various forms of green "V"''s are used, like this one...



I quite like the idea of the new branding and think the logo looks fine. I prefer the round version to the one on the flag

Vegan Flag International


----------



## mrs quoad (Aug 1, 2017)

Guess us poor excluded carnists will just have to run a pair of beef curtains up the flagpole.

#instantrimshot.com

Christ.

That became worse and worse as I typed it. Sorry, humanity.


----------



## coley (Aug 1, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I like cauldron lincolnshire sausages. Also quite like quorn. My cat used to go mad for quorn.
> 
> Linda Mac stuff is awful crap, though.


On this we will have to agree to disagree, I find cauldron products too spicy, whereas quorn and McCartney's,  while nice enough on their own,  is more suited for adding your own preferences, says the bloke who has trouble boiling an egg, my comments are lifted from the Boss and her observations of 40 years adapting and preparing vegetarian meals.


----------



## 8ball (Aug 1, 2017)

mrs quoad said:


> ...that became worse and worse as I typed it. Sorry, humanity.


----------



## coley (Aug 1, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Yeah maybe, but it's just a bit of fun. I'm not sure what you've seen in this thread prior to your brief concentrated burst of posting however in the context of this thread and the interventions on other threads wherever this topic is raised, I think my choice of words is quite mild and harmless, especially given that vegans are more often than not on the receiving end of ridicule and mockery.
> 
> I'm not expecting every to like my choice of words of my even my style of posting, but I'm quite happy with it and do believe it to be logical, balanced and reasonable. Some people will of course disagree with that, and I don't have a problem with that at all, you can't please everyone, and people who find my content objectionable are not being forced to read or engage.



Aye, as long as "it's just a bit of fun"
As to what I've seen prior to my "brief concentrated burst of posting" regarding the subject of vegetrianism on here? Quite a bit, most of it a damn sight more intolerant than has appeared on this particular thread.
Nice to see it kept light hearted and objective


----------



## Casually Red (Aug 1, 2017)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> The International vegan flag has launched
> 
> Will make you angry fuckers easier to spot I guess



Can we declare war on them now ? Strikes me as a bit Islamic state that carry on


----------



## coley (Aug 1, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I do love cheese in all its wonderful forms. If I had to choose between cheese and meat, I might have to plump for the cheese, I think.
> 
> To those who recoil at the idea of eating cow 'secretions', I present a slice of aged gouda. Milk can be turned into culinary delights.


Gawd, Stilton blue and a glass of 'secretary bird' while sitting in the garden(an hour ago)  heaven.


----------



## 8ball (Aug 1, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


>


----------



## OzT (Aug 2, 2017)

Although vegeterians doing stuff like this then complain to newspapers about it doesn't help their cause, imho.

McDonald's customer gets a very disappointing burger after ordering veggie meal
(I put link to Mirror here but it's in other papers as well)

He's in Sydney, goes into McDonalds to order a veggie burger then complains it is not to his liking when Mcdonalds in Australia does not offer veggie options. After all, hate to say it, it is a burger joint. I know sydney well and there are enough veggie shops and resturants already, why go to a burger bar when he knows there are no veggie option just to complain and go to the newspapers?

And the reason McDonalds don't offer veggie option in Australia is there is not enough demand for it. I'm sure if they thought there is a market in Oz they would offer it.


----------



## Spymaster (Aug 2, 2017)

OzT said:


> Although vegeterians doing stuff like this then complain to newspapers about it doesn't help their cause, imho.
> 
> McDonald's customer gets a very disappointing burger after ordering veggie meal
> (I put link to Mirror here but it's in other papers as well)
> ...



This has got to be a wind-up



> " It's not like I couldn't have got a veggie burger anywhere else, but sometimes you just crave a Maccas.


----------



## OzT (Aug 2, 2017)

Don't think so Spymaster, it's in 3 papers I know of, including the Metro, so it has got to be real 

I think it's just some young bloke craving a bit of publicity by picking on something where he knows he will not get what he wanted


----------



## Yossarian (Aug 2, 2017)

McDonald's do one of the worst veggie burgers I've ever had, though probably not as bad as the Mothburger that other story links to.

Disgusted woman finds massive dead moth in her McDonald's chicken wrap lunch


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 2, 2017)

*checks date*

Ah yes, silly season.


----------



## gentlegreen (Aug 2, 2017)

(((moth)))


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 2, 2017)

Tesla's gone "delusional", lol


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 2, 2017)

When you say fast food people think burger
But nature can take it little further
Faster than anything you can cook
Follow Macka B take a look
Real fast food what a gwarn ya
Look how fast you peel a banana
Look how quick you can peel the mango
3-2-1 go
Real fast food check the Berry
Don't have to cook them not necessary
As long as the fruits are ripe and ready
On your marks mmm get steady
Peel the orange cut the avocado
Slice the cucumber tomatice tomato
Get the kiwi cut it inna quarter
Bust the coconut drink the water
Scrape the jelly out eat it after
A the desert ,main course and the starter
In abundance for your indulgence
Food with substance, full up of nutrients
Ram packed with wholesome ingredients
Natural packaging for your convenience
Yes iyah you know it’s the truth
Real fast food’s veggies and fruit


----------



## gentlegreen (Aug 3, 2017)

I would dispute the ease of use of the mango - probably relies on being where they grow to get them at the optimum point.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 3, 2017)

gentlegreen said:


> I would dispute the ease of use of the mango - probably relies on being where they grow to get them at the optimum point.


eh? Obviously it is better to be able to pick any fruit straight off the tree when ripe, that being the optimum point, but regardless a ripe mango is quick and easy. Maybe not the rock hard unripe ones you might see in Sainsbury's (usually Kent variety), however if you go to any asian market, you can easily get a box of these...




They are not my favourite variety and nearly all the places that I would get them nowadays also sell butchered halal meat which smells RANK, but anyway they are nearly always ripe and can be eaten quite easily out of the box. Might be a bit messy without some form of cutlery though, and you may find mango juice dripping down your arm.
#FirstWorldProblems


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 3, 2017)

Intellectual heavyweights chipping in...


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 3, 2017)




----------



## 03gills (Aug 4, 2017)

I think cultured (lab grown) meat will more of less replace large scale factory farming in the future, however I think you'll still have small scale abattoirs continuing to cater for the demand for prime cuts. So if you want a steak or a joint or a whole chicken, you'll get those things, but less often than you do now.


----------



## NoXion (Aug 4, 2017)

03gills said:


> I think cultured (lab grown) meat will more of less replace large scale factory farming in the future, however I think you'll still have small scale abattoirs continuing to cater for the demand for prime cuts. So if you want a steak or a joint or a whole chicken, you'll get those things, but less often than you do now.


But if it's made in a lab that's Frankenstein food and therefore bad because um... Reasons? Despite the fact that the people saying that kind of shit almost always use other lab-produced products with no problems whatsoever.


----------



## veganomics (Aug 4, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Was going to post about that yesterday but was busy. Some folks have complained about it but I agree with ModVegan's summary...



I do like ModVegans approach and I agree with what she said in that video. I didn't know about the flag, it's not bad, I don't really know that much about design but it looks ok. Appears to work quite well as an avatar too.


----------



## veganomics (Aug 4, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Intellectual heavyweights chipping in...



I'm not a big Dawkins fan, but on this subject I think both him and Harris are right. People are finding it harder to argue against veganism because it makes sense on so many levels, which also has the effect of creating more of a resistance from some people who don't want to change, hence the anti vegan backlash.


----------



## veganomics (Aug 4, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Tesla's gone "delusional", lol



Hopefully this will trigger more widespread adoption. It's almost impossible to get a car with a vegan interior. Even if the seats aren't leather, the steering wheel often is. I think there's a growing momentum and with this being associated with electric cars which are also growing in popularity, a vegan interior car could well become the norm and rather than the exception.


----------



## Casually Red (Aug 4, 2017)

veganomics said:


> I'm not a big Dawkins fan, but on this subject I think both him and Harris are right. People are finding it harder to argue against veganism



Erm..no they aren't . And unless taking the piss out of vegans 99% of people don't even bother arguing against it .


----------



## veganomics (Aug 4, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


>



I saw this story in the Independent...
==========================================
Vegetarian farmer saves cow herd from abattoir by donating it to animal sanctuary.

A herd of cows from the East Midlands will be mooing a sigh of relief thanks the kindness of their owner, vegetarian farmer Jay Wilde who has sent them to live out their days in an animal sanctuary.

Leaving their old cattle sheds at Bradley Nook Farm in Ashbourne, Derbyshire, the 59 cows were rehomed in Norfolk at the Hillside Animal Sanctuary on Monday.

A vegetarian for a total of 25 years, Mr Wilde told The Times that he found it “very difficult to do your best to look after them and then send them to the slaughterhouse for what must be a terrifying death.”

After growing up on the farm, the 59-year-old took over the business in 2011 when his father died. Mr Wilde also made the change from producing dairy goods to organic beef.

*But he decided that he wanted to clear his conscience and profit no more from sending his cows to the slaughter house.*

“I’m relieved to have made the decision to no longer farm animals, something which I always found quite upsetting,” Mr Wilde said.

“Cows have good memories and a range of emotions. They form relationships. I’ve even seen them cry.”

The herd, worth £40,000 at market, will avoid the abattoir to join the sanctuary’s 300 cattle and 2,000 horses, donkeys and ponies. Mr Wilde has kept ten as “pets.”

Mr Wilde was told by his brother-in-law that he was “absolutely insane” to donate the herd, 30 of which are pregnant.

The founder of the sanctuary, Wendy Valentine, said Mr Wilde’s cattle could now enjoy their full 25-year lifespans rather than reaching the slaughter age of two to three years. 
==========================================
A noble humanitarian gesture from the farmer Jay. 

It's funny that so many people claim that they only eat grass-fed meat from that type of farm, and yet only a tiny minority of the meat that gets bought and eaten comes from such farms. I think at least a few of them must be telling porkie pies.


----------



## UnderAnOpenSky (Aug 4, 2017)

veganomics said:


> Hopefully this will trigger more widespread adoption. It's almost impossible to get a car with a vegan interior. Even if the seats aren't leather, the steering wheel often is. I think there's a growing momentum and with this being associated with electric cars which are also growing in popularity, a vegan could well become the norm and not the exception.



Your obviously shopping for more expensive cars then me.


----------



## veganomics (Aug 4, 2017)

UnderAnOpenSky said:


> Your obviously shopping for more expensive cars then me.


It's not just expensive cars that have leather steering wheels.


----------



## UnderAnOpenSky (Aug 4, 2017)

veganomics said:


> It's not just expensive cars that have leather steering wheels.



Sure, but almost impossible is a massive over statement. I can think of a fair few I've owned that didn't and that's without actually trying to do so.


----------



## veganomics (Aug 4, 2017)

UnderAnOpenSky said:


> Sure, but almost impossible is a massive over statement. I can think of a fair few I've owned that didn't and that's without actually trying to do so.


I believe all the cars that I've had or driven over the last 10+ years have had leather steering wheels and leather around the gear knob, without me trying. It appears to be the norm. Ok maybe almost impossible as a slight (and not massive ) overstatement, but it is a lot harder than it should be...

======================================
Buying a car when you’re vegan – Charles Reynolds-Talbot Ⓥ – Medium

Buying a car when you’re vegan
Being vegan is easy. Buying a car when you’re vegan is hard.

Sometimes being vegan is about best endevours — it’s probably impossible to buy a car that is 100% cruelty-free due to the way they’re made. One way I can try and influence the market is by purchasing a car that does not have leather in. This is hard to do. The problem isn’t just upholstery which is easier to avoid, it’s leather steering wheels and gear knobs that *come as standard in over 90% of cars on the market.*

Buying a car should be enjoyable, but it was needlessly frustrating. I have spent days searching websites and brochures for the tiniest mention of leather. Most of the time I’m looking for an absence of a tick in a table cell. Why can’t models be clearly labelled *non-leather?*

Also, why can’t I have a nice car? It seems that as soon as you go a model above the base, you get leather. Want a built in Sat Nav? You get leather. Want that sporty body kit? You get leather. Want extra safety features? Here, have some leather.

It seems that no-kills equals no-thrills.
======================================


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 4, 2017)

veganomics said:


> I'm not a big Dawkins fan, but on this subject I think both him and Harris are right. People are finding it harder to argue against veganism because it makes sense on so many levels, which also has the effect of creating more of a resistance from some people who don't want to change, hence the anti vegan backlash.


Agreed, and some of the justifications and arguments against are rather ridiculous and have an air of desperation about them, imo.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 4, 2017)

veganomics said:


> I believe all the cars that I've had or driven over the last 10+ years have had leather steering wheels and leather around the gear knob, without me trying. It appears to be the norm. Ok maybe almost impossible as a slight (and not massive ) overstatement, but it is a lot harder than it should be...
> 
> ======================================
> Buying a car when you’re vegan – Charles Reynolds-Talbot Ⓥ – Medium
> ...


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Aug 4, 2017)

Being vegan stops you from having nice shoes too.


----------



## Spymaster (Aug 4, 2017)

Yossarian said:


> McDonald's do one of the worst veggie burgers I've ever had, though probably not as bad as the Mothburger that other story links to.
> 
> Disgusted woman finds massive dead moth in her McDonald's chicken wrap lunch


They deliver round here now via UberEats. 

Surprised they didn't start doing it years ago.


----------



## gentlegreen (Aug 4, 2017)

People's focus is all wrong - all this worried chasing after "protein" - only an issue if you get too many calories from empty processed carb/fat/sugar rather than from veggies.
Broccoli has higher protein per calorie than steak.
My 250 calories of broccoli per night is probably too many


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 4, 2017)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> Being vegan stops you from having nice shoes too.


Hmm...not sure that's strictly true, these winkle pickers look rather fetching....


Hans Blix
( they are also rubbish at finding non existent WMD's. )


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 4, 2017)

The following video is imo an excellent summary of the cognitive dissonance that allows humans to do or condone bad things while viewing themselves as good people. This not only applies to how meat eaters justify killing animals unnecessarily, but also to other areas of human activity where we kid ourselves that we're not doing really shitty stuff...



Mic the Vegan is one of my favourite vegan youtubers. His videos are informative, well referenced, not too long and I like his content, presentation and humour.


----------



## Yossarian (Aug 5, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> They deliver round here now via UberEats.
> 
> Surprised they didn't start doing it years ago.



Yep, my neighbourhood also has many options for delivery of food. And McDonald's.


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Aug 5, 2017)

Now, these really are the sort of cunts who not only put me off being vegan but make me want to kick their fucking heads in.

Vegan activists force California butcher to hang animal rights sign in window


----------



## Yossarian (Aug 5, 2017)

I'm not surprised PETA types get a little wound up by the kind of hipster butchers who act like the animals they're serving up made informed end-of-life decisions at the end of long and fulfilling bovine careers.


----------



## Spymaster (Aug 5, 2017)

Yossarian said:


> Yep, my neighbourhood also has many options for delivery of food. And McDonald's.


Ah, you're one of those are you?


----------



## gentlegreen (Aug 5, 2017)

I noticed the linked article about meat-eating vegan restaurateurs who have bought into Allan Savory's "theory" that claims lifestock grazing can reverse climate change.

Famous California vegan restaurateurs under fire over revelation they eat meat


----------



## Spymaster (Aug 5, 2017)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> Now, these really are the sort of cunts who not only put me off being vegan but make me want to kick their fucking heads in.
> 
> Vegan activists force California butcher to hang animal rights sign in window


Cunts like that make me really look forward to September and October when the partridge and pheasant seasons open.


----------



## Yossarian (Aug 5, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> Ah, you're one of those are you?



One of those people who thinks McDonald's tastes like shit? Guilty as charged. And that's not even prejudice talking, I tried a Filet-o-Fish just a few days ago, it was grim.


----------



## tonysingh (Aug 5, 2017)

Yossarian said:


> One of those people who thinks McDonald's tastes like shit? Guilty as charged. And that's not even prejudice talking, I tried a Filet-o-Fish just a few days ago, it was grim.



Does anyone go to Maccy Ds expecting fine dining? 

Of course it's fucking grim. It's a fast food joint.


----------



## Spymaster (Aug 5, 2017)

Yossarian said:


> One of those people who thinks McDonald's tastes like shit?


No. One of those sillies who pretends that it isn't "food".


----------



## Spymaster (Aug 5, 2017)

tonysingh said:


> Does anyone go to Maccy Ds expecting fine dining?
> 
> Of course it's fucking grim. It's a fast food joint.


I think it's great in small doses. Fillet of fish is lush, as is the breakfast stuff, and the coffee there is very good nowadays.


----------



## Yossarian (Aug 5, 2017)

It's technically food, just the flavor, texture etc. seems really weird compared to just about any other kind of food, including food from other fast-food chains, it's as if it was something designed to be reconstituted and fed to astronauts in a country with a really shitty space program.


----------



## Spymaster (Aug 5, 2017)

gentlegreen said:


> I noticed the linked article about meat-eating vegan restaurateurs who have bought into Allan Savory's "theory" that claims lifestock grazing can reverse climate change.
> 
> Famous California vegan restaurateurs under fire over revelation they eat meat





> “Cows make an extreme sacrifice for humanity but that is their position in God’s plan as food for the predators,” Matthew Englehardt said


Apart perhaps from the god bit, he's spot on. 

And what is it with AR twats and death threats?


----------



## mojo pixy (Aug 5, 2017)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> Now, these really are the sort of cunts who not only put me off being vegan but make me want to kick their fucking heads in.
> 
> Vegan activists force California butcher to hang animal rights sign in window



That shit reminds me of the kind of forced conversion so beloved of Norwegian kings and IS psychos.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 5, 2017)

Yossarian said:


> I'm not surprised PETA types get a little wound up by the kind of hipster butchers who act like the animals they're serving up made informed end-of-life decisions at the end of long and fulfilling bovine careers.


The only thing in that article in quotes, and so directly representing the butcher's ethos, is "locally sourced, sustainably raised". That's a little bit short of Peter Davidson in a pig suit offering up his juicy belly to diners.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 5, 2017)

mojo pixy said:


> That shit reminds me of the kind of forced conversion so beloved of Norwegian kings and IS psychos.


It is a fundamentalism that sees no differentiation between the unbelievers. Those who seek to improve our meat culture are just as guilty as those involved in the worst industrialised farming. (And in this case, they're a nice, easy target without the deep pockets and lawyers of a McDonalds.)


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Aug 5, 2017)

Quite. Of all the arguably legitimate targets they could have chosen, they picked the independent small business selling locally sourced produce.

Slow handclap you fucking pricks, well done.


----------



## NoXion (Aug 5, 2017)

McDonald's is a much bigger business, more animals die in the process of making meat for them than for all the independent butchers of California combined. Why not target them?


----------



## NoXion (Aug 5, 2017)

If you genuinely believe that meat is murder, then targeting some little butcher while ignoring McDonald's is like protesting outside of some murderer's house while at the same time ignoring some company involved in an ongoing mass murder.


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Aug 5, 2017)

NoXion said:


> McDonald's is a much bigger business, more animals die in the process of making meat for them than for all the independent butchers of California combined. Why not target them?


Either:

A) Their stupid fad diet has left them hungry and unable to think straight

Or

B) They've realised a large multinational corporation has access to lawyers who cost more per hour than most of us earn in a month


----------



## Spymaster (Aug 5, 2017)

If you genuinely believe that meat is murder you're a moron.


----------



## Athos (Aug 5, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> The following video is imo an excellent summary of the cognitive dissonance that allows humans to do or condone bad things while viewing themselves as good people. This not only applies to how meat eaters justify killing animals unnecessarily, but also to other areas of human activity where we kid ourselves that we're not doing really shitty stuff...
> 
> 
> 
> Mic the Vegan is one of my favourite vegan youtubers. His videos are informative, well referenced, not too long and I like his content, presentation and humour.




That's all predicted on one big, faulty assumption i.e. that people accept that eating meat is a bad thing. I don't; so no need for cognitive dissonance.


----------



## NoXion (Aug 5, 2017)

Although to be fair, this happened in California, and it is a scientific fact that middle and upper class Californians are completely insane.


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Aug 5, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> The following video is imo an excellent summary of the cognitive dissonance that allows humans to do or condone bad things while viewing themselves as good people. This not only applies to how meat eaters justify killing animals unnecessarily, but also to other areas of human activity where we kid ourselves that we're not doing really shitty stuff...
> 
> 
> 
> Mic the Vegan is one of my favourite vegan youtubers. His videos are informative, well referenced, not too long and I like his content, presentation and humour.



Meant to comment on that video but was busy...

It's bollocks. Why do some vegans persist in this belief that certain meat eaters are somehow lying to themselves, that we're desperate to hide from what we're doing?

Eating meat isn't wrong. Killing animals for food isn't wrong.

I'll glady enter a debate about how we go about the above. Farming practices, food miles, sustainability etc etc But start telling me I'm somehow blind to what goes on, that I have to pretend I'm something I'm not and I'll just tell you to fuck off.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 5, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> If you genuinely believe that meat is murder you're a moron.


If you genuinely believe that meat is murder, then I can see how you will think that a small butcher sourcing free-range locally is just as bad as a supermarket sourcing factory-farmed meat from the other side of the world. It is the act of killing the animal that is the primary crime. 

These activists remind me most of anti-abortion campaigners. They're less damaging as what they are doing is far less viscerally hurtful to those they target, but the thought process is similar: these people are murderers, and so it is our duty to do all we can to stop them at all times, and the tactics employed are strikingly similar: dress up in blood, wail for the innocent lives being taken, accept no compromise ever. Vegan activists also add their own 'wake up sheeple' twist.


----------



## NoXion (Aug 5, 2017)

I've worked in a slaughterhouse. Admittedly it was only for a week's worth of work experience, but nonetheless I do have an appreciation for how messy and hard the work involved in the mass production of meat is. I certainly think that slaughterhouse workers should be paid more than they are.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 5, 2017)

NoXion said:


> I've worked in a slaughterhouse. Admittedly it was only for a week's worth of work experience, but nonetheless I do have an appreciation for how messy and hard the work involved in the mass production of meat is. I certainly think that slaughterhouse workers should be paid more than they are.


If you eat meat, it has to mean that you don't think about where it's come from, that you pretend it arrived in the world fully trimmed and vacuum-sealed. Because if you did think about where it comes from, you couldn't possibly consider eating it. 

There's a lot of projecting going on. Because they have a strong disgust reaction to the idea of eating the flesh of once-living animals, they assume that everyone else must do so too, and so can only be eating it by being in some kind of denial. 

It's patent bollocks, but it's hard to shake, it seems, because some people find it impossible to imagine being that other person who isn't disgusted by the idea of eating animals.


----------



## nogojones (Aug 5, 2017)

OzT said:


> I liked the above cartoon, elements of truth in it. Though no doubt there's the other picture with a vegan lambasting others about their eating habits and preching their morals. Great thing about these type of debates, makes for an interesting read as neither side will really sway the other, for the majority,  imho



But people are swayed by argument and debate otherwise how do you acccount for the rise in veganism?

Folks don't just wake up one morning thinking, you know I don't think I'll bother anymore with animal products.

I was a heavy meat eater for 40 odd years and became a veggie a couple of years ago mostly because of the ethics of meat eating. I used to really enjoy meat and it took years of listening to debates on the ethics of meat before I could reconcile my own ethics on it. I'd like to think I am heading towards veganism, but I'm not there yet.


----------



## NoXion (Aug 5, 2017)

Conversely, I can understand why someone might have an "ew" reaction to meats. You're dealing with actual flesh after all. But when it's cooked or prepared? It tastes and smells good enough for me that I can overlook that.


----------



## Spymaster (Aug 5, 2017)

Athos said:


> That's all predicted on one big, faulty assumption i.e. that people accept that eating meat is a bad thing. I don't; so no need for cognitive dissonance.


They just don't seem to get this. Vegans seem completely convinced that carnists all secretly hate themselves for carning.


----------



## Athos (Aug 5, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> They just don't seem to get this. Vegans seem completely convinced that carnists all secretly hate themselves for carning.



Many vegans are surprisingly incapable of empathy.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 5, 2017)

NoXion said:


> Conversely, I can understand why someone might have an "ew" reaction to meats. You're dealing with actual flesh after all. But when it's cooked or prepared? It tastes and smells good enough for me that I can overlook that.


I understand that people have disgust reactions to all kinds of things. If I don't share that particular reaction, I can at least empathise with the kind of thing it is by relating it to something I do have a disgust reaction to.

The reverse is also possible, though, that I recognise that not everyone shares my disgust reactions to certain things, and am able to empathise with their lack of disgust, even if I don't share it.


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Aug 5, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:
			
		

> The reverse is also possible, though, that I recognise that not everyone shares my disgust reactions to certain things, and am able to empathise with their lack of disgust, even if I don't share it.


The success of Coldplay is proof enough of this.


----------



## DotCommunist (Aug 5, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> Fillet of fish is lush


massive lie


QP is good though, qp wid cheese


----------



## Casually Red (Aug 5, 2017)

NoXion said:


> Although to be fair, this happened in California, and it is a scientific fact that middle and upper class Californians are completely insane.



Also there's very restrictive gun laws in Hippistan so the butcher probably didn't have a 45 under the counter . If they'd tried that in Texas the butcher would have hung them and their sign in the window as trophies .


----------



## Maggot (Aug 5, 2017)

Did Metro get the idea for this article from Urban?

Aggressive vegans are putting meat-eaters off going veggie, says survey | Metro News


----------



## Casually Red (Aug 5, 2017)

That bloody article . Riven throughout by the assumption normal people would like to stop eating meat . It's just more bloody vegan propaganda . Getting really pissed off about it's prevalence .


----------



## Maggot (Aug 5, 2017)

Casually Red said:


> That bloody article . Riven throughout by the assumption normal people would like to stop eating meat .


According to the article 2/3 of the meat eaters questioned had considered going vegan or veggie in the last year, so it's a fair assumption.


----------



## gentlegreen (Aug 5, 2017)

Casually Red said:


> That bloody article . Riven throughout by the assumption normal people would like to stop eating meat . It's just more bloody vegan propaganda . Getting really pissed off about it's prevalence .


With the easy availability of information, might not "normal people" simply be interested in living longer, healthier lives - especially now that lung cancer from tobacco smoking has taken second place to heart disease ?
And with Alzheimers being another disease that probably has similar causes ?
Diet and other lifestyle choices is implicated in most premature causes of death.


----------



## NoXion (Aug 5, 2017)

Maggot said:


> According to the article 2/3 of the meat eaters questioned had considered going vegan or veggie in the last year, so it's a fair assumption.


 I'm not one of them, certainly. The only limiting factor in my meat consumption is cost. Which is doubtless an angle that vegans are considering in their war against the bloodmouths.


----------



## Casually Red (Aug 5, 2017)

NoXion said:


> their war against the bloodmouths.


----------



## mrs quoad (Aug 5, 2017)

gentlegreen said:


> I still reckon that health is the best angle to
> 
> With the easy availability of information, might not "normal people" simply be interested in living longer, healthier lives - especially now that lung cancer from tobacco smoking has taken second place to heart disease ?
> And with Alzheimers being another disease that probably has similar causes ?
> ...


What do you want people to die from?

Extreme sports, or choking on nutroasts?


----------



## gentlegreen (Aug 5, 2017)

mrs quoad said:


> What do you want people to die from?
> 
> Extreme sports, or choking on nutroasts?



Extreme sports in my 90s


----------



## Casually Red (Aug 5, 2017)

Maggot said:


> According to the article 2/3 of the meat eaters questioned had considered going vegan or veggie in the last year, so it's a fair assumption.



Meat eaters are the overwhelming majority , into the high 90s percentile . I find it extremely difficult to believe that 2 thirds of people are actively considering going vegan . I'd assume there were some pretty loaded questions in that survey .  
I eat meat because I really like it . Sometimes I'll even buy a couple of steaks when I can't really afford them . 
People really and truly like meat , there's no getting away from it .


----------



## NoXion (Aug 5, 2017)

I'm three sheets to the wind and I'm fucking desperate for a steak right now.


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Aug 5, 2017)

NoXion said:


> I'm not one of them, certainly. The only limiting factor in my meat consumption is cost. Which is doubtless an angle that vegans are considering in their war against the bloodmouths.


The limiting factor in my meat consumption is time. Only three meals a day to cram it all in


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 5, 2017)

gentlegreen said:


> Extreme sports in my 90s


If your heart gives out mid-bungee, you'll enter the stats as dead from heart failure, whatever age you were.

Some research done on long-term evolutionary changes in outlying deitary populations. Finding that Inuit have evolved to suppress uptake of fatty acids to avoid oding on the primarily fish diet, while long-term veggie populations in India have evolved to metabolise fatty acids in plants more effectively, which in turn leaves them at some risk of disease with modern diets.

I would suggest that these findings strongly support the contention that humans have evolved as flexible omnivores that have historically taken some important parts of our diets from meat  but with meat as only a small proportion of overall intake. Those outlying populations that have developed diets that diverge from this have seen evolutionary changes to compensate for the difference.

(That's not an argument against becoming vegan, just a footnote to the earlier discussion in which it was contended that humans are somehow not natural meat-eaters.)


----------



## Spymaster (Aug 5, 2017)

Casually Red said:


> I eat meat because I really like it.


No you really, really don't. You've just been conditioned to _think_ you like it.


----------



## Casually Red (Aug 5, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> No you really, really don't. You've just been conditioned to _think_ you like it.



Secretly pining for freshly steamed broccoli.

Yum yum .


----------



## Casually Red (Aug 5, 2017)

I...honestly..just made up a new word for angry vegans on a holy mission . 

Lentilist .

Y' see..it rhymes with mentalist but it's also about lentils .


----------



## Yossarian (Aug 5, 2017)

Do people remember when they first found out meat was made from animals? 

My 5-year-old has started asking awkward questions about people eating chicken and ducks, fine by me if he wants to go vegetarian but I think he'll have to ask the right questions before I volunteer the fact that the meatballs etc. that he loves are made from ground-up dead cows and pigs.

Likewise with milk, the question of what happens to the baby cows that the milk is supposed to make big and strong will be a tough one to answer, even before you get to things like zero-grazing dairy.


----------



## Yossarian (Aug 5, 2017)

Casually Red said:


> I...honestly..just made up a new word for angry vegans on a holy mission .
> 
> Lentilist .
> 
> Y' see..it rhymes with mentalist but it's also about lentils .



Sounds like a Clarksonism.


----------



## gentlegreen (Aug 5, 2017)

Casually Red said:


> Secretly pining for freshly steamed broccoli.
> 
> Yum yum .


stir-fried - or in my case more like dry-fried.
I can't get enough of it.

If I won the lottery, this is what I would have for my tea :-


----------



## Spymaster (Aug 5, 2017)

gentlegreen said:


> If I won the lottery, this is what I would have for my tea :-
> 
> View attachment 112850


Why would a lottery win be necessary? 

That looks like a couple of quids worth of typical veghead fodder.


----------



## Casually Red (Aug 5, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> Why would a lottery win be necessary?
> 
> That looks like a couple of quids worth of typical veghead fodder.



Maybe he just meant 3 numbers


----------



## gentlegreen (Aug 5, 2017)

I'm conscious that plenty would struggle to afford it. Certainly with a family.
Given the overload of certain nutrients, I suppose one might replace some of the veggies with wholegrain / beans.

Broccoli - £1
mushrooms £1
Pepper 60p
Beansprouts 60p in the shops


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 5, 2017)

Yossarian said:


> Do people remember when they first found out meat was made from animals?
> 
> My 5-year-old has started asking awkward questions about people eating chicken and ducks, fine by me if he wants to go vegetarian but I think he'll have to ask the right questions before I volunteer the fact that the meatballs etc. that he loves are made from ground-up dead cows and pigs.
> 
> Likewise with milk, the question of what happens to the baby cows that the milk is supposed to make big and strong will be a tough one to answer, even before you get to things like zero-grazing dairy.


If you get him into veal, you can deal with both questions at once. 

It never occurred to me that dairy cows had calves.


----------



## Spymaster (Aug 5, 2017)

Casually Red said:


> Maybe he just meant 3 numbers


He'd still have enough left over for a year's supply of tofu sarnies and a field of wheatgrass


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Aug 5, 2017)

Yossarian said:


> Do people remember when they first found out meat was made from animals?
> 
> My 5-year-old has started asking awkward questions about people eating chicken and ducks, fine by me if he wants to go vegetarian but I think he'll have to ask the right questions before I volunteer the fact that the meatballs etc. that he loves are made from ground-up dead cows and pigs.
> 
> Likewise with milk, the question of what happens to the baby cows that the milk is supposed to make big and strong will be a tough one to answer, even before you get to things like zero-grazing dairy.


We've made sure our eldest knew from the moment she could grasp the basic idea. Best they understand from an early age and thus become less susceptible to the vegetarian virus in later life


----------



## AnnaKarpik (Aug 5, 2017)

nogojones said:


> But people are swayed by argument and debate otherwise how do you acccount for the rise in veganism?
> 
> Folks don't just wake up one morning thinking, you know I don't think I'll bother anymore with animal products.
> 
> I was a heavy meat eater for 40 odd years and became a veggie a couple of years ago mostly because of the ethics of meat eating. I used to really enjoy meat and it took years of listening to debates on the ethics of meat before I could reconcile my own ethics on it. I'd like to think I am heading towards veganism, but I'm not there yet.



I woke up one morning and read about the potential benefits of a diet very high in vegetable matter in controlling inflammation. I don't regard this as a permanent all-or-nothing decision. A pesco-vegetarian friend wanted to opt out of supporting factory farming and chooses not to spend his money on meat.
I was persuaded by arguments but not vegan ones. I would be surprised if the debate seen on this thread convinced anybody.


----------



## Spymaster (Aug 5, 2017)

Have any carnists here ever had a relationship with a vegan? How would that work?

I went out with a vegetarian for a while but she was totally non-psycho. The only time you'd know she was a veggie was when we ate and even then it was hardly mentioned, the rest of the time she was completely normal.


----------



## nogojones (Aug 5, 2017)

AnnaKarpik said:


> I was persuaded by arguments but not vegan ones. I would be surprised if the debate seen on this thread convinced anybody.



To be honest I just read the last page. I really couldn't be arsed doing the whole 49 pages


----------



## UnderAnOpenSky (Aug 5, 2017)

NoXion said:


> McDonald's is a much bigger business, more animals die in the process of making meat for them than for all the independent butchers of California combined. Why not target them?



You remember McLibal yeah? 

I don't agree with it, but you are more likely to have success with a small operation then targeting a multi national.


----------



## UnderAnOpenSky (Aug 5, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> Have any carnists here ever had a relationship with a vegan? How would that work?
> 
> I went out with a vegetarian for a while but she was totally non-psycho. The only time you'd know she was a veggie was when we ate and even then it was hardly mentioned, the rest of the time she was completely normal.



My other half is an ex vegan and is still quite selective about what she eats and how often she wants to eat meat. Which is total understable, but I found quite frustrating and still do occasionally. On the plus side I eat loads more stuff like kale and lentils, which does me no harm. My influence on her diet has probably been less positive health wise.


----------



## Spymaster (Aug 5, 2017)

UnderAnOpenSky said:


> My other half is an ex vegan and is still quite selective about what she eats and how often she wants to eat meat. Which is total understable, but I found quite frustrating and still do occasionally. On the plus side I eat loads more stuff like kale and lentils, which does me no harm. My influence on her diet has probably been less positive health wise.


Was she vegan when you met?


----------



## UnderAnOpenSky (Aug 5, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> Was she vegan when you met?



Sadly I can't take credit for that one. Although she now eats sausages (yes, yes, I know) and far more meat in general. Still won't buy it when I'm not there mind, although the meals I've cooked in the freezer are fair game.


----------



## mrs quoad (Aug 5, 2017)

UnderAnOpenSky said:


> Sadly I can't take credit for that one. Although she now eats sausages (yes, yes, I know) and far more meat in general. Still won't buy it when I'm not there mind, although the meals I've cooked in the freezer are fair game.


My wife got into a heated discussion at a cafe recently, bc they'd only sell her a plain cheese toasted sandwich for our toddler at the same price as their "posh bacon" sandwich (still only about £3.20). There were no cheese sandwiches on their menu.

I didn't realise what was happening with this discussion, as it was complete news to me that she doesn't order him meat. She eats both sausages and fish, and burgers, tbf. And steaks. I mean, not every day. But. She does still call herself a vegetarian.

And I could've just ordered a posh bacon sandwich. Had I know what the discussion was about.

So he had £2.60 crumpets w/ jam for lunch.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 5, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> Have any carnists here ever had a relationship with a vegan? How would that work?
> 
> I went out with a vegetarian for a while but she was totally non-psycho. The only time you'd know she was a veggie was when we ate and even then it was hardly mentioned, the rest of the time she was completely normal.


I lived with a veggie for many years. I cooked a range of meals, as did she. She was funny about having meat in our kitchen, so I just ate meat when we went out or she was away. That was more or less the deal, and I was fine with it, although I may have been less fine if she'd been vegan (I reckon I'd be sneaking myself some cheese). Biggest problem came when abroad.

I think most people are similar to this, tbh. The idea of a raging entitled carnist slapping down raw steaks in front of veggies is just Jeremy Clarkson's wet dream of the world. I like my food, but I'm not arsey about insisting on things I know someone else will be upset by. Just a bit of a shame for me, that's all. I get over it, and work around it.


----------



## gentlegreen (Aug 6, 2017)

I think I may be doomed to be vegan for ever 

I just experimentally added a virtual can of sardines to my evening meal and gave my kidneys a hard time (disposal of excess protein involves the production of ammonia).

So I really ought to learn to swim like a dolphin, but not eat like one.



Just seen I can get multi-parameter urine testing strips for 1 p a shot.

Amazon.co.uk: Parameter Urine Test Strips


----------



## cupid_stunt (Aug 6, 2017)

gentlegreen said:


> stir-fried - or in my case more like dry-fried.
> I can't get enough of it.
> 
> If I won the lottery, this is what I would have for my tea :-
> ...



Just add a nice juicy steak, and you have a perfect meal.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Aug 6, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> Have any carnists here ever had a relationship with a vegan? How would that work?
> 
> I went out with a vegetarian for a while but she was totally non-psycho. The only time you'd know she was a veggie was when we ate and even then it was hardly mentioned, the rest of the time she was completely normal.



An ex was vegan for 2 out of 9 years we were together, before becoming veggie, and your second paragraph sums her up too.

When she did the evening meal I would eat whatever she prepared, when I was doing the meal I would normally have meat & do her something different.

In a normal week we would eat out one night, and do the evening meals 3 times a week each. I could cope with three main meals a week without meat, as long as I had meat at lunchtime.


----------



## gentlegreen (Aug 6, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I think most people are similar to this, tbh. The idea of a raging entitled carnist slapping down raw steaks in front of veggies is just Jeremy Clarkson's wet dream of the world. I like my food, but I'm not arsey about insisting on things I know someone else will be upset by. Just a bit of a shame for me, that's all. I get over it, and work around it.


During my spell as a pescetarian, my omnivorous GF at the time couldn't cope with me having fish on the table with the eyes looking at her


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Aug 6, 2017)

AnnaKarpik said:


> I was persuaded by arguments but not vegan ones. I would be surprised if the debate seen on this thread convinced anybody.



I was, in part, persuaded to go vegan because of the lack of logic and rationality from non-vegans on threads like these. I mean, I was vegetarian already and thought that I probably should go vegan but the utter absence of any even remotely plausible arguments in defence of animal exploitation were, to use a non-vegan metaphor, the straw that broke the camel's back.

I've also been PMed by somebody who told me that they went veggie as a result of reading one of these threads.


----------



## Spymaster (Aug 6, 2017)

cupid_stunt said:


> An ex was vegan for 2 out of 9 years we were together, before becoming veggie, and your second paragraph sums her up too.
> 
> When she did the evening meal I would eat whatever she prepared, when I was doing the meal I would normally have meat & do her something different.
> 
> In a normal week we would eat out one night, and do the evening meals 3 times a week each. I could cope with three main meals a week without meat, as long as I had meat at lunchtime.


Didn't she freak out about having meat in the same house/fridge/cooking utensils etc? What about leather? The vegetarian I was with was Spanish and she was even ok with cooking meat and fish (not too keen on me shooting though and I stopped for the 3 years we were together), but I've always thought a vegan would be a deal breaker for me.


----------



## Spymaster (Aug 6, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I lived with a veggie for many years. I cooked a range of meals, as did she. She was funny about having meat in our kitchen, so I just ate meat when we went out or she was away. That was more or less the deal, and I was fine with it, although I may have been less fine if she'd been vegan (I reckon I'd be sneaking myself some cheese). Biggest problem came when abroad.
> 
> I think most people are similar to this, tbh. The idea of a raging entitled carnist slapping down raw steaks in front of veggies is just Jeremy Clarkson's wet dream of the world. I like my food, but I'm not arsey about insisting on things I know someone else will be upset by. Just a bit of a shame for me, that's all. I get over it, and work around it.


Sure, but I'm looking at it the other way round. Most vegetarians I've known have been pretty reasonable but would a vegan even entertain having a carnist partner?


----------



## A380 (Aug 6, 2017)

Yossarian said:


> Do people remember when they first found out meat was made from animals?
> 
> My 5-year-old has started asking awkward questions about people eating chicken and ducks, fine by me if he wants to go vegetarian but I think he'll have to ask the right questions before I volunteer the fact that the meatballs etc. that he loves are made from ground-up dead cows and pigs.
> 
> Likewise with milk, the question of what happens to the baby cows that the milk is supposed to make big and strong will be a tough one to answer, even before you get to things like zero-grazing dairy.



It won't be awkward at all . All five year olds are all raving ego-maniacs. If he loves meatballs he wouldn't care if they were made out of babies, as long as they were babies he didn't know.


----------



## mrs quoad (Aug 6, 2017)

A380 said:


> It won't be awkward at all . All five year olds are all raving ego-maniacs. If he loves meatballs he wouldn't care if they were made out of babies, as long as they were babies he didn't know.


Tbf, fair few 5yos would be even happier if they were babies they knew.


----------



## Spymaster (Aug 6, 2017)

A380 said:


> It won't be awkward at all . All five year olds are all raving ego-maniacs. If he loves meatballs he wouldn't care if they were made out of babies, as long as they were babies he didn't know.


I don't think there's anything awkward about telling children where meat comes from is there? If there's a hang-up it likely comes from the parents. Just be honest. A friend's kid frequently helps me in the kitchen. She's 7 and has no problem whatsoever with skinning chicken thighs and boning them by hand for a curry. Last time her only concern was "is it halal?"


----------



## Ponyutd (Aug 6, 2017)

gentlegreen said:


> I think I may be doomed to be vegan for ever
> 
> I just experimentally added a virtual can of sardines to my evening meal and gave my kidneys a hard time (disposal of excess protein involves the production of ammonia).
> 
> ...


Urine testing strips for 1 p a shot. #irony


----------



## mrs quoad (Aug 6, 2017)

gentlegreen said:


> I think I may be doomed to be vegan for ever
> 
> I just experimentally added a virtual can of sardines to my evening meal and gave my kidneys a hard time (disposal of excess protein involves the production of ammonia).
> 
> ...


Have you ever worked out how many of the minutes of life you intend to save will have been spent on spreadsheets designed to calculate how many minutes you might save by the time those minutes have been saved? And assuming they are saved, obvs.

(I am reminded of the thing that someone did working out that an hour in the gym equates to sth like 50mins of added lifespan.)


----------



## gentlegreen (Aug 6, 2017)

mrs quoad said:


> Have you ever worked out how many of the minutes of life you intend to save will have been spent on spreadsheets designed to calculate how many minutes you might save by the time those minutes have been saved? And assuming they are saved, obvs.
> 
> (I am reminded of the thing that someone did working out that an hour in the gym equates to sth like 50mins of added lifespan.)


Yebbut ...
Once I have my personal telemetry nailed down, the spreadsheets will look after themselves - weighbridges in the floor, urine testing built into the toilet.
Maybe that's why I keep things like my diet and other lifestyle habits simple and regular


----------



## T & P (Aug 6, 2017)

If longevity and a healthy life are your overriding concerns, why don't you simply adopt the diet of the countries with the longest life expectancy in the world? Japan, or a number of European Mediterranean nations, for instance. No messing around with charts and spreadsheets, and as a massive bonus they all allow for yummy meat and fish to be part of one's diet.


----------



## gentlegreen (Aug 6, 2017)

T & P said:


> If longevity and a healthy life are your overriding concerns, why don't you simply adopt the diet of the countries with the longest life expectancy in the world? Japan, or a number of European Mediterranean nations, for instance. No messing around with charts and spreadsheets, and as a massive bonus they all allow for yummy meat and fish to be part of one's diet.


The Okinawans eat so little meat and fish, probably all they get from it is B12.
The Mediterranean diet is a tad iffy.
The longest lived are apparently 7th Day Adventists.

After 35 years, eating meat is not going to happen - it just isn't "food" to me.

But as I appear to be finding , the optimum diet has no place for regular fish consumption as it would displace green veggies. I would literally have to eat less broccoli to get my protein down - and globular animal protein is by all accounts the type one should dump first.

Okinawa is definitely what I'm aiming for - with a BMI of 22 and 2800 kcalories per day.

I certainly found fish to be yummy during my pescetarian interlude, but a large part of it is finding an excuse to go fishing on a regular basis - an excuse to mess about in boats 

I fully expect my retirement lifestyle to change things a lot - I'll be growing masses of green veggies and having green smoothies and macrobiotic breakfasts ...


----------



## Casually Red (Aug 6, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> Sure, but I'm looking at it the other way round. Most vegetarians I've known have been pretty reasonable but would a vegan even entertain having a carnist partner?



My mates partner was vegan when they met . Since she'd been a teenager . Then they moved in together . Hes a good cook but it was getting difficult cooking anything without it being repetitive . Then one night when there was some really nice smoked meat , and she was half pisssed and starving,  she just caved and turned into a ravenous carnist . a year on and she's racking up a body count like Hannibal lecter.

Total malzoan


They were at a wedding in eastern Europe the other week and he saw her whoosh right over to the smoked meat buffet, raw vodka in one hand, grab a big slice of bread and then shove it into this big lard spread concoction, that was full of pork bits . And just wolf it down . And then she went to town on the cuts . 

I think it's too easy being vegan around industrially processed meat . I don't believe for an instant when they're drunk hungry and smell proper, good meat they don't consider it as food . They'll deny it but we know they're lying .


----------



## Casually Red (Aug 6, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> Sure, but I'm looking at it the other way round. Most vegetarians I've known have been pretty reasonable but would a vegan even entertain having a carnist partner?



Here's another thing . What if you were vegan but were seriously into BDSM ? Must be an absolute nightmare . 
 Where would you even start ?


----------



## gentlegreen (Aug 6, 2017)

Casually Red said:


> I think it's too easy being vegan around industrially processed meat . I don't believe for an instant when they're drunk hungry and smell proper, good meat they don't consider it as food . They'll deny it but we know they're lying .



1. drunk - I'll pass on that - not my bag. People say the same idiot thing about men being open to gay sex when drunk - bonkers.

2. hungry - sadly hasn't happened in years - working on that, but my hunger is always for green veggies these days and in the past it was vegan savouries that I still far prefer to any 36 year old recollection of the real thing. And I remember the foie gras, tripe and steaks I had in France in 1975 - I have no desire to taste them again - the stunning white wine and champagne, however - I do anticipate availing myself of that in France.
Bacon I find bizarre - makes me think of cannibalism.

The only things I missed during the 22 years while I was vegan were fish and cheese and I indulged sporadically in those - even fried a dozen free range eggs towards the end of the 12 pescatarian years.
Those years left me obese and may have aggravated my diverticulosis due to being able to on implulse grab ready made cakes and biscuits and pies rather than the solidly wholegrain lifestyle I'd led before ...

What I learned was that it's difficult to un-eat wrong food.
If anything warrants reverential treatment it's my body - I need it to work for the next (hopefully) 43 years - (my dad is  about to make it to 90 - albeit with health problems related to his lifestyle - so I'm aiming for the ton) so I am strongly attracted to things I know are beneficial to it.


----------



## UnderAnOpenSky (Aug 6, 2017)

Casually Red said:


> Here's another thing . What if you were vegan but were seriously into BDSM ? Must be an absolute nightmare .
> Where would you even start ?



As BDSM is concentual where as eating meat less so, I'm not sure why that would be an issue.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Aug 6, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> Didn't she freak out about having meat in the same house/fridge/cooking utensils etc? What about leather? The vegetarian I was with was Spanish and she was even ok with cooking meat and fish (not too keen on me shooting though and I stopped for the 3 years we were together), but I've always thought a vegan would be a deal breaker for me.



She was fine about people eating meat, wouldn't cook it, tended to stay out of the kitchen when I was cooking, other than that she was totally normal.

Of course, this is going back aver 30 years ago, along before the fascist vegans made an appearance on my radar.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Aug 6, 2017)

Casually Red said:


> Here's another thing . What if you were vegan but were seriously into BDSM ? Must be an absolute nightmare .
> Where would you even start ?


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Aug 6, 2017)

UnderAnOpenSky said:


> As BDSM is concentual where as eating meat less so, I'm not sure why that would be an issue.


I think his point was more of a leather based one


----------



## Casually Red (Aug 6, 2017)

cupid_stunt said:


>



No seriously . Like ...if you were vegan ...even if you went to the spankers club and they totally assured you...swore blind..the cuffs, whips, boots , gloves, riding crops , assless chaps , nazi hats, gimp masks and stuff were made out of fake leather ...could you really trust them ? They're flipping sadists when alls said and done . they're bound to get more of a buzz inflicting even worse degradation and humiliation than normal . I reckon they'd lie or something .  
. 

Strikes me as a potential minefield for vegans


----------



## Casually Red (Aug 6, 2017)

Maybe it balances out if a vegan masochist wants to feel even more degraded ..hadn't thought about that . It might be even kinkier for both parties come to think of it .

A vegan dominatrix might just use courgettes and rhubarb too .


----------



## cupid_stunt (Aug 6, 2017)

You are nuts.


----------



## Casually Red (Aug 6, 2017)

And nettles !!

I'd be a useless slave .

" what's your safe word ? "

" ouch "


----------



## Casually Red (Aug 6, 2017)

Omfg



Links nsfw obviously

Vegan Boundary

Cruelty free bondage wear !! What's the point of that ? 

Black Ship Specialty - Cruelty Free Vegan Bondage Gear by BlackShipSpecialty


----------



## Yossarian (Aug 6, 2017)

Casually Red said:


> No seriously . Like ...if you were vegan ...even if you went to the spankers club and they totally assured you...swore blind..the cuffs, whips, boots , gloves, riding crops , assless chaps , nazi hats, gimp masks and stuff were made out of fake leather ...could you really trust them ? They're flipping sadists when alls said and done . they're bound to get more of a buzz inflicting even worse degradation and humiliation than normal . I reckon they'd lie or something .
> .
> 
> Strikes me as a potential minefield for vegans



Tell me more about how weird and unusual vegans are. 

I'm getting the impression you just like people telling you that you're a naughty boy who shouldn't have so many sausages.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 6, 2017)

gentlegreen said:


> 1
> 
> If anything warrants reverential treatment it's my body - I need it to work for the next (hopefully) 43 years - (my dad is  about to make it to 90 - albeit with health problems related to his lifestyle - so I'm aiming for the ton) so I am strongly attracted to things I know are beneficial to it.


That your dad's 89 and still going is good news for your odds in the lottery of longevity, but _everyone_ has health problems at 89, whatever their lifestyle.


----------



## Yossarian (Aug 6, 2017)

A380 said:


> It won't be awkward at all . All five year olds are all raving ego-maniacs. If he loves meatballs he wouldn't care if they were made out of babies, as long as they were babies he didn't know.



Nah, kids tend to be pretty fond of animals, IME. And city kids, at least, tend to have some degree of disconnect between the meat that they eat and the animals that meat comes from.

It's one of the stronger arguments in favour of veganism, IMO - if little kids knew the truth about what we do to animals, they would be utterly horrified, but somehow things like battery chickens, sow cages, etc. become acceptable to older people.


----------



## A380 (Aug 6, 2017)

Yossarian said:


> Nah, kids tend to be pretty fond of animals, IME. And city kids, at least, tend to have some degree of disconnect between the meat that they eat and the animals that meat comes from.
> 
> It's one of the stronger arguments in favour of veganism, IMO - if little kids knew the truth about what we do to animals, they would be utterly horrified, but somehow things like battery chickens, sow cages, etc. become acceptable to older people.


You must know very different children to the ones I do. Cruelly to animals and stuffing anything in their mouths seem to be fairly basic human behaviour we have to work hard to educate out.


----------



## mango5 (Aug 6, 2017)

I just took some home-made  'melting middle' chocolate muffins to a short-notice picnic amongst a load of other stuff.  Person arrives half way through, not someone I know well, points at muffins and  asks if they are gluten free and vegan. They then pout and give me the cold shoulder the whole time. 
It's not that difficult to to do gluten free vegan and it can sometimes coincidentally be what I make and take as sharing food. Deffo try to do this if I know there's a demand/preference in the crowd. But grumpy loose acquaintance gluten-free vegans just make me want to shout "I'm an omnivore not your mind reading servant"


----------



## UnderAnOpenSky (Aug 6, 2017)

mango5 said:


> I just took some home-made  'melting middle' chocolate muffins to a short-notice picnic amongst a load of other stuff.  Person arrives half way through, not someone I know well, points at muffins and  asks if they are gluten free and vegan. They then pout and give me the cold shoulder the whole time.
> It's not that difficult to to do gluten free vegan and it can sometimes coincidentally be what I make and take as sharing food. Deffo try to do this if I know there's a demand/preference in the crowd. But grumpy loose acquaintance gluten-free vegans just make me want to shout "I'm an omnivore not your mind reading servant"



Most stuff like that seems to be stupidly high in sugar obviously to make up for other things that make it taste good.


----------



## A380 (Aug 6, 2017)

mango5 said:


> I just took some home-made  'melting middle' chocolate muffins to a short-notice picnic amongst a load of other stuff.  Person arrives half way through, not someone I know well, points at muffins and  asks if they are gluten free and vegan. They then pout and give me the cold shoulder the whole time.
> It's not that difficult to to do gluten free vegan and it can sometimes coincidentally be what I make and take as sharing food. Deffo try to do this if I know there's a demand/preference in the crowd. But grumpy loose acquaintance gluten-free vegans just make me want to shout "I'm an omnivore not your mind reading servant"



When they asked you could have replied "No, they're nice" .


----------



## gentlegreen (Aug 7, 2017)

Where can vegans get their B12 ?



Spoiler: Gorilla eating his own (green) poo








Probably only works if you eat nothing but celery.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 7, 2017)

From I was a little youth I have heard people say
An apple a day keeps the doctor away
Seems like a very good subject to tackle
Medical Monday all about the Apple
Nowadays when you say apple people think Macs
IPhones, IPads and Apple watch
Me a talk real apples Organic unwaxed
Let’s get down to the facts
What inna the Apple making it medical
It's got the vitamins and the mineral
Pectin the fibre soluble
Helpful to lower the bad cholesterol
Antioxidants too as usual
Flavonoids and Polyphenol
Constipation fights inflammation
Weight loss can be beneficial
People cook them and a whole lot more
Personally I prefer them raw
The skin has a lot of good things in for sure
If you’re wary of the seeds you don’t have to eat the core
Some say apples are good for your teeth
Natural toothbrush kinda unique
Some say Apples are bad for your teeth
Acidity, the Fructose them say it too sweet
Counteract that when you eat the Apple little after
Swill your mouth with a little bit of water
Cause the benefits of the Apples are larger
You just need a little bit inna your armour
Apple a day might not keep them away
But nuff fruit and veg with exercise may


----------



## Spymaster (Aug 7, 2017)

mango5 said:


> I just took some home-made  'melting middle' chocolate muffins to a short-notice picnic amongst a load of other stuff.  Person arrives half way through, not someone I know well, points at muffins and  asks if they are gluten free and vegan. They then pout and give me the cold shoulder the whole time.


You should've stuck them up their arse. That's outrageous.


----------



## mrs quoad (Aug 7, 2017)

?!


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 7, 2017)

Jeff Robinson said:


> I was, in part, persuaded to go vegan because of the lack of logic and rationality from non-vegans on threads like these. I mean, I was vegetarian already and thought that I probably should go vegan but the utter absence of any even remotely plausible arguments in defence of animal exploitation were, to use a non-vegan metaphor, the straw that broke the camel's back.
> 
> I've also been PMed by somebody who told me that they went veggie as a result of reading one of these threads.


I had been mostly vegetarian for 10 years prior to going vegan and I was mostly ignorant of what was behind the milk and diary supply chain. For me it was a couple of books that nailed it for me and put the spotlight on the cruelty behind some of the things we call "food". I have already referred to some of them in a previous post, The Rubbish On Our Plates and Diet For A New America. The John Robbins book in particular nailed it for me, so I suppose that might have been my camel back breaking straw. I found the narrative compelling and but also John Robbins came across as being a man of good morals and integrity, especially for renouncing his inheritance of the Baskin Robbins ice cream wealth. He was an insider who knew exactly what went on behind the scenes in dairy production, a sort of vegan Bradley Manning or Snowden.

Online forums weren't around then, but we did face plenty of real life opposition from people telling us we're nuts etc, ("but you need protein") but never really coming up with any decent arguments against, a bit like this thread, lol.  I'm sure that at least a few people have upgraded to veganism as a result of interactions they've had with us, but even if nobody did, I don't think it would change my position. For me the evidence speaks for itself and for an increasing number of people, when they actually get to see the evidence, which still remains mostly hidden, a sizeable number of them find it enough to cause them to at least stop and think. There are of course lost causes, deliberately obstinate hecklers who don't really have any decent arguments have no real interest in the subject at all and run a negative disruptive troublemaking campaign.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 7, 2017)

T-e-a-r that can be tear,
But water from the eye is tear
P-e-a-r that can be pear
But also it can be pear, so it's pear
Before I start one thing I must share
Avocado is also a pear
It's to do with the shape from the front to the rear
You here, this is pear
2 pear is a pair of pear
From nowhere another pair appear
This is pear, a lot of good nutrients are in there
High in fibre one of the Premier
Good regulator as far as I am aware
Tell constipation to get out of here
Lowers bad cholesterol that’s heart care
Vitamins help your body to repair
Pre workout snack helps to prepare
No fat weight loss,music to your ear
Juicy and sweet no excuse there
Give yourself healthy food you have to take care
You’re married to your body it’s not an affair
So treat it good everytime, everywhere
Eat them ripe, eat them with the skin
Cause the skin’s also got the minerals and vitamins
Moderation no greedy eating
Organic without the pesticides in
Serious thing


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 7, 2017)

Athos said:


> That's all predicted on one big, faulty assumption i.e. that people accept that eating meat is a bad thing. I don't; so no need for cognitive dissonance.


Predicted? Wot like nostradamus or a gypsy with a crystal ball? lol. Of course there are a lot of people that don't accept that eating meat is a bad thing, but increasing numbers of people are at least thinking about it especially when confronted with the brutal realities of the meat egg and dairy industries. A lot of people would rather not know or see what goes on because then they might have to do something about it.


----------



## mrs quoad (Aug 7, 2017)

I'm kinda bemused by the fruit songs. 

Do rhymes have more potent truth claims, or sth?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 7, 2017)

mrs quoad said:


> I'm kinda bemused by the fruit songs.
> 
> Do rhymes have more potent truth claims, or sth?


----------



## NoXion (Aug 7, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Predicted? Wot like nostradamus or a gypsy with a crystal ball? lol. Of course there are a lot of people that don't accept that eating meat is a bad thing, but increasing numbers of people are at least thinking about it especially when confronted with the brutal realities of the meat egg and dairy industries. A lot of people would rather not know or see what goes on because then they might have to do something about it.


 I was confronted with the brutal reality of sheep processing at the tender age of 16, which included a spell in the aptly-named Gut Room. This included an incident in which a sheep's stomach full of half-digested grass landed hard enough in front of me to burst its contents all over me. And until secondary school I had been entirely a city kid. I think you overestimate how squeamish the general population is.


----------



## fishfinger (Aug 7, 2017)

I eat my peas with honey... Oh!


----------



## Spymaster (Aug 7, 2017)

What he overestimates is how much people actually give a fuck. 

Most people know exactly what goes into putting meat on their tables, the processes and suffering involved, and go right ahead and eat it anyway.


----------



## rubbershoes (Aug 7, 2017)

Got a couple of steaks from the butcher today

I was going to have them tomorrow with sweet potato chips but after reading this thread, maybe I'll give them a good burial and reflect on my life choices


----------



## ddraig (Aug 7, 2017)

*Grow the fuck up for fucks sake*

And bees you can fuck off with your reeling and cunty with your 
Proper meathead willy waving and shite going on now, as well as the carnist fragility obvs

E2A Macka B is doing good and it's working
Veganism is on the and you fucks can't stop it


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 7, 2017)

If by 'is doing good' you mean 'is getting four-year-olds to eat more fruit', then I'm glad to hear it.


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Aug 7, 2017)

ddraig said:


> *Grow the fuck up for fucks sake*
> 
> And bees you can fuck off with your reeling and cunty with your
> Proper meathead willy waving and shite going on now, as well as the carnist fragility obvs


Nurse, he's getting hysterical again...


----------



## Spymaster (Aug 7, 2017)

Carnist fragility.


----------



## mrs quoad (Aug 7, 2017)

ddraig said:


> E2A Macka B is doing good and it's working
> Veganism is on the and you fucks can't stop it


Not even wrong - RationalWiki


----------



## mrs quoad (Aug 7, 2017)

*dp


----------



## Spymaster (Aug 7, 2017)

Methinks ddraigo's been on the piss!


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 7, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> What he overestimates is how much people actually give a fuck.
> 
> Most people know exactly what goes into putting meat on their tables, the processes and suffering involved, and go right ahead and eat it anyway.


Partly that. But I think there is also a part here that conflates horror at industrialised farming processes, and killing processes (I'm glad JR posted about gassing pigs as it made me go away and read up on it), with horror at the idea of killing any animal for food ever. It's clearly not true that day-to-day contact with the death of animals that you know puts tons of people off meat - where it's the social norm and all around you from a young age, the majority grow up socialised that this is the norm and with no problem not only eating meat but killing the animals themselves. I argued earlier that the distance from the process that modern life has engineered if anything produces more distaste and disgust at the idea because, while eating meat may still be the social norm, participating in killing animals isn't. 

So then you're reduced to the straw man that meat-eaters think we're 'better' than other animals in some way, which is not necessarily the case at all. That's not my thought process, but if you aren't horrified by the act of killing for food and you don't think 'humans are better than animals', what are you left with? 

For one, you're left in the uncomfortable position as an ideological vegan of thinking that you must be superior. Even the most reasonable on here like JR thinks he's more rational than a non-vegan. But wanting to kill animals, or have them killed for you, in order to eat their meat isn't in itself at all irrational. Neither is wanting not to - neither position is irrational.


----------



## UnderAnOpenSky (Aug 7, 2017)

It's not irrationally, but it's certainly a bit weird when you look at the opposition to say fox hunting. I mean I'm all for a spot of class war fair, but I'm faintly bemused by the horror that some people have for it and yet think nothing of supporting or at least accepting other forms of animal cruelty, such as factory farming for their own enjoyment.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 7, 2017)

UnderAnOpenSky said:


> It's not irrationally, but it's certainly a bit weird when you look at the opposition to say fox hunting. I mean I'm all for a spot of class war fair, but I'm faintly bemused by the horror that some people have for it and yet think nothing of supporting or at least accepting other forms of animal cruelty, such as factory farming for their own enjoyment.


You have a point, however there is also the question of what we might consider a 'death for no reason'. For Morrissey, it is killing animals for food. For others it might not be that, but killing animals for sport might fall in that category. For others still, killing animals for sport isn't a death for no reason either. I'm in the camp that leans strongly towards the idea that killing animals for the joy of killing them is 'death for no reason'. Perhaps the better way to phrase it would be 'death for no _good_ reason', but that would ruin Morrissey's scanning, as well as weakening his point.


----------



## UnderAnOpenSky (Aug 7, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> You have a point, however there is also the question of what we might consider a 'death for no reason'. For Morrissey, it is killing animals for food. For others it might not be that, but killing animals for sport might fall in that category. For others still, killing animals for sport isn't a death for no reason either. I'm in the camp that is leans strongly towards the idea that killing animals for the joy of killing them is 'death for no reason'. Perhaps the better way to phrase it would be 'death for no _good_ reason', but that would ruin Morrissey's scanning, as well as weakening his point.



They are both death for enjoyment though, be a tasty steak or blasting round the country side on horse back. We can live perfectly healthy lives without meat in our society. We eat meat because it tastes nice.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 7, 2017)

UnderAnOpenSky said:


> They are both death for enjoyment though, be a tasty steak or blasting round the country side on horse back. We can live perfectly healthy lives without meat in our society. We eat meat because it tastes nice.


We eat meat because it tastes nice begs the question: why does it taste nice? In our society now, we can live perfectly healthy lives without meat, but humans have certainly evolved gaining advantages from eating meat. So we eat meat because it tastes nice even when we don't have to, but we also eat meat because we have always done so - its biological and cultural roots are deep, so deep that they are intertwined, and we can also live perfectly healthy lives with meat. I think there are coherent ethical arguments against eating meat, but the arguments that make various kinds of appeal to nature are not coherent.


----------



## UnderAnOpenSky (Aug 7, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> We eat meat because it tastes nice begs the question: why does it taste nice? In our society now, we can live perfectly healthy lives without meat, but humans have certainly evolved gaining advantages from eating meat. So we eat meat because it tastes nice even when we don't have to, but we also eat meat because we have always done so - its biological and cultural roots are deep, so deep that they are intertwined, and we can also live perfectly healthy lives with meat. I think there are coherent ethical arguments against eating meat, but the arguments that make various kinds of appeal to nature are not coherent.



Nature is a rather hard one to define I'd say, but the fact that humans have spread to every corner of the planet shows that being omnivores has worked rather well for us. 

Plenty of things arent "natural" like not dying from child birth or vaccines, but I do agree with the vegans that there is a pretty massively cognitive dissonance when it comes to factory farming. It's a pretty hard one to justify really. After 51 pages I've still not got any other then it tastes good.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 8, 2017)

UnderAnOpenSky said:


> Nature is a rather hard one to define I'd say, but the fact that humans have spread to every corner of the planet shows that being omnivores has worked rather well for us.
> 
> Plenty of things arent "natural" like not dying from child birth or vaccines, but I do agree with the vegans that there is a pretty massively cognitive dissonance when it comes to factory farming. It's a pretty hard one to justify really. After 51 pages I've still not got any other then it tastes good.


Yes. I said so earlier too - and I don't avoid factory-farmed produce as much as I should. But arguments against factory-farming aren't necessarily arguments against eating meat per se. Now some might argue that free-range chickens also have shit lives and it's also unacceptable, but CIWF have done the sums on it and you could have all free range chicken farming and produce as many chickens as are produced now in the UK within an area smaller than the Isle of Wight. It's perfectly feasible.


----------



## UnderAnOpenSky (Aug 8, 2017)

It's feasible but it isn't done. So it's not unreasonable for the argument to be directed at how eating meat is currently practised as opposed to how it could be done. I don't know anyone who only eats ethically sourced meat exclusively who isn't vegetarian/vegan most of the time, I suppose they must exist, but I'm not rich enough to move in such circles if they do.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 8, 2017)

UnderAnOpenSky said:


> It's feasible but it isn't done. So it's not unreasonable for the argument to be directed at how eating meat is currently practised as opposed to how it could be done. I don't know anyone who only eats ethically sourced meat exclusively who isn't vegetarian/vegan most of the time, I suppose they must exist, but I'm not rich enough to move in such circles if they do.


There have been some successes. Here in the EU, against veal crates, sow stalls and caged hens. Nowhere near enough to dismantle factory-farming, but enough will need serious system change. But there are stages along the way that can be worked towards. The battle against factory-farming may have fewer obstacles in its way if it doesn't involve getting rid of meat. We've only been factory-farming for a few decades (not that things were idyllic before that), and, setting aside ethics, factory-farming is also very bad for us, producing poor meat and degrading the environment. It is more a return to sanity than a dismantling and rebuilding of a whole culture. 

One place I would agree that cognitive dissonance has grown is that factory farming has developed in the very time during which attitudes towards other animals have been changing.


----------



## pengaleng (Aug 8, 2017)

god is this still going?


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 8, 2017)




----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 8, 2017)

NoXion said:


> I was confronted with the brutal reality of sheep processing at the tender age of 16, which included a spell in the aptly-named Gut Room. This included an incident in which a sheep's stomach full of half-digested grass landed hard enough in front of me to burst its contents all over me. And until secondary school I had been entirely a city kid. I think you overestimate how squeamish the general population is.


As I said earlier, I am well aware that there are some people (die hards?) who are not put off by death blood and guts, but there are also plenty that are...or at least would be if it wasn't hidden, so I don't believe I'm overestimating or underestimating anything tbh. It is what it is, the majority of meat eaters don't really give a shit and will eat meat anyway because it's the overwhelming norm and it's what people are used to. It is the default position. They may have some vague awareness of what goes on but are not confronted with it and it would appear would rather not know or see any of the goings on. The majority of meat eaters don't care if it's factory farmed or grass-fed, as long as they get what they're used to at a reasonable price and I very much doubt that they'd be prepared to pay the extra "humane slaughter tax". (still sounds like an oxymoron to me)

Exposure to the bloody reality DOES appear to have an effect and does make some people reconsider and make the transition away from the widespread cognitive dissonance to actually giving a fuck, hence the significant and steady growth in the number of vegans.

I haven't actually watched the documentaries myself but there are several available on youtube (cowspiracy, earthlings, forks over knives, what the health etc) that appear to have had an impact and momentum appears to be gathering pace. I did watch Simon Amstels's Carnage, and thought it was excellent. The fact that it was even on telly in the first place and got some of that BBC budget is progress as far as I'm concerned. This may explain the strength of the backlash from meat eaters who claim that they don't really care about veganism, but they clearly do, even if it's just heckling target practice, lol.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 8, 2017)

I trekked into the forest, listened out for wind-chimes, and found the skinny, plant-based herd, huddled in tie-dye apparel, singing with their eyes closed, sitting around a communal campfire. The long-haired, weed-smoking hippies were barbequing stuffed peppers and tofu burgers, whilst drinking homemade elderflower juice, infused with pine-cone coulis, through straws made from dandelion stalks.

I approached the first plant-chewer with caution, and then asked each of them the same five questions, to hopefully get an insight into their frail, confused minds…

*Why did you become a vegan-weirdo extremist?*
*But what about cheeeese? How do you live without cheeeeeese?*
*What’s your favourite meal? Leaves?*
*What if you were in a rush, and needed a quick 5 minute dinner?*
*What’s the one thing you’d recommend someone watch, if they wanted to understand why you’ve ‘willingly chosen’ to become a plant-eater?!*
*10 Vegan-Weirdo Extremists*


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Aug 8, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> For one, you're left in the uncomfortable position as an ideological vegan of thinking that you must be superior. Even the most reasonable on here like JR thinks he's more rational than a non-vegan. But wanting to kill animals, or have them killed for you, in order to eat their meat isn't in itself at all irrational. Neither is wanting not to - neither position is irrational.



Two points of correction: I don't think (and have never said) that *vegans* are superior to *non-vegans* nor do I think that *I* am more rational than a non-vegan. Rather, I think that (a) *veganism* is ethically superior to *non-veganism* and (b) that my arguments in favour of veganism are more rational than the arguments supplied for not going vegan. 

re (a) I don't think there's anything novel about thinking that the ethical/political stance you adopt is superior to its alternatives, after all, if you didn't think that, why on earth would you adopt it? I take it that you think socialism is superior to capitalism, anti-death penalty is better than pro-death penalty, pro-Corbyn is better than pro-May etc. Yet I doubt you are so arrogant as to assume that you are superior in a general sense to those adopt contrary beliefs and practices to you. Same for me. 

re (b) again, a similar story. I think that the arguments in favour of veganism are more rational than the arguments against it, if not I wouldn't have gone vegan would I? I think this because the types of arguments that people give in defence of animal product consumption are either inconsistent with arguments they'd make in any other context or are based on outright falsehoods (e.g. the belief that plant-based diets are not healthful or that they are too expensive). Until I am presented with an argument in defence of animal exploitation for food, clothing etc (i.e. non-veganism) that doesn't contradict the beliefs that the person holds in other contexts nor is based on false information then I will continue to think that that position is irrational.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 9, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Partly that. But I think there is also a part here that conflates horror at industrialised farming processes, and killing processes (I'm glad JR posted about gassing pigs as it made me go away and read up on it), with horror at the idea of killing any animal for food ever.


The industrialised farming process and the killing process are closely coupled and not entirely unrelated. They are two adjacent links on the meat supply chain. It's not as if they have absolutely nothing to do with each other as you appear to be implying.



littlebabyjesus said:


> It's clearly not true that day-to-day contact with the death of animals that you know puts tons of people off meat - where it's the social norm and all around you from a young age, the majority grow up socialised that this is the norm and with no problem not only eating meat but killing the animals themselves. I argued earlier that the distance from the process that modern life has engineered if anything produces more distaste and disgust at the idea because, while eating meat may still be the social norm, participating in killing animals isn't.


It's also possible that the disgust at blood and gore is a built in mechanism and the default response of most modern humans that is suppressed by conditioning, distance or obfuscation. 

If you are one of those people that believes that the non obligate killing of animals for food isn't inherently "wrong" and that we need to keep more in touch with our strong carnist heritage, perhaps you can ask your local MP to lobby parliament for the introduction of some kind of re-acquaintance to the national curriculum. Perhaps have specialist schools, abattoir academy's or carnivores college that organise trips to slaughterhouses. Like this one for example. As we are supposedly natural meat eaters, surely there shouldn't be too much resistance.



littlebabyjesus said:


> So then you're reduced to the straw man that meat-eaters think we're 'better' than other animals in some way, which is not necessarily the case at all. That's not my thought process, but if you aren't horrified by the act of killing for food and you don't think 'humans are better than animals', what are you left with?
> 
> For one, you're left in the uncomfortable position as an ideological vegan of thinking that you must be superior. Even the most reasonable on here like JR thinks he's more rational than a non-vegan. But wanting to kill animals, or have them killed for you, in order to eat their meat isn't in itself at all irrational. Neither is wanting not to - neither position is irrational.


That reasoning appears to me to have more twists and turns than a contortionist and I have no idea how you reached those conclusions, and in fact may have even introduced a few straw-men of your own into the mix.  Just because somebody believes that their lifestyle choice is better for them it doesn't mean that they believe they are better than others. This is a frequently used refrain against people looking to improve themselves. "You think you're better than us" and an accusation frequently levelled at vegans even when they have made no such claim.
I do believe that it IS irrational to kill and eat animals when we are not obligated to do so especially when nearly all the data available indicates that by doing so we are creating problems on many levels. On top of all that, to me it doesn't appear to be either humane or compassionate. I don't feel I need to apologise for having that opinion or to keep quiet to appease those that feel offended or threatened by a dose of common sense.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 9, 2017)

*Dinner*
Let me paint a little picture here, to help illustrate. It’s Saturday night, and perhaps you’re about to do one of the following:-

Some friends have invited you over for dinner at theirs. Michael is cooking his signature dish!
You’re going on a date, and about to have dinner at a lovely new restaurant in town.
You’ve been invited to a BBQ with your new colleagues from work.
You’re a little anxious, because at some point you’ve got to drop… the ‘V BOMB’.

Vegan is a dirty word. It would seem. So prepare yourself. There is also a possibility that your new friends/date/colleagues will write you off as soon as they even hear the V word. Not the decent ones, of course, but there are the odd few who will freak out and make a mental note that will allude to: ‘Oh God – not one of those! Won’t invite them out again. Weirdo extremist.’ You’ve got to develop a thick skin, and plenty of humour.





Why the fuck am I vegan? – The downside they don’t tell you about.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 9, 2017)

Hmmm, I love these, a bit like a green lychee...



Guinep I’m not a gambling man but I bet
A lot of you have never seen this yet
Over in the Caribbean there’s a lot oh yep
Introducing Guinep
Let’s open it and let's see
You see the skin comes off easily
Very similar to the Lychee
Should be comes from the same family
Pop it into your mouth and hmm tasty
Suck the pulp tangy and creamy
Discard the seed and take it from me
Guinep is one of nature's sweetie
Nature's sweets are proper
More healthy than a gobstopper
It's got the vitamins and it’s got the fibre
Low in calories you won't get wider
Antioxidants, mineral provider
Good for digestion increase saliva
Give your immune system a boost
Certain symptoms it might reduce
Make sure it is ripe before any use
You can also make some juice
Here are some more names for it
Spanish lime Mamoncillo kenip
Skinup, Skinip, Canep, Gunip
Chenette Limoncillo Quenepa Genip


----------



## veganomics (Aug 9, 2017)

nogojones said:


> But people are swayed by argument and debate otherwise how do you acccount for the rise in veganism?
> 
> Folks don't just wake up one morning thinking, you know I don't think I'll bother anymore with animal products.
> 
> I was a heavy meat eater for 40 odd years and became a veggie a couple of years ago mostly because of the ethics of meat eating. I used to really enjoy meat and it took years of listening to debates on the ethics of meat before I could reconcile my own ethics on it. I'd like to think I am heading towards veganism, but I'm not there yet.


I think it's a bit like how marketing and advertising works. Some people will buy into it and be persuaded and some won't. A number of those that are exposed to the full range of arguments in favour of veganism will find them persuasive and give it serious consideration. Most probably won't change and will continue with whatever they're doing now. I think the rise in veganism is built on the strong foundation of logic, reason and compassion.


----------



## veganomics (Aug 9, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> The following video is imo an excellent summary of the cognitive dissonance that allows humans to do or condone bad things while viewing themselves as good people. This not only applies to how meat eaters justify killing animals unnecessarily, but also to other areas of human activity where we kid ourselves that we're not doing really shitty stuff...
> 
> 
> 
> Mic the Vegan is one of my favourite vegan youtubers. His videos are informative, well referenced, not too long and I like his content, presentation and humour.



I think he's really good too. I've watched a few of the videos on his channel. There is plenty of good material around for people curious enough to explore.


----------



## veganomics (Aug 9, 2017)

gentlegreen said:


> I think I may be doomed to be vegan for ever


Well it's not the worst thing in the world to be lumbered with.


----------



## pug (Aug 10, 2017)

I had lunch in a vegan resturant earlier this week, I wish I'd taken a photo. 
I ordered the hummus, olives and seasonal salad combo.
The olives were ok.


----------



## pengaleng (Aug 10, 2017)

so all you were able to face eating was an unimaginative starter? thats tragic.


----------



## gentlegreen (Aug 10, 2017)

How can hummus possibly be less palatable than olives ?
Personally I group olives with rocket - highly over-rated.


----------



## Athos (Aug 10, 2017)

Let's be honest.  Veganism is healthier, less cruel, and less environmentally destructive than eating meat. However, I love the taste of meat. Even to the extent that I'm willing to risk my health, and cause some animal suffering and environmental damage. Clearly, my choice is less morally good than choosing veganism. But, for meat, that's something I'm willing to live with. And I don't care what vegans (or others) think about that, or how they choose to live.


----------



## Spymaster (Aug 10, 2017)

Athos said:


> Let's be honest.  Veganism is healthier, less cruel, and less environmentally destructive than eating meat. However, I love the taste of meat. Even to the extent that I'm willing to risk my health, and cause some animal suffering and environmental damage. Clearly, my choice is less morally good than choosing veganism. But, for meat, that's something I'm willing to live with. And I don't care what vegans (or others) think about that, or how they choose to live.


Not sure I'd agree with the morality bit. But yeah.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 10, 2017)

pug said:


> I had lunch in a vegan resturant earlier this week, I wish I'd taken a photo.
> I ordered the hummus, olives and seasonal salad combo.
> The olives were ok.


I've been vegan for almost 20 years and I've never been to a vegan restaurant. The closest was the now defunct ЯED☆VEG in Dean St and Brighton, which was like the vegetarian equivalent of McDonalds. Now there appears to be loads of new establishments knocking about. I might get around to checking them out some time, especially now that I've installed the Happy Cow app on my phone.


----------



## Athos (Aug 10, 2017)

Spymaster Regardless of the question of causing suffering to other sentient beings, the environmental impact alone makes it morally inferior. But, so what?  Which of us doesn't make selfish choices?


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 10, 2017)

Athos said:


> Let's be honest.  Veganism is healthier, less cruel, and less environmentally destructive than eating meat. However, I love the taste of meat. Even to the extent that I'm willing to risk my health, and cause some animal suffering and environmental damage. Clearly, my choice is less morally good than choosing veganism. But, for meat, that's something I'm willing to live with. And I don't care what vegans (or others) think about that, or how they choose to live.


I suppose that's the sort of thinking behind many of the seemingly poor choices that people make and the mainstay of vices like smoking, alcohol consumption, coffee, drugs and other vices, especially physically addictive ones. "I know it's wrong but I like it so I'm going to do it anyway even if it kills me or others". I think there are always going to be people who are not going to change. Fortunately there are many that do eventually realise the absurdity of their behaviours and are willing to change, however it is currently much easier to carry on doing what the majority are doing and there's not much of a motivation to go "against the grain". Safety in numbers.

For inspiration I look to the people who persisted in doing what they thought was right even if it cost them their lives. Without these courageous pioneers, slavery and apartheid might still be widespread, being gay would still be a crime, and it would still be ok to discriminate against women and beat your wives if they don't behave. The places in the world where those things still happen are considered backwards, and sometime in the future (perhaps the very distant future) humanity will look back at some of our present behaviours, including the non obligate meat eating, and think them primitive and backwards.

You say you don't care "how they chose to live", and that's fair enough, each to their own as they say. However it would appear that there are quite a few that do care how vegans live, enough to at least pass comment or criticize, which is one of the reasons that this subject is always so well attended by members of the meat eating majority ready to have a pop.


----------



## Casual Observer (Aug 10, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> I've been vegan for almost 20 years and I've never been to a vegan restaurant. The closest was the now defunct ЯED☆VEG in Dean St and Brighton, which was like the vegetarian equivalent of McDonalds. Now there appears to be loads of new establishments knocking about. I might get around to checking them out some time, especially now that I've installed the Happy Cow app on my phone.


I don't know where you are but the best veg/vegan lunch place I know of is Alara on Marchmont Street, Bloomsbury. It's mostly a healthfood shop but has a self service hot buffet with a different menu every day. The only drawback is that you pay by weight (of the food, not you) and with everything being so tasty, you can end up paying quite a bit. I used to eat there once or twice a week for 6 years or so.

Honourable mentions to Terre A Terre in Brighton and Streatham's Wholemeal Cafe.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 10, 2017)

Athos said:


> Spymaster Regardless of the question of causing suffering to other sentient beings, the environmental impact alone makes it morally inferior. But, so what?  Which of us doesn't make selfish choices?


Well at least one person in this thread was arguing that the cessation of meat eating would be problematic from an environmental standpoint (although they didn't show their working), so there isn't universal agreement even on that subject, even though the evidence appears to be overwhelmingly in favour of a plant based lifestyle being far less harmful to the environment.

Yes we all make selfish choices, but that doesn't make it ok. If your conscience can live with choices that are damaging to the environment and to humanity then good for you. Some people would like to at least try to do more of the "right things".


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 10, 2017)

Casual Observer said:


> I don't know where you are but the best veg/vegan lunch place I know of is Alara on Marchmont Street, Bloomsbury. It's mostly a healthfood shop but has a self service hot buffet with a different menu every day. The only drawback is that you pay by weight (of the food, not you) and with everything being so tasty, you can end up playing quite a bit. I used to eat there once or twice a week for 6 years or so.
> 
> Honourable mentions to Terre A Terre in Brighton and Streatham's Wholemeal Cafe.


Thanks for that.  It reminds me a bit of the Country Life shop/cafe in Picadilly that used to be run by Seventh Day Adventists. (and hence closed on Saturdays)

I'd probably know a few more if I was the sort that ate out a lot, but I hardly ever do, which is why I was surprised when I found out that there are so many more places available now. I'm almost spoilt for choice. Happy Cow has helped me find decent places since 2003 in many places in Europe and now I have the phone app it's even easier.


----------



## Yossarian (Aug 10, 2017)

I'm tempted to check out a place near me that specializes in vegan junk food, not that I'm exactly craving Big Macs.


----------



## innit (Aug 10, 2017)

Athos said:


> Spymaster Regardless of the question of causing suffering to other sentient beings, the environmental impact alone makes it morally inferior. But, so what?  Which of us doesn't make selfish choices?


You've got kids, right? Is that what you'd say to them if they asked them why you kept eating meat even though you knew it was damaging the environment? "So what"?

Think I'm going to have to hide this thread.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 10, 2017)

innit said:


> You've got kids, right? Is that what you'd say to them if they asked them why you kept eating meat even though you knew it was damaging the environment? "So what"?
> 
> Think I'm going to have to hide this thread.


That reminded me of one of this lyrical snippet from one of my favourite bands...

_Oil slicks on the ebbing tide
Progress out of hand
Blind men choke on swallowed pride
Heads down in the sand
Don't wanna see the damage they've done, oh no

Trees destroyed by acid rain
Falling from the skies
*When our children place the blame
Who will tell them, why? *
Hear me now the chant has begun...

_


----------



## Athos (Aug 10, 2017)

innit said:


> You've got kids, right? Is that what you'd say to them if they asked them why you kept eating meat even though you knew it was damaging the environment? "So what"?
> 
> Think I'm going to have to hide this thread.



I think I'd reply that we all do things that damage the environment, like flying or using a car.  And that, on balance, the pleasure I get from eating meat outweighs the displeasure of knowing the effects of that choice.


----------



## Athos (Aug 10, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Well at least one person in this thread was arguing that the cessation of meat eating would be problematic from an environmental standpoint (although they didn't show their working), so there isn't universal agreement even on that subject, even though the evidence appears to be overwhelmingly in favour of a plant based lifestyle being far less harmful to the environment.
> 
> Yes we all make selfish choices, but that doesn't make it ok. If your conscience can live with choices that are damaging to the environment and to humanity then good for you. Some people would like to at least try to do more of the "right things".



What does 'not ok mean, though? Is your choice to use fossil fuel ok, notwithstanding the harm to the environment it causes?


----------



## AnnaKarpik (Aug 10, 2017)

Athos said:


> Let's be honest.  Veganism is healthier, less cruel, and less environmentally destructive than eating meat. However, I love the taste of meat. Even to the extent that I'm willing to risk my health, and cause some animal suffering and environmental damage. Clearly, my choice is less morally good than choosing veganism. But, for meat, that's something I'm willing to live with. And I don't care what vegans (or others) think about that, or how they choose to live.



Veganism is healthier - are you sure? What does healthier mean? Can you find anyone comparing vegans with meat/fish/dairy eaters that takes account of other life-style factors? I'm genuinely interested, because the Seventh Day Adventist studies (which are conducted on a population with a reasonably similar lifestyle) appear to show that the people eating some fish do better than the vegans. There are no health benefits to avoiding honey or leather shoes that I have ever heard of.
Growing plants is not necessarily less environmentally destructive than raising meat animals - there are different ways to do both of those things. There must be vegans and vegetarians around who daily consume produce from vast monocultures, if only on cost grounds.
AS I understand it, veganism is not about avoiding causing suffering to animals but rather concentrates on not using animals (or exploiting them to use the more emotionally-loaded, preferred term); if you only talk about meat/fish/eggs you can argue that it's the same thing, as long as you accept that death always involves suffering.  But honey is also verboten, as is eating the eggs of rescued battery hens although both bees and rescue hens appear to enjoy a perfectly happy existence.


----------



## Athos (Aug 10, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> I suppose that's the sort of thinking behind many of the seemingly poor choices that people make and the mainstay of vices like smoking, alcohol consumption, coffee, drugs and other vices, especially physically addictive ones. "I know it's wrong but I like it so I'm going to do it anyway even if it kills me or others". I think there are always going to be people who are not going to change. Fortunately there are many that do eventually realise the absurdity of their behaviours and are willing to change, however it is currently much easier to carry on doing what the majority are doing and there's not much of a motivation to go "against the grain". Safety in numbers.
> 
> For inspiration I look to the people who persisted in doing what they thought was right even if it cost them their lives. Without these courageous pioneers, slavery and apartheid might still be widespread, being gay would still be a crime, and it would still be ok to discriminate against women and beat your wives if they don't behave. The places in the world where those things still happen are considered backwards, and sometime in the future (perhaps the very distant future) humanity will look back at some of our present behaviours, including the non obligate meat eating, and think them primitive and backwards.
> 
> You say you don't care "how they chose to live", and that's fair enough, each to their own as they say. However it would appear that there are quite a few that do care how vegans live, enough to at least pass comment or criticize, which is one of the reasons that this subject is always so well attended by members of the meat eating majority ready to have a pop.



My choice might not be one you'd make, but it's far from absurd; it's carefully considered and entirely rational.

People ascribe their own values to risk and reward, such that you can't really objectively describe the sort of things you're referring to as poor choices. Yes, alcohol may shorten my life, but that's a price I'm happy to pay for the pleasure it gives me. 

And some of what makes people have a pop at vegans isn't their choice of diet, but (in some cases)  their attitude.


----------



## Athos (Aug 10, 2017)

AnnaKarpik said:


> Veganism is healthier - are you sure? What does healthier mean? Can you find anyone comparing vegans with meat/fish/dairy eaters that takes account of other life-style factors? I'm genuinely interested, because the Seventh Day Adventist studies (which are conducted on a population with a reasonably similar lifestyle) appear to show that the people eating some fish do better than the vegans. There are no health benefits to avoiding honey or leather shoes that I have ever heard of.
> Growing plants is not necessarily less environmentally destructive than raising meat animals - there are different ways to do both of those things. There must be vegans and vegetarians around who daily consume produce from vast monocultures, if only on cost grounds.
> AS I understand it, veganism is not about avoiding causing suffering to animals but rather concentrates on not using animals (or exploiting them to use the more emotionally-loaded, preferred term); if you only talk about meat/fish/eggs you can argue that it's the same thing, as long as you accept that death always involves suffering.  But honey is also verboten, as is eating the eggs of rescued battery hens although both bees and rescue hens appear to enjoy a perfectly happy existence.



Of course, it depends how you do it. But I find it hard to believe that, taking both at their best, veganism wouldn't be less environmentally damaging, and more healthy. Though, as you say, I can't prove that because I'm not sure anyone can control for other factors to create a reliable data set.


----------



## tonysingh (Aug 10, 2017)

52 pages of people arguing over something as inconsequential as dietary choices. Good job!


----------



## A380 (Aug 10, 2017)

innit said:


> You've got kids, right? Is that what you'd say to them if they asked them why you kept eating meat even though you knew it was damaging the environment? "So what"?
> 
> Think I'm going to have to hide this thread.



Well, by far, by far, the best thing any individual can do to minimise their environmental impact is not have children.


----------



## Athos (Aug 10, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> ... sometime in the future (perhaps the very distant future) humanity will look back at some of our present behaviours, including the non obligate meat eating, and think them primitive and backwards.



And?  Why do you care?  Every period will look backwards to a more advanced period, almost by definition.  The idea that someone on a hoverboard in 300 years time will think me primitive because I eat meat is probably the weakest argument I've heard against so doing.


----------



## innit (Aug 10, 2017)

Athos said:


> I think I'd reply that we all do things that damage the environment, like flying or using a car.  And that, on balance, the pleasure I get from eating meat outweighs the displeasure of knowing the effects of that choice.


I don't do either of those anymore either, and as you doubtless know you may have to bear the displeasure of the consequences of your choices but it's those in poorer parts of the world and those younger than us, including our kids and grandkids, who will really bear those consequences. 

But so what.


----------



## Athos (Aug 10, 2017)

innit said:


> I don't do either of those anymore either, and as you doubtless know you may have to bear the displeasure of the consequences of your choices but it's those in poorer parts of the world and those younger than us, including our kids and grandkids, who will really bear those consequences.
> 
> But so what.



Ok, what about your use of fossil fuels in other ways?

Do you have kids, by the way?


----------



## ddraig (Aug 10, 2017)

back to hypocrisy hunting!! great


----------



## Spymaster (Aug 10, 2017)

ddraig said:


> back to hypocrisy hunting!! great


Well you call it hypocrisy hunting but it's valid, isn't it? You can't just do away with an argument because it doesn't suit you.

If the discussion is about the environment and my opponent is impacting the environment as much, more, or almost as much as me overall, but in different ways, they're on dodgy ground. That's not hypocrisy hunting.

The kids thing is _massive_.


----------



## ddraig (Aug 10, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> Well you call it hypocrisy hunting but it's valid, isn't it? You can't just do away with an argument because it doesn't suit you.
> 
> If the discussion is about the environment and my opponent is impacting the environment as much or almost as much as me, but in different ways, they're on dodgy ground. That's not hypocrisy hunting.


it is hypocrisy hunting, it's looking for something anything to prove that the vegan is "bad"/makes damaging choices in some other area of their life to make the carnist feel better about their choices and say "ner, see, you're not perfect" when the vegan isn't even claiming they are. Also the carnist probably makes many many other choices and actions that are also "bad" like most of us.
you said it yourself "_my opponent is impacting the environment as much or almost as much as me, but in different ways, they're on dodgy ground_" 
it's a competition and your opponent must be discredited / shown up
and it's boring


----------



## Athos (Aug 10, 2017)

I'm not interested in hunting hypocrisy in vegans; I have no beef with them (pun intended) - I'd rather there were more. 

I'm just trying to point out that it's not quite as binary as some would suggest.  Yes, I willingly choose a lifestyle which is less morally defensible, but, in reality, in the developed world, we *all* do that.  

It's just that some vegans choose to draw the line about where those choices should be condemned in a self-serving way, whilst pretending its objective.


----------



## ddraig (Aug 10, 2017)

Athos said:


> I'm not interested in hunting hypocrisy in vegans; I have no beef with them (pun intended) - I'd rather there were more.
> 
> I'm just trying to point out that it's not quite as binary as some would suggest.  Yes, I willingly choose a lifestyle which is less morally defensible, but, in reality, in the developed world, we *all* do that.
> 
> It's just that some vegans choose to draw the line about where those choices should be condemned in a self-serving way, whilst pretending its objective.


who here is suggesting it's totally binary?
why should people drawing their own line and having to defend it constantly be condemned?


----------



## Athos (Aug 10, 2017)

I'm not condemning anyone.  But I do think it'd be more honest for those who draw the line just short of their own moral failings to recognise that choice as self-serving sanctimony.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 10, 2017)

tonysingh said:


> 52 pages of people arguing over something as inconsequential as dietary choices. Good job!


Cheese and beans simultaneous, chuck


----------



## gentlegreen (Aug 10, 2017)

tonysingh said:


> 52 pages of people arguing over something as inconsequential as dietary choices. Good job!


I suppose it might be seen that way if your intention is to live fast and die young ...


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 10, 2017)

ddraig said:


> back to hypocrisy hunting!! great


What exactly do you think you've been doing on this thread?


----------



## rubbershoes (Aug 10, 2017)

ddraig said:


> who here is suggesting it's totally binary?
> why should people drawing their own line and having to defend it constantly be condemned?



So meat eaters drawing the line that allows meat eating shouldn't be condemned. Isn't that what the thread is about


----------



## Casually Red (Aug 10, 2017)

For the record I don't believe a fucking word out of them about either the environment or health . No matter how much propaganda they bash out . I'm not giving them an inch . And I'm not saying that piss taking either . They get way too much of a free ride on their claims . I don't trust them , don't believe them . It's an ideological position built around an eating disorder .


----------



## ddraig (Aug 10, 2017)

Casually Red said:


> For the record I don't believe a fucking word out of them about either the environment or health . No matter how much propaganda they bash out . I'm not giving them an inch . And I'm not saying that piss taking either . They get way too much of a free ride on their claims . I don't trust them , don't believe them . It's an ideological position built around an eating disorder .


  oh fucking dear


littlebabyjesus said:


> What exactly do you think you've been doing on this thread?


where to?


----------



## gentlegreen (Aug 11, 2017)

Casually Red said:


> It's an ideological position built around an eating disorder .


I had six poos yesterday. 

I no longer call myself "vegan" - though I am, materially at the moment, but thanks to "vegan (propagandists)" I'm eating a rapidly evolving spectacularly healthy diet - the best in my 57 year life - much better than even during the 20 years I was absolutely "vegan".
And once you realise the value of *actually* "treating your body as a temple", there is so much joy to be found in the quest for better and better ways to venerate it.
And modern vegetables are amazing - in a way that modern animal breeds and animal farming are not.

Oh and what a load of disingenuous crap lazily lifted from "bro" sites advocating the Flintstone lifestyle.

Methinks he doth protest too much ...

Casually Red  how often do you eat green cruciferous veggies, and how much ?
How regular are you in the bathroom ?


----------



## gentlegreen (Aug 11, 2017)

.


----------



## Athos (Aug 11, 2017)

gentlegreen said:


> And once you realise the value of *actually* "treating your body as a temple"...



... you let anyone enter as long as they take their shoes off.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 11, 2017)

Athos said:


> I think I'd reply that we all do things that damage the environment, like flying or using a car.  And that, on balance, the pleasure I get from eating meat outweighs the displeasure of knowing the effects of that choice.


Everybody does something bad so there's no point in trying to improve anything, this applies especially if the "bad" thing that I'm doing is extremely pleasurable. Yeah, that sounds legit.

it's a wonder how we ever managed to stop burning witches and heretics and lessen the amount of racism, sexism and homophobia in the more civilised countries with that sort of "I don't care, I'm all right Jack" attitude. 



Athos said:


> What does 'not ok mean, though? Is your choice to use fossil fuel ok, notwithstanding the harm to the environment it causes?


"Not ok" means whatever you want it to mean and whatever your conscience tells you. Some people in some dark corners of the world believe it's ok to kill gays or to have sex with 8 year olds and chop hands off thieves. As far as I'm concerned those sorts of things are not ok. So who's "right" and how does one measure the "rightness"? Similarly with other (subjective) areas of ethics and morals, as we evolve and hopefully become more better behaved and "civilised", things that were once considered "ok" become "not ok". In my opinion, the non obligate killing and eating of animals is one of those ethical points that is in my DEFINITELY NOT OK box. A non apologetic meat eaters set of boxes is likely quite different from mine and that's up to them, but regardless it won't stop me from behaving according to what I believe to be ok,

"Yeah...buuuut...y_ou can't be a vegan because you drive a car and fly in a plane, fossil fuels tho, and doormice get killed just so that you can have your vegetables...and...and...and I saw you step on a snail...and you've got a leather belt...you fucking vegan hypocrite_". Oh dear, big Yawn! Seriously? On this I agree with ddraig, tedious hypocrisy hunting, scratching around for any little nick nack and tidbit to try and discredit vegans presumably because the meat eaters logical and ethical arguments don't really stand up to any sort of close scrutiny. Even though meat eaters supposedly don't really care about what vegans do or believe, they seem to be prepared to spend quite a lot of their valuable time and energy attempting (and mostly failing) to diss and rubbish the vegan message with rather weak retorts which are commonly used to try and justify the majority default position of not really giving a fuck. Even if all those things were true, non obligate omnivores do all of that AND kill and eat animals unnecessarily on top of flying and driving cars...and all of that just because they like the taste. Marvellous eh?


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 11, 2017)

AnnaKarpik said:


> Veganism is healthier - are you sure? What does healthier mean?  Can you find anyone comparing vegans with meat/fish/dairy eaters that takes account of other life-style factors? I'm genuinely interested, because the Seventh Day Adventist studies (which are conducted on a population with a reasonably similar lifestyle) appear to show that the people eating some fish do better than the vegans.


If you really are genuinely interested then I would suggest doing some investigation for yourself. Even if it is the case that the health benefits are equal, health is only one of the reasons that people become vegan. In my opinion it is the combination of reasons that makes the vegan case strong, and on health alone most of the metrics indicate a plant heavy diet to have better health results.



AnnaKarpik said:


> There are no health benefits to avoiding honey or leather shoes that I have ever heard of.


What the...? 



AnnaKarpik said:


> Growing plants is not necessarily less environmentally destructive than raising meat animals - there are different ways to do both of those things. There must be vegans and vegetarians around who daily consume produce from vast monocultures, if only on cost grounds.


Even if it is true that monocultures are involved in producing food that vegans and vegetarians eat, even more monoculture needs to be produced to provide the feed for the unsustainable levels of livestock, poultry, eggs and dairy that are consumed.



AnnaKarpik said:


> AS I understand it, veganism is not about avoiding causing suffering to animals but rather concentrates on not using animals (or exploiting them to use the more emotionally-loaded, preferred term); if you only talk about meat/fish/eggs you can argue that it's the same thing, as long as you accept that death always involves suffering.  But honey is also verboten, as is eating the eggs of rescued battery hens although both bees and rescue hens appear to enjoy a perfectly happy existence.


Similar to Athos, there seems to be an awful lot of stratching around hunting for vegan gotchas with little or no understanding and mainly speculation and supposition. For those that are not really interested in veganism, don't bother with it, stay away, be happy with your eating of the flesh. You need not concern yourself with what those mad vegans are yapping on about. The thing is, for some strange reason, meat eaters seem to be as just as invested in this topic as the vegans, which I find quite amusing.


----------



## bimble (Aug 11, 2017)

I've just learnt a new word : Orthorexia. Just saying like.  
Orthorexia - Symptoms, Warning Signs and Side Effects of Orthorexia - Timberline Knolls


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 11, 2017)

bimble said:


> I've just learnt a new word : Orthorexia. Just saying like.
> Orthorexia - Symptoms, Warning Signs and Side Effects of Orthorexia - Timberline Knolls


...and?


----------



## bimble (Aug 11, 2017)

And.. I am glad there's a word for the idea I was vaguely trying to describe early on somewhere in this thread. Not interested in fighting any angry vegans!


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 11, 2017)

Looks a bit like a hit and run. 
I am so happy that you found yourself a nice new word and that you're not interested in fighting those mythical angry vegans. Good for you.


----------



## Athos (Aug 11, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> "Not ok" means whatever you want it to mean...



How very convenient for you.


----------



## Athos (Aug 11, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Everybody does something bad so there's no point in trying to improve anything, this applies especially if the "bad" thing that I'm doing is extremely pleasurable.



I've not suggested that. My point was that perhaps, given we all fall short sometimes, all our efforts would be better put towards self-improvement in our own ways, rather than hectoring others from a position of smug sanctimony.  Quite apart from anything else, it's counter-productive.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 11, 2017)

Athos said:


> I've not suggested that. My point was that perhaps, given we all fall short sometimes, all our efforts would be better put towards self-improvement in our own ways, rather than hectoring others from a position of smug sanctimony.  Quite apart from anything else, it's counter-productive.


lol, the "smug santimony" is pure invention and one of the excuses used to justify having a pop. If it's not to your liking you're not obliged to partake, and yet the non obligates appear not to be able to stop themselves. What's that all about?


----------



## Casually Red (Aug 11, 2017)

You'll never win .

Never .


----------



## Wilf (Aug 11, 2017)

tonysingh said:


> 52 pages of people arguing over something as inconsequential as dietary choices. Good job!


Well, somebody forgot to get the quinoa in for his tea tonight.  See, that's me, a vegan and I'm _ANNNNNGGGGGRRRRY!!!!_ mildly vexed.


----------



## Athos (Aug 11, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> lol, the "smug santimony" is pure invention and one of the excuses used to justify having a pop. If it's not to your liking you're not obliged to partake, and yet the non obligates appear not to be able to stop themselves. What's that all about?



I'm nor having a pop; just explaining why some vegans irritate people. And the pointlessness of them behaving that way.


----------



## gentlegreen (Aug 11, 2017)

bimble said:


> I've just learnt a new word : Orthorexia. Just saying like.
> Orthorexia - Symptoms, Warning Signs and Side Effects of Orthorexia - Timberline Knolls





> A person with orthorexia will be obsessed with defining and maintaining the perfect diet, rather than an ideal weight. She will fixate on eating foods that give her a feeling of being pure and healthy. An orthorexic may avoid numerous foods, including those made with:
> 
> 
> Artificial colors, flavors or preservatives
> ...


what a load of bollocks.

Note the use of "she" - and the suggestion that it would be normal to obsess about her weight ..


----------



## bimble (Aug 11, 2017)

Calm down gentlegreen! It's a website for some weird women's treatment centre, that's why the 'she'.
But if you are 'triggered' by reading about the concept I am sorry. It was not intended as an attack or accusation.
It is a thing that I've felt for a long time, that an obsessive focus on dietary rules of whatever kind, when they become a huge part of someone's life and conversation, is not a very healthy thing, that's all, and was glad to find there's a word for that idea of something which resembles in some ways an eating disorder but is not one of the usually recognised ones.


----------



## gentlegreen (Aug 11, 2017)

Your use of the word "triggered" is rather telling ...


----------



## bimble (Aug 11, 2017)

Should I have said 'offended' instead? Or 'angered'? But I didn't put the word here with the intent of attacking you or making you feel bad. I think my ex boyfriend is definitely the thing described and he eats mountains of meat, it's definitely not about what is eaten just about how much the fixed rules of diet assume a huge part in self identity and daily brain-space if you know what I mean.


----------



## gentlegreen (Aug 11, 2017)

Apart from the fact that I'm not at all bothered about GM or much bothered about pesticides - certainly not glyphosate, that could be me - and if I'm at all obsessive, it's because I have just emerged from a phase of my life where I got very careless about nutrition.

I found a Guardian article where 45 minutes of daily exercise is regarded as obsessive - I've done more than that every weekday for 30 years simply by cycling to work.

Orthorexia: when healthy eating turns against you


----------



## gentlegreen (Aug 11, 2017)

Anyway, the new obsessive element of my daily diet is how to fit in 30 grammes of milled flaxseed.... (supplies omega 3 precursors and may help my prostate)


----------



## cantsin (Aug 11, 2017)

not sure if this right place for it, but it felt like veganism reached a new place in mainstream culture for me today, when discussion about potential fantasy football players elicited the comment (rightly or wrongly, and based on no science etc, obvs)  about veteran Sunderland striker Jermaine Defoe :  " he's getting on a bit. but his vegan diet's giving him a big boost /physical advantage...." -  doesn't seem long ago that the exact opposite would have been assumed about the effect of vegan diet on a pro sportsman.


----------



## lefteri (Aug 11, 2017)

gentlegreen said:


> I found a Guardian article where 45 minutes of daily exercise is regarded as obsessive - I've done more than that every weekday for 30 years simply by cycling to work.
> 
> Orthorexia: when healthy eating turns against you



Cycling can be pretty low level exercise though unless you're cycling very vigorously, constantly


----------



## gentlegreen (Aug 11, 2017)

lefteri said:


> Cycling can be pretty low level exercise though unless you're cycling very vigorously, constantly


I don't go nuts, but I like to be drenched in sweat when I arrive


----------



## ddraig (Aug 11, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> What exactly do you think you've been doing on this thread?





bimble said:


> Calm down gentlegreen! It's a website for some weird women's treatment centre, that's why the 'she'.
> But if you are 'triggered' by reading about the concept I am sorry. It was not intended as an attack or accusation.
> It is a thing that I've felt for a long time, that an obsessive focus on dietary rules of whatever kind, when they become a huge part of someone's life and conversation, is not a very healthy thing, that's all, and was glad to find there's a word for that idea of something which resembles in some ways an eating disorder but is not one of the usually recognised ones.


Vegans are generally healthy and healthier than they were before becoming vegan so please stop with this shit, of course it's intended as an attack or a dig at the least

if you're going to have a go and make spurious claims then stand by them


----------



## ddraig (Aug 11, 2017)

more timely aptness


----------



## bimble (Aug 11, 2017)

ddraig said:


> Vegans are generally healthy and healthier than they were before becoming vegan so please stop with this shit, of course it's intended as an attack or a dig at the least
> 
> if you're going to have a go and make spurious claims then stand by them



 For a bunch of non-angry vegans you lot on this thread don't half take things very personally.

What do you think my spurious claim was? I did not suggest vegans are unhealthy ffs.

I'm not at all interested in what you do or don't eat tbh, find it very boring listening to people talking about their dietary choices.

I am really interested though in how come increasing numbers of people around me seem to be living in such a way that controlling  what they eat, their food rules, becomes a central part of their lives and idea of who they are. One friend's just stopped wheat, gluten and dairy, the ex is a paleo-nutter, my Mum's on some really weird diet prescribed by a quack crystal waving nutritionist.
It's a recent thing I think and i find it intriguing and weird, symptomatic of .. something.


----------



## Casually Red (Aug 11, 2017)

gentlegreen said:


> Your use of the word "triggered" is rather telling ...



As is your reaction to it


----------



## Casually Red (Aug 11, 2017)

bimble said:


> For a bunch of non-angry vegans you lot on this thread don't half take things very personally.
> 
> What do you think my spurious claim was? I did not suggest vegans are unhealthy ffs.
> 
> ...



It's identity now . Just look at the way they've forced an alternate identity on the carnists, blood mouths, malzoans etc . It's identity politics crossed with an eating disorder .


----------



## ddraig (Aug 11, 2017)

bimble said:


> For a bunch of non-angry vegans you lot on this thread don't half take things very personally.
> 
> What do you think my spurious claim was? I did not suggest vegans are unhealthy ffs.
> 
> ...


you can ignore the thread you know
so some people defending their ethical and dietary choices on here translates to "becomes a central part of their lives and idea of who they are"
projection much?


----------



## gentlegreen (Aug 11, 2017)

Casually Red said:


> As is your reaction to it


I only have a slight understanding of it.
Ditto "safe spaces".
It's used - along with "SJW" and "feminazi" by messed-up male bloggers like thunderf00t - it's taken over from accusations of "political correctness"

I know to stay clear of that sort of nonsense.


----------



## bimble (Aug 11, 2017)

ddraig i don't think you know what projection means.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 11, 2017)

ddraig said:


> more timely aptness



You do get that nobody's been arguing that here, yes? Athos's point, whether you agree with it or not, was very different. 

Seems to be a bit of a recurring pattern developing on this thread, with you popping up every now and then to misrepresent what others are saying by way of some little cartoon.


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Aug 11, 2017)

rubbershoes said:


> So meat eaters drawing the line that allows meat eating shouldn't be condemned. Isn't that what the thread is about


----------



## ddraig (Aug 11, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> You do get that nobody's been arguing that here, yes? Athos's point, whether you agree with it or not, was very different.
> 
> Seems to be a bit of a recurring pattern developing on this thread, with you popping up every now and then to misrepresent what others are saying by way of some little cartoon.


lol! recurring pattern, that's what you do all the time here on this and other subjects, priceless
time for you to flounce the thread again yet?


----------



## Casually Red (Aug 11, 2017)

gentlegreen said:


> I only have a slight understanding of it.
> Ditto "safe spaces".
> It's used - along with "SJW" and "feminazi" by messed-up male bloggers like thunderf00t - it's taken over from accusations of "political correctness"
> 
> I know to stay clear of that sort of nonsense.



It's actually used by people ...who identify as left wing for some bizarre reason...who insist on trigger warnings and stuff like that . The people who invented safe spaces , jazz handing and the like .
it's in turn scoffed at by people on the left, right and centre . Mentioning " trigger " in a negative fashion doesn't make anyone right wing ( or even Boycie ) . However the right wing have certainly gotten a great deal of internet mileage out of it . Unsurprisingly .


----------



## Spymaster (Aug 11, 2017)

bimble said:


> ddraig i don't think you know what projection means.



Pah!

Ddraigo's clearly a decent geezer, and he's an superb poster in the Wales forum (I lurk there - don't tell anyone-)

But he gets so bent-out-of-shape when it comes to plant-scoffing that it's _really hard_ to resist giving him a prod every now and then!

Is that bad?


----------



## bimble (Aug 11, 2017)

it is not bad. Its healthy, like a lovely spinach and kale smoothie.


----------



## bestkeptsecret (Aug 11, 2017)

I'm not a vegan but I am a vaginatarian - do I get any brownie points for that?


----------



## rubbershoes (Aug 11, 2017)

bestkeptsecret said:


> I'm not a vegan but I am a vaginatarian - do I get any brownie points for that?



No


----------



## bestkeptsecret (Aug 11, 2017)

rubbershoes said:


> No


Damn - Well I can't take meat off the menu. Having to eat paste with the consistency of baby food is bad enough as it is


----------



## mrs quoad (Aug 11, 2017)

bestkeptsecret said:


> Damn - Well I can't take meat off the menu. Having to eat paste with the consistency of baby food is bad enough as it is


Are there many edible pastes that lack the consistency of baby food?

(I added edible, after thinking "grinding paste.")


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 12, 2017)

Athos said:


> How very convenient for you.


...what? lol. You rather "conveniently" surgically removed a snippet, responded with something fairly meaningless, and ignored the rest of the post. Anyway, as I said, what is deemed ok and not ok is not fixed and depends on the individuals beliefs and their circumstances. It's not a fixed thing. If you believe otherwise and believe that what is "ok" is a fixed thing, then it would be interesting to hear your thought processes behind that.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 12, 2017)

ddraig said:


> lol! recurring pattern, that's what you do all the time here on this and other subjects, priceless
> time for you to flounce the thread again yet?


I never flounced. Something else you've made up. I told PaoloSanchez that I would leave them there at a particular point as I thought the discussion was going nowhere. You really need to stop making shit up.

The idea that putting up the number of posts people have made on this thread proves anything is frankly bizarre.


----------



## Athos (Aug 12, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> ...what? lol. You rather "conveniently" surgically removed a snippet, responded with something fairly meaningless, and ignored the rest of the post. Anyway, as I said, what is deemed ok and not ok is not fixed and depends on the individuals beliefs and their circumstances. It's not a fixed thing. If you believe otherwise and believe that what is "ok" is a fixed thing, then it would be interesting to hear your thought processes behind that.



Ood course is not fixed. Which is why many people find a lot of vegans' air of moral superiority irritating.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 12, 2017)

I've been finding it hard to articulate the question that's nagged at me through this thread. I'm going to try to do it here.

Anyone looking in detail at the food production system we have at the moment is unlikely to think it is ok. Various aspects of it are clearly far from ok, primarily to do with animal welfare and environmental degradation. So how do we move forward from here? That's the question that nags at me. What results do we want to produce, and what is the best way to produce those results? What compromises are people prepared to make in order to forge effective alliances that will produce some of those results? Are the vegan activists posting here prepared to work with meat-eaters who want change? Is the free range meat or dairy farmer striving for sustainable and, to their eyes at least, humane farming methods the enemy or a potential ally? If the former, then what sort of change do you think is possible?


----------



## Spymaster (Aug 12, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I've been finding it hard to articulate the question that's nagged at me through this thread. I'm going to try to do it here.
> 
> Anyone looking in detail at the food production system we have at the moment is unlikely to think it is ok. Various aspects of it are clearly far from ok, primarily to do with animal welfare and environmental degradation. So how do we move forward from here? That's the question that nags at me. What results do we want to produce, and what is the best way to produce those results? What compromises are people prepared to make in order to forge effective alliances that will produce some of those results? Are the vegan activists posting here prepared to work with meat-eaters who want change? Is the free range meat or dairy farmer striving for sustainable and, to their eyes at least, humane farming methods the enemy or a potential ally? If the former, then what sort of change do you think is possible?


Vegans are, by definition, extremists. I'll be surprised if any would accept working towards anything other than total abstinence from meat.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 12, 2017)

As a for instance. CIWF. Enemy or potential ally?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 12, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> Vegans are, by definition, extremists. I'll be surprised if any would accept working towards anything other than total abstinence from meat.


Well here we need to be careful in our definitions. There are animal welfare activists who are vegan. Many of the people who work for CIWF are vegan. And then there are vegan activists, such as the people who demonstrate in front of butcher shops. I'll let others decide what kind of activist they are, if indeed they are activists.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 12, 2017)

Athos said:


> Ood course is not fixed. Which is why many people find a lot of vegans' air of moral superiority irritating.


Oh dear. 
Well, as I said before, if you really do find it that irritating, you are not under any obligation to engage or participate in any vegan activity or discussions. (...and yet the subject appears to attract meat eaters like iron fillings to a magnet)

This alleged "air of superiority" that "a lot of vegans" have (no citations) is I suspect yet another rather convenient invention of yours. My non scientific hunch is that the irritation felt by "a lot of" meat eaters is based on their own inferiority complex and the guilty realisation that, as Richard Dawkins very accurately stated, "I have no defense for eating meat" and that it is a morally superior position.

I make no apology for believing veganism to be a morally superior position to meat eatery in the same way that I make no apology for believing that not being a pedophile is morally superior to pedophillia. I try not to rub it in anybody's face, however if meat eaters get up in my grill with the sort of crappy nonsensical arguments and heckling as evidenced in this thread, I reserve the right to stoutly defend my position.


----------



## Athos (Aug 12, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Oh dear.
> Well, as I said before, if you really do find it that irritating, you are not under any obligation to engage or participate in any vegan activity or discussions. (...and yet the subject appears to attract meat eaters like iron fillings to a magnet)
> 
> This alleged "air of superiority" that "a lot of vegans" have (no citations) is I suspect yet another rather convenient invention of yours. My non scientific hunch is that the irritation felt by "a lot of" meat eaters is based on their own inferiority complex and the guilty realisation that, as Richard Dawkins very accurately stated, "I have no defense for eating meat" and that it is a morally superior position.
> ...



Can you really not see why  some people find some vegans' claims to moral superiority irritating?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 12, 2017)

Oh dear indeed.


----------



## bimble (Aug 12, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> This alleged "air of superiority" that "a lot of vegans" have (no citations) is I suspect yet another rather convenient invention of yours. ..
> I make no apology for believing veganism to be a morally superior position to meat eatery in the same way that I make no apology for believing that not being a pedophile is morally superior to pedophillia.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 12, 2017)

Athos said:


> Can you really not see why  some people find some vegans' claims to moral superiority irritating?


I already answered that in my previous post. My non scientific hunch, meat eaters inferiority complex. They can feel it in their bones that what they're doing isn't that great and so scratch around looking for excuses and justifications and someone to lash out at, hence this "smug superior vegan" nonsense. If it bothers you that much then just stay out of the way, which should be very easy with you being in the overwhelming 99% majority. I'm not sure why you folks find that so hard. 

Bottom line is, frankly, I really don't care if you find my position irritating or not, that's up to you. The behaviour of the non obligates in this thread has on balance been much worse than the vegheads (imo), that was mildly irritating I suppose. I think I'll just about survive.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 12, 2017)

If this were just about any other subject, I think many of the same people here privileging individual moral responsibility over class analysis and systems analysis would be acting very differently, and themselves be calling out others for having superficial, moralistic, counterproductive positions.


----------



## Spymaster (Aug 12, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> ... meat eaters inferiority complex. They can feel it in their bones that what they're doing isn't that great and so scratch around looking for excuses and justifications ...


Do you really believe this nonsense? 

It seems to be a vegan trope.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 12, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Bottom line is, frankly, I really don't care if you find my position irritating or not, that's up to you.


This is in the General forum, tbf, so no reason particularly why your position should include some kind of politics. But it really does include zero useful politics. In the end it is little more than self-congratulation. It borders on nihilism.


----------



## Casually Red (Aug 12, 2017)

And I was being mocked and chided earlier...by editor no less.. for saying there was vegan propaganda afoot .

Ha!!


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 12, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> Do you really believe this nonsense?
> 
> It seems to be a vegan trope.


We can only be forgiven for eating meat through this kind of mitigation - we're in denial, we're conflicted, we're ignorant. The alternative is something far worse - that we are monsters. It strikes me as a self-defence mechanism as much as anything, allowing the person to pity us as weak rather than condemn us as evil.


----------



## Athos (Aug 12, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> I already answered that in my previous post. My non scientific hunch, meat eaters inferiority complex. They can feel it in their bones that what they're doing isn't that great and so scratch around looking for excuses and justifications and someone to lash out at, hence this "smug superior vegan" nonsense. If it bothers you that much then just stay out of the way, which should be very easy with you being in the overwhelming 99% majority. I'm not sure why you folks find that so hard.
> 
> Bottom line is, frankly, I really don't care if you find my position irritating or not, that's up to you. The behaviour of the non obligates in this thread has on balance been much worse than the vegheads (imo), that was mildly irritating I suppose. I think I'll just about survive.



I know you don't care if you irritate non-vegans with your sanctimony.  However, given that such a stance is likely to turn people off veganism, I think your attitude is a good example of a phenomenon I've observed; essentially, that furthering the interests of animals comes second to signalling their moral superiority, for many vegans.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 12, 2017)

gentlegreen said:


> what a load of bollocks.
> 
> Note the use of "she" - and the suggestion that it would be normal to obsess about her weight ..


lol, and they complained about the use of the word "carnist", lol. I think the "hit and run" introduction of that word to the thread was yet another rather lame attempt to smear. Some people are really scraping the barrel. I first heard orthorexia used in that heavily biased god awful BBC documentary last year...

Attempting to associate vegans with eating disorders or even worse, claim that veganism itself is some kind of eating disorder is below the belt and dishonest.


----------



## Casually Red (Aug 12, 2017)

Lentilist


----------



## bimble (Aug 12, 2017)

Paolo S your posts make no sense. 
Look at the state of the thing you wrote up there, the one saying that vegans don't claim to be morally superior but also you look down on meat eaters on a similar way to how you might look at say people who want to sexually abuse children. What was that? 
Nobody is saying that veganism is an eating disorder.


----------



## gentlegreen (Aug 12, 2017)

I was directed today to a very dodgy French TV discussion from 1992.
I admit the vegan looks rather under-the-weather...



I haven't been able to work out who that is at 21:21, but she says that vegetable protein was inferior to animal protein and at 40:11 a rep from the meat industry saying that vegetarianism had been declared a mental illness ...

And things haven't improved nearly as well as in the UK :-



Life in France is going to be interesting.


----------



## Spymaster (Aug 12, 2017)

bimble said:


> Paolo S your posts make no sense.


And he keeps posting the same shit over and over again!


----------



## Sphinxminx (Aug 12, 2017)

I was wondering about pets - dogs and cats - do vegans feed them a meat free diet? If that ok for them? ( the pets not the vegans).

Btw this is a genuine query - not intended to be inflammatory.


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Aug 12, 2017)

Sphinxminx said:


> I was wondering about pets - dogs and cats - do vegans feed them a meat free diet? If that ok for them? ( the pets not the vegans).
> 
> Btw this is a genuine query - not intended to be inflammatory.


There are some who try to feed cats veggie/vegan food. They are fucking idiots who shouldn't be allowed to keep animals. 

Dogs are different and afaik can manage on a (presumably carefully chosen) veggie/vegan diet.


----------



## Yossarian (Aug 12, 2017)

Sphinxminx said:


> I was wondering about pets - dogs and cats - do vegans feed them a meat free diet? If that ok for them? ( the pets not the vegans).
> 
> Btw this is a genuine query - not intended to be inflammatory.



Some vegans feed their dogs vegan or vegetarian diets, some allegedly try to feed their cats vegetarian diets but certainly nobody that I know.

IME, most vegans and vegetarians who keep dogs and cats feed them meat and fish because their pets are carnivores.


----------



## Spymaster (Aug 12, 2017)

Surely vegans shouldn't keep pets. Animal exploitation and all that.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 12, 2017)

Cats are obligate carnivores. It is an act of gross stupidity to keep one if you're not prepared to give it meat.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 12, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> Surely vegans shouldn't keep pets. Animal exploitation and all that.


Yep. Cats exploit us something rotten.


----------



## Yossarian (Aug 12, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> Surely vegans shouldn't keep pets. Animal exploitation and all that.



1/10, and the 1 is for spelling exploitation correctly. What is it that you get out of trolling these kind of threads?


----------



## gentlegreen (Aug 12, 2017)

This is Urban - argumentum ad absurdum...


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 12, 2017)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> There are some who try to feed cats veggie/vegan food. They are fucking idiots who shouldn't be allowed to keep animals.
> 
> Dogs are different and afaik can manage on a (presumably carefully chosen) veggie/vegan diet.


Dogs are omnivores, but much more towards the meat-eating balance of the spectrum than, say, humans or pigs. It is species-appropriate to give them lots of meat. 

To quote a vet, if you want a vegan pet, get yourself a rabbit.


----------



## Yossarian (Aug 12, 2017)




----------



## Casually Red (Aug 12, 2017)

bimble said:


> Nobody is saying that veganism is an eating disorder.


----------



## Casually Red (Aug 12, 2017)

Sphinxminx said:


> I was wondering about pets - dogs and cats - do vegans feed them a meat free diet? If that ok for them? ( the pets not the vegans).
> 
> Btw this is a genuine query - not intended to be inflammatory.



This dog expert...himself a former vegan ..would strongly disagree . Reckons its very bad for them . Too much gluten, chemicals etc


----------



## Casually Red (Aug 12, 2017)

He tried veganism , didn't work out for him .


----------



## campanula (Aug 12, 2017)

Who are all these people able to have such '_choice' _over what they eat_? _I find it laughable to take any sort of moral stance over diet...which, for me, has been the most contingent act, predicated almost entirely on a range of conditions out of my hands to change. Time, money, knowledge, the rest of the world...including dependents, access...have dictated my diet to be a mish-mash of what I can afford, can acquire for free, can cook...in the time I have available...and so, over a lifetime, I have embraced various 'ethical' positions (such as the laughable period of insane lurchers when I fondly imagined a diet based on 'wild meat'), have fallen prey to guilt (ensuring I shopped at the expensive wholefoods emporium...and as with many of these decisions, poverty has definitely been involved in the 'purity' of my stance...and I have always been a bit lacking in the willpower dept so once falling off the wagon, it was easy to wallow in the gutter.  And although I have only been saved from ready-meals by greed and money, I had a Cannery Row moment when 2 of my children were still too young to complain...which consisted of strewing edibles onto a tarp on the floor...because who can spend hours arsing about when toast counts as cooking.However, the single biggest decider (for me, as the reluctant household cook) has been the picky choices, imaginary complaints from the hypochondriacs (several of them). I will, I admit, cook any number of sausages just to pander to the lowest common denominator. I am too exhausted to have any moral position at all and wish a hungry pill was available. 

I find the weird foodie thing a bit...decadent and sort of narcissistic...while  fully appreciating the politics of food. It's a fine balance, imo.


----------



## Yossarian (Aug 12, 2017)

Casually Red said:


> He tried veganism , didn't work out for him .




Is Peter Caine a household name in some circles, or is he just some random guy with crows and pigeons wandering around his house and some terrible facial hair difficulties?


----------



## gentlegreen (Aug 12, 2017)

campanula said:


> I find the weird foodie thing a bit...decadent and sort of narcissistic...while  fully appreciating the politics of food. It's a fine balance, imo.


As a gardener, surely cooking up a mass of yummy veggies would come naturally to you ?


----------



## Casually Red (Aug 12, 2017)

Hes apparently well known in new York for dog training and some other stuff .


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 12, 2017)

campanula said:


> Who are all these people able to have such '_choice' _over what they eat_? _I find it laughable to take any sort of moral stance over diet...which, for me, has been the most contingent act, predicated almost entirely on a range of conditions out of my hands to change. Time, money, knowledge, the rest of the world...including dependents, access...have dictated my diet to be a mish-mash of what I can afford, can acquire for free, can cook...in the time I have available...and so, over a lifetime, I have embraced various 'ethical' positions (such as the laughable period of insane lurchers when I fondly imagined a diet based on 'wild meat'), have fallen prey to guilt (ensuring I shopped at the expensive wholefoods emporium...and as with many of these decisions, poverty has definitely been involved in the 'purity' of my stance...and I have always been a bit lacking in the willpower dept so once falling off the wagon, it was easy to wallow in the gutter.  And although I have only been saved from ready-meals by greed and money, I had a Cannery Row moment when 2 of my children were still too young to complain...which consisted of strewing edibles onto a tarp on the floor...because who can spend hours arsing about when toast counts as cooking.However, the single biggest decider (for me, as the reluctant household cook) has been the picky choices, imaginary complaints from the hypochondriacs (several of them). I will, I admit, cook any number of sausages just to pander to the lowest common denominator. I am too exhausted to have any moral position at all and wish a hungry pill was available.
> 
> I find the weird foodie thing a bit...decadent and sort of narcissistic...while  fully appreciating the politics of food. It's a fine balance, imo.



Precisely why the politics of food has to involve, well, politics – not just individuals making choices, but societies effecting change at society-wide level. The choices available to us are contingent on all kinds of things, as you say. 

tbh in most other subjects on here, this is the starting point. But not this, it seems.


----------



## campanula (Aug 12, 2017)

gentlegreen said:


> As a gardener, surely cooking up a mass of yummy veggies would come naturally to you ?



Not really GG. I grow some veggies (which can be processed or stored)...but food is not emotionally neutral for me...and I am completely loathe to allow the parade of contentious issues (especially my own personal antipathy) to make any inroads in my most enjoyable, redeeming, thrilling activity. I love plants for numerous reasons...not just as edibles.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 13, 2017)

Athos said:


> I know you don't care if you irritate non-vegans with your sanctimony.


Er, nope you got that bit wrong. I don't care if shallow superficial obligates choose to feel irritated by the weakness in their own arguments.



Athos said:


> However, given that such a stance is likely to turn people off veganism, I think your attitude is a good example of a phenomenon I've observed; essentially, that furthering the interests of animals comes second to signalling their moral superiority, for many vegans.


Yet more made up psychbabble and pure invention I presume to cover up for you lack of cogent argument. I would hope that the folks that choose to go vegan do so based on the solid foundation of reason, logic and compassion and not be the fickle type that are easily persuaded or disuaded by some random posts on a forum, but regardless, your assertion that what I've posted here is "likely to turn people off veganism" (once again no citation) is yet more completely made up bollocks. The arguments in favour of veganism speak for themselves regardless of individuals. lol @ "for many vegans". I'd love to see the study you conducted to come up with this rubbish.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 13, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> So how do we move forward from here? That's the question that nags at me. What results do we want to produce, and what is the best way to produce those results? What compromises are people prepared to make in order to forge effective alliances that will produce some of those results? Are the vegan activists posting here prepared to work with meat-eaters who want change? Is the free range meat or dairy farmer striving for sustainable and, to their eyes at least, humane farming methods the enemy or a potential ally? If the former, then what sort of change do you think is possible?


I'm not sure that I would count as an "activist". I don't go out of my way to lobby support or protest. I'd consider myself more of an advocate. My sphere of influence are those around me and my purchasing decisions.

I'm not sure what action you are proposing tbh, and I'm not sure why you feel the need to form some kind of alliance with vegans when your position is more compatible with the non obligate omnivore meat eating majority. From my perspective there is little value in supporting "humane slaughter". I won't be going out to support or buy "humanely slaughtered" meat as some kind of "compromise" to make some meat eaters feel better about what they do. The "humane" part makes it ever so slightly "better" I suppose, however the big elephant in the room is the "slaughter" part which you appear to completely gloss over as if it's something insignificant.

It's frankly it's a bit of a nonsense to expect vegans to support ANY kind of slaughter. In the same way that the majority appear not to care about the slaughtering, they also don't care about the treatment as long as they don't see it and get their meat cheap. In the same way that you don't believe it's wrong to slaughter an animal for food when there's no need to, the majority don't believe it's wrong to factory farm and lock animals in prison. Who cares, if they're mistreated, they're only animals, right? 

So how do we move forward? Behave in accordance with your values and beliefs and associate with those that share those beliefs. That's the best suggestion I can offer at the moment. I think it's a bit off trying to point the finger at "extremist" vegans and try blame them for the widespread mistreatment of animals, and bit of a cop out. It is the very high demand for meat products that is the driving force behind those conditions. Changing from feedlot to pasture fed is not practical at the current (and increasing) levels of demand, from either an environmental or an economic point of view.

Of course I'm going to agree that it is wrong to mistreat animals and that we should do what we can to reduce or eliminate that, HOWEVER I and probably most vegans also believe that killing them when we are not obligated to do so is even more wrong and it isn't something that I would condone.


----------



## Athos (Aug 13, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Er, nope you got that bit wrong. I don't care if shallow superficial obligates choose to feel irritated by the weakness in their own arguments.
> 
> Yet more made up psychbabble and pure invention I presume to cover up for you lack of cogent argument. I would hope that the folks that choose to go vegan do so based on the solid foundation of reason, logic and compassion and not be the fickle type that are easily persuaded or disuaded by some random posts on a forum, but regardless, your assertion that what I've posted here is "likely to turn people off veganism" (once again no citation) is yet more completely made up bollocks. The arguments in favour of veganism speak for themselves regardless of individuals. lol @ "for many vegans". I'd love to see the study you conducted to come up with this rubbish.



You really have no empathy, if you still fail to appreciate that what irritates people is many vegans' air of superiority.

I've given a cogent argument: I eat meat because the pleasure it gives me outweighs the benefits (as I perceive them) of not eating meat. Don't confuse your inability to understand that position with a lack of cogency.

I don't need a citation for the proposition that vegan sanctimony puts off potential converts to veganism. I'm a case in point; I have sympathy for veganism (as mentioned earlier). But, part of what puts me off is that so many vegans seem like utter dicks.  (Ones I've dealt with; my experience, rather than any study.)


----------



## UnderAnOpenSky (Aug 13, 2017)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> There are some who try to feed cats veggie/vegan food. They are fucking idiots who shouldn't be allowed to keep animals.
> 
> Dogs are different and afaik can manage on a (presumably carefully chosen) veggie/vegan diet.



It's got taurine added, which is what cats need. You can see how impressed the cat looks.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 13, 2017)

Yossarian said:


> 1/10, and the 1 is for spelling exploitation correctly. What is it that you get out of trolling these kind of threads?


It's the gang of meat-trolls. It is the phenomenon that happens on nearly all forums and all threads where this topic is raised. Bacon mmmmmmm!
It's a bit like how school bullies picking on unpopular kids.
Bullies Pick on Unpopular Kids, Study Finds


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 13, 2017)

Athos said:


> You really have no empathy, if you still fail to appreciate that what irritates people is your air of superiority.


No still wrong. Repeating an error doesn't not magically turn into a truth.  



Athos said:


> I don't need a citation for the proposition. I'm a case in point; I have sympathy for veganism. But, part of what puts me off is that so many vegans seem like utter dicks.  (Ones I've dealt with; my experience, rather than any study. )


Yes, personal anecdotes "I met a vegan once", "I met a black man once", " I met a jew once", "I met a Bulgarian once" ...and he was a dick. 

I suspect that your irritation is caused more by your lack of progress in this debate more than anything else. You appear to have run out of ideas and have alligned yourself with the rest of the troll bully gang (which incidentally includes bonafide dicks...surely that should put you off being an obligate omnivore, no?)


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 13, 2017)

Yossarian said:


> Is Peter Caine a household name in some circles, or is he just some random guy with crows and pigeons wandering around his house and some terrible facial hair difficulties?


He is whatever CR manages to dredge up from his google/youtube search activity, lol.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 13, 2017)

bimble said:


> Paolo S your posts make no sense.


What, none of them? Are you sure? 



bimble said:


> Look at the state of the thing you wrote up there, the one saying that vegans don't claim to be morally superior but also you look down on meat eaters on a similar way to how you might look at say people who want to sexually abuse children. What was that?


lol @ "look at the state of the thing you wrote...".
It might be better if you read it properly and accurately recalled what I actually said rather than your own cockeyed version. 



bimble said:


> Nobody is saying that veganism is an eating disorder.


...and this is the person claiming that my posts make no sense. Just drop a word into a thread for no good reason and run away, and then claim "I wasn't trying to start nuffink...honest guv". A fine example of cowardly trolling.


----------



## Spymaster (Aug 13, 2017)




----------



## Athos (Aug 13, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> No still wrong. Repeating an error doesn't not magically turn into a truth.
> 
> 
> Yes, personal anecdotes "I met a vegan once", "I met a black man once", " I met a jew once", "I met a Bulgarian once" ...and he was a dick.
> ...


----------



## Spymaster (Aug 13, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> No still wrong. Repeating an error doesn't not magically turn into a truth.
> 
> 
> Yes, personal anecdotes "I met a vegan once", "I met a black man once", " I met a jew once", "I met a Bulgarian once" ...and he was a dick.


The irony of this post seems lost on our flower munching friend here!


----------



## bimble (Aug 13, 2017)

Why are you calling the enemy an 'obligate omnivore' PaoloSanchez , you wally ? It's nonsense and directly counter to your argument.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 13, 2017)

Yossarian said:


> Some vegans feed their dogs vegan or vegetarian diets, some allegedly try to feed their cats vegetarian diets but certainly nobody that I know.
> 
> IME, most vegans and vegetarians who keep dogs and cats feed them meat and fish because their pets are carnivores.


When we had cats they were given regular cat food (whiskas). As cats are obligate carnivores it's a lot harder feed them a plant based diet and for them to remain healthy. Harder, but perhaps not impossible.



_Of course, providing your domestic cat with a steady stream of its preferred prey is hardly convenient or humane—and cats can wreak havoc on local wildlife populations if left to forage on their own. So we fill them up on dry “kibble,” which combines animal products with vegetable-based starches, and meat-based canned “wet” foods, many containing parts of animals cats would likely never encounter, much less hunt and kill, in a purely natural situation. *Most cats adapt to such diets, but it is far from ideal nutritionally.*_
_
Veggie Cat Food? Why Not All Cats Need Meat
_
When we had a rescued cat, we fed it regular cat food (whiskas). I would probably do the same if I had a cat now, but I would also investigate to see if anybody has successfully managed to keep a cat healthy on plant based food. I mean if we can create formula based on cows milk to feed human babies and do it quite successfully, it's possible that it can also be done for cats, no?

VeganCats.com - Frequently Asked Questions - Vegan Cat Food - Vegan Dog Food


----------



## Spymaster (Aug 13, 2017)




----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 13, 2017)

bimble said:


> Why are you calling the enemy an 'obligate omnivore' PaoloSanchez , you wally ? It's nonsense and directly counter to your argument.


What enemy? What are you talking about? Why do you post random riddles? When will you post something that actually makes sense and contribute meaningfully to the thread instead of trolling?


----------



## xenon (Aug 13, 2017)

Why would a vegan have a pet cat anyway?


----------



## Spymaster (Aug 13, 2017)




----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 13, 2017)

xenon said:


> Why would a vegan have a pet cat anyway?


For the same reasons that a non vegan would have a pet cat.


----------



## AnnaKarpik (Aug 13, 2017)

xenon said:


> Why would a vegan have a pet cat anyway?



Quite. There is even less excuse for exploiting living things as companions than there is for eating them; at least eating is obligatory.

eta; are these companions animals also sexually mutilated to make them easier for humans to live with?


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 13, 2017)

AnnaKarpik said:


> Quite. There is even less excuse for exploiting living things as companions than there is for eating them; at least eating is obligatory.


First of all, for most modern folk, meat eating is not obligatory, it is a taste preference. Secondly, I can only speak for myself but the cat that we had was an abandoned one that we rescued so I'm not sure that counts as "exploitation". I did not see to many signs of stress and unhappiness when she was with us. 



AnnaKarpik said:


> eta; are these companions animals also sexually mutilated to make them easier for humans to live with?


Hmm, that's an overly dramatic word to use in this instance, no? So I take it if a man has a vasectomy, that's also "sexual mutilation", right? Our cat had already been sterilised before she was with us, and I don't consider it to be sexual mutilation.


----------



## UnderAnOpenSky (Aug 13, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> When we had cats they were given regular cat food (whiskas). As cats are obligate carnivores it's a lot harder feed them a plant based diet and for them to remain healthy. Harder, but perhaps not impossible.
> 
> View attachment 113379
> 
> ...



Ours are fussy buggers as it is. I suspect they'd leave if we started feeding them that. Or get better at hunting I guess.


----------



## xenon (Aug 13, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> For the same reasons that a non vegan would have a pet cat.



   What reasons are they then? I don't have a cat though we had one when I grew up.  Originally it was bought to kill mice.


----------



## xenon (Aug 13, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> First of all, for most modern folk, meat eating is not obligatory, it is a taste preference. Secondly, I can only speak for myself but the cat that we had was an abandoned one that we rescued so I'm not sure that counts as "exploitation". I did not see to many signs of stress and unhappiness when she was with us.
> 
> Hmm, that's an overly dramatic word to use in this instance, no? So I take it if a man has a vasectomy, that's also "sexual mutilation", right? Our cat had already been sterilised before she was with us, and I don't consider it to be sexual mutilation.



 The man has a choice.  Cutting animals. It's fine in some circumstances then?  Such as for human convenience?


----------



## UnderAnOpenSky (Aug 13, 2017)

xenon said:


> What reasons are they then? I don't have a cat though we had one when I grew up.  Originally it was bought to kill mice.



I asked myself that question when the wet nose woke me up this morning. They're kinda cute and most definitely not kept for killing things.


----------



## Spymaster (Aug 13, 2017)

AnnaKarpik said:


> Quite. There is even less excuse for exploiting living things as companions than there is for eating them ...


And why keep a pet whose existence pretty much depends on its owner supporting the slaughterhouse industry?


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 13, 2017)

UnderAnOpenSky said:


> Ours are fussy buggers as it is. I suspect they'd leave if we started feeding them that. Or get better at hunting I guess.


Our cat was very fussy too, and would only eat a particular whiskas flavour. 
tbf, the choice of commercial cat food isn't great, which is perhaps why a lot of domestic cats end up going to the vets anyway for some ailment or other.
If I were to have another cat I would spend the time investigating and checking what others who claim to have successfully raised healthy vegan cats have done. There appear to be at least a few of them "nutters" out there...

_"I have been feeding my rescue FIV cats a vegan formula for more than 20 years extremely successfully. While the predominant objection is that felines are carnivores, an undisputed fact, felines can also adapt well to a well balanced vegan formula. The primary reasons for considering making a cat vegan are:

1. The commercial pet food is plagued with recalls. All commercial pet food brands, including all major brands have been recalled numerous times for having toxic ingredients that have sicken and killed millions of dogs and cats. That’s because they spent billions of dollars in advertising and not in quality. Vegan dog and cat food companies don’t have any of the toxic ingredients their counterparts have, making vegan dog and cat food the healthiest and the best choice.
Vegan dog & cat food companies. EVOLUTION http://www.petfoodshop.com Vdog.com Vegepet.com ami vegan cat food.

2. Ethically and morally, being vegan is about not participating in the suffering and exploitation of animals. Feeding your dog or cat dead animal waste, which is mainly the ingredients on all commercial pet food is cruel and supports the slaughterhouse industry. Instead you should feed your loved ones a complete, balanced vegan food free from toxics and cruelty. The choice is simple."_


----------



## UnderAnOpenSky (Aug 13, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Our cat was very fussy too, and would only eat a particular whiskas flavour.
> tbf, the choice of commercial cat food isn't great, which is perhaps why a lot of domestic cats end up going to the vets anyway for some ailment or other.
> If I were to have another cat I would spend the time investigating and checking what others who claim to have successfully raised healthy vegan cats have done. There appear to be at least a few of them "nutters" out there...
> 
> ...




I know. It's fucked. As a new cat owner last year I spent time researching cat foods that had little in the way of filler and used quality ingredients. My budget wouldn't stretch to some of the poshest brands in tiny sachets, but I tried all the ones within my budget (still a fair bit more then supermarket stuff). We assumed that our cats weren't that food driven.

They went to someone else whilst we were away and was demolishing their cats food. Turns out they just hated the stuff. After many complaints I just gave up and started buying them whiskers which is what they clearly prefer. Supplemented from whatever they can beg from me when I preparing food.


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Aug 13, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I've been finding it hard to articulate the question that's nagged at me through this thread. I'm going to try to do it here.
> 
> Anyone looking in detail at the food production system we have at the moment is unlikely to think it is ok. Various aspects of it are clearly far from ok, primarily to do with animal welfare and environmental degradation. So how do we move forward from here?



We first have to acknowledge a fundamental disagreement that we have: you see factory farming as the problem. I see factory farming as a symptom of a more basic, fundamental problem: the belief that the other animals are commodities for humans to exploit and inflict violence upon when we have no need to. To effectively combat factory farming we have to challenge the idea that it's acceptable to inflict needless violence on the other animals.  



littlebabyjesus said:


> That's the question that nags at me. What results do we want to produce, and what is the best way to produce those results?



The result we (vegans) want is an end to human violence against, and exploitation of, the other animals. The best way to achieve this is by disengaging, as far as practicable, from violent and animal-exploiting practices and encouraging and assisting others to do the same. That's the first step. Once there is a critical mass of people who embrace the vegan ethic, this will open up meaningful possibilities for collective political action.	



littlebabyjesus said:


> What compromises are people prepared to make in order to forge effective alliances that will produce some of those results?



Whatever compromises are necessary to effectively oppose human violence against the other animals.



littlebabyjesus said:


> Are the vegan activists posting here prepared to work with meat-eaters who want change?



I'd enter into an alliance with animal eaters if they are opposing things like the badger cull, fox hunting, vivisection, wild animal circuses or are trying to get cruel practices banned, such as farrowing crates or mutilations without anaesthesia. That being said, in my experience 99% of the people involved in all of these campaigns are vegan anyway.



littlebabyjesus said:


> Is the free range meat or dairy farmer striving for sustainable and, to their eyes at least, humane farming methods the enemy or a potential ally? If the former, then what sort of change do you think is possible?



They are the enemy - because they inflict needless violence on animals. They are also potential allies to the extent that they decide to desist from doing so, like this wonderful man. The sort of change that I think is possible is veganism. Millions of people are already living happy, richly fulfilling lives without supporting violence against and exploitation of the other animals. There is no reason why this shouldn't be the dominant way of living - at least in a developed, industrialised society like our own.


----------



## bimble (Aug 13, 2017)

Anyone seriously considering trying to keep a cat and not feeding them meat , just get a rabbit instead, ffs. Madness.


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Aug 13, 2017)

AnnaKarpik said:


> Quite. There is even less excuse for exploiting living things as companions than there is for eating them; at least eating is obligatory.
> 
> eta; are these companions animals also sexually mutilated to make them easier for humans to live with?



IME most vegans who have cats either bought those cats before they went vegan or they are rescue cats. They regard feeding their cats meat as the lessor of two evils.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 13, 2017)

UnderAnOpenSky said:


> I know. It's fucked. As a new cat owner last year I spent time researching cat foods that had little in the way of filler and used quality ingredients. My budget wouldn't stretch to some of the poshest brands in tiny sachets, but I tried all the ones within my budget (still a fair bit more then supermarket stuff). We assumed that our cats were that food driven.
> 
> They went to someone else whilst we were away and was demolishing their cats food. Turns out they just hated the stuff. After many complaints I just gave up and started buying them whiskers which is what they clearly prefer. Supplemented from whatever they can beg from me when I preparing food.


Yes we ended up throwing away lots of expensive "posh" cat food too. I think maybe Whiskas put some kind of highly addictive cat cocaine in their cat food.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 13, 2017)

Jeff Robinson said:


> We first have to acknowledge a fundamental disagreement that we have: you see factory farming as the problem. I see factory farming as a symptom of a more basic, fundamental problem: the belief that the other animals are commodities for humans to exploit and inflict violence upon when we have no need to. To effectively combat factory farming we have to challenge the idea that it's acceptable to inflict needless violence on the other animals.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Thanks for your reply. Thinking about it that post was basically aimed at you. You are right that we do still have a fundamental disagreement. But I think at least we are able to talk to each other rather than past each other.


----------



## NoXion (Aug 13, 2017)

Every square foot of land occupied or used by humans and their associated activities represents land in which wild animals have either been pushed out, or pushed into the very margins, depending on whether one includes pests, parasites and various other hangers-on in the definition of "wild".

Since vegans and animal rights types supposedly do not privilege the lives of animals over that of humans, then on what basis do humans have a right to exist as a technological species, given the costs of civilization on the rest of nature?


----------



## UnderAnOpenSky (Aug 13, 2017)

NoXion said:


> Every square foot of land occupied or used by humans and their associated activities represents land in which wild animals have either been pushed out, or pushed into the very margins, depending on whether one includes pests, parasites and various other hangers-on in the definition of "wild".
> 
> Since vegans and animal rights types supposedly do not privilege the lives of animals over that of humans, then on what basis do humans have a right to exist as a technological species, given the costs of civilization on the rest of nature?



Even as a meat eater I can see that's a shit argument. You can only make choices based on the world that you live in.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 13, 2017)

Jeff Robinson said:


> We first have to acknowledge a fundamental disagreement that we have: you see factory farming as the problem. I see factory farming as a symptom of a more basic, fundamental problem: the belief that the other animals are commodities for humans to exploit and inflict violence upon when we have no need to. To effectively combat factory farming we have to challenge the idea that it's acceptable to inflict needless violence on the other animals.


Exactly! I'm not sure how it's possible for there to be some kind of alliance between those who believe that it's wrong to kill and eat animals when we have no need to, and those who believe that there's nothing wrong with that. They are polar opposites. 



Jeff Robinson said:


> They are the enemy - because they inflict needless violence on animals. They are also potential allies to the extent that they decide to desist from doing so, like this wonderful man. The sort of change that I think is possible is veganism. Millions of people are already living happy, richly fulfilling lives without supporting violence against and exploitation of the other animals. There is no reason why this shouldn't be the dominant way of living - at least in a developed, industrialised society like our own.


He is indeed a wonderful man and I posted a reference to him earlier in this thread. There are other influential wonderful people out there who are making a difference and are making people think about what they are doing. John Robbins and Howard Lyman both former meat and diary industry insiders then there's people like Dr Vadana Shiva and ex Citibank VP Phillip Wollen. All good people.


----------



## NoXion (Aug 13, 2017)

UnderAnOpenSky said:


> Even as a meat eater I can see that's a shit argument. You can only make choices based on the world that you live in.


 Don't be so pessimistic. The world can be changed, contrary to the words of the naysayers.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 13, 2017)

UnderAnOpenSky said:


> Even as a meat eater I can see that's a shit argument. You can only make choices based on the world that you live in.


One of many I'm afraid. The relentless hunt for anti-vegan "gotchas" is in full swing...

It's a bit like he search for the holy grail, lol.


----------



## Spymaster (Aug 13, 2017)

Ding!


----------



## NoXion (Aug 13, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> One of many I'm afraid. The relentless hunt for anti-vegan "gotchas" is in full swing...
> 
> It's a bit like he search for the holy grail, lol.


So you don't think that animal lives are equal to human lives?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 13, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Exactly! I'm not sure how it's possible for there to be some kind of alliance between those who believe that it's wrong to kill and eat animals when we have no need to, and those who believe that there's nothing wrong with that. They are polar opposites.


And yet such things happen. I linked to an organisation, CIWF, that is run by people who are very often vegan themselves and that forms alliances with meat eaters and meat producers in order to effect change. And they have had tangible results - law-changing results - wrt practices such as farrrowing crates. Not enough, not nearly enough, and they wouldn't claim it was, but very clearly better than not having done that.


----------



## mojo pixy (Aug 13, 2017)

So now I'm on the right thread (if this thread is in any sense _right_) then why is vegan pronounced "veegun" and not "veg'un" (_veg_ as in vegetable, vegetarian etc)

What's the point except to make veg'uns feel better about the nomenclature?


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 13, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> And yet such things happen. I linked to an organisation, CIWF, that is run by people who are very often vegan themselves and that forms alliances with meat eaters and meat producers in order to effect change. And they have had tangible results - law-changing results - wrt practices such as farrrowing crates. Not enough, not nearly enough, and they wouldn't claim it was, but very clearly better than not having done that.


Fine, if that's your calling then go for it and see how you get on. 

There is a fundamental principle at steak (badumtss) here which I don't believe it's reasonable to expect most vegans to find at all acceptable. As JR accurately put it, factory farming is the symptom. The real cause is the high demand for meat, dairy, fish and eggs. Changing the farming practices that produce the end product that people are buying is a bit "arse about face" imo. I would have thought that the biggest bang for your buck would be from changing the attitudes of the people who buy the stuff. 

Most vegans would include slaughtering with all the other animal welfare items, and slaughtering a well cared for animal is perhaps an even bigger betrayal and inhumanity than factory farming, in that at least they are relieved of their misery.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 13, 2017)

Well we fundamentally disagree on the real cause here. The real cause of the destructive nature of modern farming practices is the capitalist mode of production. By capitalist logic, it is better to ruin the soil with 50 years' exploitation then abandon it than to farm that land in a sustainable way that gives a lower return on the capital invested in it but does so indefinitely. 

I'll give you a worked example:

A tract of land can be managed in a sustainable way that produces a 10k return per year to the farmer, a way involving mixed farming, rotation, etc. But the farmer calculates that he needs at least 20k to make farming a viable living. By making certain capital investments in technology, the farmer can increase yield in the short term to make that 20k, paying back the capital investment over time, let us say 50 years. So the farmer gets his living, capital gets its return, and 50 years later the land is useless as the soil has been degraded so much. The reason that farmer couldn't make a living without the capital investment is because the capitalist system has driven prices down due to the fact that this investment/higher yield/destruction option exists alongside the option of cheaper imports. The alternative is just to abandon the land and leave it unfarmed, which in practice is often what happens. So you end up with some land being overexploited while other land is not exploited at all, all in the name of maximising returns on capital over the short term (and when it comes to land, 50 years is very much the short term), which is the only thing capitalism is interested in. 

That's what we're up against.


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Aug 13, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> And yet such things happen. I linked to an organisation, CIWF, that is run by people who are very often vegan themselves and that forms alliances with meat eaters and meat producers in order to effect change. And they have had tangible results - law-changing results - wrt practices such as farrrowing crates. Not enough, not nearly enough, and they wouldn't claim it was, but very clearly better than not having done that.



Farrowing crates are not banned and gestation crates are still legal for the first four weeks of a sow's pregnancy. Cages for laying hens have also not been banned, they have just been substituted for slightly larger cages. Veal crates have been banned, but calves are still ripped away from their mothers shortly after birth and live in isolated, barren pens before being killed. In other words these individuals still have to endure forms of suffering and torture that I would not wish on my worst enemy. Why should I or anybody else support these practices when there are an abundance of alternatives now available?


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Aug 13, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Well we fundamentally disagree on the real cause here. The real cause of the destructive nature of modern farming practices is the capitalist mode of production. By capitalist logic, it is better to ruin the soil with 50 years' exploitation then abandon it than to farm that land in a sustainable way that gives a lower return on the capital invested in it but does so indefinitely.
> 
> I'll give you a worked example:
> 
> ...



Well quite, but surely this makes the prospects for the humane treatment of exploited animals even more fanciful? It seems more plausible that we ought to remove animals from the sphere of commodity exchange entirely, if we are concerned about their welfare. Capitalists only care about the bottom line - if we boycott animal products they will stop producing them and animals will stop being bred into miserable lives.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 13, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Well we fundamentally disagree on the real cause here. The real cause of the destructive nature of modern farming practices is the capitalist mode of production. By capitalist logic, it is better to ruin the soil with 50 years' exploitation then abandon it than to farm that land in a sustainable way that gives a lower return on the capital invested in it but does so indefinitely.


Yes the economic system does play a major part in how our food is produced, there would not be any factory farmed and slaughtered animals if there wasn't the demand for them. It is the publics insatiable appetite for animal products that encourages the suppliers to meat (  )  that demand. Simply changing the farming practices, whilst in itself is an improvement, is like trying to put a band aid over a gaping wound.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 13, 2017)

An excerpt from this excellent book...







*THE SLAUGHTERHOUSE*

_When you picture grass-fed beef, you probably envision an idyllic scene of a cow outside in a pasture munching happily on grass. That is certainly the image those endorsing and selling these products would like you to hold. And there is some truth to it.

But it is only a part of the story. There is something missing from such a pleasant picture—something that nevertheless remains an ineluctable part of the actual reality. Grass-fed beef does not just come to you straight from God's green Earth. It also comes to you via the slaughterhouse.

The lives of grass-fed livestock are more humane and natural than the lives of animals confined in factory farms and feedlots, but their deaths are often just as terrifying and cruel. If they are taken to a conventional slaughterhouse, as indeed most of them are, they are just as likely as feedlot animals to be skinned while alive and fully conscious, and just as apt to be butchered and have their feet cut off while they are still breathing—distressing realities that tragically occur every hour in meat-packing plants nationwide. Confronting the brutal realities of modern slaughterhouses can be a harsh reminder that those who contemplate only the pastoral image of cattle patiently foraging do not see the whole picture._

No Happy Cows: Dispatches from the Frontlines of the Food Revolution: Amazon.co.uk: John Robbins: 9781573245753: Books


----------



## AnnaKarpik (Aug 13, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> First of all, for most modern folk, meat eating is not obligatory, it is a taste preference. Secondly, I can only speak for myself but the cat that we had was an abandoned one that we rescued so I'm not sure that counts as "exploitation". I did not see to many signs of stress and unhappiness when she was with us.
> 
> Hmm, that's an overly dramatic word to use in this instance, no? So I take it if a man has a vasectomy, that's also "sexual mutilation", right? Our cat had already been sterilised before she was with us, and I don't consider it to be sexual mutilation.



'Signs of distress' are neither here nor there; if keeping animals for meat is exploitation, then keeping companion animals is too. And feeding meat to a companion animal is supporting the meat industry as much as eating the stuff yourself. 

You might well be too young to know this, but a vasectomy does not deprive a man (or any male creature) of a sex life, so consent aside, is not the same as the mutilation of castration or spaying.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 13, 2017)

AnnaKarpik said:


> 'Signs of distress' are neither here nor there; if keeping animals for meat is exploitation, then keeping companion animals is too. And feeding meat to a companion animal is supporting the meat industry as much as eating the stuff yourself.


Another "gotcha" hunting session. 
So keeping a rescued abandoned cat is equivalent to keeping an animal for meat? Really? 



AnnaKarpik said:


> You might well be too young to know this, but a vasectomy does not deprive a man (or any male creature) of a sex life, so consent aside, is not the same as the mutilation of castration or spaying.


Myths and facts about spaying and neutering : The Humane Society of the United States


----------



## AnnaKarpik (Aug 13, 2017)

Jeff Robinson said:


> IME most vegans who have cats either bought those cats before they went vegan or they are rescue cats. They regard feeding their cats meat as the lessor of two evils.



Have I got this right, it's ok to farm animals to feed other animals but not to feed people? Why isn't it the lesser of two evils to let the cat be put down humanely and stop supporting the exploitation of farm animals? I would suggest that campaigning against keeping companion animals, and the subsequent absence of a market for the bits of creatures that people cannot or will not eat would go some way to pricing meat out of the reach of many people thus reducing the number of meat animals being raised. And why is it OK that animals be used to satisfy the emotional needs of humans but not OK that they be used to provide food, footwear or shelter? Humans can - and arguably should - find companionship with other humans.


----------



## AnnaKarpik (Aug 13, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Another "gotcha" hunting session.
> So keeping a rescued abandoned cat is equivalent to keeping an animal for meat? <snip>



Who said that?


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 13, 2017)

AnnaKarpik said:


> Who said that?


_"if keeping animals for meat is exploitation, then keeping companion animals is too."_
Really?


----------



## AnnaKarpik (Aug 13, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> _"if keeping animals for meat is exploitation, then keeping companion animals is too."_



Serious question - is English your first language?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 13, 2017)

AnnaKarpik said:


> Have I got this right, it's ok to farm animals to feed other animals but not to feed people? Why isn't it the lesser of two evils to let the cat be put down humanely and stop supporting the exploitation of farm animals? I would suggest that campaigning against keeping companion animals, and the subsequent absence of a market for the bits of creatures that people cannot or will not eat would go some way to pricing meat out of the reach of many people thus reducing the number of meat animals being raised. And why is it OK that animals be used to satisfy the emotional needs of humans but not OK that they be used to provide food, footwear or shelter? Humans can - and arguably should - find companionship with other humans.



wrt 'using' pets, I would suggest that, with cats and dogs, at least, that's not the best way to describe the relationship. We use one another, and have done ever since these relationships started. You can't really make that argument about animals bred for meat.


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Aug 13, 2017)

AnnaKarpik said:


> Have I got this right, it's ok to farm animals to feed other animals but not to feed people? Why isn't it the lesser of two evils to let the cat be put down humanely and stop supporting the exploitation of farm animals? I would suggest that campaigning against keeping companion animals, and the subsequent absence of a market for the bits of creatures that people cannot or will not eat would go some way to pricing meat out of the reach of many people thus reducing the number of meat animals being raised. And why is it OK that animals be used to satisfy the emotional needs of humans but not OK that they be used to provide food, footwear or shelter? Humans can - and arguably should - find companionship with other humans.



No it's not okay. We shouldn't be breeding cats as pets in the first place but the fact is that we have cats in shelters and the question is what should we do with them. There are two options (assuming that the cat's nutritional needs cannot be met with fortified plant foods): (a) kill the cat or (b) adopt them and feed them other animals. It's a genuinely morally difficult dilemma, one that vegans are not responsible for and wish didn't arise in the first place. I am not sure what I think about it, but it's very far down my list of practical concerns about the way we treat other animals.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 13, 2017)

Jeff Robinson said:


> No it's not okay. We shouldn't be breeding cats as pets in the first place but the fact is that we have cats in shelters and the question is what should we do with them. There are two options (assuming that the cat's nutritional needs cannot be met with fortified plant foods): (a) kill the cat or (b) adopt them and feed them other animals. It's a genuinely morally difficult dilemma, one that vegans are not responsible for and wish didn't arise in the first place. I am not sure what I think about it, but it's very far down my list of practical concerns about the way we treat other animals.


Cats unlike dogs need meat in their diets


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 13, 2017)

Jeff Robinson said:


> No it's not okay. We shouldn't be breeding cats as pets in the first place but the fact is that we have cats in shelters and the question is what should we do with them. There are two options (assuming that the cat's nutritional needs cannot be met with fortified plant foods): (a) kill the cat or (b) adopt them and feed them other animals. It's a genuinely morally difficult dilemma, one that vegans are not responsible for and wish didn't arise in the first place. I am not sure what I think about it, but it's very far down my list of practical concerns about the way we treat other animals.


To be clear, is it right that you don't think it's ok to breed any animals as pets? What about using animals as, for instance, guide dogs?


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 13, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> To be clear, is it right that you don't think it's ok to breed any animals as pets? What about using animals as, for instance, guide dogs?


You think guide dogs are pets? Wtf?


----------



## AnnaKarpik (Aug 13, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> wrt 'using' pets, I would suggest that, with cats and dogs, at least, that's not the best way to describe the relationship. We use one another, and have done ever since these relationships started. You can't really make that argument about animals bred for meat.



I really don't see any distinction; meat animals are fed, watered, sheltered, medicated. Some of them are probably named and get their ears scratched. They broadly get from people what pets get from people.


----------



## UnderAnOpenSky (Aug 13, 2017)

AnnaKarpik said:


> I really don't see any distinction; meat animals are fed, watered, sheltered, medicated. Some of them are probably named and get their ears scratched. They broadly get from people what pets get from people.



I've heard that naming animals isn't a great move if your going to eat them later.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 13, 2017)

UnderAnOpenSky said:


> I've heard that naming animals isn't a great move if your going to eat them later.


Depends what you call them, e.g. dinner, thanksgiving (in Canada and America)


----------



## AnnaKarpik (Aug 13, 2017)

Jeff Robinson said:


> No it's not okay. We shouldn't be breeding cats as pets in the first place but the fact is that we have cats in shelters and the question is what should we do with them. There are two options (assuming that the cat's nutritional needs cannot be met with fortified plant foods): (a) kill the cat or (b) adopt them and feed them other animals. It's a genuinely morally difficult dilemma, one that vegans are not responsible for and wish didn't arise in the first place. I am not sure what I think about it, but it's very far down my list of practical concerns about the way we treat other animals.



Fair enough. Human interference in the lives of other species isn't going to end before the extinction of humans probably.


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Aug 13, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> To be clear, is it right that you don't think it's ok to breed any animals as pets? What about using animals as, for instance, guide dogs?



I certainly think we shouldn't breed obligate carnivores period. I certainly think that we should adopt and foster companion animals rather than buy them from breeders. I suspect that pet ownership generally is wrong. Can breeding guide dogs be justified? I'm not sure. It's an issue I hadn't considered until you asked me. Veganism, like every ethical doctrine, has to deal with hard cases, but I'm not so interested in discussing those whilst there are practices so manifestly and obviously unjust as our use of animals for food.


----------



## Athos (Aug 13, 2017)

Jeff Robinson said:


> I certainly think we shouldn't breed obligate carnivores period. I certainly think that we should adopt and foster companion animals rather than buy them from breeders. I suspect that pet ownership generally is wrong. Can breeding guide dogs be justified? I'm not sure. It's an issue I hadn't considered until you asked me. Veganism, like every ethical doctrine, has to deal with hard cases, but I'm not so interested in discussing those whilst there are practices so manifestly and obviously unjust as our use of animals for food.



But, surely it's around the margins - the difficult cases - where principles are clarified?  It's hard to know where to draw the line on exploiting animals without some unified conception of why (and when) it's ok to do so. Also, it's that absence of a  coherent ideology that leaves some vegans exposed to charges of hypocrisy.


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Aug 13, 2017)

Athos said:


> But, surely it's around the margins - the difficult cases - where principles are clarified?  It's hard to know where to draw the line on exploiting animals without some unified conception of why (and when) it's ok to do so. Also, it's that absence of a  coherent ideology that leaves some vegans exposed to charges of hypocrisy.



These problems occur in all moral domains. For example most people accept that it's generally wrong to kill other humans but there are numerous disputes about when it is permissible to kill (e.g. war, abortion, euthanasia, death penalty and so forth). Similarly it's not incoherent to think that it's generally wrong to exploit and kill animals whilst acknowledging that there are tricky cases where it might be okay (often these cases are tricky for epistemic rather than normative reasons - I don't know anything about guide dogs or potential viable alternatives so I'm loath to comment without possession of all the relevant information).


----------



## Athos (Aug 13, 2017)

Jeff Robinson said:


> These problems occur in all moral domains. For example most people accept that it's generally wrong to kill other humans but there are numerous disputes about when it is permissible to kill (e.g. war, abortion, euthanasia, death penalty and so forth). Similarly it's not incoherent to think that it's generally wrong to exploit and kill animals whilst acknowledging that there are tricky cases where it might be okay (often these cases are tricky for epistemic rather than normative reasons - I don't know anything about guide dogs or potential viable alternatives so I'm loath to comment without possession of all the relevant information).



 Of course. And i wouldn"t accuse you of incoherence. 

I guess we seek to resolve some of those dilemmas (to some extent) with conceptions of human rights.  

Your answer presents the obvious question of what it is about those situations where it might be ok that makes them different from those where it is not. Without being able to point to that, it's hard to explain veganism on anything nor than sentimental grounds (not that that"s necessarily a problem).


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Aug 13, 2017)

Athos said:


> Of course. And i wouldn"t accuse you of incoherence.
> 
> I guess we seek to resolve some of those dilemmas (to some extent) with conceptions of human rights.
> 
> Your answer presents the obvious question of what it is about those situations where it might be ok that makes them different from those where it is not. Without being able to point to that, it's hard to explain veganism on anything nor than sentimental grounds (not that that"s necessarily a problem).



There are a variety of different ethical theories one could plug in, but at it's simplest for me it's the harm principle. It's prima facie wrongful to harm others unless you have sufficiently weighty reasons for doing so. This is why killing animals for food is an easy case for me: we inflict huge harm on animals (torture, suffering and killing) and the reasons we do so are not sufficiently weighty (pleasure and convenience basically). Guide dogs are a harder case because, without knowing the facts at least, it is not clear to what extent guide dogs are harmed per se (clearly far less than factory farmed animals at any rate) and the interest they serve looks sufficiently weightier than mere pleasure and convenience. I'm not conceding that guide dogs are morally permissible btw, I just don't have the knowledge required for an informed assessment. 

Hard cases are unavoidable however, whatever ethical theory you plug in, in any context (human rights raise numerous complex issues, as the voluminous jurisprudence of HR courts and tribunals show us).


----------



## Athos (Aug 13, 2017)

Jeff Robinson said:


> There are a variety of different ethical theories one could plug in, but at it's simplest for me it's the harm principle. It's prima facie wrongful to harm others unless you have sufficiently weighty reasons for doing so.


 
Interesting. But presents more questions e.g. whether the question of sufficiency turns on the nature of the other.


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Aug 13, 2017)

Athos said:


> Interesting. But presents more questions e.g. whether the question of sufficiency turns on the nature of the other.



The capacity of the other to be harmed, and the extent to which they can be harmed, are all that matters about their nature. This is to me is the singularly most beautiful ethical insight of veganism, animal rights etc.


----------



## Athos (Aug 13, 2017)

Jeff Robinson said:


> The capacity of the other to be harmed, and the extent to which they can be harmed, are all that matters about their nature. This is to me is the singularly most beautiful ethical insight of veganism, animal rights etc.



And by what do you measure that capacity? And what abouts to harm e.g. an imposition on liberty, physical pain, etc.?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 13, 2017)

Jeremy Bentham on this 200 years ago still sounds remarkably modern.



> Other animals, which, on account of their interests having been neglected by the insensibility of the ancient jurists, stand degraded into the class of things. ... The day has been, I grieve it to say in many places it is not yet past, in which the greater part of the species, under the denomination of slaves, have been treated ... upon the same footing as ... animals are still. The day may come, when the rest of the animal creation may acquire those rights which never could have been withholden from them but by the hand of tyranny. The French have already discovered that the blackness of skin is no reason why a human being should be abandoned without redress to the caprice of a tormentor. It may come one day to be recognized, that the number of legs, the villosity of the skin, or the termination of the os sacrum, are reasons equally insufficient for abandoning a sensitive being to the same fate. What else is it that should trace the insuperable line? Is it the faculty of reason, or perhaps, the faculty for discourse?...the question is not, Can they reason? nor, Can they talk? but, Can they suffer? Why should the law refuse its protection to any sensitive being?... The time will come when humanity will extend its mantle over everything which breathes...



I agree with him that 'Can they suffer?' is the right question, and 'stand degraded into the class of things' is a very good way of putting it. However, 'extending its mantle over everything which breathes' is difficult, practically difficult as much as anything, as a consequence of the nature of life itself and competition for limited resources. At best we negotiate a path through life aware of these issues. I don't see a resolution of them as ever being possible. 

I think Bentham would be rather disappointed to discover where we are 200 years on.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 13, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I think Bentham would be rather disappointed to discover where we are 200 years on.


Does he sound modern on punishment, lbj? Bit pick and mix this. But we all know where (most of) Bentham is 200 years on.


----------



## bimble (Aug 13, 2017)

Jeff Robinson said:


> The capacity of the other to be harmed, and the extent to which they can be harmed, are all that matters about their nature. This is to me is the singularly most beautiful ethical insight of veganism, animal rights etc.


Can oysters be harmed or do you have to have a nervous system for that?


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 13, 2017)

bimble said:


> Can oysters be harmed or do you have to have a nervous system for that?


oysters have nervous systems, chuck


[Content removed at request of poster]


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Aug 13, 2017)

Athos said:


> And by what do you measure that capacity? And what abouts to harm e.g. an imposition on liberty, physical pain, etc.?



We measure this capacity with both our common sense and the best available information from the empirical sciences.

An individual is harmed to the extent that their interests are set back and their interests are determined by the natures. With regard to liberty, the more autonomous the being is the the greater the harm in restricting their liberty. A normal adult human being has a nature such that denying them liberty is a serious setting back of their interests. A small child or a severely cognitively impaired human (I.e in the late stages of dimentia) have very much weaker liberty interests as do many nonhuman animals. Certain nonhuman animals such as the great apes, cetaceans, elephants, parrots and corvidae have a degree of practical autonomy such that they have some liberty interests.

When it comes to physical (and mental) pain and suffering, this is something that all sentient beings have an interest in avoiding. Sentient beings share a nature such that pain of the same duration and intensity is (all else equal) equally harmful regardless of the organism it manifests in. (See Bentham quote above)

There are other interests too, but that's just a response to the two you mentioned.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 13, 2017)

AnnaKarpik said:


> Serious question - is English your first language?


Serious question - was that a serious question?

You see no difference between keeping an animal for meat and keeping an animal as a pet. 


AnnaKarpik said:


> I really don't see any distinction; meat animals are fed, watered, sheltered, medicated. Some of them are probably named and get their ears scratched. They broadly get from people what pets get from people.


Pets on the whole are usually treated MUCH better than animals bred for food, not always the case but mostly so. Also pets don't usually have a bolt shot through their head and their throats cut, but apart from those two glaring differences, I guess they're both exactly the same.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 13, 2017)

Jeff Robinson said:


> We measure this capacity with both our common sense and the best available information from the empirical sciences.
> 
> An individual is harmed to the extent that their interests are set back and their interests are determined by the natures. With regard to liberty, the more autonomous the being is the the greater the harm in restricting their liberty. A normal adult human being has a nature such that denying them liberty is a serious setting back of their interests. A small child or a severely cognitively impaired human (I.e in the late stages of dimentia) have very much weaker liberty interests as do many nonhuman animals. Certain nonhuman animals such as the great apes, cetaceans, elephants, parrots and corvidae have a degree of practical autonomy such that they have some liberty interests..



Yes, I don't see any other way to approach this. In the case of cetaceans and elephants, the only conclusion possible is that captivity _of any kind_ is a cause of suffering. This is starting to dawn on more people now I think.


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Aug 13, 2017)

bimble said:


> Can oysters be harmed or do you have to have a nervous system for that?



They lack a central nervous system but they do have nerve ganglia. I think the dominant view is that they are not sentient, and in which case they cannot be harmed on my view . But I don't eat them for two reasons (well three if you include me thinking they taste gross!). First, I adopt a precautionary principle and avoid interfering with a potentially sentient being when I don't need to, and second because consuming other animals, even if they are not sentient, is part of a culture that I don't want to support or endorse. Can't fully articulate the second thought ATM, but that's roughly it.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 13, 2017)

Jeff Robinson said:


> I certainly think we shouldn't breed obligate carnivores period. I certainly think that we should adopt and foster companion animals rather than buy them from breeders. I suspect that pet ownership generally is wrong. Can breeding guide dogs be justified? I'm not sure. It's an issue I hadn't considered until you asked me. Veganism, like every ethical doctrine, has to deal with hard cases, but I'm not so interested in discussing those whilst there are practices so manifestly and obviously unjust as our use of animals for food.


I always felt uneasy about feeding my our cat Whiskas when we were looking after her. Domestic cats and dogs exist. Perhaps we shouldn't really be breeding them or even be encouraging the breeding of them but they are already here and they sometimes breed themselves independently of us. Feeding cat food from animals that have been killed is a dilemma that some vegans have to face. Some deal with it by not having cats at all, and a very small minority try to do so by feeding them fortified plant based foods, and some will give them regular cat food, like we did (after trying different options which she didn't like). Now I don't have a cat and have no plans to get another one, however if one did appear on my doorstep again that needed help I might be in the same position again. 

As you said compared to all the other issues surrounding the treatment of animals, this is a comparatively minor one. The impression that I get is that people who are not vegan and don't really have an interest in becoming vegan try to make mischief and use these kind of side issues to find every little chink in the vegan amoury, so that if you're not what they consider to be a 100% perfect vegan, it justifies their meat consumption.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 13, 2017)

Jeff Robinson said:


> They lack a central nervous system but they do have nerve ganglia. I think the dominant view is that they are not sentient, and in which case they cannot be harmed on my view . But I don't eat them for two reasons (well three if you include me thinking they taste gross!). First, I adopt a precautionary principle and avoid interfering with a potentially sentient being when I don't need to, and second because consuming other animals, even if they are not sentient, is part of a culture that I don't want to support or endorse. Can't fully articulate the second thought ATM, but that's roughly it.


We touched on this earlier in the thread. In order to suffer, you need to have a mind. Few people  - well, perhaps phildwyer  - argue that only humans have minds. That's clearly ludicrous. But it is a tricky thing to establish where mind starts. 

Various things I have read trying to grapple with this have come up with the idea of a 'proto-mind' to describe marginal cases, but I'm not so sure how helpful that is. In _The feeling of what happens_, Antonio Damasio makes a distinction between what he calls an 'extended consciousness' that encompasses awareness of past and future and a more immediate consciousness lacking extension across time and space. He only very reluctantly admits that elephants show evidence of limited extended consciousness, where I would say they show bountiful evidence of extension equal to that of humans. When I first read Damasio, I thought he was mostly right, but since then I've reached the conclusion that he fell into the trap of using humans as the measure of things and unconsciously perhaps setting humans at the top not as a conclusion but as an assumption. 

All that said, for the purposes of arguments over meat-eating, I would say that the animals we breed for meat all have minds. We should certainly assume that they do. And I think most people would accept that. In that at least, we have perhaps moved somewhat towards Bentham.


----------



## bimble (Aug 13, 2017)

littlebabyjesus May I recommend.. "Other Minds - the Octopus and the evolution of intelligent life".
(I haven't finished yet but it is a very good book).
He talks about how impossible it is to not do that, not use our selves - our bodies and brains and experience - as the measuring stick.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 13, 2017)

bimble said:


> littlebabyjesus May I recommend.. "Other Minds - the Octopus and the evolution of intelligent life".
> (I haven't finished yet but it is a very good book).


Ta. I will recommend to you Beyond Words. 

Best book on the subject I've read, it reverses many of the usual scientific protocols regarding attaching intention to the behaviour of other animals (never do it unless you can prove it, and even then you're committing professional suicide), and gives a very robust scientific justification for doing so.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 13, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Jeremy Bentham on this 200 years ago still sounds remarkably modern.
> 
> I agree with him that 'Can they suffer?' is the right question, and 'stand degraded into the class of things' is a very good way of putting it. However, 'extending its mantle over everything which breathes' is difficult, practically difficult as much as anything, as a consequence of the nature of life itself and competition for limited resources. At best we negotiate a path through life aware of these issues. I don't see a resolution of them as ever being possible.
> 
> I think Bentham would be rather disappointed to discover where we are 200 years on.


Jean-Jacques Rousseau might have been one of "The French" that Jeremy was referring to...

"_By this method also we put an end to the time-honored disputes concerning the participation of animals in natural law: for it is clear that, being destitute of intelligence and liberty, they cannot recognize that law; as they partake, however, in some measure of our nature, in consequence of the sensibility with which they are endowed, they ought to partake of natural right; so that mankind is subjected to a kind of obligation even toward the brutes. It appears, in fact, that if I am bound to do no injury to my fellow-creatures, this is less because they are rational than because they are sentient beings: and this quality, being common both to men and beasts, ought to entitle the latter at least to the privilege of not being wantonly ill-treated by the former._"

I would also recommend two out of print books that discuss this topic in more depth by Hans Reusch.
The Slaughter Of The Innocent
The Naked Empress


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 13, 2017)

bimble said:


> He talks about how impossible it is to not do that, not use our selves - our bodies and brains and experience - as the measuring stick.


Maybe. But in our culture at least there is often an unspoken assumption of humans somehow naturally at the top. I think I blame a lot of this on religion, and the Abrahamic religions in particular: the idea that god made humans in its own image and that the world is here _for us_ is a poisonous one.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 13, 2017)

While we're recommending books, I've just read a remarkable book, _Elephants on the Edge_ by GA Bradshaw. 

She uses tools developed for human psychiatry to analyse case studies of abused elephants. It's an attempt at cross-species psychiatry, explaining transgressive behaviour in terms of attachment theory and trauma theory. But she does not crudely place human categories on elephants, rather seeing how the categories might fit given our differences, comparing yes, but not assuming human superiority, as open to learning about humans from elephants as vice versa.


----------



## mojo pixy (Aug 13, 2017)

Vegan. Sounds like _hedgen_

/edit: it's tickling me just now because before this week it had never occurred to me. This is what happens when a word gets repeated over and over in my head, it begins to disintegrate and reform in unpredictable ways.

But this is an epiphanic moment for me.


----------



## AnnaKarpik (Aug 13, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Serious question - was that a serious question?
> 
> You see no difference between keeping an animal for meat and keeping an animal as a pet.
> 
> Pets on the whole are usually treated MUCH better than animals bred for food, not always the case but mostly so. Also pets don't usually have a bolt shot through their head and their throats cut, but apart from those two glaring differences, I guess they're both exactly the same.



The point that you are at pains to miss is that it makes no difference to a meat animal who eats it at the end of its life. If you buy meat you are supporting the meat industry.
If I paraphrase you might get it; I see no difference between you eating meat and you purchasing meat so that your cat can eat it. And by difference, as you assuredly need that pointing out too, I mean that the animals killed for food will not be treated any better or worse because of the end-user's species.

You seem to be saying that the the manner of a pet's death is important rather than the fact of it. Why does that not apply to meat animals?


----------



## Athos (Aug 13, 2017)

Jeff Robinson said:


> Sentient beings share a nature such that pain of the same duration and intensity is (all else equal) equally harmful regardless of the organism it manifests in.



Can you sensibly assert equalivalence between humans and animals with a parenthetical "all else equal"? 

Eta: Though I guess, in fairness, that question goes less to the nature and extent of harm as to the question of whether there's a moral imperative to avoid harm of a particular type and intensity regardless of species.


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Aug 14, 2017)

Athos said:


> Can you sensibly assert equalivalence between humans and animals with a parenthetical "all else equal"?
> 
> Eta: Though I guess, in fairness, that question goes less to the nature and extent of harm as to the question of whether there's a moral imperative to avoid harm of a particular type and intensity regardless of species.



The parentheses were there to denote that there might be relevant factors other than the intensity and duration of pain that might be harmful for the individual. For example the pain might also impose an opportunity cost on the individual experiencing the pain that make it all things considered worse than the same amount of pain of another individual who does not also experience a compariable opportunity cost.

E.g person A is a professional athlete who gets a knee injury. They cannot perform competitively as a result.

Person B is not a professional athlete who gets the same injury, but their career is not adversely impacted in the same way.

Although both experience the same quantity of suffering, person B is harmed more because of the additional opportunity cost they suffer. But species is not of direct relevance to this point.


----------



## Casually Red (Aug 14, 2017)

This is a massive load of bollocks . If some animals  eg cats..big and small...are thoroughly meat eating then the principle of " meat is murder " is blown clean out of the water . If those animals have the same agency as humans..as vegans maintain....then meat eating is fair game . It's not murder . Lions and tigers eat other species...there's a hierarchy . So do we . That's it .meat eating is totally natural and normal, and therefore how it was intended . Capitalism doesn't make a lioness eat a gazelle . Nor does patriarchy . It's what thy eat . Capitalism doesn't make a crocodile eat a water buffalo . Capitalism doesn't make carrion eaters like vultures, crows etc eat dead animals . A complete natural order were other species are fir game does . And that's why we eat other species...like loads of other species do .
Vegans are fucking mental and everyone knows it . A foppish cosmopolitan fad/ disorder .

Fops !!


----------



## Casually Red (Aug 14, 2017)

This is bollocks . Some species eat other species . If a shark / crocodile/ lion/ tiger / polar bear eats me ...it's not his fucking ethics that are the problem . It's me being a nice source of tasty protein that he wants to eat is the problem . That's how it is for all species .

Vegans...stop being wankers . By that I mean eat whatever makes you happy . Don't eat what makes you unhappy . But take yourselves the fuck off and stop lecturing us with your fucking idiocy .


----------



## IC3D (Aug 14, 2017)

If there is a natural hierarchy at what point did humans go off message Casually Red? What are the characteristics of a human natural order? Vegans don't maintain cats have the agency to choose their diet, you're confused.


----------



## Casually Red (Aug 14, 2017)

I'm not confused . Humans are the apex predator, top of the food chain . Everyone under us is fair game .


----------



## IC3D (Aug 14, 2017)

vegans aren't apex predators though


----------



## Yossarian (Aug 14, 2017)

Casually Red said:


> I'm not confused . Humans are the apex predator, top of the food chain .



Might be true on land in most of Europe now, but not as soon as you step into the sea.


----------



## Athos (Aug 14, 2017)

Jeff Robinson said:


> The parentheses were there to denote that there might be relevant factors other than the intensity and duration of pain that might be harmful for the individual. For example the pain might also impose an opportunity cost on the individual experiencing the pain that make it all things considered worse than the same amount of pain of another individual who does not also experience a compariable opportunity cost.
> 
> E.g person A is a professional athlete who gets a knee injury. They cannot perform competitively as a result.
> 
> ...



No, I understand that. Which I why I edited. But your post doesn't address that edit; whether (and why) any moral imperative is species-blind?


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Aug 14, 2017)

Athos said:


> No, I understand that. Which I why I edited. But your post doesn't address that edit; whether (and why) any moral imperative is species-blind?



I'll turn the question on you: why should all moral imperatives be species exclusive?


----------



## mrs quoad (Aug 14, 2017)

Athos said:


> No, I understand that. Which I why I edited. But your post doesn't address that edit; whether (and why) any moral imperative is species-blind?


If it isn't, this appears to suggest that the ultimate goal of veganism (though one that I had not heard of) is vast interventionism in the 'natural' world, and that human cruelty / infliction of harm is only a starting point...?


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 14, 2017)

IC3D said:


> If there is a natural hierarchy at what point did humans go off message Casually Red? What are the characteristics of a human natural order? Vegans don't maintain cats have the agency to choose their diet, you're confused.





IC3D said:


> vegans aren't apex predators though


CR was probably drunk...again.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 14, 2017)

Any moral imperative extended to other animals is going to need some kind of asterisk. Exceptions apply that don't apply to humans such as killing rats in a hospital. One reason why the idea of animal rights is always going to be problematic.


----------



## AnnaKarpik (Aug 14, 2017)

I understand that there are likely as many different variations of vegan ethics as there are vegans but I did think that the one shared belief is that people should not use animals. "Use" here meaning consume or make use of anything derived from an animal (this is to leave aside keeping animals for non-food reasons). Even that is, apparently, not a belief shared by all - if you make use of dead creatures for a companion animal, that's a side issue for which vegans have no responsibility despite actually dishing up dead creatures. 

This makes no sense to me. Either you have a code of ethics, give yourself and your gang a cool name, tell the rest of world how wrong they are and live by those ethics OR you have a bunch of personal preferences about what you will or won't eat. I think it's the mixing up of the two approaches that bugs me. On the one hand, veganism is a thing, it's us against them, we've got all the moral arguments on our side, we coin insulting terms for people who are not us or who question us. And on the other hand, it's not black and white, people have to make difficult choices which boil down to personal choices. 

But if even vegans are prepared to serve dead things up to their (animal) friends what does being vegan mean? What does a vegan future look like?


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Aug 14, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Any moral imperative extended to other animals is going to need some kind of asterisk. Exceptions apply that don't apply to humans such as killing rats in a hospital. One reason why the idea of animal rights is always going to be problematic.



I think animal rights theory has the tools to account for situations like this. If you are interested, I'd recommend this:

Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness? Specifying the Rights of Animals

Section 11.4 deals with the question of rodents specifically.



AnnaKarpik said:


> I understand that there are likely as many different variations of vegan ethics as there are vegans but I did think that the one shared belief is that people should not use animals. "Use" here meaning consume or make use of anything derived from an animal (this is to leave aside keeping animals for non-food reasons). Even that is, apparently, not a belief shared by all - if you make use of dead creatures for a companion animal, that's a side issue for which vegans have no responsibility despite actually dishing up dead creatures.
> 
> This makes no sense to me. Either you have a code of ethics, give yourself and your gang a cool name, tell the rest of world how wrong they are and live by those ethics OR you have a bunch of personal preferences about what you will or won't eat. I think it's the mixing up of the two approaches that bugs me. On the one hand, veganism is a thing, it's us against them, we've got all the moral arguments on our side, we coin insulting terms for people who are not us or who question us. And on the other hand, it's not black and white, people have to make difficult choices which boil down to personal choices.
> 
> But if even vegans are prepared to serve dead things up to their (animal) friends what does being vegan mean? What does a vegan future look like?



The Vegan Society define veganism as 'A philosophy and way of living which seeks to exclude—as far as is possible and practicable—all forms of exploitation of, and cruelty to, animals for food, clothing or any other purpose'. Notice the 'as far as is possible and practicable' qualifier. We do not consume animal products because we don't need them, but if we happen to be looking after an animal that requires them to live then one could plausibly make the argument that it's not possible or practicable to avoid them. Now you could make the counter-argument that vegans should not adopt cats at all for that reason - but then you have the situation where cats are languishing in shelters (and being fed meat there anyway) or are killed.

Neither feeding meat to a cat or cats being killed in shelters is a good option for vegans. It then becomes a judgement call about which is the lessor of the two evils. It's absurd however to dismiss the ethical philosophy of veganism because vegans might differ about which of the two evils is the lesser one. All other ethical theories also run into conceptual and practical problems of this kind. Human rights for example, whilst they sound lovely in the abstract, are often very tricky to apply in practical legal context and delineating their scope and content involves taking account of many different factors and competing considerations. One can very easily find disagreement amongst human rights lawyers and activists about the nature of a particular right. Yet would this lead us to reject human rights tout court? I think not, that would be unreasonable, as it is in the vegan context too. 

btw in a vegan future this problem would not arise in the first place because we would not be breeding obligate carnivores.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 14, 2017)

Jeff Robinson said:


> I think animal rights theory has the tools to account for situations like this. If you are interested, I'd recommend this:
> 
> Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness? Specifying the Rights of Animals
> 
> ...


It's a deeply thought-out piece, but I'm not convinced. In the case of rats, specifically, I quite like them, think they're cute. But lots of people really don't and their first reaction on seeing one in their house will be to try to bash its brains out. I don't think there is a strong case against this reaction - certainly I know from personal experience that it's not a good idea to tell the person to calm down, it's only a rat.


----------



## Athos (Aug 14, 2017)

Jeff Robinson said:


> I'll turn the question on you: why should all moral imperatives be species exclusive?



For instance, there's an evolutionary bias towards favouring one's own species. 

Why shouldn't they be?


----------



## ddraig (Aug 14, 2017)

Why everyone should go vegan immediately

typical comments in the comments, just like a lot here


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Aug 14, 2017)

Athos said:


> For instance, there's an evolutionary bias towards favouring one's own species.
> 
> Why shouldn't they be?



I see no reason to think that our evolutionary biases are anything like a reliable guide to what's right and wrong. At any rate, whether or not one favours one's own species is a different question to the one you asked me about, which was whether it is equally wrong to equally harm other species in the absence of sufficiently weighty reasons for doing so. You can favour x over y whilst it still being equally wrong to harm x and y. For example, I think its right that a parent favours their child over another child, they should provide the most care and protection for their own child. But its still equally wrong of the parent to inflict the same level of harm on their child or another child.  

Why shouldn't they be? Many reasons, but chiefly the lack of any compelling reason that I've heard to the contrary.


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Aug 14, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> It's a deeply thought-out piece, but I'm not convinced. In the case of rats, specifically, I quite like them, think they're cute. But lots of people really don't and their first reaction on seeing one in their house will be to try to bash its brains out. I don't think there is a strong case against this reaction - certainly I know from personal experience that it's not a good idea to tell the person to calm down, it's only a rat.



The reason I highlighted the article was because it makes the case that one can be in favour of animal rights whilst also recognising the permissibility of killing rats in some circumstances.

With regard to people's reactions to rats, I think the thought they have is something like this: 'these rats are intruders in my home and not only that, they are carriers of disease and they pose a health threat to me and my family, I'm going to kill them'. Here we are clearly in the realm of self-defence, which I would classify (in some instances at least) as a sufficiently weighty reason to override the obligation not to harm another. We can get in to the specifics of whether the reaction is necessary and proportionate (which the article explores), but its very different to the raising animals for food: these animals pose no threat to us, and indeed only exist because we choose to bring them into existence for food. This makes the harming of them a clearer instance of something that is unjust and wrongful.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 14, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Any moral imperative extended to other animals is going to need some kind of asterisk. Exceptions apply that don't apply to humans such as killing rats in a hospital. One reason why the idea of animal rights is always going to be problematic.


tbh, I don't find it problematic at all, in fact the core principles are fairly simple. Don't cause harm to animals unless there is good reason to do so and if it can be avoided. There may be some disagreement as to what constitutes "good reason", however from my perpective, palate preference definitely not one of the reasons.


----------



## Athos (Aug 14, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> tbh, I don't find it problematic at all, in fact the core principles are fairly simple. Don't cause harm to animals unless there is good reason to do so and if it can be avoided. There may be some disagreement as to what constitutes "good reason", however from my perpective, palate preference definitely not one of the reasons.



Yes, but you're a fucking idiot.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 14, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> tbh, I don't find it problematic at all, in fact the core principles are fairly simple. Don't cause harm to animals unless there is good reason to do so and if it can be avoided. There may be some disagreement as to what constitutes "good reason", however from my perpective, palate preference definitely not one of the reasons.


Framing the discussion in terms of rights rather than welfare, I think it does get tricky. It's basically saying 'you have the right to live except where your living hurts our (human) interests'. It's not really much of a right if it's contingent like that. In fact, it isn't really a right at all.


----------



## Athos (Aug 14, 2017)

Jeff Robinson said:


> Why shouldn't they be? Many reasons, but chiefly the lack of any compelling reason that I've heard to the contrary.



It doesn't have to be compelling in isolation, just relative to the counter position. My reason is the pleasure I derive.  You've offered no reasons why I ought not harm other species (beyond an absence of reasons to do so).

Though in fairness, I appreciate that you're not trying to persuade me not to, and that you've framed what you said in terms of reasons you perceive; maybe you just didn't enjoy meat as much as I do.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 14, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Framing the discussion in terms of rights rather than welfare, I think it does get tricky. It's basically saying 'you have the right to live except where your living hurts our (human) interests'. It's not really much of a right if it's contingent like that. In fact, it isn't really a right at all.


tbh, I have no idea where you are going with this. You appear to be dragging this into a semantic and pedantic quagmire. I'm happy to stick with how I framed it until I see something that improves on that.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 14, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> tbh, I have no idea where you are going with this. You appear to be dragging this into a semantic and pedantic quagmire. I'm happy to stick with how I framed it until I see something that improves on that.


I'm going where the discussion has been going. Quite a few people wish to speak seriously and in detail about the concept of animal rights. From Jeremy Bentham onwards, this has been an idea put out there, one that is attractive to many people, and there are serious questions as to how it can work in practice.


----------



## LDC (Aug 14, 2017)

I've always found this the most interesting and convincing read on the subject of animal liberation http://thesparrowsnest.org.uk/collections/public_archive/PAR0067.pdf

Good review here (although almost as long as the pamphlet) Beasts of Burden: Capitalism - Animals - Communism (Do or Die)


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 14, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I'm going where the discussion has been going. Quite a few people wish to speak seriously and in detail about the concept of animal rights. From Jeremy Bentham onwards, this has been an idea put out there, one that is attractive to many people, and there are serious questions as to how it can work in practice.


Fair enough, I'll leave you to it, but I don't believe that it is anywhere near as problematic as you are making it out to be.


----------



## mojo pixy (Aug 14, 2017)

On what exactly is/are _animal rights_ based though? Just _sentience_, or is there more to it than that?
Or is it enough to be born / hatched to gain the right to remain alive / free from suffering?

And then, what about creatures _we deem_ non-sentient?

Wherever you fall along the spectrum between _Everything living has the right to stay that way without suffering_ and _Only humans have special rights because humans are better than the rest_, there are huge issues with Animal Rights, and they're there from the word go.

I was basically radicalised by Animal Rights, I'm not detailing the criminal activity I engaged in _for the cause _(have a listen to This is the ALF by Conflict though) ... I still support animal rights, and I'm definitely near the _Everything _extreme of my little spectrum there, but experience has taught me that it is an extreme view, and it's unlikely most of humanity will ever come to share it. I have to admit, I try not to worry too much about that. Just do what I can where I can (and no criminal activity any more, officer).

For me, if someone viscerally cares about animal rights and disrupting the _murderous _(let's say) food chain of the meat industry, forget trying to convince people because most people just don't care. It turns into a ruck, every time, and is IMO counter productive.

Do direct action and (probably best to) keep quiet about it.
Again, I urge a listen to the Conflict tune. Better still, just read the lyrics.
And have fun


----------



## mojo pixy (Aug 14, 2017)

Anger is only useful when it's directed properly .. so there, ''Angry Vegans''.


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Aug 14, 2017)

Athos said:


> It doesn't have to be compelling in isolation, just relative to the counter position. My reason is the pleasure I derive.  You've offered no reasons why I ought not harm other species (beyond an absence of reasons to do so).



(1) Do you think it's acceptable to inflict harm on humans if you derive pleasure from doing so? If not what is it that distinguishes humans from the other animals that makes it wrong in the former case but not the later?

(2) Do you think it's ever wrong to inflict suffering on the other animals for reasons of pleasure? Do you, for example, think it's okay to torture elephants into performing circus tricks if people enjoy watching them? And if you do think the later is wrong, by what criteria do you distinguish acceptable inflicting of suffering on animals for pleasure from unacceptable inflicting of suffering on animals for pleasure?


----------



## ddraig (Aug 14, 2017)

even the wanna be cockney wanker is getting in on it!! yo Spymaster


----------



## mrs quoad (Aug 15, 2017)

Jeff Robinson said:


> (1) Do you think it's acceptable to inflict harm on humans if you derive pleasure from doing so? If not what is it that distinguishes humans from the other animals that makes it wrong in the former case but not the later?
> 
> (2) Do you think it's ever wrong to inflict suffering on the other animals for reasons of pleasure? Do you, for example, think it's okay to torture elephants into performing circus tricks if people enjoy watching them? And if you do think the later is wrong, by what criteria do you distinguish acceptable inflicting of suffering on animals for pleasure from unacceptable inflicting of suffering on animals for pleasure?


Do you think it's acceptable for other animals to inflict harm on other animals, if that harm is avoidable or only for pleasure?

I ask, because - as noted above - the single harm principle (that I think you) set out above seems to imply a mandate for mass intervention in the "natural" world, quite apart from human behaviour.


----------



## Athos (Aug 15, 2017)

Jeff Robinson said:


> (1) Do you think it's acceptable to inflict harm on humans if you derive pleasure from doing so? If not what is it that distinguishes humans from the other animals that makes it wrong in the former case but not the later?
> 
> (2) Do you think it's ever wrong to inflict suffering on the other animals for reasons of pleasure? Do you, for example, think it's okay to torture elephants into performing circus tricks if people enjoy watching them? And if you do think the later is wrong, by what criteria do you distinguish acceptable inflicting of suffering on animals for pleasure from unacceptable inflicting of suffering on animals for pleasure?



1. No. Reciprocity. 
2. I'll have to think about.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 15, 2017)

AnnaKarpik said:


> The point that you are at pains to miss is that it makes no difference to a meat animal who eats it at the end of its life.


lol @ "at pains to miss". There was no pain involved my dear. If your English is as good as you appear to believe, then you would have been able to see for yourself that what you wrote could be interpreted in several ways. I assumed that you were saying that keeping an animal for a pet was equivalent to keeping an animal for food, which I believe was a better fit for what was being discussed at the time. Now what you're claiming that you actually meant was that killing an animal to feed a pet is the equivalent to killing an animal to feed ourselves. Sorry but that was not the obvious interpretation that you're not making it out to be.



AnnaKarpik said:


> If you buy meat you are supporting the meat industry.
> If I paraphrase you might get it; I see no difference between you eating meat and you purchasing meat so that your cat can eat it. And by difference, as you assuredly need that pointing out too, I mean that the animals killed for food will not be treated any better or worse because of the end-user's species.


Well I've already covered this in an answer that I gave earlier. It is a dilemma faced by some vegans and it is dealt with in different ways. The one major difference as far as I'm concerned is that cats are obligate carnivores and humans are not, but that aside, this type of questioning appears to be aimed more at finding fault than trying to understand. The majority of the critics here are not remotely interested in the subject and are just here to troll and make mischief hence the nitpicking and focus on peripheral non issues. My choices and purchasing decisions end up supporting all sorts of things that I'd rather not, for example the taxes I paid supported Blairs war in Iraq. Choosing to not eat meat or to use animal products is a choice that I can make that is doable, practical and is beneficial on many levels. The fact that only a small percentage of people participate in this practice is outweighed by the fact that I think it's the right thing to do. If other folks disagree then that's up to them.



AnnaKarpik said:


> You seem to be saying that the the manner of a pet's death is important rather than the fact of it. Why does that not apply to meat animals?


I have no idea what you're getting at now. All animals die. Meat animals die well before their time and are killed (some might even dare to say "murdered"). Humans and their pets are sometimes murdered but usually live out their natural lifespan unless it's cut short by illness or accident.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 15, 2017)

ddraig said:


> even the wanna be cockney wanker is getting in on it!! yo Spymaster



Over a decade after the famous "silencer of the lamb" episode on live telly. I think a lot of what he said in that clip made sense. He was chatting to the same man that was on the BBC Victoria Derbyshire show recently and I believe JO paid for Tim. Full clip here...



Jamie Oliver on vegans: 'They hate me'

...and a response from some real proper absolutely fuming "angry" hippie vegan fundamentalist militant terrorists...


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 15, 2017)

My problem, I know, but my prejudices are hard to suppress when I'm confronted by people who smile too much and wear tie-dyed 'I'm vegan' t-shirts.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 15, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> My problem, I know, but my prejudices are hard to suppress when I'm confronted by people who smile too much and wear tie-dyed 'I'm vegan' t-shirts.


 lol, that's more of a response that I would expect from CR and not somebody who's supposedly a thinker. 
You're clearly not really interested in veganism and that's fair enough, whatever floats your boat. If you'd rather focus on trivialities like tie dyes and smiles and not what is being said that's rather immature and childish imo.


----------



## A380 (Aug 15, 2017)

Jeff Robinson said:


> .... btw in a vegan future this problem would not arise in the first place because we would not be breeding obligate carnivores.



So kno kitehs? I can haz kno future?


----------



## Spymaster (Aug 15, 2017)

How do vegans feel about animals being used to grow organs for humans?

Surely if it has the potential to save human lives then this is something that needs to be thoroughly explored? 

Animals that grow designer organs for humans are a step closer


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 15, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> How do vegans feel about animals being used to grow organs for humans?
> 
> Surely if it has the potential to save human lives then this is something that needs to be thoroughly explored?
> 
> Animals that grow designer organs for humans are a step closer



Sidestepping that issue, this is an issue that I think is often poorly addressed.



> There are also ethical issues. Because the technique would involve inserting human cells into pig embryos, the adult animals could have some human brain cells. Does that mean we should give those pigs greater moral consideration? Ethicists will need to tackle such issues as research into such human-pig chimeras continues, says Bernhard Hering at the University of Minnesota. “We are crossing a crucial line here. But exciting papers always come with new questions.”



There is often what amounts to magical thinking over this kind of issue, as if 'human cells' were somehow sprinkled with human soul-dust.


----------



## Spymaster (Aug 15, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Sidestepping that issue, this is an issue that I think is often poorly addressed.
> 
> 
> 
> There is often what amounts to magical thinking over this kind of issue, as if 'human cells' were somehow sprinkled with human soul-dust.


So the answer to the question posed in the second sentence is 'no, of course not'?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 15, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> So the answer to the question posed in the second sentence is 'no, of course not'?


Yes. My spunk contains millions of human cells. That doesn't mean it should be given a moral consideration.

If those 'human brain cells' gave the pig different cognitive abilities, then they would become relevant.


----------



## Spymaster (Aug 15, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Yes. My spunk contains millions of human cells. That doesn't mean it should be given a moral consideration.
> 
> If those 'human brain cells' gave the pig different cognitive abilities, then they would become relevant.


Right. But I get that animal testing for cosmetics would upset people but this research has the potential to provide an unlimited supply of human hearts, lungs, etc ..

How can anyone be against that?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 15, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> Right. But I get that animal testing for cosmetics would upset people but this research has the potential to provide an unlimited supply of human hearts, lungs, etc ..
> 
> How can anyone be against that?


Certainly seems more valuable than growing pigs for bacon.

I don't have an easy answer wrt vivisection, other than that it should definitely be avoided where there are alternatives, which there often are. But it can't be denied that various human life-saving advances have been made with experiments on animals, and it's pretty hard to say to someone directly involved 'I don't think that thing that saved your life should have been done'.


----------



## Spymaster (Aug 15, 2017)

It's probably a discussion for a different thread, tbf.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 15, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> It's probably a discussion for a different thread, tbf.


Not sure it is. I'd be interested to hear answers from various people on this thread.


----------



## Athos (Aug 15, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Certainly seems more valuable than growing pigs for bacon.
> 
> I don't have an easy answer wrt vivisection, other than that it should definitely be avoided where there are alternatives, which there often are. But it can't be denied that various human life-saving advances have been made with experiments on animals, and it's pretty hard to say to someone directly involved 'I don't think that thing that saved your life should have been done'.



How many pig's lives equal one human life?


----------



## tonysingh (Aug 15, 2017)

Athos said:


> How many pig's lives equal one human life?



27


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 15, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> How do vegans feel about animals being used to grow organs for humans?
> 
> Surely if it has the potential to save human lives then this is something that needs to be thoroughly explored?


My opinion isn't representative of all vegans, there's not one big amorphous vegan blob that has the same views on every conceivable situation and hypothetical scenario. 

Using animals to grow organs is not something that I am overly concerned about and I consider very low on the priority list and shouldn't be necessary. There are other low hanging fruit that would save far more human lives and massively reduce the need for organ replacement in the first place, especially given that lifestyle is the major cause of organ failure. It's not as if we don't know how to look after our organs, we just can't really be arsed.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 15, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> My opinion isn't representative of all vegans, there's not one big amorphous vegan blob that has the same views on every conceivable situation and hypothetical scenario.
> 
> Using animals to grow organs is not something that I am overly concerned about and I consider very low on the priority list and shouldn't be necessary. There are other low hanging fruit that would save far more human lives and massively reduce the need for organ replacement in the first place, especially given that lifestyle is the major cause of organ failure. It's not as if we don't know how to look after our organs, we just can't really be arsed.


Can you put some numbers on that?  Reason for needing a transplant and way that person could have avoided that need?


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 15, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Can you put some numbers on that?  Reason for needing a transplant and way that person could have avoided that need?


Not really, as I said, it's not something I'm overly concerned with. If it is something that interests you and you think you can find evidence/numbers that demonstrate the opposite is true, then go ahead. 

It is well known that the leading causes of premature death and chronic illness are preventable, so to me it makes more sense to prioritise preventative measures.


----------



## veganomics (Aug 15, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> lol, and they complained about the use of the word "carnist", lol. I think the "hit and run" introduction of that word to the thread was yet another rather lame attempt to smear. Some people are really scraping the barrel. I first heard orthorexia used in that heavily biased god awful BBC documentary last year...
> View attachment 113363
> Attempting to associate vegans with eating disorders or even worse, claim that veganism itself is some kind of eating disorder is below the belt and dishonest.


I happened to watch that last year and agree, it was a terribly one sided stitch up. Some of the people who appeared on it have posted reaction videos on youtube.


----------



## veganomics (Aug 15, 2017)

I can't keep up with all the posts. I only managed to get up to page 57 I will have to catch up later sometime. Anyway it's all good stuff (even the bad posts) and it's nice to see the subject getting plenty of air time. 

Regarding the often expressed view that it was eating meat that made our brains so big and wonderful, here is an excellent examination of that theory and some other talking points by Kerry McCarthy


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 15, 2017)

veganomics said:


> I can't keep up with all the posts. I only managed to get up to page 57 I will have to catch up later sometime. Anyway it's all good stuff (even the bad posts) and it's nice to see the subject getting plenty of air time.
> 
> Regarding the often expressed view that it was eating meat that made our brains so big and wonderful, here is an excellent examination of that theory and some other talking points by Kerry McCarthy



Good intelligent stuff. I like the bit at the end...
_"The vegan revolution is a cultural revolution, it's not something we're going to leave to politicians, educators and scientists. This is a battle we can fight and win in our own homes with our own knives and forks". _


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 15, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Not really, as I said, it's not something I'm overly concerned with. If it is something that interests you and you think you can find evidence/numbers that demonstrate the opposite is true, then go ahead.
> 
> It is well known that the leading causes of premature death and chronic illness are preventable, so to me it makes more sense to prioritise preventative measures.


So you're just talking shit then. Judgemental ignorant bollocks.

Proper nasty shit blaming people for their illnesses.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 16, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> So you're just talking shit then. Judgemental ignorant bollocks.
> 
> Proper nasty shit blaming people for their illnesses.


Oops, looks like he's finally flipped, the signs were there. It might be an idea to learn how to keep your composure.

"Talking shit"?
"Judgemental ignorant bollocks"?


Are you saying that the leading causes of premature death and chronic illnesses are NOT preventable? I'd love to see your working so that you can demonstrate your apparently superior knowledge, however I suspect that this time you have really left the building and slammed the door shut behind you after throwing your toys out of the pram, lol. I wonder if there's going to be another comeback. That mini rant of yours has perhaps showed your true colours, along with all those long winded complicated hypothetical scenarios and semantic gymnastics , I don't believe that you were ever interested in having a balanced civilised discussion in the first place. At least CR and MI5 don't try to hide their trolling. 

Anyway, on the subject of preventable diseases, I wouldn't have thought that it would be that hard for you to find the widely available information, perhaps you were not really interested in looking and just needed something to try and attack me with :-


Chronic Disease Overview | Publications | Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion | CDC


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 16, 2017)

I would also recommend anything from the legend that is Dr Greger :-

NutritionFacts.org | The Latest in Nutrition Related Research

I have the Kindle version of his excellent book, well worth a look imo...
How Not To Die


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 16, 2017)

A quack claiming to be able to cure/prevent all known diseases?

At best you should be flagging his claims up as controversial. Here's one of many criticisms of his work to be found online. From a first look, even those who like his work have to admit that he cherry-picks his studies to match the conclusion he wants to reach.


----------



## gentlegreen (Aug 16, 2017)

*Preventable* diseases.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 16, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> A quack claiming to be able to cure/prevent all known diseases?


Er, nope, wrong again. I suggest that you read or listen to what he actually says and not just make things up off the top of your head.



littlebabyjesus said:


> At best you should be flagging his claims up as controversial.


I doubt that you even know what his claims are, lol



littlebabyjesus said:


> Here's one of many criticisms of his work to be found online.


Yeah right, "_here's a 4 year old critique that I just found online and putting forward as evidence of Gregers quackery_". There have been several take downs of Ms Hall's low quality unscientific critique which funnily enough can also be found online. Now ain't that something. 



littlebabyjesus said:


> From a first look, even those who like his work have to admit that he cherry-picks his studies to match the conclusion he wants to reach.


So you haven't actually looked properly and you are relying on what you yourself have cherry picked with Googles help, to reach the conclusion you want to reach. Hmmm, as tempting as your research might appear at first glance, I think I still prefer Dr Greger. You get a 6/10 for effort though, which isn't bad.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 16, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Er, nope, wrong again. I suggest that you read or listen to what he actually says and not just make things up off the top of your head.
> 
> I doubt that you even know what his claims are, lol
> 
> ...


I didn't reach a conclusion other than starting out with the approach: 'this is a list of huge claims - I'm not just going to accept them unquestioning, I'm going to look and see what others have said about them'. Would you like to address the accusation of cherry-picking? Do you understand the accusation of cherry-picking?


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 16, 2017)

No sorry, I'm bored of you now, I'm not interested in going through another one of your time wasting convoluted mazes. Your instant dismissal without actually reading his stuff and accusation of quackery based on what "others" have said once again shows your true colours.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 16, 2017)

Fuck me you're full of shit.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 16, 2017)




----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Aug 16, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> I would also recommend anything from the legend that is Dr Greger :-
> 
> NutritionFacts.org | The Latest in Nutrition Related Research
> 
> ...



Fuck me. Seriously?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 16, 2017)

We should not be growing replacement organs in pigs because we would be able to do away with the need for transplants if we all went vegan. Biggest cop-out in the entire thread.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 16, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> We should not be growing replacement organs in pigs because we would be able to do away with the need for transplants if we all went vegan. Biggest cop-out in the entire thread.


Except nobody actually said that. Strawman much?


----------



## A380 (Aug 16, 2017)

Never mind pigs, I'd like an organ* transplant from
a stallion!


* fnah fnah.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 16, 2017)

veganomics said:


> I can't keep up with all the posts. I only managed to get up to page 57 I will have to catch up later sometime. Anyway it's all good stuff (even the bad posts) and it's nice to see the subject getting plenty of air time.


After your post I caught up with a few more of Kerry's videos, it's been a while since I last watched them and some of them are very good and a great antidote to watching the numpty lbj having yet another hissy fit and losing his shit. Here's a response to a vegetarian professor of religion and culture commenting on the so called "clean eating" puritanical (mythical?) phenomenon...



@ 4:00
"_It's about setting that example so that other people can see it and do the same. If you're prevented from doing that from embarrassment then progress ends, because people are cowed into this amorphous submission. 

Don't fear looking self righteous. *Do what's right with a sense of duty*, because society is built on peoples convictions. We wouldn't have Rosa Parks, we wouldn't have Ghandi, we wouldn't have Martin Luther King or the worlds great artists or scientists or thinkers if people were so concerned about looking hubristic that they abandoned their labours for a life of quiet acceptance. 

This might only be about diet which doesn't seem a big deal, but the implications for the rest of the planet are so HUGE in terms of the environment, in terms of peoples health and of course in terms of animal cruelty that we as a very small minority have a duty to speak up LOUDLY about why this is important. This is what's going to change other peoples minds, we're like the last chance saloon, people aren't arriving at this decision of their own volition seemingly._"


----------



## Spymaster (Aug 16, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Except nobody actually said that. Strawman much?


Not really. The thrust of your argument is that if people lived different lifestyles then they could avoid getting diseases for which cures are being sought using vivisection. 

It's bollocks.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 16, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> Not really. The thrust of your argument is that if people lived different lifestyles then they could avoid getting diseases for which cures are being sought using vivisection.
> 
> It's bollocks.


Hmmm...so a couple of forum trolls say "it's bollocks" vs reputable sources say that chronic diseases are mostly preventable. I wonder who I should listen too.  

Here's an example from our very own NHS...
 
The top five causes of premature death
Did you see that "completely preventable", which would mean no need to grow a human heart in a pig.
Here's another from the CDC...
 
https://www.cdc.gov/chronicdisease/pdf/2009-power-of-prevention.pdf
Or how about the WHO...
 
Overview - Preventing chronic diseases: a vital investment

_Across the board, I think we need to get much more preventative when it comes to public health. Why wait to give a person expensive gastric band surgery, insulin or radiotherapy when you could have nipped the problem in the bud years earlier at a fraction of the cost? We need to stop complaining about the end results and concentrate on tackling the root causes._
Tanni Grey-Thompson: Prevention’s better than cure if we want to save the NHS

_Cardiovascular diseases, cancers, diabetes and chronic respiratory diseases are the biggest threats to health globally, with similar burden as infectious diseases; their impact undermines social and economic development at the community, national and global levels. While the magnitude of these health challenges has been progressively rising across the globe during the last three decades, so have substantial improvements in knowledge and understanding about their prevention and control. As highlighted in previous chapters, current evidence unequivocally demonstrates that these diseases are largely preventable. Countries can reverse the advance of these diseases and achieve quick gains if appropriate action is taken._
http://www.who.int/nmh/publications/ncd_report_full_en.pdf

Those are just a few of the many available reports, they're not that hard to find and contain nothing more than "uncommon" common sense. Although there is some ignorance around, a lot of people know what they should be doing but can't really be arsed.

So, as I said earlier, I would prioritise preventable measures well above the exotic headline grabbing "jam tomorrow", exotic, risky and very expensive procedures. I don't quite understand why me stating that as a preference should generate so much rage amongst some of the obligate omnivore trolls. I thought it was supposed to be the vegans that were the angry ones. What's up with that?


----------



## Spymaster (Aug 16, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Hmmm...so a couple of forum trolls say "it's bollocks" vs reputable sources say that chronic diseases are mostly preventable. I wonder who I should listen too.
> 
> Here's an example from our very own NHS...
> View attachment 113632
> ...


Way to miss the fucking point (to pretend to in your case). 

Of course some chronic illnesses are preventable. Loads of others aren't and even if they were, people would still get them. There will be a need for heart/lung/kidney/liver/etc transplants for ever. Therefore vivisection in order to provide for those people is the issue.


----------



## mrs quoad (Aug 16, 2017)

Preventable diseases and decontextualised individual responsibility are probably nothing st all to do with why rich privileged people live longer


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 16, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> Way to miss the fucking point (to pretend to in your case).
> 
> Of course some chronic illnesses are preventable. Loads of others aren't and even if they were, people would still get them.


Er...not just some, most. "Loads of others aren't"? Really? Which ones are they then, and how many of those require a organ to be grown in a pig? If people are still getting preventable diseases then the focus should imo still be on prevention. 



Spymaster said:


> There will be a need for heart/lung/kidney/liver/etc transplants for ever. Therefore vivisection in order to provide for those people is the issue.


Well, it's up to you if that's what you believe and that's where your priorities lie.  It is not something that keeps me awake at night.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 16, 2017)

mrs quoad said:


> Preventable diseases and decontextualised individual responsibility are probably nothing st all to do with why rich privileged people live longer


Poor people are lazy fuckers.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 16, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Er...not just some, most. "Loads of others aren't"? Really? Which ones are they then, and how many of those require a organ to be grown in a pig? If people are still getting preventable diseases then the focus should imo still be on prevention..


Why is it either/or? 

In any case, the economics of this are not quite what you seem to think they are. It costs more to keep someone with failing kidneys alive through dialysis than it does to keep them alive with a new kidney, a lot more (figures here if you're interested). And that's before you consider the enormous improvement in the quality of their life, no longer chained to a machine for hours every day. Potentially, pig-grown organs could save health services money, not cost it.


----------



## bimble (Aug 16, 2017)

I can't believe this is still going with the semblance of a conversation .
 Paolo Sanchez is happy to try " counting in pictures up to infinity" so there will be no end to this thread either .


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 16, 2017)

bimble said:


> I can't believe this is still going with the semblance of a conversation .
> Paolo Sanchez is happy to try " counting in pictures up to infinity" so there will be no end to this thread either .


The ethics of vivisection do interest me, fwiw. And it's something I have conflicting feelings over. PS isn't the person to have the conversation with about it, though, clearly.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 17, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Why is it either/or?


...and where exactly did I say it was "either/or"? Did you not see the word "prioritise"?



littlebabyjesus said:


> In any case, the economics of this are not quite what you seem to think they are. It costs more to keep someone with failing kidneys alive through dialysis than it does to keep them alive with a new kidney, a lot more (figures here if you're interested). And that's before you consider the enormous improvement in the quality of their life, no longer chained to a machine for hours every day. Potentially, pig-grown organs could save health services money, not cost it.


If I was in control of the health budget the priority would go to preventing kidney failure which imo save far more lives than untried exotic potential "solutions" of pig grown organs. This is a much less riskier and more effective use of resources especially given that nearly all of the health agencies agree that these are mostly preventable.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 17, 2017)

bimble said:


> I can't believe this is still going with the semblance of a conversation .
> Paolo Sanchez is happy to try " counting in pictures up to infinity" so there will be no end to this thread either .


Yet another bitchy comment from a troll with no real interest in the subject. "I can't believe this thread is still going", while they bump it up with another post.



littlebabyjesus said:


> The ethics of vivisection do interest me, fwiw. And it's something I have conflicting feelings over.


Well if you are genuinely interested in vivisection talk then the perspective of Hans Reusch in his two books that I recommended earlier might be of interest to you.



littlebabyjesus said:


> PS isn't the person to have the conversation with about it, though, clearly.


So you say, yet you keep coming back for more, like a frikkin crack addict. I don't mind having a conversation with reasonably intelligent people who don't get butt hurt when somebody disagrees with them or has a different opinion. Those type of people appear to be in short supply.


----------



## felixthecat (Aug 17, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Er...not just some, most. "Loads of others aren't"? Really? Which ones are they then, and how many of those require a organ to be grown in a pig? If people are still getting preventable diseases then the focus should imo still be on prevention.
> 
> Well, it's up to you if that's what you believe and that's where your priorities lie.  It is not something that keeps me awake at night.



Most organ transplants arent because of preventable diseases. They are because of genetic conditions.

Tell sportsmen like Aries Merritt (athletics) Sean Elliott, Alonzo Mourning (both NBA basketball) and Andy Cole that their FSGS was preventable. Its the biggest cause of adult kidney failure and need for a transplant.

You clearly aren't aware of the criteria for organ transplant.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 17, 2017)

There's an easy thought test for this one to test how much you object to the idea.  Your child is ill and on the transplant list. You are offered a potentially lifesaving pig-grown organ. Do you sign the consent form?


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 17, 2017)

felixthecat said:


> Most organ transplants are because of preventable diseases. They are because of genetic conditions.


??? That didn't make sense.



felixthecat said:


> Tell sportsmen like Aries Merritt (athletics) Sean Elliots, Alonzo Mourning (both NBA basketball) and Andy Cole that their FSGS was preventable. Its the biggest cause of adult kidney failure and need for a transplant.
> 
> You clearly aren't aware of the criteria for organ transplant.


Organ transplants are required when the persons organ can no longer function and they would die without a replacement organ. The overwhelming majority of organ failures are due to preventable causes. A small minority are due to genetics. If you have the data demonstrating otherwise then it would be interesting to see them and I'll stand corrected if it proves to be the other way around.

Anyway, regardless the money and resources we waste on dealing with preventable diseases could then be better targeted at looking at ways to deal with the minority of cases that are genetic and currently not preventable.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 17, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> There's an easy thought test for this one to test how much you object to the idea.  Your child is ill and on the transplant list. You are offered a potentially lifesaving pig-grown organ. Do you sign the consent form?


This is yet another one of those far fetched hypotheticals that you seem to love, similar to this...


----------



## veganomics (Aug 17, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> I would also recommend two out of print books that discuss this topic in more depth by Hans Reusch.
> The Slaughter Of The Innocent
> The Naked Empress


Those books have been on my wishlist for a while, I've heard good things about them from friends.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 17, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> This is yet another one of those far fetched hypotheticals that you seem to love, similar to this...


Did you not read that New Scientist article? It's not far-fetched at all. It may be the reality within a few years. In the here and now, such choices already need to be made by some parents regarding treatments. Up to the 1980s, if you had a type 1 diabetic kid, you had to make exactly that choice - allow your kid to die or give them treatment that involves killing animals.


----------



## veganomics (Aug 17, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Good intelligent stuff. I like the bit at the end...
> _"The vegan revolution is a cultural revolution, it's not something we're going to leave to politicians, educators and scientists. This is a battle we can fight and win in our own homes with our own knives and forks". _


Most of Kerry's videos are excellent in my opinion, and indeed that was a nice quote. It is our choices that will eventually make the difference.


----------



## Spymaster (Aug 17, 2017)

veganomics said:


> Those books have been on my wishlist for a while, I've heard good things about them from friends.



You really think that is any way relevant?

Pig and sheep grown organs routinely saving human lives is probably just a decade away. Did you read the piece? 

Don't you think that's worth pursuing?


----------



## veganomics (Aug 17, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> After your post I caught up with a few more of Kerry's videos, it's been a while since I last watched them and some of them are very good and a great antidote to watching the numpty lbj having yet another hissy fit and losing his shit. Here's a response to a vegetarian professor of religion and culture commenting on the so called "clean eating" puritanical (mythical?) phenomenon...
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Excellent. I've not watched that video but will get around to it after reading that quote. 
Coming back to the OP question. I don't think it's supposed "angry vegans" that puts of potential vegans, it's the amount of grief and hassle you get from the majority that try to harrass and bully you into conformity. Most people would rather have a quiet life and would rather not be singled out as a weirdo. However I think Kerry is spot on with that, if you believe that what you're doing is the right thing to do, then you need strength of character to be able to live your truth and face the possible consequences and the possibility of strong opposition.

"First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win" - Ghandi.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 18, 2017)

veganomics said:


> Those books have been on my wishlist for a while, I've heard good things about them from friends.


I bought Naked Empress about 5 years ago and Slaughter of the Innocent 3 years ago and like you they were on my wanted list for a while. One of the things that was putting me off buying them was the price, I remember in the early 2000's I couldn't find any for less than £80. I eventually managed to eventually get both of them for under £20 imported from a bookshop in Australia, but if you look on Amazon now some of them are over £100.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 18, 2017)

veganomics said:


> Most of Kerry's videos are excellent in my opinion, and indeed that was a nice quote. It is our choices that will eventually make the difference.


I do like her videos. They can be a bit on the longish side, but her content is really good quality and very intelligent imo. Here's a comedy one that she did with her partner in response to the hater comments on her channel...


----------



## felixthecat (Aug 18, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Organ transplants are required when the persons organ can no longer function and they would die without a replacement organ. The overwhelming majority of organ failures are due to preventable causes. A small minority are due to genetics. If you have the data demonstrating otherwise then it would be interesting to see them and I'll stand corrected if it proves to be the other way around.
> 
> Anyway, regardless the money and resources we waste on dealing with preventable diseases could then be better targeted at looking at ways to deal with the minority of cases that are genetic and currently not preventable.



I've done a bit of research. These are the commonest conditions that result in organ failure needing a transplant. Ive done the 4 biggies - heart, lung, kidneys and liver. It was dead interesting and occupied a ridiculously quiet afternoon at work.

 Heart transplants:
Dilated cardiomyopathy  (not a preventable disease) 
Birth defects (not a preventable disease)
Severe coronary arteriosclerosis with damage to heart muscle (preventable disease)

Kidney transplants:
Diabetes (approximately 70% preventable - Type 1 {10-15% of all diabetes} isn't preventable and neither is genetically linked type 2 which accounts for 2 out of every 5 cases)
Hypertension (can be preventable - can't find any data giving direct correlation to anything really)
Glomerulonephritis (occasionally caused by preventable disease such as HIV but often due to immune system conditions such as lupus or rheumatoid arthritis)
Polycystic kidney disease (not a preventable disease)
Severe defects of the urinary tract (not a preventable disease)

Lung transplants:
Cystic Fibrosis (not a preventable disease)
COPD ( preventable, smoking related, sometimes occupational)
Pulmonary hypertension (often associated with other lung and heart conditions so  in some/most cases preventable?)
Idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis ( who knows? No idea what causes it hence the 'idiopathic' bit)

Liver transplants:
Chronic alcohol misuse (100% preventable)
Hepatitis (hep B and C mainly, virus borne so preventable)
Liver Ca ( ? some cases preventable)
Primary Sclerosing Cholangitis (not a preventable disease)
Primary Biliary Cirrhosis (not alcohol related, probably not preventable not really sure of the root cause)

That's a lot of stuff that either genetic, idiopathic or a birth defect and thats a lot of people who need transplants through no fault of their own. If it was my kid who needed an organ and one was available that was animal grown, damn right Id take it.


----------



## Spymaster (Aug 18, 2017)

felixthecat said:


> I've done a bit of research. These are the commonest conditions that result in organ failure needing a transplant. Ive done the 4 biggies - heart, lung, kidneys and liver. It was dead interesting and occupied a ridiculously quiet afternoon at work.
> 
> Heart transplants:
> Dilated cardiomyopathy  (not a preventable disease)
> ...


Nice work.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 18, 2017)

felixthecat said:


> I've done a bit of research. These are the commonest conditions that result in organ failure needing a transplant. Ive done the 4 biggies - heart, lung, kidneys and liver. It was dead interesting and occupied a ridiculously quiet afternoon at work.
> 
> Heart transplants:
> Dilated cardiomyopathy  (not a preventable disease)
> ...


So with careful word selection you've gone from "most organ transplants arent because of preventable diseases" to "a lot of people who need transplants".  

I also noticed that you kind of glossed over any actual numbers for the number one killer and most preventable, heart disease. Advanced cherry picking? Or maybe you ran out of boring afternoon hours. 

None of what you've posted there changes what I stated earlier, the *overwhelming majority* of organ failures are from preventable causes. Of course there are some that are genetic but they are a minority. As I said, I'll stand corrected if you have clear evidence to the contrary.



felixthecat said:


> If it was my kid who needed an organ and one was available that was animal grown, damn right Id take it.


It's up to you what you do, it's not really any of my business. If you'd prefer to put your money and thought energy on the unknown and unproven then that's your call. My preference would still be to concentrate on the tangible and doable low hanging fruit that few can be arsed with and as a result is bankrupting countries with ever increasing and crippling "health" budgets. 

I'm not sure why my choice and opinion appears to be of so much concern to the obligate omnivores. If you're happy and content with your choices and decisions then get on with it. I will continue to base my choices and opinions on what makes sense to me, and if that irritates people who have a different opinion or need to have their sacred cow beliefs protected from possible alternatives, then that's just too bad.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 18, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Did you not read that New Scientist article? It's not far-fetched at all. It may be the reality within a few years.


I've learned over the years to treat these sorts of headlines with caution. (Don't believe the hype) The delivery/promise ratio is fairly low, and the headlines are often more to do with public relations and the associated funding than any genuine advances. Cancer cures have been "just around the corner" for at least 40 years since Nixon's promise. The completion of the genome project was supposed to herald in a whole bunch of advances...personalised medicine, designer drugs etc. The point is that there's a lot of hype surrounding scientific banner headlines which generates a lot of excitement. The advances are very often far more "pedestrian" and not that exciting. Prevention is one of those boring and mundane items which doesn't excite or generate headlines, however imo, would most likely be far more effective if people could be bothered.



littlebabyjesus said:


> In the here and now, such choices already need to be made by some parents regarding treatments. Up to the 1980s, if you had a type 1 diabetic kid, you had to make exactly that choice - allow your kid to die or give them treatment that involves killing animals.


Well as I said to felix in the previous post, whatever floats your boat. It is not something that I'm overly concerned about. Any area where I do have some influence is in prevention and that's where I choose to concentrate more of my time and energy and where I believe that I will get a MUCH BETTER return on investment.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 18, 2017)

You haven't grasped the purpose of the question. We're talking about society here - society-level collective effort, which is the only way we have any medical care at all. The question relates to what 'we' should do - should _we_ cure or treat conditions using technology and knowledge acquired through killing animals?

I also note how you are still avoiding the question, so to avoid hypotheticals I'll present you with the exact position my parents were faced with: 

You have a sick young child, and the only treatment that will stop that child from dying is insulin taken from pigs or cows, which need to be killed first. Do you save your child's life in the knowledge that you will be relying on killing animals to keep the child alive from now on? 

It's a no-brainer for me, but I am interested in the opinions of those who oppose all vivisection.


----------



## Spymaster (Aug 18, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> So with careful word selection you've gone from "most organ transplants arent because of preventable diseases" to "a lot of people who need transplants".
> 
> I also noticed that you kind of glossed over any actual numbers for the number one killer and most preventable, heart disease. Advanced cherry picking? Or maybe you ran out of boring afternoon hours.
> 
> ...





PaoloSanchez said:


> I've learned over the years to treat these sorts of headlines with caution. (Don't believe the hype) The delivery/promise ratio is fairly low, and the headlines are often more to do with public relations and the associated funding than any genuine advances. Cancer cures have been "just around the corner" for at least 40 years since Nixon's promise. The completion of the genome project was supposed to herald in a whole bunch of advances...personalised medicine, designer drugs etc. The point is that there's a lot of hype surrounding scientific banner headlines which generates a lot of excitement. The advances are very often far more "pedestrian" and not that exciting. Prevention is one of those boring and mundane items which doesn't excite or generate headlines, however imo, would most likely be far more effective if people could be bothered.
> 
> 
> Well as I said to felix in the previous post, whatever floats your boat. It is not something that I'm overly concerned about. Any area where I do have some influence is in prevention and that's where I choose to concentrate more of my time and energy and where I believe that I will get a MUCH BETTER return on investment.



"But, but, but, ..." <post silly pictures> "but, but, but ..." <ignore point> "but, but, but ..." <boring YouTube clip> "but, but, but ..." <attack source> "but, but, but ..." <evade with irrelevancies> "but, but, but ..."



You wanker.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 18, 2017)

You missed out <pretends there's no such thing as society>


----------



## ElizabethofYork (Aug 18, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> "
> 
> 
> You wanker.




Bit harsh.


----------



## Spymaster (Aug 18, 2017)

ElizabethofYork said:


> Bit harsh.


Nah. The bloke's a passive aggressive cunt of the highest order.


----------



## ddraig (Aug 18, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> Nah. The bloke's a passive aggressive cunt of the highest order.


no, _you _are


----------



## Spymaster (Aug 18, 2017)

ddraig said:


> no, _you _are


Nothing passive about my aggression.


----------



## klang (Aug 18, 2017)

aggressive passion


----------



## ddraig (Aug 18, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> Nothing passive about my aggression.


yeah, really manly meathead real aggression
well done bigman


----------



## Spymaster (Aug 18, 2017)

ddraig said:


> ... manly meathead ...


----------



## felixthecat (Aug 18, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> So with careful word selection you've gone from "most organ transplants arent because of preventable diseases" to "a lot of people who need t
> I also noticed that you kind of glossed over any actual numbers for the number one killer and most preventable, heart disease. Advanced cherry picking? Or maybe you ran out of boring afternoon hours.
> 
> None of what you've posted there changes what I stated earlier, the *overwhelming majority* of organ failures are from preventable causes..



I absolutely agree that the number one killer of people is heart disease. Its not the commonest reason for someone to have a heart transplant though. I thought we were just talking about animal/ human transplants...? If we're talking about morbidity from preventable diseases full stop that's a whole different conversation and one we'd probably agree on.

People with organ failure resulting from poor lifestyle choices usually are also poor  candidates for organ transplant due to the co-morbidities that they have.


----------



## Spymaster (Aug 18, 2017)

felixthecat said:


> I thought we were just talking about animal/ human transplants...?


You were. He's dodged it.


----------



## felixthecat (Aug 18, 2017)

Btw can i add i don't give a flying fuck what people eat. I'm interested in the medical ethics around using animal and animal products.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 19, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> "But, but, but, ..." <post silly pictures> "but, but, but ..." <ignore point> "but, but, but ..." <boring YouTube clip> "but, but, but ..." <attack source> "but, but, but ..." <evade with irrelevancies> "but, but, but ..."
> 
> 
> 
> You wanker.


lol, yeah right, so says the useless parasitic troll with no decent arguments of his own.


----------



## Spymaster (Aug 19, 2017)

"But, but, but ..." <troll>

No point in arguing with you, you just up throw smoke and duck and dive.

At least two other posters are trying to engage you seriously here.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 19, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> You haven't grasped the purpose of the question. We're talking about society here - society-level collective effort, which is the only way we have any medical care at all. The question relates to what 'we' should do - should _we_ cure or treat conditions using technology and knowledge acquired through killing animals?


Perhaps you mean that I haven't answered the question in the way you would like it answered. I believe that my reply also applies at a society-level collective effort, probably even more so. In my opinion to make the best use of finite and limited resources we'll get the biggest bang per buck by focusing in prevention strategies. 



littlebabyjesus said:


> I also note how you are still avoiding the question, so to avoid hypotheticals I'll present you with the exact position my parents were faced with:
> 
> You have a sick young child, and the only treatment that will stop that child from dying is insulin taken from pigs or cows, which need to be killed first. Do you save your child's life in the knowledge that you will be relying on killing animals to keep the child alive from now on?
> 
> It's a no-brainer for me, but I am interested in the opinions of those who oppose all vivisection.


I would explore all the options available, however even in your supposed real life scenario, killing animals was not necessary. 

_"Until 1936 diabetics were dependent on animal insulin, but it is important to establish that they were dependent on an animal product (which was obtained from the meat industry) as opposed to animal experimentation.  In 1936 synthetic insulin was developed.

This history of diabetes and insulin is verified to reliable medical and historical texts, and shows that diabetics owe nothing to animal experimenters.  The claim that they do does persist, and we would encourage anyone interested to look into this further."_

Source


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 19, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> "But, but, but ..." <troll>
> 
> No point in arguing with you, you just up throw smoke and duck and dive.
> 
> At least two other posters are trying to engage you seriously here.


Yeah right, as if you were ever trying to engage seriously yourself. Just a parasite troll riding on other people coat tails and heckling.


----------



## Spymaster (Aug 19, 2017)

Yet it was me who brought up the subject that you're now getting tied in knots on


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 19, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> Yet it was me who brought up the subject that you're now getting tied in knots on


And? You posed a question that you would like answered in a particular way. As soon as you don't like the answers you go back to your normal heckling mode. Very predictable.

lol @ "tied in knots". Now that's a genuine example of someone talking bollocks.


----------



## Spymaster (Aug 19, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> And? You posed a question that you would like answered in a particular way. As soon as you don't like the answers you go back to your normal heckling mode. Very predictable.
> 
> lol @ "tied in knots". Now that's a genuine example of someone talking bollocks.


Lol, no. You are being used for completely different purposes now! 

<ding>


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Aug 19, 2017)

mrs quoad said:


> Do you think it's acceptable for other animals to inflict harm on other animals, if that harm is avoidable or only for pleasure?



It's fairly rare to find the other animals inflicting harm just for the pleasure of it. In most instances animals harm one another for reasons of survival. Even with animals who engage in seemingly brutal or pointless acts of violence, it's often not entirely clear what their motives are or to what degree they are merely acting instinctively. In any event they don't have the same degree of moral agency that humans do, and humans are by far the master species when it comes to inflicting harm for pleasure. 



mrs quoad said:


> I ask, because - as noted above - the single harm principle (that I think you) set out above seems to imply a mandate for mass intervention in the "natural" world, quite apart from human behaviour.



No, not really. The harm principle is a principle of non-maleficence: it's about not harming others. Intervening in the natural world to save pray animals from predators (let's say) would be an act of beneficence and as such is governed by different considerations. One of those is the principle of proportionality - that you shouldn't engage in an act if the harm it causes outweighs the good. I suspect the strongest reason against mass intervention in the natural world is that the harm it would cause would outweigh any good. Eco-systems are very delicately balanced and attempting to 'fix' them on a vast scale would, in current conditions, likely lead to starvation, over-population, species extinction and other very bad outcomes.

But again, we shouldn't think of this as a unique problem in the animal rights context. Governments regularly inflict egregious human rights violations against their citizens. Yet we are often skeptical of calling upon our governments or bodies like the UN or NATO to intervene on behalf of those citizens. And the reason we are skeptical I think is because we worry that they'll do more harm than good. That's not necessarily an argument against human rights though, it just shows the practical world difficulties of implementing them.



Athos said:


> 1. No. Reciprocity.
> 2. I'll have to think about.



I'd need to know what you mean by reciprocity and why you think it's relevant to engage with that answer.

Have you decided if you think torturing elephants into being circus performers is immoral yet?


----------



## Athos (Aug 19, 2017)

Jeff Robinson said:


> Have you decided if you think torturing elephants into being circus performers is immoral yet?



I feel that it is wrong. Though I'm not sure I can rationalise why, exactly. Probably something to do with the fact that it brings or the worst in people. I'm still thinking on it.


----------



## Athos (Aug 19, 2017)

Jeff Robinson said:


> I'd need to know what you mean by reciprocity and why you think it's relevant to engage with that answer.



The idea that rights are something we subscribe to in order to make society work and protect our own interests, such that they are extended to those classes of beings capable of - if not actually - recognising them in others, (albeit with specific exceptions e.g. people in comas)


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 19, 2017)

felixthecat said:


> I absolutely agree that the number one killer of people is heart disease. Its not the commonest reason for someone to have a heart transplant though. I thought we were just talking about animal/ human transplants...? If we're talking about morbidity from preventable diseases full stop that's a whole different conversation and one we'd probably agree on.
> 
> People with organ failure resulting from poor lifestyle choices usually are also poor  candidates for organ transplant due to the co-morbidities that they have.


It would be interesting to see the figures showing what the commonest reason for heart transplants really is. Like I said, I'll stand corrected if it is shown to be from largely non preventable causes, however my understanding is that the majority of them are and a minority are inherited/genetic.



felixthecat said:


> Btw can i add i don't give a flying fuck what people eat. I'm interested in the medical ethics around using animal and animal products.


Fair enough whatever floats yer boat. It would appear that an awful lot of people do give a flying fuck about what people eat which is why this thread is so well attended, especially by people trying to "have a dig".

I would also add that medical ethics and the use of animals are fairly closely related and in many ways fairly closely coupled. It may even be a double whammy for the animals (and ultimately ourselves) in that it is our (superior?) attitudes towards animals that allows us to both eat AND experiment on them and not feel too bad about it. Eating them seemingly making humans and the planet more sick and hence creating more of a reason to experiment on animals. 

It is the same sort of attitude that was prevalent back in the day when blacks were used to perfect medical procedures some of which we take for granted now. (for example gynaecology) Blacks were seen as "lesser" beings and therefore those doing the experimenting did not feel any guilt in conducting the experiments that they saw as important for the advancement of medicine. 

Medical Apartheid (good exploration of medical ethics)
Talk


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Aug 19, 2017)

Athos said:


> The idea that rights are something we subscribe to in order to make society work and protect our own interests, such that they are extended to those classes of beings capable of - if not actually - recognising them in others, (albeit with specific exceptions e.g. people in comas)



It's not clear to me why it's in "our" (whoever that is) self-interest to recognise the rights of others simply because they're *capable* of doing the same for us. What self-interested reason do I have to stand up for the rights of Syrian refugees or victims of US drone attacks in Pakistan? Or those living in poverty in sub-  Saharan Africa? I doubt most of them will ever be able to reciprocate for me. As a general matter, various humans benefit (economically, politically) all the time from human rights violations. Appeals to self-interest are a very shaky foundation for rights.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 19, 2017)

Jeff Robinson said:


> It's fairly rare to find the other animals inflicting harm just for the pleasure of it. In most instances animals harm one another for reasons of survival. Even with animals who engage in seemingly brutal or pointless acts of violence, it's often not entirely clear what their motives are or to what degree they are merely acting instinctively. In any event they don't have the same degree of moral agency that humans do, and humans are by far the master species when it comes to inflicting harm for pleasure.


This is a commonly used justification for humans killing/mistreating animals. "If they can do it why can't we?" 
I suppose there are examples of killer whales playing with a seal and then not even bothering to eat it, and domestic cats seemingly torturing their prey, but even if that were true, as you said our moral agency should be the thing that stops us "behaving like animals".


----------



## Spymaster (Aug 19, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> It would appear that an awful lot of people do give a flying fuck about what people eat which is why this thread is so well attended


This thread is very far from being "well attended". There are a handful of active posters on it now, most of whom have repeatedly told you they don't care what you or others eat, but do care about your holier than thou attitudes.


----------



## Athos (Aug 19, 2017)

The common feature of the group to which the 'our' refers is the potential for reciprocity; that's what we have in common, and which excludes animals. The interest you have in the human rights of others is that they, like you are human, such that setting standards for their treatment is also to set them for yours.


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Aug 19, 2017)

Athos said:


> The common feature of the group to which the 'our' refers is the potential for reciprocity; that's what we have in common, and which excludes animals. The interest you have in the human rights of others is that they, like you are human, such that setting standards for their treatment is also to set them for yours.



its true that I'm a human but I'm also an earthling, an animal, a mammal, a primate, a great ape, white, male, British and so forth. Why, for self-interested reasons, should I be concerned about humans per se and not some subset of humans that share more characteristics with me?

And why should I care more about the rights of people who don't care about mine (e.g KKK and ISIS members) and who actively desire to violate them than animals who do not understand my rights and pose no threat to them (e.g farmed animals)?


----------



## A380 (Aug 19, 2017)

> Have you decided if you think torturing elephants into being circus performers is immoral yet


----------



## A380 (Aug 19, 2017)

Elephants  don't have prehensile toes; so no amount of torture can get them to hang onto the trapeze.


Actually performing animals is not a bad example. There is a two way axis of consideration. There is a gate, should any animal be reduced into captivity at all?

Then firstly the effect on the animals and secondly the effect on people.

Firstly on performance Is the training cruel or performing cruel? Dolphins kept in tiny enclosures and elephants trained by pain compliance probably are for most people. Working dogs (even attack dogs - a whole other issue) are trained through play mostly and recreation of a pack hierarchy and fleas in a circus - not really trained at all but probably feel no pain by the techniques used. So is the performing cruel to the animal?

Secondly. Does making animals perform devalue us as humans? Watching a falconer fly her birds and allow us to see their magnificence up close at one end of the spectrum and hippos wearing tutus and standing on barrels at the other. Everyone will have their own line on that spectrum.

I love watching working animals but hate more 'circus like' performances but I'm notsure if that's based on rationale sensibilities or just middle class angst. People will need to decide.


----------



## Athos (Aug 19, 2017)

Jeff Robinson said:


> its true that I'm a human but I'm also an earthling, an animal, a mammal, a primate, a great ape, white, male, British and so forth. Why, for self-interested reasons, should I be concerned about humans per se and not some subset of humans that share more characteristics with me?
> 
> And why should I care more about the rights of people who don't care about mine (e.g KKK and ISIS members) and who actively desire to violate them than animals who do not understand my rights and pose no threat to them (e.g farmed animals)?



I've explained why. Those other classes don't have the important characteristic: the potential for reciprocity.

With your second question, are you seriously asking why you should respect others human rights?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 19, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Perhaps you mean that I haven't answered the question in the way you would like it answered. I believe that my reply also applies at a society-level collective effort, probably even more so. In my opinion to make the best use of finite and limited resources we'll get the biggest bang per buck by focusing in prevention strategies.
> 
> 
> I would explore all the options available, however even in your supposed real life scenario, killing animals was not necessary.
> ...


The options available to a type 1 diabetic are: a) you use the insulin the NHS gives you or b) you die. 

Take your time exploring those options.


----------



## spanglechick (Aug 19, 2017)

What I think creates the antagonism in these discussion is twofold: firstly, most vegans are making a choice that is ethics-based.  This means that non vegan behaviour is a less ethical way of living.  It perpetuates cruelty and so on.  Vegans may be happy to keep these views to themselves, but both groups of people know they exist, and since it isn't nice to be judged negatively, many meat-eaters are keen to make vegans see them as ethical people, or to see themselves as less ethical than they imagine.  It's futile, of course, but a reaction to knowing someone is judging you.  

Then the type of debate is overwhelmingly centred around a number of perceived hypocrisies. This is because Veganism is commonly presented in absolutist terms.  Lbj's earlier arguments about Compassion in World Farming were rejected.  Gg's proposed "seaganism" was dismissed.  While there's no great surprise in either case, from an ethical perspective both are simply wrong. But the inflexibility of the position invites a person arguing against the absolutist vegan position to find the cases around the margins: cosseted pet hens who lay eggs for the family table being less exploited and abused for human benefit than the mice killed in arable farming.  Bees.  Pig hearts.  Vegans find these arguments irritating because the most important bits of veganism are being sidelined.  Those arguing against can't resist them because an absolutist ethical position invites testing.


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Aug 19, 2017)

A380 said:


> Actually performing animals is not a bad example. There is a two way axis of consideration. There is a gate, should any animal be reduced into captivity at all?



That was not the discussion I was having with Athos. He said he didn't see anything wrong with making animals suffer for human pleasure. I then asked him if, given this, he didn't have any problem with torturing elephants to perform circus tricks - if people get pleasure from watching the circus tricks. In response he has said that he does think it is wrong because it 'brings out the worst in people'. I assume he is referring to the trainers themselves rather than the circus goers (most of whom I suspect are oblivious to the torture that the animals go through, as are tourists who ride elephants in Thailand). I agree with him that it does bring out the worst in the trainers (though I suspect they are already fairly psychopathic to go that line of work in the first place) but I also think that working in factory farms and slaughter houses brings out the worst in humans too (as well as mental health problems of various kinds). So I don't think it's a distinction with too much weight.


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Aug 19, 2017)

Athos said:


> I've explained why. Those other classes don't have the important characteristic: the potential for reciprocity.
> 
> With your second question, are you seriously asking why you should respect others human rights?



You were equivocating between 'being in the same group' and 'potential for reciprocity'. You are now sliding back to potential for reciprocity - and my question remains: why should I care about that? See my earlier examples of refugees, drone attacks and the global poor. 

I'm asking why I should respect human rights _for the reasons you give_. I do respect human rights, but not for those reasons - which seem to be very unpersuasive and ill thought out.


----------



## mrs quoad (Aug 19, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> This is a commonly used justification for humans killing/mistreating animals. "If they can do it why can't we?"
> I suppose there are examples of killer whales playing with a seal and then not even bothering to eat it, and domestic cats seemingly torturing their prey, but even if that were true, as you said our moral agency should be the thing that stops us "behaving like animals".


This isn't the harm principle as it was described, though. And nor does the harm principle - as set out - provide any reason for why it is only related to "maleficence". If, indeed, it is, then that is a substantial additional qualification, and one that is not contained within what (I think) someone described as the "single most beautiful ethical insight" of veganism.


----------



## A380 (Aug 19, 2017)

Jeff Robinson said:


> ...working in factory farms and slaughter houses ...as well as mental health problems of various kinds...



This is a significant argument to support the cause of veganism. I've never seen any empirical or anecdotal  evidence about higher levels of mental ill health in these industries before . 

I'd find it interesting to look at if you could point me in the directions of those studies or articles.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 19, 2017)

Jeff Robinson said:


> That was not the discussion I was having with Athos. He said he didn't see anything wrong with making animals suffer for human pleasure. I then asked him if, given this, he didn't have any problem with torturing elephants to perform circus tricks - if people get pleasure from watching the circus tricks. In response he has said that he does think it is wrong because it 'brings out the worst in people'. I assume he is referring to the trainers themselves rather than the circus goers (most of whom I suspect are oblivious to the torture that the animals go through, as are tourists who ride elephants in Thailand). I agree with him that it does bring out the worst in the trainers (though I suspect they are already fairly psychopathic to go that line of work in the first place) but I also think that working in factory farms and slaughter houses brings out the worst in humans too (as well as mental health problems of various kinds). So I don't think it's a distinction with too much weight.



Don't know if you've read any of GA Bradshaw's work on the psychology of elephants, but she also looks at the psychology of elephant keeping. Within that abusive relationship, the keepers/trainers can at the same time abuse the elephants and feel that they care for them, in a very similar way to abusive relationships between humans. Certain self-justifying myths have grown up to allow them to live with what they are doing, such as the idea that free-ranging elephants physically discipline their young - the scientists who study free-ranging elephants are in agreement that they never do this. Similar things are seen in dolphin/killer whale trainers, most of whom would sincerely claim to love their animals.


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Aug 19, 2017)

A380 said:


> This is a significant argument to support the cause of veganism. I've never seen any empirical or anecdotal  evidence about higher levels of mental ill health in these industries before .
> 
> I'd find it interesting to look at if you could point me in the directions of those studies or articles.



Here's a few for you: 

I stopped eating animals because of human rights

Was Jack the Ripper a Slaughterman? – Modern Implications of Human-Animal Violence - Sarx (see section 'slaughterhouses and violent crime')

This book is also very powerful: 

https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B005ZC7I62/ref=dp-kindle-redirect?_encoding=UTF8&btkr=1


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 19, 2017)

A380 said:


> This is a significant argument to support the cause of veganism. I've never seen any empirical or anecdotal  evidence about higher levels of mental ill health in these industries before .
> 
> I'd find it interesting to look at if you could point me in the directions of those studies or articles.


Here's one on chicken farming in Georgia.


----------



## Athos (Aug 19, 2017)

Jeff Robinson said:


> You were equivocating between 'being in the same group' and 'potential for reciprocity'. You are now sliding back to potential for reciprocity - and my question remains: why should I care about that? See my earlier examples of refugees, drone attacks and the global poor.
> 
> I'm asking why I should respect human rights _for the reasons you give_. I do respect human rights, but not for those reasons - which seem to be very unpersuasive and ill thought out.



There's no equivocation. The potential for reciprocity is the defining characteristic of the group.


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Aug 19, 2017)

Athos said:


> There's no equivocation. The potential for reciprocity is the defining characteristic of the group.



I asked why the potential for reciprocity was the basis for human rights and you said: 'The interest you have in the human rights of others is that they, like you are human, such that setting standards for their treatment is also to set them for yours.' My response to that argument was 'I am a member of many groups: why should my membership of humanity be the morally relevant one?'. Your response is 'the potential for reciprocity'. That's circular reasoning. You haven't as of yet shown the link between potential for reciprocity and human rights. And this is before we address the even thornier problem of humans who lack the potential for reciprocity and what their moral status is.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 19, 2017)

veganomics said:


> Excellent. I've not watched that video but will get around to it after reading that quote.
> Coming back to the OP question. I don't think it's supposed "angry vegans" that puts of potential vegans, it's the amount of grief and hassle you get from the majority that try to harrass and bully you into conformity. Most people would rather have a quiet life and would rather not be singled out as a weirdo. However I think Kerry is spot on with that, if you believe that what you're doing is the right thing to do, then you need strength of character to be able to live your truth and face the possible consequences and the possibility of strong opposition.
> 
> "First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win" - Ghandi.


Indeed, and timely with yet another "holier than thou" baseless accusation that usually gets trotted out when rational arguments are in short supply, as Kerry mentions in that video...

_"...and if I could labour the self-righteousness point, I think this is a sign that we're onto something. *Self-righteousness is a term that comes up as an affront to people doing the right thing when there's no compelling evidence to suggest that they're not. So there's no argument against them, the best one can do is to say 'well I think you look very smug about doing the right thing, I don't think people will like you'. *

Well I'm not ashamed of doing right and knowing it. Society appeals to our vanity to make us comply with destructive behaviours in order to fit in because the destructive behaviours make money, but I'm not so vain that I live in mortal terror of somebody mistakenly thinking I'm smug about what I eat, I mean how shallow would you need to be to lose sleep over that. 

In any case if you do feel embarrassed about having to say to someone 'I don't eat that I'm a vegan', *you just have to get a backbone about it*, because where we do something that sets a good example to others we should strive to let people see that. It's not about us feeling good."_


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 19, 2017)

Athos said:


> There's no equivocation. The potential for reciprocity is the defining characteristic of the group.


That doesn't define away the possibility of extending the group, though. I think the potential for reciprocity with, say, a cat is probably pretty limited, but there are other animals with whom much greater potential would appear to exist, but where that potential faces the not inconsiderable barrier of communication. I'm thinking of the obvious examples of killer whales and elephants here. In the case of whales, the evidence is mounting that they look at us and recognise an intelligence in us comparable to their own, and that they may very well be rather puzzled by some of our actions towards them and have an active desire to create a different relationship with us. If that sounds far-fetched, I'd ask for other ways to explain various species of whale's reaction to the whaling industry and their changing attitudes now that whaling has stopped (in the areas where it has stopped).

There's certainly no reason per se to believe that a potential for reciprocity can only exist between humans. In fact, I would argue, given what we're starting to understand about certain other animals, that there's reason to believe that this is likely wrong.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 19, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> The options available to a type 1 diabetic are: a) you use the insulin the NHS gives you or b) you die.
> 
> Take your time exploring those options.


Well as I am not in that situation, it's not something that I need to spend too much time worrying about for the moment. In any case your hypothetical doesn't require mean that an animal has to die so that my child may live.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 19, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Well as I am not in that situation, it's not something that I need to spend too much time worrying about for the moment. In any case your hypothetical doesn't require mean that an animal has to die so that my child may live.


It's kind of pointless talking to you, isn't it?


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Aug 19, 2017)

A380 said:


> This is a significant argument to support the cause of veganism. I've never seen any empirical or anecdotal  evidence about higher levels of mental ill health in these industries before .
> 
> I'd find it interesting to look at if you could point me in the directions of those studies or articles.



Here's another: 

The Psychological Damage of Slaughterhouse Work

A slaughterman quoted in the first hyperlink in the article:

“The worst thing, worse than the physical danger, is the emotional toll. If you work in the stick pit [where hogs are killed] for any period of time—that let’s [sic] you kill things but doesn’t let you care. You may look a hog in the eye that’s walking around in the blood pit with you and think, ‘God, that really isn’t a bad looking animal.’ You may want to pet it. Pigs down on the kill floor have come up to nuzzle me like a puppy. Two minutes later I had to kill them. … I can’t care.”


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 19, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> It's kind of pointless talking to you, isn't it?


Well I don't believe so, but I sense yet another flounce coming, so you're free to stop replying to me whenever you feel you can manage it. You appear to get a bit flustered when people don't agree with your opinion or share your views. I'm used to people disagreeing with me so maybe that's why it doesn't bother me as much as it appears to bother you.


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Aug 19, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> That doesn't define away the possibility of extending the group, though. I think the potential for reciprocity with, say, a cat is probably pretty limited, but there are other animals with whom much greater potential would appear to exist, but where that potential faces the not inconsiderable barrier of communication. I'm thinking of the obvious examples of killer whales and elephants here. In the case of whales, the evidence is mounting that they look at us and recognise an intelligence in us comparable to their own, and that they may very well be rather puzzled by some of our actions towards them and have an active desire to create a different relationship with us. If that sounds far-fetched, I'd ask for other ways to explain various species of whale's reaction to the whaling industry and their changing attitudes now that whaling has stopped (in the areas where it has stopped).
> 
> There's certainly no reason per se to believe that a potential for reciprocity can only exist between humans. In fact, I would argue, given what we're starting to understand about certain other animals, that there's reason to believe that this is likely wrong.



The abstract of a recent paper:

The presence of direct reciprocity in animals is a debated topic, because, despite its evolutionary plausibility, it is believed to be uncommon. Some authors claim that stable reciprocal exchanges require sophisticated cognition which has acted as a constraint on its evolution across species. In contrast, a more recent trend of research has focused on the possibility that direct reciprocity occurs within long-term bonds and relies on simple as well as more complex affective mechanisms such as emotional book-keeping, rudimentary and higher forms of empathy, and inequity aversion, among others. First, we present evidence supporting the occurrence of long-term reciprocity in the context of existing bonds in social birds and mammals. Second, we discuss the evidence for affective responses which, modulated by bonding, may underlie altruistic behaviours in different species. We conclude that the mechanisms that may underlie reciprocal exchanges are diverse, and that some act in interaction with bonding processes. From simple associative learning in social contexts, through emotional contagion and behavioural mimicry, to empathy and a sense of fairness, widespread and diverse social affective mechanisms may explain why direct reciprocity may not be a rare phenomenon among social vertebrates.

Direct reciprocity in animals: The roles of bonding and affective processes

Though I think Athos has in mind a much more demanding notion of reciprocity requiring a high level of abstract cognitive reasoning ability.


----------



## Athos (Aug 19, 2017)

Jeff Robinson said:


> The abstract of a recent paper:
> 
> The presence of direct reciprocity in animals is a debated topic, because, despite its evolutionary plausibility, it is believed to be uncommon. Some authors claim that stable reciprocal exchanges require sophisticated cognition which has acted as a constraint on its evolution across species. In contrast, a more recent trend of research has focused on the possibility that direct reciprocity occurs within long-term bonds and relies on simple as well as more complex affective mechanisms such as emotional book-keeping, rudimentary and higher forms of empathy, and inequity aversion, among others. First, we present evidence supporting the occurrence of long-term reciprocity in the context of existing bonds in social birds and mammals. Second, we discuss the evidence for affective responses which, modulated by bonding, may underlie altruistic behaviours in different species. We conclude that the mechanisms that may underlie reciprocal exchanges are diverse, and that some act in interaction with bonding processes. From simple associative learning in social contexts, through emotional contagion and behavioural mimicry, to empathy and a sense of fairness, widespread and diverse social affective mechanisms may explain why direct reciprocity may not be a rare phenomenon among social vertebrates.
> 
> ...



I do. And on an  inter (rather than intra) species basis.


----------



## Athos (Aug 19, 2017)

Jeff Robinson said:


> I asked why the potential for reciprocity was the basis for human rights and you said: 'The interest you have in the human rights of others is that they, like you are human, such that setting standards for their treatment is also to set them for yours.' My response to that argument was 'I am a member of many groups: why should my membership of humanity be the morally relevant one?'. Your response is 'the potential for reciprocity'. That's circular reasoning. You haven't as of yet shown the link between potential for reciprocity and human rights. And this is before we address the even thornier problem of humans who lack the potential for reciprocity and what their moral status is.



I have explained why i consider reciprocity important. Essentially, self-interest. We respect others rights, that others will respect ours.  I'm not sure such an exchange is possible with other species. And, although you criticise self- interest as a basis for rights, I'm yet to hear a more convincing one.


----------



## Athos (Aug 19, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> That doesn't define away the possibility of extending the group, though. I think the potential for reciprocity with, say, a cat is probably pretty limited, but there are other animals with whom much greater potential would appear to exist, but where that potential faces the not inconsiderable barrier of communication. I'm thinking of the obvious examples of killer whales and elephants here. In the case of whales, the evidence is mounting that they look at us and recognise an intelligence in us comparable to their own, and that they may very well be rather puzzled by some of our actions towards them and have an active desire to create a different relationship with us. If that sounds far-fetched, I'd ask for other ways to explain various species of whale's reaction to the whaling industry and their changing attitudes now that whaling has stopped (in the areas where it has stopped).
> 
> There's certainly no reason per se to believe that a potential for reciprocity can only exist between humans. In fact, I would argue, given what we're starting to understand about certain other animals, that there's reason to believe that this is likely wrong.



I don't rule out the possibility. But, to date, I see no convincing evidence for that idea.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 19, 2017)

spanglechick said:


> What I think creates the antagonism in these discussion is twofold: firstly, most vegans are making a choice that is ethics-based.  This means that non vegan behaviour is a less ethical way of living.  It perpetuates cruelty and so on.  Vegans may be happy to keep these views to themselves, but both groups of people know they exist, and since it isn't nice to be judged negatively, many meat-eaters are keen to make vegans see them as ethical people, or to see themselves as less ethical than they imagine.  It's futile, of course, but a reaction to knowing someone is judging you.
> 
> Then the type of debate is overwhelmingly centred around a number of perceived hypocrisies. This is because Veganism is commonly presented in absolutist terms.  Lbj's earlier arguments about Compassion in World Farming were rejected.  Gg's proposed "seaganism" was dismissed.  While there's no great surprise in either case, from an ethical perspective both are simply wrong. But the inflexibility of the position invites a person arguing against the absolutist vegan position to find the cases around the margins: cosseted pet hens who lay eggs for the family table being less exploited and abused for human benefit than the mice killed in arable farming.  Bees.  Pig hearts.  Vegans find these arguments irritating because the most important bits of veganism are being sidelined.  Those arguing against can't resist them because an absolutist ethical position invites testing.


I think there's something to what you're saying if I've understood you correctly. In general people don't like to feel that they're being judged. Vegans tend to make choices based on what they believe to be the right thing to do from either a health, environmental, ethical or compassionate standpoint or any combination of those. Some might focus only on one of those, others might embrace all of them. This can represent a challenge to people who are not vegan and can cause them to launch pre-emptive strikes against vegans in order to try and defend their position.

wrt to arguments being "rejected" or "dismissed", I'm not sure that I'd agree with that. As is often the case in debates, there are differences in opinion and sometimes at the end of the debate, there is still no agreement and the differences remain. I disagreed with lbj's idea of "humane slaughter" and I don't think it would be something that I would ever agree with unless I take a blow to the head or something. Just because he has a different opinion to me that doesn't mean that I should start getting stroppy say things like "you're talking bollocks" or him a "cunt". I accept that his perspective is different and I'm prepared to move on. Unfortunately some of the more strident, or dare I say "angry" omnivores appear to not be able to conduct themselves in a civilised manner and use the false accusation of the "smug vegan" to justify their behaviour. 

I've found the elaborate hypothetical side issues (pig hearts etc) to be more amusing than irritating, although I do believe they are a bit of a ridiculous waste of time. To me they seem like rather desperate attempts to find something wrong with vegans and therefore justify the omni position, hunting for vegan hypocrisy so that they don't have to feel guilty about killing animals. I'm waiting for the next outrageous scenario. "...what if you had bum cancer and were about to die and the only way you could live was if they had to grow a new bum hole on a pig, would you agree with animal testing then? Or would you just shrug your shoulders and die?"


----------



## danny la rouge (Aug 19, 2017)

Athos said:


> I have explained why i consider reciprocity important. Essentially, self-interest. We respect others rights, that others will respect ours.  I'm not sure such an exchange is possible with other species. And, although you criticise self- interest as a basis for rights, I'm yet to hear a more convincing one.


"Reciprocal altruism" is the term used in animal behaviour. It definitely applies within social species. I'd argue it can happen between social species too. Dogs and humans, for example, know they're useful to each other.


----------



## danny la rouge (Aug 19, 2017)

(Sorry for jumping in on page 63: full disclosure - I haven't read back).


----------



## DotCommunist (Aug 19, 2017)

danny la rouge said:


> Dogs and humans, for example, know they're useful to each other.


'You know they can make light come and go when they like? light and warm'

'bollocks, thats just a trick to keep all the food'

'watch this'

*extended barking followed by a light switch being turned on by irate human*

'well, shit. Do they do it for free?'

'No, you have to look after them. Look they don't see very well in low light and they have to change skins daily'

'are you shitting me?'

'no they literally have to change their hide every day. Just look after the small ones and the food will follow'

'they're mental'

'judge not lest you be judged. Now its time to eat this poo we found young un'


----------



## Athos (Aug 19, 2017)

danny la rouge said:


> "Reciprocal altruism" is the term used in animal behaviour. It definitely applies within social species. I'd argue it can happen between social species too. Dogs and humans, for example, know they're useful to each other.



Not sure it can happen at the level we're talking about though; a reciprocal recognition of rights.


----------



## danny la rouge (Aug 19, 2017)

Athos said:


> Not sure it can happen at the level we're talking scout though; a reciprocal recognition of rights.


Hmm.  If you mean by "rights" a legalistic charter, then maybe so.  But if you mean something less bureaucratic, like respect for social boundaries/mores, then I think it can.

My dog was taught (by us) as a puppy that nipping us with her teeth was against the rules, for example.  She'd do it (as is natural for a razor-toothed puppy); we'd emit a pantomime squeal, and turn away from her.  She very quickly learned it was something that broke a social bond, and stopped.


----------



## Athos (Aug 19, 2017)

danny la rouge said:


> Hmm.  If you mean by "rights" a legalistic charter, then maybe so.  But if you mean something less bureaucratic, like respect for social boundaries/mores, then I think it can.
> 
> My dog was taught (by us) as a puppy that nipping us with her teeth was against the rules, for example.  She'd do it (as is natural for a razor-toothed puppy); we'd emit a pantomime squeal, and turn away from her.  She very quickly learned it was something that broke a social bond, and stopped.



I font think it's a question of legalism so much as conceptual complexity beyond immediate cause and effect.


----------



## danny la rouge (Aug 19, 2017)

Athos said:


> I font think it's a question of legalism so much as conceptual complexity beyond immediate cause and effect.


I disagree. I think morality is a very basic impulse for social animals, and "rights" just a way of us describing really quite fundamental behaviours. It's the description of it/them that's complex.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Aug 19, 2017)

danny la rouge said:


> Hmm.  If you mean by "rights" a legalistic charter, then maybe so.  But if you mean something less bureaucratic, like respect for social boundaries/mores, then I think it can.
> 
> *My dog was taught (by us) *as a puppy that nipping us with her teeth was against the rules, for example.  She'd do it (as is natural for a razor-toothed puppy); we'd emit a pantomime squeal, and turn away from her.  She very quickly learned it was something that broke a social bond, and stopped.


Bolded an important bit.


----------



## danny la rouge (Aug 19, 2017)

sleaterkinney said:


> Bolded an important bit.


And we were taught (*by her*) The things she doesn't appreciate.


----------



## danny la rouge (Aug 19, 2017)

To be clear: there are two layers going on here. You're only looking at one. (The teaching, the describing). Rather than the other (the social behaviour).

If by Rights we mean the former, then no, dogs can't do that. If we mean the latter, then they very much do. (And to facilitate that, they learn much more about us than we deliberately teach them)


----------



## Athos (Aug 19, 2017)

danny la rouge said:


> I disagree. I think morality is a very basic impulse for social animals, and "rights" just a way of us describing really quite fundamental behaviours. It's the description of it/them that's complex.



There was no impulse in your dog not to bite you; you had to train her out of it. In any event, I don't think rights are a matter of morality; I think they require a certain cognitive ability, and ability to empathise.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Aug 19, 2017)

danny la rouge said:


> And we were taught (*by her*) The things she doesn't appreciate.


I think its inaccurate to project human behaviour onto other species - probably why I'm not a veggie.


----------



## danny la rouge (Aug 19, 2017)

sleaterkinney said:


> I think its inaccurate to project human behaviour onto other species.


I do too. But then I haven't.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 19, 2017)

sleaterkinney said:


> I think its inaccurate to project human behaviour onto other species - probably why I'm not a veggie.


I think often the opposite mistake occurs, though - setting humans up as somehow special and forgetting that we are evolved too. Taking morality as the example, I agree with dlr on this. The evidence is that humans are born with a predisposition to look for moral systems, to find the categories 'right' and 'wrong' in the world and work out how these categories work. It's easy to see how a social animal would evolve such a disposition - it ensures the animal will be able to recognise and learn the social rules of its group while allowing for a degree of cultural variation between the rules of different groups. It's a solid evolutionary strategy. Dogs would appear to be born with a similar kind of moral predisposition, and why wouldn't they?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 19, 2017)

danny la rouge said:


> And we were taught (*by her*) The things she doesn't appreciate.


We domesticated dogs. But dogs also domesticated us.


----------



## A380 (Aug 19, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> We domesticated dogs. But dogs also domesticated us.


Cats remain wankers though.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Aug 19, 2017)

PaoloSanchez, powered by Duracell.


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Aug 19, 2017)

Athos said:


> I have explained why i consider reciprocity important. Essentially, self-interest. We respect others rights, that others will respect ours.  I'm not sure such an exchange is possible with other species. And, although you criticise self- interest as a basis for rights, I'm yet to hear a more convincing one.



TBH this sounds like something an Ayn Rand follower or an unreconstructed Hobbesean would say. I find it hard to believe that you actually hold this view. It seems like you started from the thought "I like meat" and then worked backwards from there.

It also has very little relevance to the real world. Imbalances of power mean that it is often in the self interest of the powerful to violate the rights of the powerless and for the people in the middle to do nothing about it. Self-interest often points to supporting or  acquiescing to rights violations rather respecting rights.


----------



## Athos (Aug 19, 2017)

Jeff Robinson said:


> TBH this sounds like something an Ayn Rand follower or an unreconstructed Hobbesean would say. I find it hard to believe that you actually hold this view. It seems like you started from the thought "I like meat" and then worked backwards from there.
> 
> It also has very little relevance to the real world. Imbalances of power mean that it is often in the self interest of the powerful to violate the rights of the powerless and for the people in the middle to do nothing about it. Self-interest often points to supporting or  acquiescing to rights violations rather respecting rights.



There's nothing particularly Hobbesean or Randian about my position. It's far more universal than that; after all, do unto others as you would have them do unto you features in pretty much every major religion.

The argument isn't undermined by the fact that some don't observe human rights, any more than that fact undermines any other bases for such rights.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 19, 2017)

Jeff Robinson said:


> The abstract of a recent paper:
> 
> The presence of direct reciprocity in animals is a debated topic, because, despite its evolutionary plausibility, it is believed to be uncommon. Some authors claim that stable reciprocal exchanges require sophisticated cognition which has acted as a constraint on its evolution across species. In contrast, a more recent trend of research has focused on the possibility that direct reciprocity occurs within long-term bonds and relies on simple as well as more complex affective mechanisms such as emotional book-keeping, rudimentary and higher forms of empathy, and inequity aversion, among others. First, we present evidence supporting the occurrence of long-term reciprocity in the context of existing bonds in social birds and mammals. Second, we discuss the evidence for affective responses which, modulated by bonding, may underlie altruistic behaviours in different species. We conclude that the mechanisms that may underlie reciprocal exchanges are diverse, and that some act in interaction with bonding processes. From simple associative learning in social contexts, through emotional contagion and behavioural mimicry, to empathy and a sense of fairness, widespread and diverse social affective mechanisms may explain why direct reciprocity may not be a rare phenomenon among social vertebrates.
> 
> ...


I'm guessing that too, that Athos has in mind consciously decided upon moral action taken in the knowledge that it is a moral action.

But this is the right way to look at things, imo (the abstract you quote). For a long time, altruism was deemed generally outside evolutionary mechanisms (although that always begged the question of where the fuck it came from in us), but there's been game theory work by Martin Nowak and others showing mathematically how selection of altruistic behaviour can work within the narrow parameters that evolution sets up.

(Generally, we make progress when we place ourselves and our behaviour within evolutionary processes, not in some way outside them. This idea meets more resistance than it should - humans are a case study in evolution just like any other species.)


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Aug 19, 2017)

Athos said:


> There's nothing particularly Hobbesean or Randian about my position. It's far more universal than that; after all, do unto others as you would have them do unto you features in pretty much every major religion.
> 
> The argument isn't undermined by the fact that some don't observe human rights, any more than that fact undermines any other bases for such rights.



The golden rule is rather different to your ethical framework though. It's about being able to empathise with others, not acting out of self-interest.

I agree non-observervance does not undermine the ideal of human rights, but your idea that self-interest undergirds human rights is flawed because it implies that whenever it is in your self-interest to violate another's rights you should. The only alternative is to claim that there can never be any self-interested reasons to violate rights, which is obviously false.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 19, 2017)

A vivisector is having a nightmare: lying on a cold steel table, he's going numb as a giant rat approaches with a large knife.
The rat says, "We are going to need those kidneys, my friend."
"Wait!" shouts the vivisector. "I understand that I'm going to die, but just tell me, is it for the good of humanity?"
"Something like that," the rat tells him with a smirk. "It's for the good of two manatees."


----------



## fishfinger (Aug 20, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> A vivisector is having a nightmare: lying on a cold steel table, he's going numb as a giant rat approaches with a large knife.
> The rat says, "We are going to need those kidneys, my friend."
> "Wait!" shouts the vivisector. "I understand that I'm going to die, but just tell me, is it for the good of humanity?"
> "Something like that," the rat tells him with a smirk. "It's for the good of two manatees."


With nightmares like that I would suggest that you don't eat cheese before bed time. But as you're a vegan...


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 20, 2017)

Athos is right that the 'do unto others...' idea is one that is common to lots of religions and no doubt predates those religions as a sentiment taught to children. But it is primarily something for children, I would argue, whose brains have not developed sufficiently for them to show a great deal of empathy, so who need to be appealed to more directly by a utilitarian idea. But once our brains have reached maturity, in our mid-20s or so, we don't need such ideas nor do we use such ideas as the basis for our actions towards others. The basis for our actions towards others involves genuine consideration of the needs of others for their own sake. 

In evolutionary terms, you would pare the idea back to a form like 'do unto others' to see if you can get an evolutionary payback from acting like that. But that doesn't explain the content of the mechanism that evolved, merely the reason why it evolved. In other words, empathy evolved because it gives an evolutionary payback, but empathy itself has its own qualities, qualities that have in a sense been accidentally 'discovered' by evolution.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 20, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> A vivisector is having a nightmare: lying on a cold steel table, he's going numb as a giant rat approaches with a large knife.
> The rat says, "We are going to need those kidneys, my friend."
> "Wait!" shouts the vivisector. "I understand that I'm going to die, but just tell me, is it for the good of humanity?"
> "Something like that," the rat tells him with a smirk. "It's for the good of two manatees."


So, your hypothetical diabetic child. You worked out what you would do yet?


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 20, 2017)

fishfinger said:


> With nightmares like that I would suggest that you don't eat cheese before bed time. But as you're a vegan...


...wait, what? You calling me a vivisector? That be fighting talk.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 20, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> So, your hypothetical diabetic child. You worked out what you would do yet?


I'll offer him/her up for sacrifice to the Invisible Pink Unicorn. (or the Flying Spaghetti Monster)

You really are getting desperate aren't you?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 20, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> I'll offer him/her up for sacrifice to the Invisible Pink Unicorn. (or the Flying Spaghetti Monster)
> 
> You really are getting desperate aren't you?


You're a cunt. I gave you a real example from my own life. You cunt.


----------



## Athos (Aug 20, 2017)

Jeff Robinson said:


> The golden rule is rather different to your ethical framework though. It's about being able to empathise with others, not acting out of self-interest.
> 
> I agree non-observervance does not undermine the ideal of human rights, but your idea that self-interest undergirds human rights is flawed because it implies that whenever it is in your self-interest to violate another's rights you should. The only alternative is to claim that there can never be any self-interested reasons to violate rights, which is obviously false.



I don't think that distinction between empathy and self-interest is that stark, in this context. We empathise with others by putting ourselves in their shoes; often that means realising that we wouldn't want what's happening to them to happen to us.  To achieve which we agree at a social level that it ought not to happen to anyone.  The social aspect is important, as that addresses your claim that my understanding implies that individuals should breach others' human rights where they have a self- interest in doing so.

In any event, I'm not sure I accept that it's anyone's interests to violate others' human rights. At best, it's a gamble that it won't undermine such protections should you seek to rely on them in an unknown future.

But, even if is, at a social level, can still be the underpinning, regardless of whether or not there's some individual exceptions.   Whatever you say the basis of human rights are, there'll be some exceptions (as evidenced by the fact they're not universally observed).

If not, what do you think the basis of human rights is? And why should they apply to other animals?


----------



## DotCommunist (Aug 20, 2017)

Athos said:


> In any event, I'm not sure I accept that it's anyone's interests to violate others' human rights. At best, it's a gamble that it won't undermine such protections should you seek to rely on then in an unknown future.


there are two sorts of human rights violating tyrants fate. One is to die old and fabulously wealthy from the money you made exploiting the population, and yes violating their human rights. Shooting labour organisers, pandering to conservative factions of a religious establishment to bolster your arm- I don't need to list them all. The choice thefts and brutalism covers it.

the other is to die being dragged behind a landrover, or perhaps hung from a DIY scaffold. So yes it is in the interest of some humans to violate other peoples human rights for personal gain and yes they do tend to find their own human rights are worthless once the boot is on the other foot. Surely.


----------



## mojo pixy (Aug 20, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> A vivisector is having a nightmare: lying on a cold steel table, he's going numb as a giant rat approaches with a large knife.
> The rat says, "We are going to need those kidneys, my friend."
> "Wait!" shouts the vivisector. "I understand that I'm going to die, but just tell me, is it for the good of humanity?"
> "Something like that," the rat tells him with a smirk. "It's for the good of two manatees."



Refusing to answer something because it's 'hypothetical' then instead presenting what resembles an attempt at humour but is in fact just a snide attempt to draw out a silly straw man. It's not a good look, even for someone claiming moral high ground.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 20, 2017)

mojo pixy said:


> Refusing to answer something because it's 'hypothetical' then instead presenting what resembles an attempt at humour but is in fact just a snide attempt to draw out a silly straw man. It's not a good look, even for someone claiming moral high ground.


...and here comes the white knight. 





Just goes to show how heavily one sided and biased some people can be. Refusing to answer something? I answered the rude twat perfectly well the first time, he wasn't happy with my answer and so kept chasing even though he has on a number of occasions thrown his toys out of the pram "I'm not playing with you any more" stylee. He has relentlessly pursued the acceptance of his "humane slaughter" concept and isn't happy that I don't agree with his precious idea hence the increasingly desperate hounding.

One of the main differences between myself and the rude twat is that I am ok with RT having a different opinion to myself, I do not feel the need to harrass and harry anybody that disagrees with me even if they are championing something as ridiculous (to me) as "humane slaughter". lbj on the other hand cannot fathom someone not believing as he does and will come up with all sorts of convoluted and elaborate questions in order to try and get acceptance and then get into a strop when you don't agree with him. Sounds more like a religious fundamentalist than any vegan that I've ever met.


----------



## Athos (Aug 20, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> ...and here comes the white knight.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Plead would you point to the post in which you think you answered the question posed by  his hypothetical example?


----------



## Spymaster (Aug 20, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> ...and here comes the white knight.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Some decent debate has broken out on this thread in the last day or two. Can't you go away now?


----------



## mrs quoad (Aug 20, 2017)

Ahimsa cows are the 'happiest cows' in the world | Daily Mail Online

No-slaughter milking with 6 months of weaning? Nopety nope nope nope?


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 20, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> Some decent debate has broken out on this thread in the last day or two. Can't you go away now?


Wow, and this coming from the master troll who has contributed precious little himself. Pot meet kettle. Anyhow, some people like that sort of pseudo-academic semantic torture, that's not really for me so I'll let the experts get on with it.
In case you haven't noticed, there are multiple strands of conversations going on...and then there's voyeur trolls like you who don't really add much of any quality or value.

Oh, and another thing, wtf was this rubbish...


Spymaster said:


> This thread is very far from being "well attended". There are a handful of active posters on it now, most of whom have repeatedly told you they don't care what you or others eat, but do care about your holier than thou attitudes.


Hahaha, that was hilarious. "very far from being well attended"? lol. Now if that's not an example of genuine bollocks I don't know what is. Here's some numbers for you...

Number of urban75 General forum threads: 117, 953
Ranking of this "angry vegan" thread - replies: 54 (1,915)
Ranking of this "angry vegan" thread - views: 49 (23,542)
Ranking of "anti vegetarian backlash" thread - replies 36 (2,773)
Ranking of "anti vegetarian backlash" thread - views 26 (34,632)
Number of members posting on this "angry vegan" thread: 128
Number of posts/day: 46
Number of views/day: 565

Did you see that?  In this forum, there are actually 117,899 threads ranked lower than this thread by number of replies. Quite remarkable for a thread that's barely six weeks old don't you think? Not well attended? You're 'avin a larf, lol. 

Now given that veg*ns are an overwhelming minority there would appear to be an awful lot of meateaters that "don't care".  I mean genuinely not caring would mean, you know, avoiding the subject, and yet they come, like vultures to a dead wildebeest. It seems that they really DO care, even if they only care enough to have a go, doesn't matter, still gives the subject plenty of air time and as the saying goes, there's no such thing as bad publicity. It's all good.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 20, 2017)

"Humane" meat? ...


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 20, 2017)

Another excellent video and and well balanced review...

...that's another book that I'll be adding to my collection.


----------



## Spymaster (Aug 20, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Wow, and this coming from the master troll who has contributed precious little himself.


Oh I know my limitations and I'm not about to mix it with LBJ, Athos, Pilch, and Jeff, in an ethics debate. I'll sit back and read instead. I'm happy to consider and learn, but generally speaking, dicking twats like you around on the internet is more my level.


> Anyhow, some people like that sort of pseudo-academic semantic torture


Thoughtful debate = pseudo-academic semantic torture. That pretty much sums you up.


> "very far from being well attended"? lol. Now if that's not an example of genuine bollocks I don't know what is. Here's some numbers for you...
> 
> Number of urban75 General forum threads: 117, 953
> Ranking of this "angry vegan" thread - replies: 54 (1,915)
> ...



Oh dear! 

Do you not see the glaring error you've just made?

Now, shoo. And take you silly videos with you. Nobody is watching them.


----------



## mrs quoad (Aug 20, 2017)

Have you heard of echo chambers, Paolo?


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 20, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> Now, shoo. And take you silly videos with you. Nobody is watching them.


Yeah sure...a bit like there's "nobody" in this thread, lol.

Here's another good one for your ethics catalogue...



Enjoy.


----------



## Spymaster (Aug 20, 2017)

Seriously. Nobody (at least, nobody that you want) is clicking on them.



> a bit like there's "nobody" in this thread




 I'll leave others to judge you on this.


----------



## bimble (Aug 20, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> ...and here comes the white knight.


What is this shit now?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 20, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> ...and here comes the white knight.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



You did not answer. You merely gave reasons why you would not answer, mostly that it was too hypothetical. So I addressed those reasons and gave you a concrete example that actually happened instead. And you did not answer that either. And then you ridiculed the question and I called you a cunt. 

As for the drivel above about humane slaughter, you are absurdly wrong. I have explicitly said that this is one of the points of difference between me and others like you - that I consider such a thing possible and you don't. 

You didn't have to reply to my post. It wasn't aimed specifically at you, merely at anybody who wished to give an answer. You could have ignored it. Or you could have answered with something honest such as 'in a vegan non-animal-using world there would be some casualties, but it's worth it'. Instead you pretended that it was a non-problem. You pretend that there is no downside whatever to any of your beliefs, which makes you either disingenuous or an idiot.


----------



## mojo pixy (Aug 20, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> ...and here comes the white knight.



lolwut?


----------



## mojo pixy (Aug 20, 2017)

...mockery from some gobby pseud who seems to think diet + internet posting = activism


----------



## ViolentPanda (Aug 20, 2017)

UnderAnOpenSky said:


> It's got taurine added, which is what cats need. You can see how impressed the cat looks.



"Human grade ingredients"?

It's fucking Soylent Green!!!


----------



## ViolentPanda (Aug 20, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> It's the gang of meat-trolls. It is the phenomenon that happens on nearly all forums and all threads where this topic is raised. Bacon mmmmmmm!
> It's a bit like how school bullies picking on unpopular kids.
> Bullies Pick on Unpopular Kids, Study Finds



You keep making false equivalences, and your false equivalences keep marking you as a dick.  Don't be a dick.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Aug 20, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Hmm, that's an overly dramatic word to use in this instance, no? So I take it if a man has a vasectomy, that's also "sexual mutilation", right? Our cat had already been sterilised before she was with us, and I don't consider it to be sexual mutilation.



A man has a vasectomy through choice. A tomcat, not so much.


----------



## A380 (Aug 20, 2017)

ViolentPanda said:


> A man has a vasectomy through choice. A tomcat, not so much.


Also I had a vacectomy and, the last time I looked, my bollocks were still there and functioning. Just not conectected. It didn't  change my personality or make me fat and lazy *

*TBF I was fat and lazy before...


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Aug 20, 2017)

Athos said:


> I don't think that distinction between empathy and self-interest is that stark, in this context.; often that means realising that we wouldn't want what's happening to them to happen to us.  To achieve which we agree at a social level that it ought not to happen to anyone.  The social aspect is important, as that addresses your claim that my understanding implies that individuals should breach others' human rights where they have a self- interest in doing so.
> 
> In any event, I'm not sure I accept that it's anyone's interests to violate others' human rights. At best, it's a gamble that it won't undermine such protections should you seek to rely on them in an unknown future.
> 
> ...



I agree somewhat that self-interest and empathy are not necessarily in stark contrast with one another, we need an account of exactly what we mean by self interest (and empathy too for that matter) to know how these two phenomena interact.

I also agree that 'We empathise with others by putting ourselves in their shoes' but that empathy does not stop at the species barrier, I can also imagine what it is like to be in the hooves, claws or trotters of another creature. I know we are related in biology and evolution to the other animals, I know we share with them, in varying degrees, our pysiology and psychology. I know many of them (all vertebrates at least and some invertebrates too) can suffer. I can see from their behaviour and facial expressions signs of distress, fear, pain and despair as well as happiness, satisfaction and contentment.

When I see other animals (mammals at least) suffering, my empathy is engaged just as strongly as when I see humans suffering. I think this is true of most people. Most people hate seeing animals suffering and only continue supporting the industries inflicting the suffering because that suffering is "out of sight, out of mind".

I do not find your claims about human rights convincing. They rest on the contingent and implausible claim that it's always impossible for committing a human rights violation to be in the violator's self interest.

I think the basis for human rights relates to the moral status of human beings. Humans possess moral status in my view on account of their sentience. I am aware that this is an unorthodox view but I am convinced it is the correct one. Setting the bar for rights any higher than sentience inevitably excludes some humans in ways no defender of human rights is prepared to accept. I have read many attempts to get round this problem and they are, in my view, all implausible and post hoc in character.

Animal rights and human rights share the same basis therefore: sentience. This doesn't mean that humans and the other animals have the same rights, but humans don't have the same rights either (children don't have the right to vote, the profoundly cognitively impaired don't have a right to liberty etc.). Human rights are just a convenient shorthand for a subset of sentient rights that applies to the interests that most humans have at some point in their existence.


----------



## Athos (Aug 20, 2017)

Jeff Robinson said:


> I do not find your claims about human rights convincing. They rest on the contingent and implausible claim that it's always impossible for committing a human rights violation to be in the violator's self interest.



I concede that that point was a weak one, but would argue that my conception of human rights doesn't rest on such a position. You atm determined to overlook my contents about the social, as opposed to individualistic, aspects.


----------



## Athos (Aug 20, 2017)

Jeff Robinson said:


> I think the basis for human rights relates to the moral status of human beings. Humans possess moral status in my view on account of their sentience.



It's be interested to hear you expand on this a bit.

In other news, my eldest has just announced that she'd like to become a vegetarian.


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Aug 20, 2017)

Athos said:


> In other news, my eldest has just announced that she'd like to become a vegetarian.


Thoughts with you at this difficult time


----------



## mojo pixy (Aug 20, 2017)

When I announced it at 13 to my ma and pa they told me I'd have to start cooking for myself. 
At the time it seemed crap, but looking back it was the best thing they could have said.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 20, 2017)

Jeff Robinson said:


> I think the basis for human rights relates to the moral status of human beings. Humans possess moral status in my view on account of their sentience. I am aware that this is an unorthodox view but I am convinced it is the correct one. Setting the bar for rights any higher than sentience inevitably excludes some humans in ways no defender of human rights is prepared to accept. I have read many attempts to get round this problem and they are, in my view, all implausible and post hoc in character.



Humans possess moral status because we humans grant it to ourselves, in the end. I'm not so sure there's much more to it than that. And we are also free to extend it beyond ourselves - or not. Some would extend it to foetuses, others not. Some societies have practised a form of post-natal abortion, so did not really extend moral status to babies.

My position wrt foetuses/babies is that the moment of birth is the sensible place to convey moral status, to convey rights, but that's essentially arbitrary, a pragmatic decision given that it is the moment at which the woman's autonomy is no longer a competing issue. It seems hugely misguided to me when people try to identify some point earlier than that in debates about abortion limits – a point during gestation when some particular aspect of the foetus has developed. For one, being sentient is not the same as being conscious, as having constructed a model of yourself in the world that is experience, and for two, these aspects are also entirely arbitrary but of little pragmatic use. That has to mean that sentience cannot be the rule being used here.


----------



## veganomics (Aug 22, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Indeed, and timely with yet another "holier than thou" baseless accusation that usually gets trotted out when rational arguments are in short supply, as Kerry mentions in that video...
> 
> _"...and if I could labour the self-righteousness point, I think this is a sign that we're onto something. *Self-righteousness is a term that comes up as an affront to people doing the right thing when there's no compelling evidence to suggest that they're not. So there's no argument against them, the best one can do is to say 'well I think you look very smug about doing the right thing, I don't think people will like you'. *
> 
> ...


Right on the money!


----------



## veganomics (Aug 22, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> I think there's something to what you're saying if I've understood you correctly. In general people don't like to feel that they're being judged. Vegans tend to make choices based on what they believe to be the right thing to do from either a health, environmental, ethical or compassionate standpoint or any combination of those. Some might focus only on one of those, others might embrace all of them. This can represent a challenge to people who are not vegan and can cause them to launch pre-emptive strikes against vegans in order to try and defend their position.


Pre-emptive strike is a fairly accurate description of what has been my experience whenever this subject is raised both in real life and online.


----------



## veganomics (Aug 22, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> "Humane" meat? ...



"There's nothing humane about breeding animals only to kill them, and there's nothing humane about ending the life of a healthy animal in his or her youth. We only tell ourselves it is so we can sleep at night and so that we can continue to see things as we want to and not as they really are." 

That's a good summary. I always found the term humane slaughter to be a bit ridiculous.


----------



## mrs quoad (Aug 22, 2017)

veganomics said:


> "There's nothing humane about breeding animals only to kill them, and there's nothing humane about ending the life of a healthy animal in his or her youth. We only tell ourselves it is so we can sleep at night and so that we can continue to see things as we want to and not as they really are."
> 
> That's a good summary. I always found the term humane slaughter to be a bit ridiculous.


Pint of milk?

Ahimsa cows are the 'happiest cows' in the world | Daily Mail Online


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 22, 2017)

mrs quoad said:


> Have you heard of echo chambers, Paolo?


Hell yeah, you mean like King Tubby...

I'm going to get me a dose of that at the carnival this weekend.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 22, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> Seriously. Nobody (at least, nobody that you want) is clicking on them.
> 
> I'll leave others to judge you on this.


Yeah sure, there ain't nobody here, you keep telling yourself that, in spite of the evidence to the contrary. The place is teeming with invisible "don't care" folk, lol.


----------



## Spymaster (Aug 22, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Yeah sure, there ain't nobody here, you keep telling yourself that, in spite of the evidence to the contrary. The place is teeming with invisible "don't care" folk, lol.




Why do this to yourself?

I understand that you've been licking your wounds recently but coming back and lashing out with moronic posts like this will only make things worse.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 22, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> You did not answer. You merely gave reasons why you would not answer, mostly that it was too hypothetical. So I addressed those reasons and gave you a concrete example that actually happened instead. And you did not answer that either. And then you ridiculed the question and I called you a cunt.


I answered, you didn't like my answer (hence your stupid claim that I didn't answer), then you got into a strop (again) like a baby after chasing my around and demanding an answer. That's a bit more accurate.



littlebabyjesus said:


> As for the drivel above about humane slaughter, you are absurdly wrong. I have explicitly said that this is one of the points of difference between me and others like you - that I consider such a thing possible and you don't.
> 
> You didn't have to reply to my post. It wasn't aimed specifically at you, merely at anybody who wished to give an answer. You could have ignored it. Or you could have answered with something honest such as 'in a vegan non-animal-using world there would be some casualties, but it's worth it'. Instead you pretended that it was a non-problem. You pretend that there is no downside whatever to any of your beliefs, which makes you either disingenuous or an idiot.


Er...except that you were the one quoting me, repeatedly, and this after already flouncing off on one of your previous cry baby sulks. You appear to lose your shit if your hypotheticals are not answered in precisely the way you want them answered, and this after me telling you that it is not something I am interested in. You're like a flat track bully. I'd be quite happy for you to go and sulk in your corner and not bother replying unless you have something decent to say.


----------



## ddraig (Aug 22, 2017)

mrs quoad said:


> Pint of milk?
> 
> Ahimsa cows are the 'happiest cows' in the world | Daily Mail Online







the fucking Krishnas are blurring the boundaries and weirdly worship the cow yet exploit it at the same time!


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 22, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> Why do this to yourself?
> 
> I understand that you've been licking your wounds recently but coming back and lashing out with moronic posts like this will only make things worse.


lol, fuck knows what rubbish you're talking about now. You are the genuine moronic poster.
Licking wounds? What?  

Things can only get better and they have already. Baby shower on Sunday, second grandchild born yesterday 20:30, 19 days early. 6lb 4oz.


----------



## Spymaster (Aug 22, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> You are the genuine moronic poster.




Ding!


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 22, 2017)

mrs quoad said:


> Pint of milk?
> 
> Ahimsa cows are the 'happiest cows' in the world | Daily Mail Online


A bit like the pasture-fed, grass-fed beef that everybody claims to be eating, of course this is much better than the factory farming method, however there's no way that this ahimsa milk can keep up with the current levels of demand for dairy products, and it's totally impractical. The existence of ahimsa milk is yet another lever that dairy consumers try to use to feel a bit less guilty about the horrors of milk production, even though almost nobody actually drinks ahimsa milk.


----------



## Spymaster (Aug 22, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> A bit like the pasture-fed, grass-fed beef that everybody claims to be eating ...


It certainly makes for tastier steaks. Or are we deluding ourselves there too?


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 22, 2017)

Slaughter-free milk is great for cows, but not the environment

_If you don’t eat beef because you feel sorry for those cows in Chick-fil-A ads, then you probably shouldn’t drink milk either. The typical male calf born to a dairy cow becomes veal. The typical female is milked for five years—a quarter of her natural lifetime—then sent to the abattoir to become pet food or low-grade hamburger meat. Elsie the Cow, Borden Dairy Company’s famous cartoon logo, is smiling only because she doesn’t realize that she’s about to get euthanized with a cattle gun.

Yet if you’re an ethical vegetarian who still can’t bear to give up milk, you now have another option: slaughter-free dairy, which comes from farms where cows never get killed. Since 2011, the UK-based Ahimsa Dairy has offered slaughter free-milk and cheese to customers in London. In February, Pennsylvania’s Gita Nagari Creamery, which has supplied no-kill milk to the local Hare Krishna community for many years, began offering it to the public through subscription and mail order—for a whopping $10 a gallon. The price includes a $2.50 cow retirement fee and $1.50 for “boy calf care.” Less than half of its 60-head herd gets milked; the rest of the animals pull plows or spend their golden years lackadaisically chomping grass.

“For us, the cows or oxen or bulls are seen as extended family members,” says Pari Jata, the co-president of Gita Nagari Creamery. “It’s very important for us to protect them in their retirement. We take care of them just as one would take care of elderly parents in their old age.”

The slaughter-free milk movement takes its cues from India, where many vegetarian Hindus drink milk but consider cows sacred animals that should never be consumed for meat. Yet increasing numbers of Gita Nagari and Ahimsa customers are Westerners who eschew meat for ethical reasons. Both dairies have considered selling their milk in stores; Ahimsa is in talks with a major retailer.

As vegetarianism gains popularity, slaughter-free milk could become a bona fide food trend—but there’s a catch: It might take a toll on the environment. Cows are already the nation’s single largest source of methane, a greenhouse gas produced by oil extraction, decomposing trash, and the guts of grazing animals that’s as much as 105 times more potent than carbon dioxide. A single cow farts and belches enough methane to match the carbon equivalent of the average car. According to a 2006 United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization report, the world’s 1.4 billion cows produce 18 percent of the world’s greenhouse gases—more than the entire transportation sector. Since the turn of the 19th century, global methane emissions have increased by more than 150 percent, and cows are largely to blame.

If all dairies became slaughter-free, we’d need three to four times as many dairy cows to produce the same amount of milk, which would mean adding at least 27 million additional cows to our herds. Those added cows would each year produce greenhouse gas emissions equivalent to four large coal-fired power plants. We’d also need more meat cows to keep up with the demand for products such as veal and dog food. Pasturing all of these cows would displace wildlife or agricultural crops, straining biodiversity and increasing food prices.

Jata knows there’s a potential for the slaughter-free milk trend to go bad—just like the craze for tofu and soymilk contributed to the spread of soybean plantations in South America’s rainforests, she says (though most soybeans are consumed by livestock). “Where does it end?” she asks. “For us, as a community, we bring it all back to local food sources and local practices that are self-contained but shared, so it doesn’t create this mass corporation-style approach to everything.”		

Small, humane dairies can certainly find other ways to mitigate their environmental impacts. The Gita Nagari and Ahimsa dairies employ cow manure to fertilize their organic vegetables and bull power to plow their fields, avoiding carbon-intensive tractors and chemical fertilizers. And the Gita Nagari dairy uses an anaerobic digester to convert manure into a gas that residents of the dairy use for cooking—but this sort of thing would be hard to implement on a larger scale.

For Nicola Pazdzierska, the co-director of the Ahimsa Dairy Foundation, the price and environmental impact of slaughter-free milk underscores the need to rethink our relationship with dairy products. “We’re not saying more cows,” she told me. “We’re saying possibly even fewer cows, but kept in better circumstances.” She went on: “We think milk is a precious foodstuff. If you pay more for it, you value it more. You use it more thoughtfully. It should be treated with respect.”_


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 22, 2017)

ViolentPanda said:


> You keep making false equivalences, and your false equivalences keep marking you as a dick.  Don't be a dick.


Even if that were true (and I don't believe I have), then the sensible thing to do would be to correct whatever you believe was incorrect. Alternatively you can make a bitchy snide comment out of the blue and then go back into hiding.


----------



## mojo pixy (Aug 22, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> ...and here comes the white knight.





PaoloSanchez said:


> Alternatively you can make a bitchy snide comment out of the blue and then go back into hiding.



How's the vegan activism going?


----------



## Spymaster (Aug 22, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Alternatively you can make a bitchy snide comment...



That's all you've done on this thread!!!


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 22, 2017)

mojo pixy said:


> How's the vegan activism going?


Aren't there any more cry baby maidens that need rescuing?


----------



## mojo pixy (Aug 22, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Aren't there any more cry baby maidens that need rescuing?



You'd know.
Be sure to point it out every time OK?


----------



## ViolentPanda (Aug 22, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Even if that were true (and I don't believe I have), then the sensible thing to do would be to correct whatever you believe was incorrect. Alternatively you can make a bitchy snide comment out of the blue and then go back into hiding.



You should lead by example, but appear to prefer the "bitchy snide comment" side of things.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 22, 2017)

Jeff Robinson said:


> I agree somewhat that self-interest and empathy are not necessarily in stark contrast with one another, we need an account of exactly what we mean by self interest (and empathy too for that matter) to know how these two phenomena interact.
> 
> I also agree that 'We empathise with others by putting ourselves in their shoes' but that empathy does not stop at the species barrier, I can also imagine what it is like to be in the hooves, claws or trotters of another creature. I know we are related in biology and evolution to the other animals, I know we share with them, in varying degrees, our pysiology and psychology. I know many of them (all vertebrates at least and some invertebrates too) can suffer. I can see from their behaviour and facial expressions signs of distress, fear, pain and despair as well as happiness, satisfaction and contentment.
> 
> When I see other animals (mammals at least) suffering, my empathy is engaged just as strongly as when I see humans suffering. I think this is true of most people. Most people hate seeing animals suffering and only continue supporting the industries inflicting the suffering because that suffering is "out of sight, out of mind".


"Out of sight out of mind" indeed. That also applies to other aspects of modern life where the majority of folk would rather not know what is going on. There are some who claim that they would have no problem seeing the animals that they eat killed, however I would imagine that anybody that considers themselves compassionate and empathetic not be able to witness their deaths and remain unmoved.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 22, 2017)

ViolentPanda said:


> You should lead by example, but appear to prefer the "bitchy snide comment" side of things.


Wait, aren't you the one that called me a dick based on your one sided and half baked assessment? In case you haven't noticed the overwhelming majority of the bitchiness has been incoming.


----------



## spanglechick (Aug 22, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> "Out of sight out of mind" indeed. That also applies to other aspects of modern life where the majority of folk would rather not know what is going on. There are some who claim that they would have no problem seeing the animals that they eat killed, however I would imagine that anybody that considers themselves compassionate and empathetic not be able to witness their deaths and remain unmoved.


Unmoved is a broad term, though. Have I felt moved by videos of slaughterhouses? Yes.  As I have when I've found a dead mouse on a trap I've set.  It's a shame, but ultimately, I prioritise myself over those animals. To me, animals have fewer rights than people, and in simple terms - I'm ok with that.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 22, 2017)

spanglechick said:


> Unmoved is a broad term, though. Have I felt moved by videos of slaughterhouses? Yes.  As I have when I've found a dead mouse on a trap I've set.  It's a shame, but ultimately, I prioritise myself over those animals. To me, animals have fewer rights than people, and in simple terms - I'm ok with that.


I've also not seen meat eaters claiming high moral ground on this subject. I've not seen a single meat eater on this thread make any kind of serious suggestion that others should be eating meat too.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 22, 2017)

spanglechick said:


> Unmoved is a broad term, though. Have I felt moved by videos of slaughterhouses? Yes.  As I have when I've found a dead mouse on a trap I've set.  It's a shame, but ultimately, I prioritise myself over those animals. To me, animals have fewer rights than people, and in simple terms - I'm ok with that.


People set their priority bars at different levels, and I suspect that many would feel a bit more than simply "it's a shame" were they to witness the slaughter at first hand especially for the larger animals. Of course there are some who won't care at all, psychopaths would probably be amongst those who have zero empathy, however I do feel that there are plenty of people that would feel very uncomfortable seeing it, which is why I suspect that it remains out of sight. 

The hoo haa when Jamie Oliver killed a lamb on tv or the gasps from the audience when he did that "truth about chicken" live show and he suffocated male chicks and electrocuted a chicken in front of them was indicative of the general discomfort imo. The curious thing with that Oliver show was that it was supposed to be publicity against factory farming, which on the face of it sounds good, except that both the factory farmed and "free range" chickens all end up in the same slaughterhouses and are killed in the same way.

As Erin said in the following video (which "nobody" is going to watch apparently,  ) "there's no right way to do the wrong thing".


----------



## ViolentPanda (Aug 22, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Wait, aren't you the one that called me a dick based on your one sided and half baked assessment? In case you haven't noticed the overwhelming majority of the bitchiness has been incoming.



I'm pretty sure that I called you a dick because you were acting like a dick.

In fact, I believe that what I said was "don't be a dick", rather than "you are a dick".  Guilty conscience much?


----------



## bimble (Aug 22, 2017)

Err.. I tried to watch your video paolo but got to the bit where she says 


That's just not true, is it. 
In fact , the opposite is true, consumption of meat and dairy are going up, significantly. Unless you're just interested in what's going on in Brighton, or Carlifornia I suppose. 

World consumption of both is expected to continue to rise sharply as it has been for the past couple of generations. 
World Agriculture: Towards 2015/2030 - An FAO perspective

Why would Erin say a thing that isn't true?


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 22, 2017)

veganomics said:


> Those books have been on my wishlist for a while, I've heard good things about them from friends.


Another out of print book that I bought fairly early on was a Dick Gregory Book who died day after Brucie and the day before Jerry, but didn't get a thread.



The book I bought from him was called "Dick Gregory's Natural Diet for Folks Who Eat: Cookin' with Mother Nature!", which I bought on Amazon for £54 in 2001, which I've seen recently selling for $200 and will probably get more expensive that that he's passed away.

Anyway here's an extract from the book...

_Sometimes the strangest things cause you to stop and think. I remember when I first started thinking about whether or not it was right to eat meat. It was on Thanksgiving Day a number of years ago. I had been drinking while I waited for the turkey to get done. By the time I was standing at the head of the table with my carving knife, I suddenly had the strangest thoughts. *I got to thinking that there might be some beings on another planet somewhere who are as intelligent compared with us as we are compared with turkeys.*

Now that's a disturbing thought! I could just see myself in some strange planetary oven, being roasted. It would be one thing to roast white folks brown; they'd be trying to figure out a way to "undone" us black folks. I even thought about myself lying on a platter all filled with stuffing!

Then I had visions of these beings from another planet going to the butcher shop with their meat list. I wonder what they'd call their butcher shops? They'd probably call them "folks shops." I could hear them placing an order: "Give me a half dozen Oriental knees, two Caucasian feet and twelve fresh Black lips." And the folks-shopkeeper comes back smiling and says, "These Black lips are so fresh they're still talking'." After that little fantasy, I couldn't eat my Thanksgiving dinner. But it started me thinking.

There would be a whole lot of changes in America if we Americans decided one day to start thinking. And one of the biggest and most important changes would be in the "traditional American diet. The old saying is true: You are what you eat." It would be more accurate, perhaps, to say: "You are what you assimilate." That is, your body literally is what you assimilate from the "foods"-or more frequently "things"-you eat to rebuild cells and what you eliminate as waste products of the cell-building activity as you revitalize yourself each day.

If you just stop and look around you, you can see-and many of you can feel-the sorry results of eating habits of the majority of folks in America today. Folks getting old twenty, thirty, forty or even fifty years before their time. Swollen ankles, varicose veins, pot bellies, bald heads, arthritis, rheumatism, ulcers, sinus trouble, hemorrhoids, heart trouble, liver trouble, kidney trouble, overweight, underweight, anemia, bad feet, headaches, short breath, can't sleep or can't wake up, no energy, "tired" blood, sitting in front of the television set all evening and falling asleep watching it-the list is endless and very, very familiar._


----------



## mrs quoad (Aug 22, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> A bit like the pasture-fed, grass-fed beef that everybody claims to be eating, of course this is much better than the factory farming method, however there's no way that this ahimsa milk can keep up with the current levels of demand for dairy products, and it's totally impractical. The existence of ahimsa milk is yet another lever that dairy consumers try to use to feel a bit less guilty about the horrors of milk production, even though almost nobody actually drinks ahimsa milk.


So it'd be fine if people actually did drastically reduce their milk consumption, and only drank said milk?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 22, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> _
> If you just stop and look around you, you can see-and many of you can feel-the sorry results of eating habits of the majority of folks in America today. Folks getting old twenty, thirty, forty or even fifty years before their time. Swollen ankles, varicose veins, pot bellies, bald heads, arthritis, rheumatism, ulcers, sinus trouble, hemorrhoids, heart trouble, liver trouble, kidney trouble, overweight, underweight, anemia, bad feet, headaches, short breath, can't sleep or can't wake up, no energy, "tired" blood, sitting in front of the television set all evening and falling asleep watching it-the list is endless and very, very familiar._


Top man, Dick Gregory. But what exactly is the point of this post? Many people in the US need to improve their diet. And? So what?

Your magic wand solution 'Veganism for all!' is based on what? The fact that vegans on average have fewer of these health problems than the general population? Well so do lots of other groups of people who pay close attention to their diets. The vast majority of vegans in the US are members of a small subset of the total population: the group of 'those who think carefully about their diet'. Any comparison between vegan health and that of the general meat-eating population has to account for this inbuilt bias (and others such as class) for it to have any useful meaning.

btw, there was nothing stopping you from starting an obit thread about DG. Still isn't.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Aug 22, 2017)

To answer the original question, as in the thread title - YES. 

Well done PaoloSanchez


----------



## andysays (Aug 22, 2017)

I'm a little disappointed that the "angry vegans" on this thread aren't really living up to the levels of anger we were originally promised.

Some of you need to up your game a little, unless anyone here is the originator of this tweet posted by SpackleFrog on the charlottesville aftermath discussion thread


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Aug 22, 2017)

andysays said:


> I'm a little disappointed that the "angry vegans" on this thread aren't really living up to the levels of anger we were originally promised.
> 
> Some of you need to up your game a little, unless anyone here is the originator of this tweet posted by SpackleFrog on the charlottesville aftermath discussion thread



Wow


----------



## cupid_stunt (Aug 22, 2017)

andysays said:


> I'm a little disappointed that the "angry vegans" on this thread aren't really living up to the levels of anger we were originally promised.
> 
> Some of you need to up your game a little, unless anyone here is the originator of this tweet posted by SpackleFrog on the charlottesville aftermath discussion thread




Fuck me sideways!


----------



## bimble (Aug 22, 2017)

Christ,  I just went to vegan revolution's twitter, they're a proper nasty piece of shit, full on antisemite, with 63,000 followers.  Reporting them, with twitter's new rules.

That's the thing, because of what they eat / don't eat they genuinely think they're living a morally superior life, whilst spending their time spewing hatefilled racist bile.


----------



## ddraig (Aug 22, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I've also not seen meat eaters claiming high moral ground on this subject. I've not seen a single meat eater on this thread make any kind of serious suggestion that others should be eating meat too.


apart from the "normal" comments the usual crap and your pseudo science of course!


----------



## ddraig (Aug 22, 2017)

bimble said:


> Christ,  I just went to vegan revolution's twitter, they're a proper nasty piece of shit, full on antisemite, with 63,000 followers.  Reporting them, with twitter's new rules.
> 
> That's the thing, because of what they eat / don't eat they genuinely think they're living a morally superior life, whilst spending their time spewing hatefilled racist bile.


not indicative of all vegans of course!! just like the nazi vegan cup cake dicks!!  fuck them


----------



## mrs quoad (Aug 22, 2017)

ddraig said:


> not indicative of all vegans of course!! just like the nazi vegan cup cake dicks!!  fuck them


Has vegan sidekick perhaps produced an entertaining and timely cartoon about this?


----------



## mx wcfc (Aug 22, 2017)

have I posted this yet?


----------



## ddraig (Aug 22, 2017)

mrs quoad said:


> Has vegan sidekick perhaps produced an entertaining and timely cartoon about this?


dunno! ask him  (hilarious edit! yawn)


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 22, 2017)

Hmm...well I did say this...


PaoloSanchez said:


> I'd be quite happy for you to go and sulk in your corner and not bother replying unless you have something decent to say.



...I'm not sure if you quoting me (yet again) counts as "something decent to say" but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt. 


littlebabyjesus said:


> Top man, Dick Gregory. But what exactly is the point of this post? Many people in the US need to improve their diet. And? So what?


The point was to show an extract from Dick Gregory's book. The main part that I was interested in from that extract was his thanksgiving meal vision which I found quite amusing and relevant.



littlebabyjesus said:


> Your magic wand solution 'Veganism for all!' is based on what?


I'm afraid that is yet another strawman that you've just conjured up out of nowhere. You seem to be keen on attributing claims that I haven't made to me followed by a raising of heckles, and that's one of the reasons I'd be quite happy for you to stop replying to me, something which I've indicated several times and also something which you've hinted at too, but for some reason you appear not to be able to stop yourself. I'd be quite happy to reply to reasonable posts without the false accusations and the pestering if you are able to manage that.



littlebabyjesus said:


> btw, there was nothing stopping you from starting an obit thread about DG. Still isn't.


Obituary threads and RIP's are not usually my cup of tea, well not enough to start a thread for. I just thought that it was interesting that in the crowd that are into that sort of thing that he wasn't mentioned. tbf I didn't really know that much about him until I bought his book 16 years ago and I believe that he was much more well known in the US than over here. Besides, if I did big him up too much no doubt some idiot in this forum will go look up something he said in the past and use it to claim that vegans as anti-semitic nazis.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 22, 2017)

cupid_stunt said:


> To answer the original question, as in the thread title - YES.
> 
> Well done PaoloSanchez







You got to laugh at the idiot meatheads who were never ever going to even think of becoming vegan, claiming that I've stopped them, lol.


----------



## mojo pixy (Aug 22, 2017)

Yeah you haven't stopped anything much have you. You haven't stopped the animals from getting slaughtered, you haven't stopped the vans from taking the meat to the butcher, you haven't stopped the butcher's shop from opening. Being an angry vegan seems kinda pointless these days.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 23, 2017)

bimble said:


> Christ,  I just went to vegan revolution's twitter, they're a proper nasty piece of shit, full on antisemite, with 63,000 followers.  Reporting them, with twitter's new rules.
> 
> That's the thing, because of what they eat / don't eat they genuinely think they're living a morally superior life, whilst spending their time spewing hatefilled racist bile.



Hi  Not come across this thread before and haven't previously seen nationalist/racist sympathy type stuff like it in relation to veggie/vegan issues. Would I be right in thinking it has some kind of origin in eco-nationalist/anti-globalist ideas?


----------



## mojo pixy (Aug 23, 2017)

And conspiraloonery. A lot of vegans i've known over the years have been into conspiracy theories too. I don't know why but I'd guess there's a certain mindset that lends itself to both interests.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 23, 2017)

mojo pixy said:


> Yeah you haven't stopped anything much have you. You haven't stopped the animals from getting slaughtered, you haven't stopped the vans from taking the meat to the butcher, you haven't stopped the butcher's shop from opening. Being an angry vegan seems kinda pointless these days.


Not sure what bollocks you're yapping on about now tbh. For a start I'm nowhere near "angry" and secondly, in spite of the strong meathead resistance particularly from the more bloodthirsty hardcore ones, there is a steady growth in interest and take up of veganism. If China can somehow manage to wise up and becomes more civilised and stops trying to adopt the SAD crap, we might even reach critical mass by 2045.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 23, 2017)

Morrissey called. He wants his racial stereotypes back.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 23, 2017)

There is an anti-human subtext to much of your posting ps.  It leaks out now and then. Leaves quite a mess.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 23, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> If China can somehow manage to wise up and becomes more civilised


----------



## cupid_stunt (Aug 23, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> "Out of sight out of mind" indeed. That also applies to other aspects of modern life where the majority of folk would rather not know what is going on. There are some who claim that they would have no problem seeing the animals that they eat killed, however I would imagine that anybody that considers themselves compassionate and empathetic not be able to witness their deaths and remain unmoved.



Somewhat depends on where & how you were brought-up and life experiences, in my teens I regularly witnessed dinner being killed, be it a chicken on the small-holding down the road, or a pheasant shot by my father. Saw dad shoot many rabbits, but we weren't into eating them, but the dog fucking loved them. 

A quick search on here, and I see at least one poster that has been shooting birds & hunting dear for many years, and I would be very surprised if he has a problem eating them.



Spymaster said:


> Firstly, deer hunting is by no means the sole preserve of "Eton toffs", I've shot loads of them and am neither publicly educated nor toff-like!



So, Spymaster what do you think about personally killing & eating animals?


----------



## emanymton (Aug 23, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> Depends what you call them, e.g. dinner, thanksgiving (in Canada and America)


Britain's oldest turkey is called DINNER and dodges Christmas roast for 16 years


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Aug 23, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Not sure what bollocks you're yapping on about now tbh. For a start I'm nowhere near "angry" and secondly, in spite of the strong meathead resistance particularly from the more bloodthirsty hardcore ones, there is a steady growth in interest and take up of veganism. If China can somehow manage to wise up and becomes more civilised and stops trying to adopt the SAD crap, we might even reach critical mass by 2045.


Your true colours are starting to show here.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 23, 2017)

cupid_stunt said:


> Somewhat depends on where & how you were brought-up and life experiences, in my teens I regularly witnessed dinner being killed, be it a chicken on the small-holding down the road, or a pheasant shot by my father. Saw dad shoot many rabbits, but we weren't into eating them, but the dog fucking loved them.
> 
> A quick search on here, and I see at least one poster that has been shooting birds & hunting dear for many years, and I would be very surprised if he has a problem eating them.
> 
> ...


Pa's really squeamish, he even looks away when cutting bacon or sausages on his plate

When he's shot deer it's because he missed the target he was aiming for, he's the terror of the glorious twelfth


----------



## mojo pixy (Aug 23, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Not sure what bollocks you're yapping on about now tbh.



'course not. safer just to keep eating and feel smug.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 23, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Morrissey called. He wants his racial stereotypes back.





littlebabyjesus said:


> There is an anti-human subtext to much of your posting ps.  It leaks out now and then. Leaves quite a mess.


Again, more incoherent nonsense, looks like that completely run out of argument and getting desperate.


----------



## mojo pixy (Aug 23, 2017)

It's amazing how a little cognitive dissonance can turn a short and concise statement that relates directly to a point so recently posted into_ incoherent nonsense_.

Amazing.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 23, 2017)

cupid_stunt said:


> Somewhat depends on where & how you were brought-up and life experiences, in my teens I regularly witnessed dinner being killed, be it a chicken on the small-holding down the road, or a pheasant shot by my father. Saw dad shoot many rabbits, but we weren't into eating them, but the dog fucking loved them.


Nature vs nurture. Indeed some people have been brought up with that kind of thing and don't feel at all squeamish at all and some of the hunting psychos love that shit. A substantial (an growing) number of compassionate and civilised people don't much care for blood and guts and are repulsed by it. Which explains why youtube have warnings on those types of videos. I suppose that we could "train them early" in schools so that children can get used to what some believe comes naturally, although somehow I doubt that that will ever become a popular addition to the national curriculum, but you never know.


----------



## Teaboy (Aug 23, 2017)

Can a passing mod change the thread title to _Do misanthropes who use horribly outdated racist tropes put you off going vegan?_


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 23, 2017)

mojo pixy said:


> 'course not. safer just to keep eating and feel smug.





mojo pixy said:


> It's amazing how a little cognitive dissonance can turn a short and concise statement that relates directly to a point so recently posted into_ incoherent nonsense_.
> 
> Amazing.


lol, lbj's "phone a friend" shows up right on cue. It is indeed incoherent nonsense accusations, he appears to have run out of ideas, and so do you, adding nothing of any value to the thread just cowardly digs.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Aug 23, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> hunting psychos



*grabs popcorn*


----------



## mojo pixy (Aug 23, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> If China can somehow manage to wise up and becomes more civilised



(((Chinese civilisation)))


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 23, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> lol, lbj's "phone a friend" shows up right on cue. It is indeed incoherent nonsense accusations, he appears to have run out of ideas, and so do you, adding nothing of any value to the thread just cowardly digs.


you're not even adding cowardly digs 

just shite attempts at cowardly digs 

raise your game


----------



## spanglechick (Aug 23, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Nature vs nurture. Indeed some people have been brought up with that kind of thing and don't feel at all squeamish at all and some of the hunting psychos love that shit. A substantial (an growing) number of compassionate and civilised people don't much care for blood and guts and are repulsed by it. Which explains why youtube have warnings on those types of videos. I suppose that we could "train them early" in schools so that children can get used to what some believe comes naturally, although somehow I doubt that that will ever become a popular addition to the national curriculum, but you never know.


It does suggest, though, that the idea that if people were closer to the "animal/death/blood" bit of the process, they wouldn't eat meat - is fallacious.


----------



## mojo pixy (Aug 23, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> adding nothing of any value to the thread just cowardly digs.



Apart from my exhortation to direct action instead of online smugness, yeah.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 23, 2017)

mojo pixy said:


> (((Chinese civilisation)))


Yes, and?
The chinese heading towards western levels of meat consumption so they are potentially where we were 20 years ago. We are becoming more civilised the growth in the number of vegans (and the fierce backlash from meatheads).
Falsely claiming that to be "racist" is just lame.


----------



## mojo pixy (Aug 23, 2017)

So will you be freeing any animals from vivisection labs in the near future? Glueing up any locks? Smashing any windows? Any acetone on vehicles, potatoes up exhaust pipes, slashed tyres, paint on fur / leather products in shops?

If not then as far as I'm concerned you're just an online smugbucket, and any and all digs (cowardly or otherwise) are fully warranted.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 23, 2017)

mojo pixy said:


> Apart from my exhortation to direct action instead of online smugness, yeah.


Like I said, nothing of value. Lame accusation without any foundation. 



mojo pixy said:


> So will you be freeing any animals from vivisection labs in the near future? Glueing up any locks? Smashing any windows? Any acetone on vehicles, potatoes up exhaust pipes, slashed tyres, paint on fur / leather products in shops?


Sounds more like the actions of a psycho nutcase like yourself might get up to.


----------



## mojo pixy (Aug 23, 2017)

Yeah, as I said before



mojo pixy said:


> safer just to keep eating and feel smug.


----------



## Athos (Aug 23, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Not sure what bollocks you're yapping on about now tbh. For a start I'm nowhere near "angry" and secondly, in spite of the strong meathead resistance particularly from the more bloodthirsty hardcore ones, there is a steady growth in interest and take up of veganism. If China can somehow manage to wise up and becomes more civilised and stops trying to adopt the SAD crap, we might even reach critical mass by 2045.



Yes those uncivilized Chinese.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 23, 2017)

spanglechick said:


> It does suggest, though, that the idea that if people were closer to the "animal/death/blood" bit of the process, they wouldn't eat meat - is fallacious.


...and yet there are very examples of that very thing happening. People who were "close to the action" have stopped notable examples being Howard Lyman, John Robbins and Phillip Wollen. Like I said we can put this to the test by putting children in touch with their true meat eating nature and see how it goes.


----------



## DotCommunist (Aug 23, 2017)

a great bunch of lads


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 23, 2017)

mojo pixy said:


> Yeah, as I said before


It was bollocks then and is still bollocks now.


----------



## Athos (Aug 23, 2017)

PaoloSanchez I'm on holiday. The breakfast buffet in the current hotel is unlimited. For every post you make on this thread from now on, I'm going to take another sausage, even if I can't eat it. Let's see if saving animals from being eaten is more important to you than having the last word.


----------



## mojo pixy (Aug 23, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> It was bollocks then and is still bollocks now.



Nah, pretending to care about an issue like animal rights but rejecting direct action as _psychotic _is what's bollocks. Have a word with yourself.


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Aug 23, 2017)

_compassionate and civilised people_


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 23, 2017)

mojo pixy said:


> Nah, pretending to care about an issue like animal rights but rejecting direct action as _psychotic _is what's bollocks. Have a word with yourself.


Making shit up off the top of your head cos no argument is the genuine bollock article. Take a look in the mirror.


----------



## mojo pixy (Aug 23, 2017)

Making shit up off the top of my head?

I'm relating stuff I've done before in real life, you pseud. I've got nothing to prove here, but you seem to have the way you keep coming back for the last word and echoing others' posts in slightly different words.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 23, 2017)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> _compassionate and civilised people_


Yeah, you know, folks who believe slaughtering for no good reason is not the right thing to do.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 23, 2017)

mojo pixy said:


> I'm relating stuff I've done before in real life, you pseud. I've got nothing to prove here, but you seem to have the way you keep coming back for the last word and echoing others' posts in slightly different words.


More nonsense. So you've gone and smashed up places and believe that's the only way to get things done. How big of you. There's more than one way to peel a mango.


----------



## mojo pixy (Aug 23, 2017)

It's easy to carp from the sidelines


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 23, 2017)

mojo pixy said:


> It's easy to carp from the sidelines


It's even easier to snipe. Maybe you need to try something harder.


----------



## Spymaster (Aug 23, 2017)

cupid_stunt said:


> So, Spymaster what do you think about personally killing & eating animals?


Well obviously I don't eat everything that I shoot, but someone does, and of course even some meat eaters find hunting and shooting distasteful. Dirty Sanchez will think I'm a psycho murderer.

I haven't shot deer or boar for a few years but that's more down to lack of opportunity than anything else. Last year on a pheasant shoot I shot a parakeet and strangely, felt really bad about it. Nobody was going to eat that and it nagged at me for ages afterwards. Same with foxes. Some shoots allow you to take ground game, including foxes, and I've shot a couple but don't anymore. Apart from anything else, if you're on a bird shoot you're probably carrying the wrong shells for fox, but it's more than that. Even murderers like me have limits. Last year we had one come over a wall and trot straight through the line. Everyone just watched. No one shot at him.

Shooting things to eat is different. There's a justification there but that's not what it's about really. There are much cheaper and easier ways to put meat on the table!


----------



## mojo pixy (Aug 23, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> It's even easier to snipe. Maybe you need to try something harder.



Yeah, maybe!


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Aug 23, 2017)

Rescued piglets served up as sausages to firefighters - BBC News



> A litter of piglets whose bacon was saved from a barn fire has been served up as dinner to the firefighters who rescued them.
> 
> The 18 piglets and two sows survived the fire in Wiltshire in February, which saw 60 tonnes of hay catch fire.
> 
> ...


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 23, 2017)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Rescued piglets served up as sausages to firefighters - BBC News


FEB >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Aug 23, 2017)

Teaboy said:


> Can a passing mod change the thread title to _Do misanthropes who use horribly outdated racist tropes put you off going vegan?_



People can choose who to be inspired by, and who to be put off by.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Aug 23, 2017)




----------



## Spymaster (Aug 23, 2017)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Rescued piglets served up as sausages to firefighters - BBC News


I can't see why anyone would have an issue with that or why it made the news. The pigs were always going to be eaten and not letting them burn to death is pretty normal!


----------



## cupid_stunt (Aug 23, 2017)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> View attachment 114155



Classic - idiot cyclist story, vegan protest story, and a fucking tasty looking burger.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Aug 23, 2017)

cupid_stunt said:


> Classic - idiot cyclist story, vegan protest story, and a fucking tasty looking burger.




It's a Spymaster special


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Aug 23, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Yeah, you know, folks who believe slaughtering for no good reason is not the right thing to do.


The slaughter is for a very good reason. To feed people.


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Aug 23, 2017)

Jeff Robinson said:


> People can choose...who to be put off by.


Quotes like that not only put me off, but make me want to punch the twat saying it in the face.

Harming my bodies spirit lol


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 23, 2017)

Jeff Robinson said:


> People can choose who to be inspired by, and who to be put off by.



Exactly, and hopefully the folks that choose to go vegan do so after careful consideration of it's merits and not just based on some kneejerk reaction. There's still quite a way to go before critical mass especially given that habits are well established and entrenched, however I do believe that sense will prevail eventually and the words and actions from inspirational folks like those quoted will be the sparks that light the flames of compassion.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 23, 2017)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> _compassionate and civilised people_





beesonthewhatnow said:


> but make me want to punch the twat saying it in the face.


Doesn't look like that applies to you.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Aug 23, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Exactly, and hopefully the folks that choose to go vegan do so after careful consideration of it's merits and not just based on some kneejerk reaction. There's still quite a way to go before critical mass especially given that habits are well established and entrenched, however I do believe that sense will prevail eventually and the words and actions from inspirational folks like those quoted will be the sparks that light the flames of compassion.


----------



## Spymaster (Aug 23, 2017)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> Quotes like that not only put me off, but make me want to punch the twat saying it in the face.
> 
> Harming my bodies spirit lol


"If you're violent to yourself ... it will be difficult not to perpetuate that violence onto someone else" 

Dexter Scott King is a fuckwit.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Aug 23, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Exactly, and hopefully the folks that choose to go vegan do so after careful consideration of it's merits and not just based on some kneejerk reaction. There's still quite a way to go before critical mass especially given that habits are well established and entrenched, however I do believe that sense will prevail eventually and the words and actions from inspirational folks like those quoted will be the sparks that light the flames of compassion.



Get Surrey's doing 20% off burgers though.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 23, 2017)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> Quotes like that not only put me off, but make me want to punch the twat saying it in the face.
> 
> Harming my bodies spirit lol


Now now bees. How can you be expected to love anybody else unless you first love yourself? 

*books self in to an expensive Buddhist retreat*


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Aug 23, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Doesn't look like that applies to you.


I'm not the one preaching some moral superiority here.


----------



## Teaboy (Aug 23, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> "If you're violent to yourself ... it will be difficult not to perpetuate that violence onto someone else"
> 
> Dexter Scott King is a fuckwit.



People who self-harm will inevitably go onto attack others. Its _inevitable.
_
I know he qualifies it but its a truly bizarre statement, but you know stick it a frame and it becomes profound.


----------



## Spymaster (Aug 23, 2017)

Teaboy said:


> People who self-harm will inevitably go onto attack others. Its _inevitable.
> _
> I know he qualifies it but its a truly bizarre statement, but you know stick it a frame and it becomes profound.


It's thoughtless shit that he probably made up on the spot. Very surprised that Jeff bothered posting it.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 23, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> It's thoughtless shit that he probably made up on the spot.


Not realising how offensively fucking stupid it was.


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Aug 23, 2017)

Teaboy said:


> People who self-harm will inevitably go onto attack others. Its _inevitable.
> _
> I know he qualifies it but its a truly bizarre statement.



I concede that that quote is poor and I regret including it. What I was trying to do was point out that key figures from the anti-racist and civil rights movement have seen animal rights as connected to their struggles for equality. Some random troll on twitter does not represent the movement.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 23, 2017)

Jeff Robinson said:


> I concede that that quote is poor and I regret including it. What I was trying to do was point out that key figures from the anti-racist and civil rights movement have seen animal rights as connected to their struggles for equality. Some random troll on twitter does not represent the movement.


Fair dos, although the post you quoted wasn't referring to a random troll on twitter. I think it was referring to one of our very own.


----------



## mrs quoad (Aug 23, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Again, more incoherent nonsense, looks like that completely run out of argument and getting desperate.


HOUSE!!!

We're playing Trump speech bingo, right?

Edit: though now I check my card, I see you're missing "fake news"


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 23, 2017)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> I'm not the one preaching some moral superiority here.


So that's your very poor excuse for behaving like a savage thug, lol. (typical meathead?) Anyway, I reject your bogus "preaching" claim and all the other claims of being "smug", "condescending" and all the other crap that you and your professional hater buddies pull out of your backsides. When you've run out of rational argument the "smug" accusation is the refuge for you cowardly scoundrels.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Aug 23, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> So that's your very poor excuse for behaving like a savage thug, lol. (typical meathead?) Anyway, I reject your bogus "preaching" claim and all the other claims of being "smug", "condescending" and all the other crap that you and your professional hater buddies pull out of your backsides. When you've run out of rational argument the "smug" accusation is the refuge for you cowardly scoundrels.



I want to call you as mad as a march hare, but I don't want to upset the hares.


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Aug 23, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> savage thug... professional hater... cowardly scoundrels.


----------



## mrs quoad (Aug 23, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> So that's your very poor excuse for behaving like a savage thug, lol. (typical meathead?)


Savages?

Are they lacking in civilisation, too?


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 23, 2017)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> The slaughter is for a very good reason. To feed people.


Except that palate preference is not a good reason especially given that most of us are not obligated to eat meat and all the other well documented negatives that meat eaters choose to disregard.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 23, 2017)

Athos said:


> PaoloSanchez I'm on holiday. The breakfast buffet in the current hotel is unlimited. For every post you make on this thread from now on, I'm going to take another sausage, even if I can't eat it. Let's see if saving animals from being eaten is more important to you than having the last word.


Well you might have to cool hand Luke those sausages. I'll take your sausages and raise them. For every future numpty hater post from now I will reply with an educational video (which of course we all know that all the "nobody's" that have swarmed this thread will not be watching  ).


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Aug 23, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Except that palate preference is not a good reason


Yes it is. Food with a wonderful variety of flavours and textures is a great joy of life.



> the other well documented negatives that meat eaters choose to disregard.


Or that some give consideration to and then reach a different conclusion that you.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 23, 2017)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> Or that some give consideration to and then reach a different conclusion that you.


Like I said many times, whatever floats your boat. People that are comfortable with their choices shouldn't be affected by my opinions, and yet it really seems to bother them that I have a different perspective. Why is that, especially given that they are in the overwhelming majority?

Funny how the vegans are supposedly the angry ones and yet meatheads be fuming in this thread.


----------



## Spymaster (Aug 23, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Funny how the vegans are supposedly the angry ones and yet meatheads be fuming in this thread.


I don't see anyone fuming here. Just people taking the piss out of you. You've probably realised by now that a few of us are having a private game for which your presence is completely essential. You're being played like a fiddle.


----------



## Yossarian (Aug 23, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Like I said many times, whatever floats your boat. People that are comfortable with their choices shouldn't be affected by my opinions, and yet it really seems to bother them that I have a different perspective. Why is that, especially given that they are in the overwhelming majority?



"Because sausages and bacon are yummy, everybody loves sausages and bacon, look, I'm going to eat more yummy sausages right now" seems to be the level of debate right now.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 23, 2017)

Yossarian said:


> "Because sausages and bacon are yummy, everybody loves sausages and bacon, look, I'm going to eat more yummy sausages right now" seems to be the level of debate right now.


Come off it. That post was in response to his China nonsense. He's got off relatively lightly for most of his nonsense on this thread. He was bringing in comparisons to paedophilia earlier.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 23, 2017)

Yossarian said:


> "Because sausages and bacon are yummy, everybody loves sausages and bacon, look, I'm going to eat more yummy sausages right now" seems to be the level of debate right now.


...and don't forget...


----------



## Spymaster (Aug 23, 2017)

Ding


----------



## ddraig (Aug 23, 2017)

bullies basically
however much shit you think PS has posted or however much you disagree with them a few of you have been acting like gleeful kids in the playground picking on the person who's different
puerile, pathetic and typical


----------



## Spymaster (Aug 23, 2017)

ddraig said:


> bullies basically
> however much shit you think PS has posted or however much you disagree with them a few of you have been acting like gleeful kids in the playground picking on the person who's different
> puerile, pathetic and typical


Yep. Nothing to do with his behaviour. Oh no.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 23, 2017)

Not once on this entire thread has ps acknowledged that some aspect of something he's posted might not quite be absolutely wonderful and correct.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 23, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Not once on this entire thread has ps acknowledged that some aspect of something he's posted might not quite be absolutely wonderful and correct.


More bs. If you disagree with something that I've posted then it is for you to counter/challenge it with a good argument, and not make bogus strawman claims about what you think I'm doing.

Alternative you can complain and whine like a baby which you seem to be quite keen on.


----------



## Spymaster (Aug 23, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Alternative you can complain and whine like a baby which you seem to be quite keen on.


Ding


----------



## mrs quoad (Aug 23, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> More bs. If you disagree with something that I've posted then it is for you to counter/challenge it with a good argument, and not make bogus strawman claims about what you think I'm doing.
> 
> Alternative you can complain and whine like a baby which you seem to be quite keen on.


Your comment about Chinese civilisation was blatant racism, loosely covered by some sort of appeal to veganism being "civilised"; your approach to individual responsibility and preventable diseases ignored every facet of social and structural factors constraining free choice (let alone the IRL situation that was put to you); and you don't seem to have any response to ahimsa milk actually being ok in and of itself.

Tbf, the first two are the proper "wtf" points from the last two pages. The third, as lbj said, is probably because you don't seem to be unable to accept any nuance (let alone backtracking) in your opinion. No compromise, or sth.


----------



## hipipol (Aug 23, 2017)

Eat what you want, but passive aggressive waftyism is the style eh?
Don't try to "Nudge" me into guilt (you Blairite fools)
Kut me down with yer organic Avacado flint mattocks you haters of fleshchompers,  whatever, DONT do this:-





  self congratulatory superiorist wank frenzy land


----------



## mojo pixy (Aug 23, 2017)

And still no actual direct action for the cause, to justify the aggressive moralising. 
Because direct action is just _psychotic_.


----------



## 8ball (Aug 23, 2017)

Watermelon Man said:


> My question to the good people of Urban75 is this.  Do angry vegans make you want to shout bacon in their face? Do angry vegans make you think say oh f*** off would you?  Are you more receptive to a non judgemental, the right side of sanity vegan? Or do you still want to shout bacon in their face?



I think we shouldn't be too harsh on angry vegans.
I get the hump when I'm hungry too.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 24, 2017)

ddraig said:


> bullies basically
> however much shit you think PS has posted or however much you disagree with them a few of you have been acting like gleeful kids in the playground picking on the person who's different
> puerile, pathetic and typical


A bile of bullies? tbh, they are more cowards than bullies...a flight of cowards?
In order to make up for the lack of progress in any of their arguments, they use all sorts of dirty tricks and techniques including ridiculous accusations and general swarming and trolling when they don't get their way. It's their way of trashing the thread and trying to make it uninhabitable like Homs. 

Of course I don't think I've posted any shit at all (but then I would say that wouldn't I  ), but even if for the sake of argument everything I said was complete bollocks, if any of them were any good they would be able to soundly beat down my arguments with solid ones of their own, especially given their overwhelmingly superior numerical advantage.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 24, 2017)

mrs quoad said:


> Your comment about Chinese civilisation was blatant racism, ...blah blah blah...


How many folks does lbj have on his payroll, ffs.

tbh, I don't always bother replying to your weird riddle posts but I'll make an exception.
1. Blatant racism? Wow, just wow! Over reach much? I stand by what I said regarding China potentially becoming more civilised, and there's nothing racist in that whatsoever in spite of you and others grotesquely pathetic attempt to extract racism from that. If you really do genuinely believe that to be "blatantly racist" then put your money where your mouth with and report it to the moderators. What utter nonsense. Incidentally while we're at it, in this regard I also consider the west to also be rather uncivilised in this regard, so I guess that must also be racist, right? 

2. Regarding this gobbledigook..."your approach to individual responsibility and preventable diseases ignored every facet of social and structural factors constraining free choice", even if whatever you were trying to say there was true, so what? If I have a different opinion about something, why should that bother anybody else? Why do you and others feel that you need to continuously pound away until I agree with you?

3. "let alone the IRL situation that was put to you", more bollocks. I stand by my original answer to the alleged IRL. It is not something that I am overly concerned with. Even the example that lbj gave doesn't require animal testing so his whole point was fucking moot anyway ffs.

4. Ahimsa milk? So what? You want me to agree that it's ok and I don't agree, and yet I'm supposed to be the one "forcing my opinion on others". 

5 "The third, as lbj said, is probably because you don't seem to be unable to accept any nuance (let alone backtracking) in your opinion. No compromise, or sth."
You must have rushed that because it was even more nonsensical than your usual posts, but I think I can figure out what you're getting at, and my response yet again is, even if that was true (which it isn't btw)...SO WHAT?

My basic premise is that killing animals when we have no need to is cruel, uncivilised, inhumane and just plain wrong. If you have convincing arguments that you believe show the opposite then bring them to the table. I'm not going to suddenly say "actually killing animals when we don't need to is a good thing" unless I hear a convincing argument in favour. The only reason that you are complaining about supposed "lack of compromise" is that you can't really make any of your arguments stick, hence the frustration. If anybody here is trying to force their opinions, it's definitely you lot, and all this when you don't really need to given that you are in the 99%.


----------



## mojo pixy (Aug 24, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> ...trying to make it uninhabitable like Homs.



An ISIS comparison now? JFC what's the matter with you?


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 24, 2017)

mojo pixy said:


> And still no actual direct action for the cause, to justify the aggressive moralising.
> Because direct action is just _psychotic_.


lol, another lbj devotee labouring a moot point. 
You have no idea what goes on in my world so you are just talking out of your behind, as usual.
There are many ways to promote and influence and effect change. Smashing up buildings and sticking bananas in tailpipes might be what floats your boat, but it's not for everyone so I'm not sure what's behind continued pursuit of that rather lame point. I've appeared on tv and in the centre spread a tabloid and have done several presentations. I'm happy with that. You've burned down a building? Good for you, whatever floats your boat.

As for the "agressive moralising" nonsense, loooool. That's just laughable, especially given the genuinely aggressive and angry tone coming from those on your side of the fence, but of course you're not going to see that with those heavily biased blinkers of yours, eh. 

Anyway...I'm now out for the day. I shall return tomorrow and hopefully there'll be some non numpty posts to respond to.


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Aug 24, 2017)

Fuck me.


----------



## mojo pixy (Aug 24, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> lol, another lbj devotee labouring a moot point





PaoloSanchez said:


> How many folks does lbj have on his payroll, ffs.



Because people can't disagree autonomously with the great great _you._ How could they? There has to be a conspiracy....
Quelle surprise de con.



PaoloSanchez said:


> You have no idea what goes on in my world



Not entirely true after sixty nine pages.



PaoloSanchez said:


> There are many ways to promote and influence and effect change. Smashing up buildings and sticking bananas in tailpipes might be what floats your boat, but it's not for everyone so I'm not sure what's behind continued pursuit of that rather lame point. I've appeared on tv and in the centre spread a tabloid and have done several presentations. I'm happy with that. You've burned down a building? Good for you, whatever floats your boat.
> 
> As for the "agressive moralising" nonsense, loooool. That's just laughable



Aggressive moralising isn't a must. You could just do your thing and not wank on about it smugly. Choosing to do _that_ while condemning direct action for animal rights as _psychotic_ (ffs) suggests to me a certain integrity is lacking. But you've been on TV, just like that Gwyneth Paltrow, so your views must _matter_.

Direct action for animal rights isn't meant to promote influence and change (aww cute). It's meant to cause damage and financial loss to those who profit from animal abuse, with the intention of making those kinds of trade less safe and less profitable, therefore less attractive. Forgive me but when I hear your kind of (yes)_ aggressive moralising_ from people who aren't prepared to back it up with _action,_ it rings hollow. Make your personal choices by all means but keep them personal. Want to throw your weight around in the debate? You'd better bring some weight with you.



PaoloSanchez said:


> those on *your side of the fence*, but of course you're not going to see that with those heavily biased blinkers of yours, eh.



Yeah, no. This is why I stopped taking your posts seriously a number of pages ago. You aren't even bothering to read mine, you're just reacting to them prickishly.

For the record (and I believe this is borne out by my posts) I'm actually on _your_ 'side of the fence', but you're pretending so hard to be immune to any kind of criticism you can't even see it.

I think I know what'll happen next, but I'm always up for a pleasant surprise instead.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Aug 24, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> I don't see anyone fuming here. Just people taking the piss out of you. You've probably realised by now that a few of us are having a private game for which your presence is completely essential. You're being played like a fiddle.



Once again you happily admit to being a troll.


----------



## Spymaster (Aug 24, 2017)

SpookyFrank said:


> Once again you happily admit to being a troll.


 Duh!


----------



## ddraig (Aug 24, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> I don't see anyone fuming here. Just people taking the piss out of you. You've probably realised by now that a few of us are having a private game for which your presence is completely essential. You're being played like a fiddle.


a private bullying game, well done, you must be so proud


----------



## Spymaster (Aug 24, 2017)

ddraig said:


> a private bullying game, well done, you must be so proud


No, no, Draigo. Dirty isn't being bullied. He's being a dick, and that quality is being exploited for comedic its value. You're in the game as well and you're not being bullied, are you?   You've made me quite a few points


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Aug 25, 2017)

mojo pixy said:


> Aggressive moralising isn't a must. You could just do your thing and not wank on about it smugly. Choosing to do _that_ while condemning direct action for animal rights as _psychotic_ (ffs) suggests to me a certain integrity is lacking. But you've been on TV, just like that Gwyneth Paltrow, so your views must _matter_.
> 
> Direct action for animal rights isn't meant to promote influence and change (aww cute). It's meant to cause damage and financial loss to those who profit from animal abuse, with the intention of making those kinds of trade less safe and less profitable, therefore less attractive. Forgive me but when I hear your kind of (yes)_ aggressive moralising_ from people who aren't prepared to back it up with _action,_ it rings hollow. Make your personal choices by all means but keep them personal. Want to throw your weight around in the debate? You'd better bring some weight with you.



I don't agree with you that militant direct action is the best way to advance animal rights in current circumstances. Vegans make up about 1% of the UK population. Whilst we're a growing movement we're also still very much on the fringes of society. Trying to advance our cause through acts of law-breaking, property damage, threats and so forth invites state repression and further social ostracism and isolation. The image of AR activists as terrorists and criminals still looms large in the public mind today. And in any event the idea that a small handful of activists can take on the might of animal industrial complex and the state through direct action is fanciful.	

The main barrier to advancing the AR cause is the cultural norm of speciesism: the belief that the other animals don't count, or count for so little that it's okay to send them to terrifying deaths in industrial slaughterhouses just for our convenience and taste preferences. Whilst that attitude prevails there can be no meaningful or lasting change for the other animals.

Vegan advocacy is therefore about addressing the problem of animal abuse at the root and building a critical mass of people who are prepared to stand up for animal rights. It's also about diminishing demand for animal products and thereby saving animals from the fate of being bred into systems of violent exploitation. I know just talking to people isn't as sexy as direct action, but I believe it's the more effective strategy given where we're at ATM.


----------



## Teaboy (Aug 25, 2017)

Jeff Robinson said:


> The main barrier to advancing the AR cause is the cultural norm of speciesism: the belief that the other animals don't count, or count for so little that it's okay to send them to terrifying deaths in industrial slaughterhouses just for our convenience and taste preferences. Whilst that attitude prevails there can be no meaningful or lasting change for the other animals.
> 
> .



When we're happy to send our own species to terrifying deaths.  When we're happy to turn a blind eye to the wars that are happening and our own politicians cause it makes me wonder what chance there is for animals.


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Aug 25, 2017)

Teaboy said:


> When we're happy to send our own species to terrifying deaths.  When we're happy to turn a blind eye to the wars that are happening and our own politicians cause it makes me wonder what chance there is for animals.



I can't pretend that I'm always hopeful either but 'pessimism of the intellect, optimism of the will' and all that.


----------



## mojo pixy (Aug 25, 2017)

Jeff Robinson said:


> I don't agree with you that militant direct action is the best way to advance animal rights in current circumstances.



I don't disagree, and I never said it was the best way to advance the cause. As I admitted, direct action of the sort I'm on about isn't meant to change minds and _persuade_. It's meant to disrupt business and make it less profitable. It's not for everyone either - but if someone wants to come on all holier-than-though about the issues then frankly, I expect to see more commitment than a revised shopping list.

I'd add that if persuasion is the aim, insults of the sort we've seen over the last few dozen pages will do little to advance the cause. It's literal elitism, and that's never a good look. In that respect some who consider themselves committed to the cause are, to all intents and purposes, working counter-productively (as suggested in the OP)


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Aug 25, 2017)

mojo pixy said:


> I don't disagree, and I never said it was the best way to advance the cause. As I admitted, direct action of the sort I'm on about isn't meant to change minds and _persuade_. It's meant to disrupt business and make it less profitable. It's not for everyone either - but if someone wants to come on all holier-than-though about the issues then frankly, I expect to see more commitment than a revised shopping list.
> 
> I'd add that if persuasion is the aim, insults of the sort we've seen over the last few dozen pages will do little to advance the cause. It's literal elitism, and that's never a good look. In that respect some who consider themselves committed to the cause are, to all intents and purposes, working counter-productively (as suggested in the OP)



I have no disagreement with any of that. I would classify vegan advocacy and mentoring as forms of activism though.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Aug 26, 2017)

ddraig said:


> apart from the "normal" comments the usual crap and your pseudo science of course!



Hmm, because Vegans never use pseudo-science, do they?

A tip:  If you're going to self-righteously chuck around such declarations, it's usually sensible to make sure that your "side" isn't just as guilty of the crime(s) you're referring to.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Aug 26, 2017)

ddraig said:


> ...nazi vegan cup cake dicks!



They'd sell well to the fascists, who are among the most homo-erotically-charged closet cases on the planet.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Aug 26, 2017)

SpackleFrog said:


> Hi  Not come across this thread before and haven't previously seen nationalist/racist sympathy type stuff like it in relation to veggie/vegan issues. Would I be right in thinking it has some kind of origin in eco-nationalist/anti-globalist ideas?



Way back at least 50 years before Hitler was born - mentioned for those who believe that this all began with Schiklegruber - in Europe, in terms of linking in with early "Green" philosophy (although most European Green parties have long abjured the hard right).  Not sure of the "anti-Globalist" angle, as "Globalist" seems to mean different things to different people, especially conspiracy theorists.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Aug 26, 2017)

mojo pixy said:


> And conspiraloonery. A lot of vegans i've known over the years have been into conspiracy theories too. I don't know why but I'd guess there's a certain mindset that lends itself to both interests.



I disagree.  I'd say that the "fringier" Vegans are, but that the "fringier" elements of many lifestyles, philosophies and ideologies are equally as prone to metaphorically kneeling and sucking Icke's cock, as Vegans are.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Aug 26, 2017)

mojo pixy said:


> Nah, pretending to care about an issue like animal rights but rejecting direct action as _psychotic _is what's bollocks. Have a word with yourself.



A case of either having, or lacking, the courage of your convictions.  One should never talk the talk without having walked the walk.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Aug 26, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> More nonsense. So you've gone and smashed up places and believe that's the only way to get things done. How big of you. There's more than one way to peel a mango.



There may very well be more than one way to peel a mango, but there's only one sensible way.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Aug 26, 2017)

mojo pixy said:


> It's easy to carp from the sidelines



Mmmmm, carp!!!!


----------



## ViolentPanda (Aug 26, 2017)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> Quotes like that not only put me off, but make me want to punch the twat saying it in the face.
> 
> Harming my bodies spirit lol



The Dick Gregory quote, fine, the King quote though, rank "I'm better than you physically and spiritually because I keep my body pure" bullshit.  Smug self-righteous motherfuckingness.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Aug 26, 2017)

Yossarian said:


> "Because sausages and bacon are yummy, everybody loves sausages and bacon, look, I'm going to eat more yummy sausages right now" seems to be the level of debate right now.



It's not just about "yumminess", although I suspect that *some* Vegans would like it to be.  It's also about cheap nutrition, and here in the industrialised west, that means cheap meat products - cheap calorie-dense food that's easily available, and easily cooked.  Provide a "ready meal" alternative that doesn't have a cost premium, and more people might "convert" to Veganism, but as it is, you're still swimming against a tide.  I spent 8 years as a veggie, and eat very little meat now, in terms of volume.  I take the same approach my grandad - who spent his later teenage years and his twenties in Burma and India - took: Meat used almost as a "seasoning", not as the dominant foodstuff on the plate.  I know plenty of people who follow a similar philosophy too.  That they aren't Vegans is not something to rail against, it's a source of hope - a limiting of consumption over even 20 years ago.  If Vegans want to throw themselves into direct action regarding flesh, then attacking those who pump animals full of growth enhancers, antibiotics and other shit is a better target than burger-eaters and slaughterhouses.


----------



## mojo pixy (Aug 26, 2017)

ViolentPanda said:


> I disagree.  I'd say that the "fringier" Vegans are, but that the "fringier" elements of many lifestyles, philosophies and ideologies are equally as prone to metaphorically kneeling and sucking Icke's cock, as Vegans are.



I must have met mainly fringier elements then because in my experience the crossover is broad


----------



## ViolentPanda (Aug 26, 2017)

mojo pixy said:


> I must have met mainly fringier elements then because in my experience the crossover is broad



Maybe you're a weirdo magnet?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 26, 2017)

ViolentPanda said:


> It's not just about "yumminess", although I suspect that *some* Vegans would like it to be.  It's also about cheap nutrition, and here in the industrialised west, that means cheap meat products - cheap calorie-dense food that's easily available, and easily cooked.  Provide a "ready meal" alternative that doesn't have a cost premium, and more people might "convert" to Veganism, but as it is, you're still swimming against a tide.  I spent 8 years as a veggie, and eat very little meat now, in terms of volume.  I take the same approach my grandad - who spent his later teenage years and his twenties in Burma and India - took: Meat used almost as a "seasoning", not as the dominant foodstuff on the plate.  I know plenty of people who follow a similar philosophy too.  That they aren't Vegans is not something to rail against, it's a source of hope - a limiting of consumption over even 20 years ago.  If Vegans want to throw themselves into direct action regarding flesh, then attacking those who pump animals full of growth enhancers, antibiotics and other shit is a better target than burger-eaters and slaughterhouses.


This is also where it becomes more complicated than 'make sure you never buy factory farmed meat'. We need society-wide changes on that front, and I'm fucked if I know where to get organic, free range chorizo from, as a for instance. It's expensive enough as it is, but I use it sparingly in stews and the like, as you describe it above, as seasoning. I would like all meat to be produced free range and as organic as possible, but all of this cannot be laid at the door of consumers within modern societies. We simply don't have the power as individuals, unless we're rich or extremely highly motivated and lucky enough to live somewhere where these options exist, to buy our entire food supply from highly ethical sources.  

On other subjects, this kind of contigency of choices available to individuals within a society is a given in debates on here. On this subject, it is all too often ignored, minimised or, as has been happening on this thread, belittled.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 27, 2017)

mojo pixy said:


> Because people can't disagree autonomously...yadda yadda yadda"


Sigh.  Is this an attempt to see how many fallacious claims you can fit into a single post?

1. Who said anything about a "conspiracy"? Yet another "ooh look, I've got no decent argument so I'll just throw the words "conspiracy" and "conspiraloon" into the mix". lol @ "autonomous disagreement". More like an opportunistic bunch of hecklers backing each other up...

2. "Aggressive moralising"? wtf. Aggressive fibbing on your part would be a more accurate summary. Never heard so much nonsense in my life.

3. re: "direct action for animal rights". I'm not sure why you are labouring that "activism" point. "You ain't no real vegan unless you've burned down a building and caused damage"  Not once have I ever claimed to be an activist or involved in any kind of psycho "direct action". If others feel that that's how to get things done then good luck to you. A positive appearance on widely viewed media is imo far more effective and acts criminal vandalism and sabotage. Having said that, I also do respect people like the former activist Gary Yourofsky, or the "mercy for pigs" protesters, definitly not psychos imo. I've only been to one protest which was against the Iraq war. Apparently my protesting didn't really amount to much and Blair totally blanked me. 

4. "This is why I stopped taking your posts seriously a number of pages ago. You aren't even bothering to read mine, you're just reacting to them prickishly." - Well tbh, up until you "aggressively" forced yourself into an argument between myself and lbj which wasn't really any of your business, you are right, I didn't bother reading much of your stuff, which appeared to me not to make much sense anyway and was you muttering away to yourself about how words are pronounced and not very interesting. I am truly devastated to learn that there's an idiot out there that doesn't take my posts seriously. How will I ever survive such a damaging blow to my apparently massive ego.

5.  "For the record (and I believe this is borne out by my posts) I'm actually on your 'side of the fence', but you're pretending so hard to be immune to any kind of criticism you can't even see it." - hahahahahah, holy shit. You really believe that your posts clearly demonstrate that you are "my side of the fence". That's got to be a joke right? They're all over the shop so I'm really not how in heavens name you've reached that conclusion.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 27, 2017)

SpookyFrank said:


> Once again you happily admit to being a troll.


He appears to be particularly proud of it and wears it like a badge of honour, bless him.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 27, 2017)

Jeff Robinson said:


> The main barrier to advancing the AR cause is the cultural norm of speciesism: the belief that the other animals don't count, or count for so little that it's okay to send them to terrifying deaths in industrial slaughterhouses just for our convenience and taste preferences. Whilst that attitude prevails there can be no meaningful or lasting change for the other animals.


100% ...and as with many cultural norms, it is deeply entrenched and many people have a very strong resistance to fundamental change. Palate preferance trumps any genuine concern for animal welfare.

...for now.



Jeff Robinson said:


> Vegan advocacy is therefore about addressing the problem of animal abuse at the root and building a critical mass of people who are prepared to stand up for animal rights. It's also about diminishing demand for animal products and thereby saving animals from the fate of being bred into systems of violent exploitation. I know just talking to people isn't as sexy as direct action, but I believe it's the more effective strategy given where we're at ATM.


Indirect action via networking, mainstream media and increasingly social media, can often be far more of an effective change agent than burning down McDonalds headquarters, imo. That is not so say that there shouldn't be protests and demonstrations, they also have their place. 
Bottom line is I believe we're heading in the right direction and we're gaining traction built on solid foundations. The signs are there and there is a positive "buzz" in the air. Of course it would be nice if things moved a bit quicker, but changing peoples attitudes and sacred cow beliefs is not that easy.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 27, 2017)

ViolentPanda said:


> There may very well be more than one way to peel a mango, but there's only one sensible way.


Not true. There are several "sensible" ways.


----------



## Watermelon Man (Aug 27, 2017)

Fuck me! Is this still going?

To the Brixton vegans...what is your view on Ms Cupcake? 

Best cakes evah?
Overpriced crap?
Not too bad?
They are vegan so I like them regardless? 
They give me a dodgy tum? 

Love to hear your views.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 27, 2017)

Watermelon Man said:


> Fuck me! Is this still going?


See what you started. 



Watermelon Man said:


> To the Brixton vegans...what is your view on Ms Cupcake?
> 
> Best cakes evah?
> Overpriced crap?
> ...


I've never been to Ms Cupcake but I might give it a visit one day just to check it out.
However, yesterday my daughter made some cinamon rolls with chocolate and lemon zest that were very nice and probably wouldn't be out of place at Ms Cupcake.

Anyhoo, I'm off to the carnival now, looks like a nice day for it.


----------



## mojo pixy (Aug 27, 2017)

mojo pixy said:


> I think I know what'll happen next, but I'm always up for a pleasant surprise instead.





PaoloSanchez said:


> 1. Everyone's against me
> 2. You're a liar
> 3. I got ignored by Tony Blair once
> 4. I don't need to make sense because of my massive ego
> 5. You're not on my side anyway



OK, whatever you like. There's no point in going on, no progress is being made. I've made some points that have been acknowledged by a couple of rational posters (so i know I'm not just whining into the void, which is always nice) and I really have better things to do this week than this.



ViolentPanda said:


> Maybe you're a weirdo magnet?



QED.


----------



## mojo pixy (Aug 27, 2017)

I'm still pronouncing vegan with the _veg_ from _veg_etable and _veg_etarian. Because it amuses me, and because it's a tiny pop to an elitist bubble. A good friend of mine who's strictly vegan got really annoyed by it, which is all the encouragement I need


----------



## UnderAnOpenSky (Sep 6, 2017)

Even I’m not sanctimonious enough to turn vegan, says Corbyn


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 6, 2017)

UnderAnOpenSky said:


> Even I’m not sanctimonious enough to turn vegan, says Corbyn





> *JEREMY Corbyn has admitted that even he is not self-righteous and smug enough to become a vegan. *


----------



## ddraig (Sep 6, 2017)

what is smug about wanting to remove cruelty from your food?


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 6, 2017)

Hooked one.


----------



## ddraig (Sep 6, 2017)

are you playing the childish bully game as well then?? or don't have an answer so have to post a cop out


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 6, 2017)

I am not playing any game, just laughing at your reaction to a bit of satire.


----------



## ddraig (Sep 6, 2017)

cupid_stunt said:


> I am not playing any game, just laughing at your reaction to a bit of satire.


i know it's satire but still asking you why it's funny
you're not in the cunty bee spy gang? just another tiresome twat getting a giggle from pointing at people who live differently then, how sad


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 6, 2017)

Calm down, dear, it's a wind-up article, nothing worth getting angry about.


----------



## emanymton (Sep 6, 2017)

ddraig said:


> i know it's satire but still asking you why it's funny
> you're not in the cunty bee spy gang? just another tiresome twat getting a giggle from pointing at people who live differently then, how sad


I sent it to a friend of mine who is vegan. She thought it was hilarious.


----------



## ddraig (Sep 6, 2017)

cupid_stunt said:


> Calm down, dear, it's a wind-up article, nothing worth getting angry about.


case in point


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Sep 6, 2017)

What Jeremy Corbyn actually said...


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Sep 7, 2017)

ddraig said:


> what is smug about wanting to remove cruelty from your food?


The whole "smug" thing is yet another one of those bogus accusations used as a substitute for a valid argument. Mic sums it up quite nicely...


----------



## Yossarian (Sep 7, 2017)

Not sure what other kind of reaction people were expecting from posting a sub-par Daily Mash story on a thread about veganism.

The Onion tends to do a better job of satirizing the issue from both sides:

More Realistic Meat Substitute Made From Soy Raised In Brutally Cruel Conditions


> “Our vegetarian entrées and meal starters are the most authentically meat-like available on the market, because we make sure our soybeans are raised in filth-caked, overcrowded growing troughs in a windowless facility where daytime temperatures regularly exceed 120 degrees,” said Greenwood Farms marketing director Michael Latimer, adding that the beans’ rich, savory flavor is enhanced by the unsanitary conditions and the regular spread of disease and infection through the crop.


----------



## mrs quoad (Sep 7, 2017)

cupid_stunt said:


>


They don't mention angry, tbf. So this is off topic.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Sep 7, 2017)

Yossarian said:


> Not sure what other kind of reaction people were expecting from posting a sub-par Daily Mash story on a thread about veganism.


It's the usual piss take and wind up tbh, nothing to be taken too seriously. 

Adrian Chiles is apparently "a bit vegan" and discussed the topic following the Corbyn story on Radio 5 a few days ago...


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Sep 7, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> It's the usual piss take and wind up tbh, nothing to be taken too seriously.
> 
> Adrian Chiles is apparently "a bit vegan" and discussed the topic following the Corbyn story on Radio 5 a few days ago...




It's so rare to have a calm, rational discussion of veganism in the media. In praise of small things.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Sep 7, 2017)

Jeff Robinson said:


> It's so rare to have a calm, rational discussion of veganism in the media. In praise of small things.


There's a slow but steady increase in positive media coverage, so I suppose we should be grateful for small mercies. Adrian tried to take a fairly balanced "devils advocate" stance in that broadcast, in spite of the number of ignorant comments. I think he did a reasonable job.

Here's another vegan media story I saw recently...

Meat-lover goes vegan for a month and this is what happened


----------



## mojo pixy (Sep 7, 2017)

ddraig said:


> what is smug about wanting to remove cruelty from your food?



Nothing smug about that; the smug bit is behaving as if following a 'cruelty free' diet (which is a loaded and almost certainly inaccurate expression anyway) makes a better person than someone else who makes a different choice.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Sep 7, 2017)

ddraig said:


> case in point


It's up to you what you do but it's probably better to ignore the "no argument" goons and trolls, who don't really have anything useful to add to the topic and are simply out to make mischief.


----------



## ddraig (Sep 7, 2017)

this is meant to be starting tonight
Pritchard's Proper Vegan Cookin' - Home


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Sep 7, 2017)

ddraig said:


> this is meant to be starting tonight
> Pritchard's Proper Vegan Cookin' - Home



lol @ mowing the lawn in a mankini.


----------



## pengaleng (Sep 7, 2017)

fuck vegans.


----------



## Lorca (Sep 7, 2017)

edgy


----------



## pengaleng (Sep 7, 2017)

vegans kill the rainforest.


----------



## pengaleng (Sep 7, 2017)

vegans contribute to global warming further by the vast amounts of methane they produce. 

vegan facts


----------



## pengaleng (Sep 7, 2017)

vegans care about the animals but they couldnt give a fuck about habitats destroyed by intensive crop farming.


----------



## pengaleng (Sep 7, 2017)

vegan cheese is solidified pus scraped from the udders of dairy cows


----------



## pengaleng (Sep 7, 2017)

vegans purely love the number 5 or the letter s cus they look like animals


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 7, 2017)

Blimey, someone is on one.


----------



## pengaleng (Sep 7, 2017)

who? I dunno who 'someone' is.

oh, whoops, you mean me dont you, you forgot a  smiley

2/10 for trying.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 7, 2017)

No, the smiley I forgot was -


----------



## veganomics (Sep 8, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> As Erin said in the following video (which "nobody" is going to watch apparently,  ) "there's no right way to do the wrong thing".



I watched it (eventually), and it was excellent.


----------



## veganomics (Sep 8, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> _Sometimes the strangest things cause you to stop and think. I remember when I first started thinking about whether or not it was right to eat meat. It was on Thanksgiving Day a number of years ago. I had been drinking while I waited for the turkey to get done. By the time I was standing at the head of the table with my carving knife, I suddenly had the strangest thoughts. *I got to thinking that there might be some beings on another planet somewhere who are as intelligent compared with us as we are compared with turkeys.*
> 
> Now that's a disturbing thought! I could just see myself in some strange planetary oven, being roasted. It would be one thing to roast white folks brown; they'd be trying to figure out a way to "undone" us black folks. I even thought about myself lying on a platter all filled with stuffing!
> 
> Then I had visions of these beings from another planet going to the butcher shop with their meat list. I wonder what they'd call their butcher shops? They'd probably call them "folks shops." I could hear them placing an order: "Give me a half dozen Oriental knees, two Caucasian feet and twelve fresh Black lips." And the folks-shopkeeper comes back smiling and says, "These Black lips are so fresh they're still talking'." After that little fantasy, I couldn't eat my Thanksgiving dinner. But it started me thinking._


High intelligence aliens treating us in the same way that we humanely treat apparently less intelligent animals. Very good metaphor.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Sep 8, 2017)




----------



## veganomics (Sep 8, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> "Humane" meat? ...



Another excellent video.  This thread is becoming a great resource library for those that can filter out the noise from the trolls.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Sep 8, 2017)

veganomics said:


> Another excellent video.  This thread is becoming a great resource library for those that can filter out the noise from the trolls.


There's plenty of good stuff out there and even though the troll posts can make things a bit untidy and messy, trolls have their uses especially when they keep bumping the thread.

Here's another channel that I found through Mic the Vegan. She's not a bad singer/songwriter either, a bit Cindi Lauperish...


----------



## Yossarian (Sep 11, 2017)

Meanwhile, in Toronto, the dairy lobby has been reduced to complete incoherence. I think they're claiming that drinking milk will help you move faster on visits to museums.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Sep 11, 2017)

Yossarian said:


> Meanwhile, in Toronto, the dairy lobby has been reduced to complete incoherence. I think they're claiming that drinking milk will help you move faster on visits to museums.
> 
> View attachment 115448


I wonder if the UK dairy industry's £1.2 million campaign will reverse the trend away from the cow juice...

£1.2m dairy campaign hits back against vegan attack


"_The organisation Go Vegan World painted a horrifying picture of calves being taken from their mothers so we can have the milk they produce.

The portrayal drew complaints from the dairy industry that it painted an inaccurate and misleading picture.

However, the Advertising Standards Authority backed the accuracy of the vegan message.

Sales of cow’s milk have been declining as consumers switch to non-animal almond and soya alternatives. In addition, milk has suffered from the fact that more people are diagnosing themselves as lactose intolerant._"


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Sep 12, 2017)

"Diagnosing themselves"


----------



## Calamity1971 (Sep 12, 2017)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> "Diagnosing themselves"


It's a thing. My ex bf's sister decided she was lactose intolerant and glugged all me soya milk, bought vegetarian shoes like mine from Brighton. Next week she was chomping a cheese sandwich and a bag of chips cooked in beef dripping. Calls herself a veggie whilst gobbling a battered cod. It's cool to be intolerant to gluten and lactose these days. Who would have thought there are bigger dickheads than the genuine non carnivores.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Sep 12, 2017)

Calamity1971 said:


> It's a thing. My ex bf's sister decided she was lactose intolerant and glugged all me soya milk, bought vegetarian shoes like mine from Brighton. Next week she was chomping a cheese sandwich and a bag of chips cooked in beef dripping. Calls herself a veggie whilst gobbling a battered cod. It's cool to be intolerant to gluten and lactose these days. Who would have thought there are bigger dickheads than the genuine non carnivores.


Not sure that I'd describe it as "a thing" as if it's just a fad like fashionable curiosity to be dismissed as a joke. There are plenty of people that are lactose intolerant and have a strong reaction to milk products, my daughter being on of them. In our case it's nothing to do with being "cool" at all. 

As for the fish eating vegetarian, well everyone is at a different place and eventually they may change their ways and at least become more consistent (and maybe not). I was one of those "fish eating vegetarians" for a while too.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 12, 2017)

There is a difference between lactose intolerance - the lack of lactase in the gut - and a milk allergy - an immune system reaction. 

If you're lactose-intolerant you'll know about it, as milk will make you properly ill. Many people complain that milk products increase their mucus levels. This is a milk allergy, not lactose intolerance.


----------



## Yossarian (Sep 12, 2017)

Most of the world is lactose intolerant to some degree, though the prevalence falls to about 5% among northern Europeans, which is why some alt-right idiots like to chug milk in public.

lactose intolerance


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Sep 12, 2017)

Yossarian said:


> Most of the world is lactose intolerant to some degree, though the prevalence falls to about 5% among northern Europeans, which is why some alt-right idiots like to chug milk in public.
> 
> lactose intolerance


It's possible that there's a lot more of it about than people realise and they don't associate whatever illness they have to be related to what they are eating/drinking. In our case we didn't need to get a diagnosis from a doctor as the symptoms were clear and obvious. Some people do like to scoff and are dismissive at the idea of lactose intolerance I presume because they are happy consuming dairy products and don't want it to be seen as a bad thing.


----------



## Calamity1971 (Sep 12, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Not sure that I'd describe it as "a thing" as if it's just a fad like fashionable curiosity to be dismissed as a joke. There are plenty of people that are lactose intolerant and have a strong reaction to milk products, my daughter being on of them. In our case it's nothing to do with being "cool" at all.
> 
> As for the fish eating vegetarian, well everyone is at a different place and eventually they may change their ways and at least become more consistent (and maybe not). I was one of those "fish eating vegetarians" for a while too.


It was tongue in cheek paolo in response to beesonthewhatnow. People who diagnose themselves intolerant cos it's on trend etc. It's a thing? I was being a bit Stewie.


----------



## gentlegreen (Sep 16, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> _
> Sales of cow’s milk have been declining as consumers switch to non-animal almond and soya alternatives. In addition, milk has suffered from the fact that more people are diagnosing themselves as lactose intolerant._"


Even if it's for a misguided reason, good to see the dairy industry getting anxious.
I deviated into occasional stinky cheese for a while, but it has always amazed me that people pour dairy milk in their coffee and many even consider it essential to their health, when it may actually be no better than drinking cola and when stuffed into fast food, artery-clogging as well as a very poor bang for your calorie.

Healthcare Triage: The milk emperor has no clothes!


----------



## UnderAnOpenSky (Sep 16, 2017)

gentlegreen said:


> Even if it's for a misguided reason, good to see the dairy industry getting anxious.
> I deviated into occasional stinky cheese for a while, but it has always amazed me that people pour dairy milk in their coffee and many even consider it essential to their health, when it may actually be no better than drinking cola and when stuffed into fast food, artery-clogging as well as a very poor bang for your calorie.
> 
> Healthcare Triage: The milk emperor has no clothes!



A glug of milk in a cup of coffee or tea is a far cry from something like coke.


----------



## gentlegreen (Sep 16, 2017)

Personally I find one of the attractive aspects of tea and coffee is that they taste so good without adding fat and sugar.

But some people drink it by itself and pour it on their cereals.

I myself - briefly - when I first went veggie - around 1981 -  for a while used to drink whole milk because I thought that was what you needed to do...


----------



## mojo pixy (Sep 16, 2017)

It's not about the milk, it's about the cheese.


----------



## gentlegreen (Sep 16, 2017)

mojo pixy said:


> It's not about the milk, it's about the cheese.


Well yes - that and oily fish were the only two things I missed last time I was a vegan - but I can live without it - might well be more difficult living in France when a neighbour is offering me it with really good wine.


----------



## mojo pixy (Sep 16, 2017)

Trying to keep strictly vegan in France is enough to make anyone angry.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Sep 17, 2017)

gentlegreen said:


> Even if it's for a misguided reason, good to see the dairy industry getting anxious.


Well tbh, I think the pro-dairy folk do like to make out that the number of genuinely lactose intolerant folk is exaggerated and that most of the claims are false and some kind of fashionable fad. I don't believe that to be the case and in fact I believe that it is the other way around and that there are quite a few ailments associated with dairy consumption that many are blissfully unaware of because they believe the "milk does a body good" mantra.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Sep 17, 2017)

Meanwhile, in other news...

...I stumbled across this while checking to see what was happening in the Singapore Grand Prix...


...probably not worth getting too excited about another "celebrity endorsement" especially given that they are often short lived, nevertheless, fair play to the fella, it will hopefully get a few more people to think about the effects of their choices.


----------



## ddraig (Sep 17, 2017)

yes fair play but caring for the environment while jetting around the world to drive cars really fast??


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Sep 17, 2017)

ddraig said:


> yes fair play but caring for the environment while jetting around the world to drive cars really fast??


As a driver and a frequent flyer myself, I might be in a similar (albiet less extreme) situation. I don't feel that it invalidates his concern, and this sort of publicity can have it's benefits even if it has flaws.


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Sep 17, 2017)

ddraig said:


> yes fair play but caring for the environment while jetting around the world to drive cars really fast??


In his own _private jet_ no less.

Typical hypocritical vegan behaviour.


----------



## ddraig (Sep 17, 2017)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> In his own _private jet_ no less.
> 
> Typical hypocritical vegan behaviour.


trust you to add that eh! yawn


----------



## veganomics (Sep 22, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> I wonder if the UK dairy industry's £1.2 million campaign will reverse the trend away from the cow juice...
> 
> £1.2m dairy campaign hits back against vegan attack
> View attachment 115467
> ...


Saw this last month...


----------



## mwgdrwg (Sep 27, 2017)

I'm having thoughts about becoming Vegetarian or Vegan.

I feel like I'm addicted to milk and meat, and I don't really want to be.


----------



## mwgdrwg (Sep 27, 2017)

What's the best milk-alternative for putting in tea/coffee/cereal?


----------



## editor (Sep 27, 2017)

mwgdrwg said:


> What's the best milk-alternative for putting in tea/coffee/cereal?


Most soya milk used to be awful, but even the bog standard supermarket stuff from Sainsburys/Tescos etc tastes fine. I've had people round and they haven't even noticed it's not 'proper' milk in their tea/coffee. If you prefer full fat milk, sweetened soya might be better for you.

My weakness is cheese, but cutting out a lot of milk from my diet _really_ helped my eczema.


----------



## mojo pixy (Sep 27, 2017)

mwgdrwg said:


> What's the best milk-alternative for putting in tea/coffee/cereal?



I like coconut milk, but almond milk is also nice. I've tried dozens of brands of soy milk but I've never stopped hating the stuff.


----------



## pug (Sep 27, 2017)

mwgdrwg said:


> What's the best milk-alternative for putting in tea/coffee/cereal?



You could have your tea and coffee without any milk/substitute and have something different for breakfast that doesn't involve milk.


----------



## ddraig (Sep 27, 2017)

mwgdrwg said:


> What's the best milk-alternative for putting in tea/coffee/cereal?


I use Almond milk now, nicer than soya milk which used for years


----------



## mwgdrwg (Sep 27, 2017)

pug said:


> You could have your tea and coffee without any milk/substitute and have something different for breakfast that doesn't involve milk.



I hate tea/coffee without milk, I need something to put in it.

Breakfast I can change!


----------



## Spymaster (Sep 27, 2017)

I got into almond mill via Mrs Spy. I actually prefer it on cereal to cow's milk now.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 27, 2017)

Spymaster's first step towards the dark side.


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Sep 28, 2017)

mwgdrwg said:


> What's the best milk-alternative for putting in tea/coffee/cereal?



It comes down to personal taste, but I think the best for tea and coffee are hemp milk, cashew milk and oat milk. These are quite creamy, kinda like semi-skimmed. Almond milk is also nice, but more like skimmed. I personally don't mind unsweetened soy milk in tea but in coffee its not always great. You can however get 'barista blends' of soy milk (in the UHT isle at the supermarket) that taste really good. Next time you're in a chain coffee shop, try a soya flat white - its one of my favourite drinks!  

For cereal, I like all of them tbh, except for rice and hazelnut - both of which can be very sweet. I go for unsweetened soy and almond.


----------



## JimW (Sep 28, 2017)

When that company I used to work for only offered dairy alternatives for tea the oatmilk went down well. I always have coffee black and like soy in tea well enough.


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Sep 29, 2017)

Schoolboy found hanged after 'class bullies threw meat at him for being vegan'


----------



## gentlegreen (Sep 29, 2017)

Horrible.
What a waste - sounded like a bright kid.
School can be such a hideous place for those who don't "fit in".


----------



## Lambert Simnel (Sep 29, 2017)

Of course that has everything to do with a shit school and nothing to do with veganism.

Schools that don't do anything to tackle bullying should be found criminally negligent in such cases.


----------



## gentlegreen (Sep 29, 2017)

Indeed - no excuse in this day and age.
Back in the 70s when other kids were making my life hell and ruining my education, you were expected to just put up with it.


----------



## Lambert Simnel (Sep 29, 2017)

Meanwhile I got accused of feeding meat to a veggie last night. I'd replaced scallops in a recipe with sliced lightly fried mushroom stalks but they didn't believe me.


----------



## gentlegreen (Sep 29, 2017)

Perhaps it was the black pudding ?


----------



## ddraig (Sep 29, 2017)

Jeff Robinson said:


> Schoolboy found hanged after 'class bullies threw meat at him for being vegan'


----------



## ddraig (Sep 29, 2017)

Lambert Simnel said:


> Of course that has nothing to do with veganism and everything to do with a shit school.
> 
> Schools that don't do anything to tackle bullying should be found criminally negligent in such cases.


how can you be sure about that?


----------



## Lambert Simnel (Sep 29, 2017)

ddraig said:


> how can you be sure about that?



Sure about what?


----------



## ddraig (Sep 29, 2017)

Lambert Simnel said:


> Sure about what?


the bit i quoted "nothing to do with veganism"
it's othering and bullying


----------



## Lambert Simnel (Sep 29, 2017)

ddraig said:


> the bit i quoted "nothing to do with veganism"
> it's othering and bullying



If he'd been bullied for wearing Lonsdale trainers would this have been about Lonsdale or about a shit school?


----------



## ddraig (Sep 29, 2017)

Lambert Simnel said:


> If he'd been bullied for wearing Lonsdale trainers would this have been about Lonsdale or about a shit school?


why was that the first thing you said? to rule out their veganism


----------



## Lambert Simnel (Sep 29, 2017)

ddraig said:


> why was that the first thing you said? to rule out their veganism



post edited, you don't know how sorry I am.


----------



## mwgdrwg (Sep 30, 2017)

I'm not even Vegan and this article is offensive in it's stupidity :

Lewis Hamilton: Could a vegan diet hamper his 'racing edge'?

BTW yesterday I purchased some oat milk, today is my first day going dairy free. Introducing the changes now. Eating more fruit too.


----------



## Lambert Simnel (Sep 30, 2017)

So how is veganism related to class oppression exactly?

I guess stuffing workers with cheap meat is the most efficient way of fuelling them.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 30, 2017)

Lambert Simnel said:


> So how is veganism related to class oppression exactly?
> 
> I guess stuffing workers with cheap meat is the most efficient way of fuelling them.


you do a lot of guessing, not always successfully


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 30, 2017)

Lambert Simnel said:


> post edited, you don't know how sorry I am.


i've never met someone as sorry as you


----------



## ddraig (Sep 30, 2017)

mwgdrwg said:


> I'm not even Vegan and this article is offensive in it's stupidity :
> 
> Lewis Hamilton: Could a vegan diet hamper his 'racing edge'?
> 
> BTW yesterday I purchased some oat milk, today is my first day going dairy free. Introducing the changes now. Eating more fruit too.


yes, crappy journalism
right at the end of article


> The timing of Hamilton's dietary change may not be ideal but there are plenty of high-profile athletes who have successfully transitioned to a vegan diet, thriving even.
> 
> And while several studies suggest testosterone levels are lower in those on a plant-based diet than in those on a meat-based one, research by the British Journal of Cancer suggests a vegan diet actually increases them.
> 
> That means Hamilton could ultimately come back with even more of an edge.


----------



## gentlegreen (Sep 30, 2017)

testosterone shtestosterone ...

Though I imagine it's useful in that sort of profession ...


----------



## mwgdrwg (Oct 1, 2017)

After replacing milk with some oat-based replacement, I've got rid of butter after finding some Flora coconut based spread. It tastes really good.

Plannig on making tomorrow my first full vegan day. Then doing two next week etc.

This is my plan anyway. It's going to have to be gradual as I'm learning to change 44 years of programmed eating!


----------



## mwgdrwg (Oct 1, 2017)

Oh, I'm also going to be making my own soup for the first time in my life. Pumpkin soup!


----------



## gentlegreen (Oct 1, 2017)

My local Tesco appears to have stopped stocking their generic soy milk in favour of expensive alternatives.

I am somewhat annoyed that the only kind of *hemp* milk that anyone sells near me is sweetened and vanilla-flavoured' To my taste it doesn't even work as dessert.

In retirement, I may well try to come up with the machinery to process bulk hemp seed as well as soy ...


----------



## Spymaster (Oct 1, 2017)

mwgdrwg said:


> I'm not even Vegan and this article is offensive in it's stupidity :
> 
> Lewis Hamilton: Could a vegan diet hamper his 'racing edge'?
> 
> BTW yesterday I purchased some oat milk, today is my first day going dairy free. Introducing the changes now. Eating more fruit too.


That's just a shit headline. The thrust of the piece makes sense and is not a pop at vegan diets in particular. It suggests that substantially changing ones diet can, in the short term, create issues that can affect performance whatever the diet is. So a vegan sportsman switching to a meat diet mid-season would be similarly inadvisable.


----------



## Casual Observer (Oct 1, 2017)

mwgdrwg said:


> Oh, I'm also going to be making my own soup for the first time in my life. Pumpkin soup!


Difficult to go wrong with vegan soup. Made my first of the season yesterday - potatoes, onions, carrots, courgettes, peppers and stock cubes. Pita bread on the side. Oooooouzing nutrients, vitamins and general goodness.


----------



## mwgdrwg (Oct 1, 2017)

Casual Observer said:


> Difficult to go wrong with vegan soup. Made my first of the season yesterday - potatoes, onions, carrots, courgettes, peppers and stock cubes. Pita bread on the side. Oooooouzing nutrients, vitamins and general goodness.



Made mine with pumpkin, onion, carrots, garlic, leeks, and a vegetable stock cube, salt and pepper. 

The pan was massive, so maybe I should've used 2 stock cubes. Other than that, it tasted lovely! Had a bowl, going to freeze two portions, and I should have enough for several bowls in the coming days. Feels good!


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Oct 5, 2017)

New article from Glenn Greenwald on the recent FBI crackdown on animal rights activists. Background:



> While filming the conditions at the Smithfield facility (a factory farm), activists saw the two ailing baby piglets laying on the ground, visibly ill and near death, surrounded by the rotting corpses of dead piglets. “One was swollen and barely able to stand; the other had been trampled and was covered in blood,” said Wayne Hsiung of Direct Action Everywhere (DxE), which filmed the facility and performed the rescue...
> 
> Rather than leave the two piglets at Circle Four Farm to wait for an imminent and painful death, the DxE activists decided to rescue them. They carried them out of the pens where they had been suffering and took them to an animal sanctuary to be treated and nursed back to health.



FBI agents have been on the hunt for the rescued piglets. Here is what they did at one farm sanctuary:



> The FBI agents ordered staff and volunteers to stay away from the animals and then approached the piglets. To obtain the DNA samples, the state veterinarians accompanying the FBI used a snare to pressurize the piglet’s snout, thus immobilizing her in pain and fear, and then cut off close to two inches of the piglet’s ear.
> 
> The piglet’s pain was so severe, and her screams so piercing, that the sanctuary’s staff members screamed and cried. Even the FBI agents were so sufficiently disturbed by the resulting trauma, that they directed the veterinarians not to subject the second piglet to the procedure. The sanctuary representative recounted that the piglet who had part of her ear removed spent weeks depressed and scared, barely moving or eating, and still has not fully recovered. The FBI “receipt” given to the sanctuaries shows they took DNA samples “from swine.”
> 
> Several volunteers at one of the raided animal shelters said they were followed back to their homes by FBI agents, who dramatically questioned them in front of family members and neighbors. And there is even reason to believe that the bureau has been surveilling the activists’ private communications regarding the rescue of this piglet duo.



The FBI’s Hunt for Two Missing Piglets Reveals the Federal Cover-Up of Barbaric Factory Farms

Unspeakable savagery and barbarism. And people wonder why vegans are angry? How the fuck can you read that and not be angry?


----------



## ddraig (Oct 5, 2017)




----------



## mwgdrwg (Oct 6, 2017)

That's horrible.


----------



## mwgdrwg (Oct 6, 2017)

5th day without meat. Have had some dairy in the form of a cake, but I've still cut out dairy otherwise.


----------



## mwgdrwg (Oct 9, 2017)

Well I've done a week without meat. Not missing it, though I am craving milk.

Where can I find our more about becoming vegan? Tips welcome.


----------



## gentlegreen (Oct 9, 2017)

Although I went vegan 36 years ago, I have only recently been learning how to do it properly.

I've settled on a "nutritarian" approach as espoused by Joel Fuhrmann and I also get an idea of what to eat from Michael Greger - it's worth watching his video "40 year vegan dies of heart attack".

You will need to make sure you have a source of B12 and D and omega 3 precursors.


----------



## ddraig (Oct 9, 2017)

mwgdrwg said:


> Well I've done a week without meat. Not missing it, though I am craving milk.
> 
> Where can I find our more about becoming vegan? Tips welcome.


da iawn! 
How to go vegan
Going Vegan with Viva!
if you're on FB there may be a group in your area you can get advice on where to get stuff locally, cafes and takeaways etc
there are also youtube channels etc


----------



## mwgdrwg (Oct 9, 2017)

Making another soup tonight! Loved the pumpkin soup I made last week, so after looking at some online recipies and what I've got in the house I've come up with this:

Onion, garlic, celery, carrot, pepper, tomato puree, red lentils, a bit of V8, paprika, tobasco sauce.

Should be nice and warming right?


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Oct 9, 2017)

mwgdrwg said:


> Well I've done a week without meat. Not missing it, though I am craving milk.
> 
> Where can I find our more about becoming vegan? Tips welcome.



A few ideas:

Do you have a smart phone? If so download the 'Happy Cow' app. When you're out and about and want food it finds all the places that sell vegan food near you.

Are you on facebook? If so follow 'Bosh' for recipes.

This is quite a good quick guide vegan food video: 

Check out this website for various resources: https://veganuary.com/

If you want a mentor for 22 days you can sign up here: Challenge 22+

If you have any questions post them up here or PM me


----------



## Calamity1971 (Oct 9, 2017)

On my way mwgdrwg.


----------



## mwgdrwg (Oct 9, 2017)

Thanks for all the links and tips everyone!


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Oct 10, 2017)

mwgdrwg said:


> I'm having thoughts about becoming Vegetarian or Vegan.
> 
> I feel like I'm addicted to milk and meat, and I don't really want to be.


In some ways it's a lot easier to go vegan than it used to be so you should be able to find vegan stuff available in lots of places and a lot more awareness around. In other ways it can still be quite a challenge with the overwhelming majority not being vegan and the abundance of information (sometimes conflicting) which can be daunting for newbies. 

A good starting point might be to think about your reasons for going veg*n in the first place and follow up on those reasons by reading, watching videos and interacting with people who are already veg*n and see what resonates with you.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Oct 10, 2017)

mwgdrwg said:


> What's the best milk-alternative for putting in tea/coffee/cereal?


I don't drink hot beverages or have cereal so don't really have much of a need for alternative milks, but my wife does and she has a preference for this particular brand of Oat Milk...







I think this is one of those things where you'll have to try a number of them and see what ones you like. If you don't like soy, there's rice milk, almond milk, coconut milk, hemp milk...and each brand will have their own formula and taste so you might need to experiment before you find one that you like.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Oct 10, 2017)

mwgdrwg said:


> I'm not even Vegan and this article is offensive in it's stupidity :
> 
> Lewis Hamilton: Could a vegan diet hamper his 'racing edge'?
> 
> BTW yesterday I purchased some oat milk, today is my first day going dairy free. Introducing the changes now. Eating more fruit too.


More often than not, the "journalism" related to vegan issues can be a bit naff. Fortunately there are some good quality alternatives to balance things out. I regularly take a peek at the Latest Vegan News - Plant Based News - Vegan News, Conscious Living & More website, and there are a number of good youtube channels, here's a sample from my subscriptions...


----------



## mwgdrwg (Oct 19, 2017)

Well after 2.5 weeks I had a chicken curry from a take-away last night.

Didn't enjoy it. Back on my vegetarian diet today, and trying not to feel too bad about it.

Did anyone else have lapses at the beginning?


----------



## gentlegreen (Oct 19, 2017)

When I first went veggie, aged about 18, with no clue about what to eat, I succumbed on Dartmoor because I was feeling weak ...
When I did it properly when I was 21, I had been eating white sliced bread, mixed fruit jam and bacon bits, so the food my hippy flatmate introduced me to was such a revelation, I wanted to eat no other way.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Oct 22, 2017)

Just watched Lewis H's win on Sky and him giving a shout out to being plant based. 

Doesn't appear to have adversely affected his performance as some of the so called "experts" were suggesting that it might.


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Oct 23, 2017)

Random veganry on R4 news just before 6am. Bad tempered exchange betweem pro dairy professor who said life without iodine as found in dairy is death. Vegan person retorted that iodine only in cattle as they were fed it & had their teats washed with it & there was more iodine in seaweed.


----------



## gentlegreen (Oct 23, 2017)

BBC Radio 4 - Farming Today, Milk and health, The Welsh Dairy Show and crab apples

at 08:40

The prof was saying that fortified dairy products eliminated a problem with deficiency that used to prevail.
I was 100 percent vegan for 20 years and must have been getting my iodine from elsewhere ... and I have always avoided excess salt ... perhaps it was the seasalt used to make soy sauce.

does soy sauce have iodine? - Thyroid Disorders Message Board - HealthBoards

I'm making an effort to get seaweed into my diet - the prof was saying that some seaweeds have dangerous levels ...which I was already aware of ..


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Oct 23, 2017)

Concerns about a trend towards a dairy-free and vegan diets have been raised by farmers in Wales.

Wales Dairy Show chairman Colin Evans said a rise in vegan celebrities meant farmers needed to "prove" that they "produce food in a healthy manner".

NFU Cymru stressed vegans only represent about 1% of people.

The Vegan Society has argued that dairy products leads to stress for animals in the industry.

It suggested last year that about 3.25% of the UK population are now vegetarians, and that the number of vegans is growing.


----------



## ddraig (Oct 23, 2017)

lol, pricks


----------



## Spymaster (Oct 23, 2017)

Nah


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Oct 23, 2017)

Seed capital: has veganism become big business?
_Vegan businesses are sprouting up across the UK to service this demand. Between 2012 and 2016, there was a 185% jump in the number of vegan products launched in the UK, while 9% of food products launched in the UK in last year carried a vegan claim, up from 3% in 2012, according to Mintel.

Consumers’ aspirations for healthier lifestyles are helping to drive this, says Clifford. “Vegan products in particular have moved into the focus of public attention, capturing the imagination of consumers on health-related as well as ethical and religious grounds.”_


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Oct 23, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> View attachment 118589
> 
> Concerns about a trend towards a dairy-free and vegan diets have been raised by farmers in Wales.
> 
> ...



"The vegan activism we've seen on a UK level in recent months represents an extremist view of dairy farming which portrays a completely inaccurate image of the UK dairy industry."

The dairy industry is based on systematic violence against and exploitation of vulnerable beings. It is the reality of the dairy industry that is extreme not what vegans say about it.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Oct 26, 2017)

Jeff Robinson said:


> "The vegan activism we've seen on a UK level in recent months represents an extremist view of dairy farming which portrays a completely inaccurate image of the UK dairy industry."
> 
> The dairy industry is based on systematic violence against and exploitation of vulnerable beings. It is the reality of the dairy industry that is extreme not what vegans say about it.


Absolutely, however unfortunately the number of people who can be bothered with this sort of stuff is still quite small and a lot of people don't really see it as a big issue. When I was a vegetarian, it wasn't something that I thought too much about tbh, not eating meat was good enough and I was not aware of the inherent cruelty that's built into the dairy industry.

The good thing, imo, is that the awareness is growing and more people are at least giving pause for thought, hence the push back from the dairy farming industry who's profits would obviously be affected, I guess in the same way that those who made a living from slavery might not have welcomed the end of the slave trade.


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Oct 26, 2017)

Yep. Bringing up the slave trade is a sure fire way to get people on side and create a reasonable debate on the issue


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Oct 26, 2017)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> Yep. Bringing up the slave trade is a sure fire way to get people on side and create a reasonable debate on the issue


Well I don't believe it to be an unreasonable comparison, in fact I think there are quite a few similarities between folks defending the slave trade back in the day and the meat, egg and dairy industry's attempts to defend their practices which some see as unethical.

A small sample of talking points from this BBC Ethics guide to illustrate this point :-

BBC - Ethics - Slavery: Attempts to justify slavery

"A number of arguments have been put forward to try and justify slavery. None of them would find much favour today, but at various times in history many people found some of these arguments entirely reasonable."

================================================
"It's natural that some people are slaves"
vs​"It's natural that animals are there for us to eat and exploit"
--
"Slaves are inferior beings"
vs​"Animals are inferior beings"
- _which means we can do whatever the fuck we want with them and not feel bad about it_
--
"Slavery is good for slaves"
vs​"Animal farming is good for animals"
_ - if it wasn't for farming they wouldn't be alive, they should be damn grateful
--_
"Slavery would be too difficult to abolish"
vs​"Nearly every one eats meat or drinks milk, you can't stop it, resistance is futile."
--
"Slaves are essential to certain industries"
vs​"Those 'extremist' vegans are a potential threat to the meat and dairy industries, they need to be stopped."
--
"Slavery is acceptable in this culture"
vs​"Eating meat and dairy is a normal part of everyday life, you can't change that fact"
--
"Slavery is legal"
vs​"Animal exploitation is legal"
_- it sure is, but is it ethical?_
================================================
See, they're not so different after all. 

I can understand why some people might be uncomfortable with the comparison and are reluctant to recognise the obvious ethical similarities.

As far as having a "reasonable debate" goes, well there's nothing stopping either you or anybody that is genuinely interested in starting one.


----------



## spanglechick (Oct 26, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Well I don't believe it to be an unreasonable comparison, in fact I think there are quite a few similarities between folks defending the slave trade back in the day and the meat, egg and dairy industry's attempts to defend their practices which some see as unethical.
> 
> A small sample of talking points from this BBC Ethics guide to illustrate this point :-
> 
> ...


That's enormously trivialising to the horrors of the slave trade.

Slaves were (and are) people.  Our own species.  Human rights and laws of murder etc don't apply to non-human animals.  To compare the suffering of slaves to that of cattle, or poultry etc, is pretty offensive.


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Oct 26, 2017)

spanglechick said:


> That's enormously trivialising to the horrors of the slave trade.
> 
> Slaves were (and are) people.  Our own species.  Human rights and laws of murder etc don't apply to non-human animals.  To compare the suffering of slaves to that of cattle, or poultry etc, is pretty offensive.


It's more than "pretty offensive", it's utterly appalling.


----------



## hash tag (Nov 1, 2017)

This would turn me against going vegan. A dish from an award winning London resturant, apparently; A whole roasted parsnip!
"whole, slow roasted parsnip in an aromatic liquorice broth topped with a parsnip and mint puree, parsnip crisps and crisp mint leaves"
Could I survive on that? Would I want to?


----------



## Silas Loom (Nov 1, 2017)

That sounds quite nice.


----------



## Spymaster (Nov 1, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> That sounds quite nice.


As a side dish


----------



## Silas Loom (Nov 1, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> As a side dish



Or as one of several courses. Or as a mid-afternoon snack. I'd give you £3.70 for a slow-roasted parsnip right now.


----------



## hash tag (Nov 1, 2017)

liquorice broth! Liquorice is poison. which is probably why it is good for constipation.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 1, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Well I don't believe it to be an unreasonable comparison, in fact I think there are quite a few similarities between folks defending the slave trade back in the day and the meat, egg and dairy industry's attempts to defend their practices which some see as unethical.
> 
> A small sample of talking points from this BBC Ethics guide to illustrate this point :-
> 
> ...



Ah, you really do love nothing more than a barn-full of hay to mess around in, don't you? You've built a whole row of straw men there, just as you have done throughout this thread. Rather than engaging with the things people actually say, you cannot resist a put-down of a silly caricature of what they're saying.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Nov 1, 2017)

hash tag said:


> This would turn me against going vegan. A dish from an award winning London resturant, apparently; A whole roasted parsnip!
> "whole, slow roasted parsnip in an aromatic liquorice broth topped with a parsnip and mint puree, parsnip crisps and crisp mint leaves"
> Could I survive on that? Would I want to?
> 
> ...


Could you survive on that? Probably not. Is it the only vegan food available? Probably not.

(ps, I'm not a big fan of liquorice either...never liked Bassets Allsorts cos of the liquorice)


----------



## spanglechick (Nov 1, 2017)

hash tag said:


> This would turn me against going vegan. A dish from an award winning London resturant, apparently; A whole roasted parsnip!
> "whole, slow roasted parsnip in an aromatic liquorice broth topped with a parsnip and mint puree, parsnip crisps and crisp mint leaves"
> Could I survive on that? Would I want to?
> 
> ...


It's a starter/tasting dish.   It's not your dinner.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Nov 1, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Ah, you really do love nothing more than a barn-full of hay to mess around in, don't you? You've built a whole row of straw men there, just as you have done throughout this thread. Rather than engaging with the things people actually say, you cannot resist a put-down of a silly caricature of what they're saying.


Sigh. 

I'm not even sure why you are getting involved here tbh. You've flounced off several times already with your bogus and non-specific claims that I'm somehow not engaging properly. I'm not sure what "rules of engagement" that you're operating under, however as I've said on a number of occasions, you are under no obligation to read or respond to anything that I've written if you find it's not to your liking.
I'm happy with what I've posted however I am open to any criticisms if you can manage to articulate them in a cordial manner which you appear to have some difficulty with.

The comparison to the attitudes to slavery are entirely reasonable as far as I'm concerned. If others disagree then that's up to them, I'm not going to lose too much sleep over it. If people are going to start claiming that such an opinion is offensive then imo that is just silly and bordering on hysteria, and not something I can take at all seriously, which is why I haven't bothered with further responses to them so far.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 1, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> If people are going to start claiming that such an opinion is offensive then imo that is just silly and bordering on hysteria, and not something I can take at all seriously, which is why I haven't bothered with further responses to them so far.


That's very convenient for you. One of your consistent (and false) claims has been that others have been avoiding the difficult questions, yet here you are doing exactly that, branding Spanglechick's response, for instance, as hysteria, when it is nothing of the kind.


----------



## NoXion (Nov 1, 2017)

If dairy farming is akin to slavery, then building things must be akin to colonialism or ethnic cleansing or something like that.

After all, it's hardly as if the vast majority of buildings were ever constructed with the consent of the wildlife that used to live there.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Nov 1, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> That's very convenient for you. One of your consistent (and false) claims has been that others have been avoiding the difficult questions, yet here you are doing exactly that, branding Spanglechick's response, for instance, as hysteria, when it is nothing of the kind.


I have no idea wtf you're rattling on about now tbh. What PRECISELY is your beef? What question have I avoided?

I DO believe that claiming that it is offensive to compare the attitudes of those who supported slavery to those who support animal exploitation IS bordering on hysteria, especially when the terms "enormously trivialising" and "utterly appalling" are thrown into the mix ffs. If you disagree and believe it's nothing of the kind then that's up to you, like I said I'm not going to lose sleep over it and I'll make no apology for my perfectly valid opinion.

Tell you what, next time you bump into Alice Walker, a person that possibly has more credibility on the subject of slavery than anyone in this thread, perhaps you can also point out to her that her views on the comparison between slavery and animal exploitation "enormously trivialises" the horrors of the slave trade :-

The Dreaded Comparison
foreword by Alice Walker

_...the similarities between the enslavement of black people in the past (and by implication the enslavement of other enslaved peoples) and the enslavement of animals past and present. It is a comparison that, even for those of us who recognize its validity, is a difficult one to face.  Especially so if we are the descendants of slaves.  Or of slave owners.  Or of both. Especially so if we are also responsible in some way for the present treatment of animals. Especially so if we, for instance, participate in or profit from animal research...or if we own animals of if we eat animals or if we are content to know that animals are shut up safely in zoos.  In short, if we are complicit in the enslavement and destruction, to which is to say we are at this juncture in history, The Master._
.
.
.
_The Dreaded comparison between the pain felt by human animals who are abused and the pain felt by non human animals who are abused and recognising it as the same pain. The animals of the world exist for their own reasons. They were not made for humans any more than black people were made for whites, or women for men. _


----------



## SpookyFrank (Nov 2, 2017)

spanglechick said:


> To compare the suffering of slaves to that of cattle, or poultry etc, is pretty offensive.



Viva's latest campaign has a picture of dairy cows with the hashtag #metoo that has been used by victims of sexual harassment and abuse.

I can only assume from this that these people don't care about animals nearly so much as they hate humans.

I don't care what axe you're grinding, trying to hijack the suffering of others is a shit way to go about it. And they know this full well. They're not trying to improve the lot of animals, they just want to punish people. And like cunts throughout history they've figured out that targetting vulnerable people is the best way to maximise the hurt you cause.


----------



## NoXion (Nov 2, 2017)

SpookyFrank said:


> Viva's latest campaign has a picture of dairy cows with the hashtag #metoo that has been used by victims of sexual harassment and abuse.
> 
> I can only assume from this that these people don't care about animals nearly so much as they hate humans.
> 
> I don't care what axe you're grinding, trying to hijack the suffering of others is a shit way to go about it. And they know this full well. They're not trying to improve the lot of animals, they just want to punish people. And like cunts throughout history they've figured out that targetting vulnerable people is the best way to maximise the hurt you cause.



Who are Viva?


----------



## SpookyFrank (Nov 2, 2017)

NoXion said:


> Who are Viva?



Vegan pressure group. They've got form for this kind of shitcuntery.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 2, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> _ The animals of the world exist for their own reasons._


This sounds nice, but it's meaningless twaddle. The animals of the world (which include us) exist because we have evolved to exist, not 'for our own reasons' at all. And many have evolved specifically to kill other animals, while others have evolved strategies to prosper in the presence of predation, all co-evolving within a larger ecosystem whose balance is also part of the story of evolution. It's an absurd, romantic, anti-scientific sentiment.


----------



## ddraig (Nov 2, 2017)




----------



## Spymaster (Nov 2, 2017)

NoXion said:


> Who are Viva?


Viva! Homepage


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Nov 2, 2017)

One of the reasons that I find it hard to take you at all seriously, aside from your frequent emotional outbursts, tantrums and flouncing, is your precise and surgical extraction of ONE sentence from the whole post and to then used that sentence out of context to base your reply on.  Yet another one of your deceptive sleight of hand moves presumably an attempt to mask your distinct lack of argument...



littlebabyjesus said:


> This sounds nice, but it's meaningless twaddle. The animals of the world (which include us) exist because we have evolved to exist, not 'for our own reasons' at all.


The only person writing meaningless twaddle here is you. The sentence following the one you conveniently extracted sums it up quite nicely..."_They were not made for humans any more than black people were made for whites, or women for men."_



littlebabyjesus said:


> And many have evolved specifically to kill other animals, while others have evolved strategies to prosper in the presence of predation, all co-evolving within a larger ecosystem whose balance is also part of the story of evolution. It's an absurd, romantic, anti-scientific sentiment.


...yeah, some animals kill other animals, so it's ok for us to do it too. That load of old cobblers. 

So you've conveniently focused on "science and evolution" while carefully avoiding the philosophical and moral aspect which was at the heart and core of Alice Walkers foreword. 

Humans supposedly have moral agency, it is one of the things that distinguishes us from the rest of the animal kingdom, and the thing that makes (some of) us "civilised". Our higher level of intelligence and our moral agency should mean that we behave in a MORE responsible and compassionate manner and not use their behaviour as a yardstick to measure how we should behave. It's not just about evolution.

Those who wish to defend their entitlement the benefits that come with abusing animals will of course scratch around looking for all sorts of ways to be offended by comparisons to the same kind abuse that humans inflict on each other. Getting offended is a rather convenient trick used to try and shut down any opinion that you don't like or can't properly argue against, and I'm not falling for it. Alice Walker was spot on in her comparison and gets the seal of approval from me.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 2, 2017)

Where did I say that 'animals are made for humans'? I didn't. Nobody on this thread has said such a thing. 

I don't accept that humans are the only animals with moral agency, fwiw. But there is a big discussion to be had concerning our moral agency and what we should do with it. That discussion can't be had with you, though, because you continue to attack positions nobody on this thread has taken. Nobody. Not a single poster has said that 'animals are made for humans.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Nov 2, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Where did I say that 'animals are made for humans'? I didn't. Nobody on this thread has said such a thing.


...and neither did I claim that you did. If you are one of those condones the unnecessary use and abuse of animals for mere human pleasure, taste, culture, habit and convenience then you don't need to say it explicitly because your beliefs and actions will do the talking for you and it becomes self evident.



littlebabyjesus said:


> I don't accept that humans are the only animals with moral agency, fwiw. But there is a big discussion to be had concerning our moral agency and what we should do with it. That discussion can't be had with you, though, because you continue to attack positions nobody on this thread has taken.


Well regardless of whether moral agency is exclusive to humans or not, if we have it, we have at least some obligation to use it. 

Some of us make use of that there moral agency to recognise that it is wrong to abuse animals in the same way we use it to recognise that it is wrong to abuse fellow human animals. That comparison does not at all diminish or trivialise the abuse that humans sometimes inflict on each other.

As far as who you can have this discussion with, lol, well you are clearly over emotional and unable to keep your composure and conduct yourself in a civilized manner, and that is the real limiting factor to your participation in these discussions. I have no problem discussion this topic with anybody (yes even you) that is able to behave reasonably and not resort to abusive outbursts and other nonsense


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 2, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> ...and neither did I claim that you did. If you are one of those condones the unnecessary use and abuse of animals for mere human pleasure, taste, culture, habit and convenience then you don't need to say it explicitly because your beliefs and actions will do the talking for you and it becomes self evident.


Hang on. You haven't claimed that I said such a thing, but you now claim that my attitudes make it self-evident that I think it? That's classic PS logic.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Nov 2, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Those who wish to defend their entitlement the benefits that come with abusing animals will of course scratch around looking for all sorts of ways to be offended by comparisons to the same kind abuse that humans inflict on each other. Getting offended is a rather convenient trick used to try and shut down any opinion that you don't like or can't properly argue against, and I'm not falling for it. Alice Walker was spot on in her comparison and gets the seal of approval from me.



It's not the comparison people are upset about. It's the way that comparison is being made at the expense of human victims of abuse. There's a clear subtext to it which is, if you drink milk you're as bad as the person who raped you. This isn't a moral or intellectual case being made, it's an emotive one and it's targetted at vulnerable people.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Nov 2, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> As far as who you can have this discussion with, lol, well you are clearly over emotional and unable to keep your composure and conduct yourself in a civilized manner, and that is the real limiting factor to your participation in these discussions.



Classic trick. Spout deliberately provocative shit designed to upset people then criticise people for getting upset. I see you mate, I fucking see you.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 2, 2017)

See also claiming that someone is upset or emotional when they are nothing of the sort.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Nov 2, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> See also claiming that someone is upset or emotional when they are nothing of the sort.



All techniques beloved of abusive people, oddly enough.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 2, 2017)

And while we're at it, jumping on the fact that someone's lost patience and used a naughty word in response to some piece of passive-aggressive drivel.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Nov 2, 2017)

SpookyFrank said:


> It's not the comparison people are upset about. It's the way that comparison is being made at the expense of human victims of abuse. There's a clear subtext to it which is, if you drink milk you're as bad as the person who raped you. This isn't a moral or intellectual case being made, it's an emotive one and it's targeted at vulnerable people.


How is the comparison to slavery at the expense of human victims? You contrived subtext is as hysterical as some of the stuff posted earlier by your fellow detractors. "if you drink milk you're as bad as the person who raped you"...really? What a load of nonsense. That has never been said or implied and is just yet another gross exaggeration used to justify bogus fake outrage as a substitute for a decent argument. 



SpookyFrank said:


> Classic trick. Spout deliberately provocative shit designed to upset people then criticise people for getting upset. I see you mate, I fucking see you.


Again, more garbage. Folks claiming to be upset on behalf on the slaves, is a bit like one of Klinsmans swan dives in the penalty area when no one fkin touched him. Simulation, deserving of at least a yellow card. Nothing that I posted was "deliberately provocative" or "designed to upset" and those are cheap shot accusations that you cannot substantiate. Anybody that really does believe that to be the case is free to try and report the offending "disruptive" posts to the moderators and see what they make of it.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Nov 2, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> See also claiming that someone is upset or emotional when they are nothing of the sort.





littlebabyjesus said:


> And while we're at it, jumping on the fact that someone's lost patience and used a naughty word in response to some piece of passive-aggressive drivel.


lol, now your trying to make excuses for your poor conduct. 
As I have stated several times when you've had hissy fits earlier in the thread, you are under no obligation to read or reply to any of my posts. I'm not sure why you keep coming back to quote me when I've already made it clear that I'm not interested. If my opinion bothers you that much then feel free to put me on ignore if you are really not able to control yourself.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 2, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> H
> 
> Folks claiming to be upset on behalf on the slaves.


And there you go again. Nobody has done that. Nobody.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Nov 2, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> And there you go again. Nobody has done that. Nobody.


Oh yes they have. Perhaps you need to make an adjustment to that selective vision of yours.

Anyway, if you've nothing but sniping. I'm going to end my interaction with you here. If you can manage to engage without all of the side issue nit picking rubbish then perhaps I might change my mind.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Nov 2, 2017)

SpookyFrank said:


> Viva's latest campaign has a picture of dairy cows with the hashtag #metoo that has been used by victims of sexual harassment and abuse.
> 
> I can only assume from this that these people don't care about animals nearly so much as they hate humans.
> 
> I don't care what axe you're grinding, trying to hijack the suffering of others is a shit way to go about it. And they know this full well. They're not trying to improve the lot of animals, they just want to punish people. And like cunts throughout history they've figured out that targetting vulnerable people is the best way to maximise the hurt you cause.


The fuck are you on about? How does that target vulnerable people? What utter nonsense.


----------



## veganomics (Nov 2, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> I have no idea wtf you're rattling on about now tbh. What PRECISELY is your beef? What question have I avoided?
> 
> I DO believe that claiming that it is offensive to compare the attitudes of those who supported slavery to those who support animal exploitation IS bordering on hysteria, especially when the terms "enormously trivialising" and "utterly appalling" are thrown into the mix ffs. If you disagree and believe it's nothing of the kind then that's up to you, like I said I'm not going to lose sleep over it and I'll make no apology for my perfectly valid opinion.
> 
> ...


Peter Tatchell quoted from that book in his Human Rights Are Animals Rights speech :-


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Nov 2, 2017)

veganomics said:


> Peter Tatchell quoted from that book in his Human Rights Are Animals Rights speech :-



Indeed, I've seen that speech and thought it was quite good, although from what I can remember of it, his delivery was a bit "slow", but the content was ok.


----------



## veganomics (Nov 2, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Indeed, I've seen that speech and thought it was quite good, although from what I can remember of it, his delivery was a bit "slow", but the content was ok.


I quite liked his speech but I hear what you say about his measured delivery, I didn't bother me much though or take anything away from that he said.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 2, 2017)

Animal rights and human rights are and always will be two different kinds of thing.

If a farmer's crops are being decimated by rabbits, the farmer will find a way to kill the rabbits. If a house is infested with rats, the residents will find a way to kill the rats. The animals are just doing what they do, but they're in the way of us doing what we want to do, so they die. 

Within the conception of universal human rights, there can be no comparable situation. It is not allowable under any circumstances to kill other humans because they're in the way of something you want to do. You must engage with them and find a solution that respects their wishes and needs. 

The idea that one is directly comparable to the other is facile.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Nov 2, 2017)

I quite like the look of that parsnip.


----------



## xenon (Nov 2, 2017)

Are milk drinkers morally equivolent to slavers or not?


----------



## SpookyFrank (Nov 2, 2017)

xenon said:


> Are milk drinkers morally equivolent to slavers or not?



Oh no. They're much, much worse.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Nov 2, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Again, more garbage. Folks claiming to be upset on behalf on the slaves, is a bit like one of Klinsmans swan dives in the penalty area when no one fkin touched him. Simulation, deserving of at least a yellow card.



You can't see any reason people might still be upset about slavery?


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Nov 2, 2017)

veganomics said:


> I quite liked his speech but I hear what you say about his measured delivery, I didn't bother me much though or take anything away from that he said.


I listened to it a few months back and vaguely remember liking it but I can't remember too much about it, I'll have another listen to it sometime. I've been watching videos from the "Ask Yourself" youtube channel. No punches pulled full of logic, reason and sharp intellect. Later on I'll post one of his better videos with links to all the good bits.


----------



## Spymaster (Nov 2, 2017)

Can't wait


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 2, 2017)

The power of the conception of human rights is its absolute nature. If you're going to claim that an equivalent kind of rights could be afforded to other animals, you either need to elevate animal rights to an absolute nature (maybe something Jainist-like, wearing a cloth over your mouth so that you don't accidentally breathe in any flies) or you need to remove the absolute nature of human rights. So which is it? A Jainist-like absolutism or an erosion of the absolute character of human rights?


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Nov 2, 2017)

SpookyFrank said:


> You can't see any reason people might still be upset about slavery?


When a leading authority and spokesperson on the subject of slavery and other justice issues, with more credibility than anybody in this thread can make the comparison without getting upset, I'm not going to lose sleep over some poor antagonistic forumers feigning injury and distress and pretending to be concerned in an attempt to score cheap points.

The "dreaded comparison" that she makes does not trivialise slavery at all. It does attempt to elevate the status of animals so that they are not seen as mere unfeeling objects that we are free to do what we please with, similar to how slaves were bought and sold as mere objects.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 2, 2017)

Ah, appeal to authority. Another fave.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Nov 2, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> The "dreaded comparison" that she makes does not trivialise slavery at all. It does attempt to elevate the status of animals so that they are not seen as mere unfeeling objects that we are free to do what we please with, similar to how slaves were bought and sold as mere objects.



You see this is the point where you piss people off. You're conflating human slaves with cattle. Given that the abolition of slavery depended in large part on the awareness that people are _not _the same as cattle, can you see why this shit might upset people?

You can't say cattle are like people without saying people are like cattle. That's not something anyone with a shred of basic tact or awareness of human history should do if they want people to take their moral pronouncements seriously.

A cow is not a person. A cow is a cow. There's no reason a cow needs to be anything other than a cow, or the suffering that cow endures needs to be anything other than what it is, for you to make a moral argument that this suffering should end.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Nov 2, 2017)

SpookyFrank said:


> You see this is the point where you piss people off. You're conflating human slaves with cattle. Given that the abolition of slavery depended in large part on the awareness that people are _not _the same as cattle, can you see why this shit might upset people?


Well if folks are so attached to their beliefs that they are unwilling to hear other points of view and opinions without getting "pissed off" and upset then that's their problem, and it's not the way to properly conduct yourself in a civilised discussion. If I happen to express an opinion or argument that you disagree with, then feel free to counter it with your own "better" argument and reasoning.  If there is still no agreement and there is an impasse, then leave it there, agree to disagree, and move on. The problem with some of you lot is that you are unable to tolerate an opinion that is different and won't rest until someone agrees with you, getting all mardy custard. lbj is a perfect example of that chasing me around the thread in relentless pursuit at every opportunity like a stalker with attempted "gotchas" and stupid hypothetical scenarios and side issues, and getting abusive if I happen to disagree with him. cba with that nonsense any more.



SpookyFrank said:


> You can't say cattle are like people without saying people are like cattle. That's not something anyone with a shred of basic tact or awareness of human history should do if they want people to take their moral pronouncements seriously.
> 
> A cow is not a person. A cow is a cow. There's no reason a cow needs to be anything other than a cow, or the suffering that cow endures needs to be anything other than what it is, for you to make a moral argument that this suffering should end.


You also have a habit of misrepresenting what I've said with strawmen (something which lbj frequently accuses me of but also does himself). I did NOT say that humans are the same as cattle. The whole point of the comparison was that human slaves were treated like how cattle slaves are currently treated, and that some people are of the view (myself included) that cattle should not be treated like that and should be afforded higher standard of living of care which includes their right not to be killed and eaten when there is no need for us to do so.

That is NOT the same as saying human = cow ffs. 

Of course, folks who don't want to see anything wrong with exploiting animals, because they like the taste, will want to hang on to the current status quo of cows being "lesser" beings which means that they don't have to feel any remorse or guilt towards when confronted with the poor treatment of these innocent creatures.  This is not a million miles away from the views that slave owners had of their "property" who were also seen lesser beings who were treated badly. They even had science to back up their belief that black people weren't really properly human. 


In hindsight and with our more evolved morals many of us look back at that time with horror and disgust. Those of us that believe that the way we currently treat cattle and other animals is horrible and disgusting look forward to a future when the majority think the same of today's behaviour.


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Nov 2, 2017)

“Cattle slaves”

You utter fucking twat.


----------



## xenon (Nov 2, 2017)

Dreaded comparison.  Oh no I have been found out.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 2, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> In hindsight and with our more evolved morals many of us look back at that time with horror and disgust. Those of us that believe that the way we currently treat cattle and other animals is horrible and disgusting look forward to a future when the majority think the same of today's behaviour.


The only flaw in your argument is that the 'science' you quote was wrong. I'm not quite sure what it is that you are trying to demonstrate with it, tbh. That one day people will realise that cows are actually just like humans? 

Yet again, you fail to engage with me and plenty of others on here who have not for one second tried to deny that cows and other non-human animals are sentient beings.


----------



## xenon (Nov 2, 2017)

I once killed some ants. That is Holocaust.


----------



## ddraig (Nov 2, 2017)

Pile on yay!


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 2, 2017)

People replying to a post. How dare they!


----------



## xenon (Nov 2, 2017)

ddraig said:


> Pile on yay!




 Yes I have received the secret message we must all attack now. Oh shit.?!  I have given the way the secret plan again.

 I've just come back from the pub, and I have just eaten a bean burger. No lie. I'm a bit drunk. I'm going to bed soon. That's how threads work.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Nov 2, 2017)

Intro to "anti-vegan arguments are weak" video...

We live in a world where speciesism and animal exploitation are deeply embedded. Animal use was part of our society long before complex moral structures arose. Whole cultures and civilisations without serious debate on the moral legitimacy of animal use. As human society grew in size and complexity, so did the institution of animal exploitation. Now after millennia of this growth we find animals in just about everything, from blood adhesive in plywood, to animal fat in gummy candy, their skins wrap our chairs, their desiccated bones filter our sugar, and if you’re in the right part of the world, their bile might be in your toothpaste. Streets are plastered with ads telling you to ingest slabs of their muscles, TV families sit down to eat their carcasses, their body parts are a common sight at grocery stores and it’s very likely that your entire lineage is an unbroken chain of animal eaters.

This is a climate of intense indoctrination. The difficulty of seeing through this veil of normalcy to the intrinsic wrong of animal exploitation is analogous to the difficulty that our predecessors faced in seeing through the veil of normalcy surrounding slavery. The sheer degree of cognitive dissonance caused by thinking about animals and morality at the same time is too much for many people, so they find ways to avoid bringing veganism into focus. This age-old psychopathic indoctrination is the reason why someone as smart as Dawkins can still have severely impaired perception of reality when it comes to animals. Worst of all these people can remain ignorant and persist in moral psychosis because at present there is a strong taboo around criticizing animal use.

Well I’m sure at this point you’ve inferred my view. I see this view as even more absurd than the view around criticizing religion and in dire need of shattering. This takes us to the core of the video. Flesh eaters usually try to defend their violent ways with a mile-high wall of pseudo logic. I’m sure you’ve seen it deployed:-

Plants are sentient
Vegans are condescending
It’s natural
I need animal products to be healthy
Live and let live
Wild animals don’t care about you why should you care about them
Etc
What we’re looking at here is a dense cluster of pathetically weak argumentation driven by fear of change and indoctrinated delusion. These arguments are usually deployed in rapid fire one after another ad nauseum until the vegan grows tired and gives up. Well I've taken the time to write down as many of these arguments as I can think of, split them into categories based on common flaws, and now I'm going to eviscerate them one by one for your pleasure, demonstrating as the title of the video says that anti-vegan arguments are weak.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 2, 2017)

PaoloSanchez Outline for us what it is that we are missing about what it is to be a cow that is analogous to the idea that slave owners diminished the humanity of their slaves in order to mistreat them. What is it that you know about cows that we are in denial about?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 2, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> blah blah blah


No, don't list a load of arguments that aren't being made on this thread. Address the points that _are_ being made.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Nov 2, 2017)

Contents of "Anti-Vegan arguments are weak" 

The nature of morality –  04:13
Morality doesn't exist – 5:05
Morality is subjective – 6:40
Religion
Self interest
Arbitrary lines
Eat or be eaten
Consistency
Law​The necessity of exploitation - 08:05
Health – 08:27
Lack nutrients – 08:48
Muscle building – 09:25
Blood type diet – 09:53
My body couldn’t sustain itself on a vegan diet – 10:30
Doctor said so
Veganism made me sick
IBS​Isolated tribes need to eat animals – 11:40
Stranded on an island – 12:00
Population control – 12:17
Job loss – 12:52
Farmed animal apocalypse – 13:29
Farmed animal extinction – 14:05
Environment – 14:34
Almonds – 15:10
Grass fed cows – 15:42
Monocropping – 16:28
Palm oil – 16:55
Amazon deforestation for soy – 17:32​Not manly – 18:02
Animal testing – 18:11
Culture – 19:41
Historic necessity – 20:07
Brain development – 20:32
Formation of modern civilization – 20:54​The difficulty of change – 21:22
Shitty food – 21:37
Low variety – 21:49
Restaurants
Shopping​Reading Labels – 22:41
Habit – 22:50
Used to cooking with dead bodies
Used to the flavour of dead bodies​Negative social pressure – 23:22
Being made fun of – 23:31
Confrontation – 23:37
Bugging waiters, hosts, family, etc – 23:48​Expense – 24:09​The right to personal choice – 24:26
Respect my choice – 25:05
Don’t push your values – 25:18
I'm on my own personal journey – 25:59
I don’t have to defend my diet – 26:21​The intrinsic good of nature – 27:22
It’s natural – 27:50
Adaptations – 28:03
Enzymes – 28:15
Canines – 28:27​Circle of life – 28:47
Food chain – 29:01
We've always eaten other animals – 29:13
Other animals eat each other – 29:21
Humans are omnivores – 29:31
Apex predator – 29:58​The ethically relevant differences/similarities between life forms – 30:07
Intelligence – 30:45
Sentience – 31:19
Animal non-sentience – 31:44
Plant sentience – 33:07​Concept formation – 34:47
Self – 35:28
Past/future – 36:15
Desire to live – 37:03​Pain – 37:40
Expression of will – 37:53
Soul – 38:14
Morphology – 38:23​The invalidity of hypocritical criticism – 39:17
You own something that caused/causes suffering – 42:09
Electronics – 42:20
Leather – 42:51
House – 43:32
Pet – 43:50​You need to eat meat – 44:47
Vegans kill more animals – 45:31
You work somewhere non-vegan – 46:46
You aren’t 100% moral – 47:07​The acceptance of welfarism – 47:52
Ethical slaughter – 48:46
Spiritual slaughter – 49:05
Hunting – 49:23
Vegetarianism – 49:46
Reducitarianism – 50:39
Systemic change – 50:57​The distastefulness of vegans – 51:28
Rude – 52:22
Superior/condescending/pretentious – 53:07
Making me feel bad – 53:17
You think all non-vegans are terrible people – 53:26
Close minded – 53:35​The futility of veganism – 54:52
What difference can I make? – 55:00
The world won’t go vegan – 55:16
Animals are going to die either way – 55:30
Animals are bred to die – 56:47
This is the way it is – 56:50​The moral counterbalances for exploitation – 57:01
The animals like it – 57:19
It’s a fair trade – 57:42
Better than dying a harsh death – 57:56
It’s not me doing the killing – 58:13
Greater purpose – 58:21
Pleasure – 58:28
I don’t eat much meat – 58:37
I do other good things – 58:53
The animal wouldn't be nice to you – 59:37​The semantic and technicalities of veganism – 59:56
What is the precise scope of veganism – 1:00:40
Is being fully vegan possible – 1:01:04
You can’t “murder” an animal – 1:01:21
How do we define wellbeing – 1:02:11
Is there a moral problem with eating roadkill – 1:02:27​


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 2, 2017)

Vegan spam. Mycoprotein no doubt.


----------



## ddraig (Nov 2, 2017)

*Caveat for the fragile carnists*
I don't agree with everything posted by ps
*Caveat for the fragile carnists*

Do people know what this is, what it's used for and think it's right??


----------



## mojo pixy (Nov 2, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Flesh eaters usually try to defend their violent ways with a mile-high wall of pseudo logic. I’m sure you’ve seen it deployed:-
> 
> Plants are sentient
> Vegans are condescending
> ...



...so learn the correct response and never struggle for that _gotcha _moment!


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Nov 2, 2017)

Night night


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Nov 2, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Contents of "Anti-Vegan arguments are weak"
> 
> The nature of morality –  04:13
> Morality doesn't exist – 5:05
> ...


Fuck me.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 2, 2017)

ddraig said:


> *Caveat for the fragile carnists*
> I don't agree with everything posted by ps
> *Caveat for the fragile carnists*
> 
> Do people know what this is, what it's used for and think it's right??


Well I looked it up, so I do know what it is now. It's a weaner ring.

This page has some details on their usage written by a dairy farmer. She may not be entirely unbiased, but I don't know enough to say.


----------



## ddraig (Nov 2, 2017)

It's to stop calves having milk from their mothers so humans can have it

So when they try it hurts the mother and it shuns their calf
Guess that's fine with you and others


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 2, 2017)

ddraig said:


> It's to stop calves having milk from their mothers so humans can have it


Not according to the page I linked to, which claims that this is not common practice, and it's specifically not to stop calves from nursing with their mothers. They've already been taken away from their mothers by that point. 

See you're joining in with the passive-aggressive assumptions of ps and others. I've already linked earlier in the thread to a farm that I considered to be just about best practice. That farm allowed mothers to nurse calves for several months. And yes, I am fully aware that most farms do not do that.


----------



## ddraig (Nov 2, 2017)

Nope I'm not joining in with whatever "passive aggressive assumptions" you think are being made
There you go again with your sneering summations

It is increasingly used so that calves can't have their mother's milk

Anyway, pointless trying with you as proved over and over


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 2, 2017)

ddraig said:


> Nope I'm not joining in with whatever "passive aggressive assumptions" you think are being made
> It is increasingly used so that calves can't have their mother's milk
> 
> Anyway, pointless trying with you as proved over and over


Increasingly used. Can you give a link? I don't know about many of the details of dairy farming. Don't claim to. But don't try to claim you're the one being all reasonable here with your bullshit about ' fragile carnists' and 'guess that's fine with you' assumptions. Own your fucking crap at least.

I will repeat for the hard of reading.

I HAVE ALREADY POSTED ABOUT WAYS FOR DAIRY FARMING TO BE IMPROVED. I DO NOT THINK CURRENT MAINSTREAM FARMING PRACTICES ARE OK.

Did you read my link, btw? Is she wrong? If so, can you show the evidence for it?


----------



## Wookey (Nov 3, 2017)

ddraig said:


> It's to stop calves having milk from their mothers so humans can have it
> 
> So when they try it hurts the mother and it shuns their calf
> Guess that's fine with you and others



Calves don't really meet their mothers. It's not a family circle, it's a factory. 

It's to prevent cow on cow or calf on calf udder chewing, to avoid mastitis and scarring that eventually damage milk production. Best to be accurate if you're going to discuss dairy husbandry, otherwise you can be accused of using cheap emotional ploys to further your argument, when the bare facts should be quite enough.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 3, 2017)

.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Nov 3, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Contents of "Anti-Vegan arguments are weak"
> 
> The nature of morality –  04:13
> Morality doesn't exist – 5:05
> ...



And you expect this sort of thing to go down well do you?


----------



## mojo pixy (Nov 3, 2017)

No, he doesn't; he expects to feel superior, and for you to feel terrible. Maybe you'll have a think and then become vegan, which would make him the daddy because he made you do something. But if you don't he'll just go on feeling superior to you like he does now. 

Win/win


----------



## SpookyFrank (Nov 3, 2017)

mojo pixy said:


> No, he doesn't; he expects to feel superior, and for you to feel terrible. Maybe you'll have a think and then become vegan, which would make him the daddy because he made you do something. But if you don't he'll just go on feeling superior to you like he does now.
> 
> Win/win



Sounds like a great strategy.

I bet he has load of friends too. Loads of friends.


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Nov 3, 2017)

ddraig said:


> It is increasingly used so that calves can't have their mother's milk


You have a source for his?



> Anyway, pointless trying with you as proved over and over


Apparently not.


----------



## mojo pixy (Nov 3, 2017)

SpookyFrank said:


> Sounds like a great strategy



Not all vegans behave like that, sure. I know vegans who don't behave like that but if you push them on the matter they admit to still _feeling _like that. Others just go about their day and don't pay too much mind to what other people eat. Hard to say how much of a minority these are though.


----------



## veganomics (Nov 3, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Intro to "anti-vegan arguments are weak" video...
> 
> We live in a world where speciesism and animal exploitation are deeply embedded. Animal use was part of our society long before complex moral structures arose. Whole cultures and civilisations without serious debate on the moral legitimacy of animal use. As human society grew in size and complexity, so did the institution of animal exploitation. Now after millennia of this growth we find animals in just about everything, from blood adhesive in plywood, to animal fat in gummy candy, their skins wrap our chairs, their desiccated bones filter our sugar, and if you’re in the right part of the world, their bile might be in your toothpaste. Streets are plastered with ads telling you to ingest slabs of their muscles, TV families sit down to eat their carcasses, their body parts are a common sight at grocery stores and it’s very likely that your entire lineage is an unbroken chain of animal eaters.
> 
> ...



Watched that last night. I found him to be a bit on the brusque side, but the content was excellent and covered nearly all of the usual objections and excuses.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 3, 2017)

mojo pixy said:


> No, he doesn't; he expects to feel superior, and for you to feel terrible. Maybe you'll have a think and then become vegan, which would make him the daddy because he made you do something. But if you don't he'll just go on feeling superior to you like he does now.
> 
> Win/win


The absurd thing is that he has people here in front of him making arguments. Why produce lists of imagined arguments when he can just dismantle what is in front of him? Same goes for ddraig with his fragile carnist bollocks. Both of them prefer to imagine what it is that we really think and rail against that rather than address what we're actually saying.

I've attempted to tackle the strongest arguments against eating meat head-on. Jeff Robinson is the only poster from the 'other side' who has done likewise. And nobody here is seriously 'anti-vegan'.


----------



## Casual Observer (Nov 3, 2017)

Vegan mushroom and chickpea pate. Only takes 5 minutes to make. Think I came up with this myself so you won't find it on the internet.

Slice and fry 10 regular sized mushrooms then put them in a blender. Drain a tin of chickpeas, rinse them and then put them to the blender. Add 15 black olives to the blender and add a generous sprinkle of your favourite spices. Blend for one minute and there's your mushroom and chickpea pate. Decant the pate to a dish and leave in the fridge for an hour to help it solidify.


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Nov 3, 2017)

Wookey said:


> Calves don't really meet their mothers. It's not a family circle, it's a factory.
> 
> It's to prevent cow on cow or calf on calf udder chewing, to avoid mastitis and scarring that eventually damage milk production. Best to be accurate if you're going to discuss dairy husbandry, otherwise you can be accused of using cheap emotional ploys to further your argument, when the bare facts should be quite enough.



I suspect this udder chewing arises chiefly because calves are separated from their mothers before weaning. At best these nose rings are a byproduct of an inherently cruel industry based on mother-offspring separation. When dairy farmers present them as a necessary corrective to the violence and abuse they have already inflicted on "their" "cattle" its as bankrupt as when pig farmers justify sow stalls to protect piglets being crushed by their mothers - when the only reason the piglets are at risk of being crushed in the first place is because the farmers have packed them so tightly into sheds they have no freedom of movement! 

In any event, a variant of the nose ring, the spiked weaning nose plate, is used for precisely the reasons ddraig identified. See the video embedded in this article in which a dairy farmer explains how these horrific devices work:   

The Spiked Nose Ring: A Symbol for All Dairy Cruelty


----------



## veganomics (Nov 3, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Of course, folks who don't want to see anything wrong with exploiting animals, because they like the taste, will want to hang on to the current status quo of cows being "lesser" beings which means that they don't have to feel any remorse or guilt towards when confronted with the poor treatment of these innocent creatures.  This is not a million miles away from the views that slave owners had of their "property" who were also seen lesser beings who were treated badly. They even had science to back up their belief that black people weren't really properly human.
> 
> View attachment 119468
> In hindsight and with our more evolved morals many of us look back at that time with horror and disgust. Those of us that believe that the way we currently treat cattle and other animals is horrible and disgusting look forward to a future when the majority think the same of today's behaviour.


I'm not sure if this has already been posted in this thread but Richard Dawkins made the same point in his Big Think video, and I agree with him.



As you well know, it's also one of the main themes in Simon Amstel's "Carnage".


----------



## Wookey (Nov 3, 2017)

Casual Observer said:


> Vegan mushroom and chickpea pate. Only takes 5 minutes to make. Think I came up with this myself so you won't find it on the internet.
> 
> Slice and fry 10 regular sized mushrooms then put them in a blender. Drain a tin of chickpeas, rinse them and then put them to the blender. Add 15 black olives to the blender and add a generous sprinkle of your favourite spices. Blend for one minute and there's your mushroom and chickpea pate. Decant the pate to a dish and leave in the fridge for an hour to help it solidify.



Totally having a go of that! Ta chef!


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 3, 2017)

Jeff Robinson said:


> I suspect this udder chewing arises chiefly because calves are separated from their mothers before weaning. At best these nose rings are a byproduct of an inherently cruel industry based on mother-offspring separation.


I'm sure it does. But that just reinforces Wookey's point about the importance of accuracy. Hyperbole is scarcely necessary when discussing industrialised farming processes - the truth is bad enough.


----------



## Casual Observer (Nov 3, 2017)

Wookey said:


> Totally having a go of that! Ta chef!


You're welcome, Wookey. Adding some soy sauce during the mushroom frying stage wouldn't go amiss either.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Nov 3, 2017)

ddraig said:


> It's to stop calves having milk from their mothers so humans can have it
> 
> So when they try it hurts the mother and it shuns their calf
> Guess that's fine with you and others


I've never actually seen them used. Ever. And that calf would have been weaned a long time ago, so maybe it's to stop them getting younger animal's milk.


----------



## Wookey (Nov 3, 2017)

Casual Observer said:


> You're welcome, Wookey. Adding some soy sauce during the mushroom frying stage wouldn't go amiss either.



And what would you fry the mushies in? Just a wee bit of olive oil?


----------



## Wookey (Nov 3, 2017)

I think if angry vegans just shared more recipes they'd have a bigger impact than telling the world off. IMHO.


----------



## Casual Observer (Nov 3, 2017)

Wookey said:


> And what would you fry the mushies in? Just a wee bit of olive oil?


Whatever oil you have to hand really. Olive oil is fine. I have to confess, I did experiment with a few of the poncier oils a few years back (sesame oil etc.) and found they didn't make much of a difference. That was for cooking generally, rather than pate making or mushroom frying.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Nov 3, 2017)

SpookyFrank said:


> And you expect this sort of thing to go down well do you?


It depends on who watches it. Of course the haters may not like it or even bother to watch any of it, but the few that do might find some of the content useful.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 3, 2017)

Casual Observer said:


> Whatever oil you have to hand really. Olive oil is fine. I have to confess, I did experiment with a few of the poncier oils a few years back (sesame oil etc.) and found they didn't make much of a difference. That was for cooking generally, rather than pate making or mushroom frying.


Adding a dash of sesame oil after cooking adds a good flavour to lots of dishes ime, and I reckon your recipe would be a good one for it. You just need a drop.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Nov 3, 2017)

veganomics said:


> Watched that last night. I found him to be a bit on the brusque side, but the content was excellent and covered nearly all of the usual objections and excuses.


lol, I hear what you mean about him being "brusque". That's his "tired of listening to all the bullshit" style, and tbh can't say I blame him. I've watched a few of his youtube debates and he's pretty good at countering the nonsensical arguments in real time too.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Nov 3, 2017)

veganomics said:


> I'm not sure if this has already been posted in this thread but Richard Dawkins made the same point in his Big Think video, and I agree with him.
> 
> 
> 
> As you well know, it's also one of the main themes in Simon Amstel's "Carnage".



Nice one. That video wasn't posted in this thread but I did post another Dawkins video here along with a Sam Harris video.


----------



## NoXion (Nov 3, 2017)

That would be Sam "pre-emptive nuclear strikes are justifiable" Harris, right?

Sounds like just the go-to guy for ethics right there.


----------



## ddraig (Nov 3, 2017)

goin out to LBJ, Bees and others


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Nov 3, 2017)

Wookey said:


> I think if angry vegans just shared more recipes they'd have a bigger impact than telling the world off. IMHO.



Avocado Pesto Pasta for two

Cooked pasta for two
Handful of pine nuts or walnuts 
1 ripe avocado
Handful of spinach 
Cherry Tomatoes (roasted) 
garlic powder or half a clove of garlic
glug of olive oil 
handful of fresh basil 
squeeze of lemon juice 
tablespoon of nutritional yeast (optional)   
salt 
pepper

1. toast pine nuts or walnuts lightly in a pan for a minute or two 
2. add nuts to food blender with a little saltand blitz until finely ground 
3. add basil, spinach, lemon juice, avocado, garlic and nutritional yeast to the blender and blitz until smooth paste, adding olive oil slowly as it blends.
4. mix with pasta and top with roast tomatoes and toasted nuts.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 3, 2017)

ddraig said:


> goin out to LBJ, Bees and others



Cool, a link about weaner rings... 

Ah no.


----------



## Spymaster (Nov 3, 2017)




----------



## Spymaster (Nov 3, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Same goes for ddraig with his fragile carnist bollocks.


I still don't get the fragility bit of this. Ok, _carnist_ is an attempt at an insult but why fragile? Is the suggestion that meat eaters all secretly feel guilty and defend their choices _because_ of that?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 3, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> I still don't get the fragility bit of this. Ok, _carnist_ is an attempt at an insult but why fragile? Is the suggestion that meat eaters all secretly feel guilty and defend their choices _because_ of that?


We're in denial and easily offended because we don't want to be confronted with the things being done in our name. Despite the evidence of the words that many have been posting. Despite the fact that we may actively support reform of factory farming, or the fact that some of us may have gone out of our way to learn about the realities of factory farming. We're either fragile or we're monsters. Not sure there's a third option.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Nov 3, 2017)

Wookey said:


> I think if angry vegans just shared more recipes they'd have a bigger impact than telling the world off. IMHO.


lol, I still haven't found the mythical "angry vegan". Do they really exist, and are these unicorn like beasts really telling the world off? Or perhaps it's just one of those Fun Boy Three stereotypes drinking their age in pints.

Recipes? I personally don't really do recipes myself, however there's no shortage of them on the interwebs for those that are into that sort of thing. You can easily have a different vegan meal for every day of the year, which may surprise those that apparently believe that being vegan means that "there's nothing to eat".

Having an impact? Well veganism already has plenty of momentum and is growing quite nicely, and it's social media, activism and videos that seem to driving the increasing awareness and adoption.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Nov 3, 2017)

*Correction - it was the Specials not the Fun Boy Three.


----------



## ddraig (Nov 3, 2017)

Vegan lifestyle winning hearts & minds across Britain, says survey marking World Vegan Month


----------



## RainbowTown (Nov 3, 2017)

I certainly agree that all animals should be treated with far more dignity and respect than they are, and that especially applies when they used for slaughter and vivisection. Most liked minded people - meat eaters or not - probably feel the same.

 However....... it would be interesting to find out if any vegans have ever used ANY products (including medicines) that were at some point used on animals in order to make them safe before human use?  If so, isn't there a contradiction of sorts in what is practiced and what is preached?  

Like I say, the less slaughter and experimentation of animals, the better. Of course. That we all agree on. But let's not kid ourselves. We've all benefited from our use of them. Vegans as much as meat eaters . And that sadly, isn't going to end for the forseeable future.


----------



## ddraig (Nov 3, 2017)

RainbowTown said:


> I certainly agree that all animals should be treated with far more dignity and respect than they are, and that especially applies when they used for slaughter and vivisection. Most liked minded people - meat eaters or not - probably feel the same.
> 
> However....... it would be interesting to find out if any vegans have ever used ANY products (including medicines) that were at some point used on animals in order to make them safe before human use?  If so, isn't there a contradiction of sorts in what is practiced and what is preached?
> 
> Like I say, the less slaughter and experimentation of animals, the better. Of course. That we all agree on. But let's not kid ourselves. We've all benefited from our use of them. Vegans as much as meat eaters . And that sadly, isn't going to end for the forseeable future.


hypocrisy hunting!


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Nov 3, 2017)

RainbowTown said:


> However....... it would be interesting to find out if any vegans have ever used ANY products (including medicines) that were at some point used on animals in order to make them safe before human use?  If so, isn't there a contradiction of sorts in what is practiced and what is preached?


People who identify themselves as vegan go out of their way to not use any products that involve animals getting harmed, however we don't live in a vegan world, and it would be extremely difficult to completely avoid using or buying ANY products that have cause an animal harm, for most of us that currently is not practical. This topic is covered briefly in the "Ask Yourself" video that I posted earlier.

The invalidity of hypocritical criticism – 39:17


----------



## Spymaster (Nov 3, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> We're in denial and easily offended because we don't want to be confronted with the things being done in our name. Despite the evidence of the words that many have been posting. Despite the fact that we may actively support reform of factory farming, or the fact that some of us may have gone out of our way to learn about the realities of factory farming. We're either fragile or we're monsters. Not sure there's a third option.


Ahhhh.


----------



## NoXion (Nov 3, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> We're in denial and easily offended because we don't want to be confronted with the things being done in our name. Despite the evidence of the words that many have been posting. Despite the fact that we may actively support reform of factory farming, or the fact that some of us may have gone out of our way to learn about the realities of factory farming. We're either fragile or we're monsters. Not sure there's a third option.



Do you seriously think that if factory farming were to be changed or abolished, that militant vegans would rest on their laurels? Like fuck they would.

They believe that meat is murder. Nothing less than the total cessation of animal-derived products will satisfy such fanatics. That's why they keep coming out with their crap, and will keep doing so forever, as despite the increase in veganism there will always be evil carnists that they can yell at.


----------



## RainbowTown (Nov 3, 2017)

ddraig and PaoloSanchez:

It's a valid question/point I think I'm asking. You can deflect all you want with tried and hackneyed responses (rather cliched too, to be honest). I think most fair minded people on here will see through that. 

Are vegans hypocritical (your words, not mine)? I wouldn't be as harsh as that. I think they are sincere (for the most part). But there is a contradiction in their stance. That cannot be denied.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Nov 3, 2017)

RainbowTown said:


> Are vegans hypocritical (your words, not mine)? I wouldn't be as harsh as that. I think they are sincere (for the most part). But there is a contradiction in their stance. That cannot be denied.


Well for a start there isn't a single amorphous blob of vegans who all do exactly the same thing and have a single stance. Secondly, what is it exactly that "cannot be denied"? As part of living in a non vegan world, there will almost inevitably be things that vegans do that end up causing harm or death. I don't think that makes for a contradiction as long as they are doing their best to minimise whatever harm they may be causing.

tbh, I'm not sure that your question is a genuine one, especially as you've already introduced a bit of unfriendly tone with the accusation of deflecting etc, but whatever...


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 3, 2017)

NoXion said:


> Do you seriously think that if factory farming were to be changed or abolished, that militant vegans would rest on their laurels? Like fuck they would.
> 
> They believe that meat is murder. Nothing less than the total cessation of animal-derived products will satisfy such fanatics. That's why they keep coming out with their crap, and will keep doing so forever, as despite the increase in veganism there will always be evil carnists that they can yell at.


Yes I know. I explored that earlier when I asked what kinds of alliances might be possible between the likes of me who want to reform farming, but who eat meat and intend to continue doing so, and vegan activists. The answer appears to be none - we are still in the enemy camp because we still condone the slaughter of animals. 

The point that cannot be accepted by some - ddraig for example - is that someone might think killing animals for meat is ok but that there is a right and wrong way to do it, and that there is nothing 'fragile' about such a position.


----------



## Spymaster (Nov 3, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> lol, I still haven't found the mythical "angry vegan".


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 3, 2017)

Jimmy forgot to put his teeth in.


----------



## NoXion (Nov 3, 2017)

On a related note, I saw some vegan cheese in the supermarket today, where there used to be none, or at least none that I had seen before.

If I had the money to spare I would have been tempted to buy some, apparently it's made of coconut oil.

The last time I had vegan cheese - quite a few years ago now - it was at a vegan food festival that I turned up to because I was broke and squatting in London, and by that point I had learnt not to turn down free food, even if I ended up getting hungry again an hour later.

As I remember, it was... underwhelming. Not *bad*, but the mere act of eating it gave me no reason to seek it out again, let alone use it to replace real cheese.


----------



## ddraig (Nov 3, 2017)

"fair minded people"


----------



## RainbowTown (Nov 3, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Well for a start there isn't a single amorphous blob of vegans who all do exactly the same thing and have a single stance. Secondly, what is it exactly that "cannot be denied"? As part of living in a non vegan world, there will almost inevitably be things that vegans do that end up causing harm or death. I don't think that makes for a contradiction as long as they are doing their best to minimise whatever harm they may be causing.
> 
> tbh, I'm not sure that your question is a genuine one, especially as you've already introduced a bit of unfriendly tone with the accusation of deflecting etc, but whatever...




A lot of meat eaters feel the same. As I said in my original post, they too, like vegans, would like animal suffering to be minimised. Certainly in respect of farming and animal experimentation. The difference is they acknowledge that contradiction, whereas it seems some vegans do not. You have in this post, yes, but I'd hazard a guess (rightly or wrongly) that you are in the minority. 

My question was certainly genuine btw. And hopefully, the unfriendly tone you allude to will be taken in the spirit that I meant it to be....just debating, a different point of view. It was meant as nothing more.


----------



## ddraig (Nov 3, 2017)

> A lot of meat eaters feel the same. As I said in my original post, they too, like vegans, would like animal suffering to be minimised


But not enough not to have them killed for their plate


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Nov 3, 2017)

RainbowTown said:


> A lot of meat eaters feel the same. As I said in my original post, they too, like vegans, would like animal suffering to be minimised. Certainly in respect of farming and animal experimentation. The difference is they acknowledge that contradiction, whereas it seems some vegans do not. You have in this post, yes, but I'd hazard a guess (rightly or wrongly) that you are in the minority.


To be honest, I'm not really sure what point you are trying to make here. A lot of meat eaters love animals like vegans do? Well as dd said, they appear not to like them enough to not have them killed. Is that what they call "tough love"? Now to me that is a genuine contradiction and in my experience not one that meat eaters are overly keen to have highlighted.

Meat eaters on the whole know that animals are harmed so that they can eat meat. Vegetarians perhaps used to believe that there was no real harm done to produce milk and eggs, but now people are getting more aware of what goes on behind the scenes in the egg and dairy industry and the harm that is caused. Vegans on the whole try as much as is practicable to reduce their "harm footprint", which they do by choosing not to purchase or use animal products. I'm not seeing where the contradiction from the vegans is supposed to be. It is not reasonable to expect vegans to be 100% harm free in a 95% non-vegan world, so I don't think that's a fair criticism to suggest that their behaviour is contradictory. (This is covered under the heading - You aren’t 100% moral – 47:07)



RainbowTown said:


> My question was certainly genuine btw. And hopefully, the unfriendly tone you allude to will be taken in the spirit that I meant it to be....just debating, a different point of view. It was meant as nothing more.


Fair enough, and if that's the case that you are genuine, I'm quite happy to engage and have no problem listening to other viewpoints. There are a few troublemakers and timewasters knocking about in the thread and I can't be arsed to give too much more of my time to them so perhaps you can forgive me questioning your motives.


----------



## mojo pixy (Nov 3, 2017)

Yeah it's terrible when people argue in bad faith innit?


----------



## Spymaster (Nov 3, 2017)

ddraig said:


> But not enough not to have them killed for their plate




Of course not.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 4, 2017)

ddraig said:


> But not enough not to have them killed for their plate


Raised and then killed for their plate. Mrs Quoad pointed this out earlier in the thread, that you seem fixated on only the end point of meat farming. These particular animals exist because we're going to kill them. I'm concerned with how we treat them while they are alive, but I have no problem with the idea of bringing animals into existence in order to put their bodies on my plate. You seemingly can't process that idea.


----------



## ddraig (Nov 4, 2017)

good for you
the post wasn't as a response to you btw
it really isn't all about you


----------



## Wookey (Nov 7, 2017)

If everyone ate vegan for three days a week, that would be the _equivalent_ of half the population going vegan. A much more realistic goal than trying to get half the population to go vegan. 

But the absolutist positioning of some vegans, for whom this is a black and white ethical issue, I believe prevents many people from exploring the possibilities of a partial transition to veganism - a failure which is ultimately resulting in more animal death rather than less. 

Meat production and consumption on a global scale has gone through the roof in the last 40 years and continues to rise. There is no revolution happening towards veganism on a global scale, if anything the direct opposite. 

The Welsh bloke off Googlebox recently provided a perfect example of how the effects of an 'all or nothing' attitude of some extremist vegans can actually prevent behaviour change... He was watching a show about veggie food, and he said: "I could do that, go veggie, that's an idea!" 

Then he says... "Oh, but I do love beef stew. Oh well scrap that then, never going to work..." 

And so the idea of perhaps eschewing meat for half the week just disappeared. Perhaps the single most important act he could have done for his health and that of the planet was thrown away, because he felt he couldn't switch partially - it had to be completely or wasn't worth it, wasn't possible, wasn't kosher. 

It's the extreme positioning of meat vs veganism that I think contributes to the entrenched habits that see us eat meat morning,  noon and night, far too much, too often and too cheap. By welcoming each and every instance of non-meat consumption as a victory and a step in the right direction, we could begin to have an impact.

By guilt-tripping people, using revulsion tactics and taking the moral high-ground, some (no doubt well-meaning) vegans are harming their own cause by alienating the very people they COULD be gently and gradually winning over.

I ate meat once this week, and it was a wild Highland venison steak that was shot on a hillside one morning. I find that falls comfortably within my own ethical parameters, and means I ate veggie for 95% of the week... Clearly not perfect, or indeed anywhere near enough for some vegan activists, but infinitely less damaging than a typical UK meat-eaters diet. It's called compromise, and is a useful tool for social change. 

Telling someone what to put in their own mouth to keep themselves alive is fraught with difficulties and bound to fail in most instances. If these kinds of vegans understood humans as well as they profess to understand the other animals,  they would get further in their quest, imo, and we would all be better off for it.


----------



## ddraig (Nov 7, 2017)

Wookey said:


> If everyone ate vegan for three days a week, that would be the _equivalent_ of half the population going vegan. A much more realistic goal than trying to get half the population to go vegan.
> 
> But the absolutist positioning of some vegans, for whom this is a black and white ethical issue, I believe prevents many people from exploring the possibilities of a partial transition to veganism - a failure which is ultimately resulting in more animal death rather than less.
> 
> ...


wookey speaks!! end of discussion/thread

who here has told you what to put in your own mouth??
do what you like/want/desire/makes you feel comfortable/tickles your tastebuds
you're the one trying to dictate how vegans should do things here, not the other way round


----------



## mojo pixy (Nov 7, 2017)

_But if you eat any amount of meat or drink any amount of milk you're a heartless scumbag worthy of scorn and derision._

Nobody's come out and said it like that but that's the tone of many posts on this thread, and I for one have heard it said quite explicitly in real life. Shit, I've probably said it myself once or twice in my more impulsive days.


----------



## Spymaster (Nov 7, 2017)

ddraig said:


> wookey speaks!! end of discussion/thread
> 
> who here has told you what to put in your own mouth??
> do what you like/want/desire/makes you feel comfortable/tickles your tastebuds
> you're the one trying to dictate how vegans should do things here, not the other way round


Why are you always so unpleasant to people with different views to you on these threads? His post was completely reasonable, considered and polite.

You really are the ultimate angry flower-scoffer.


----------



## ddraig (Nov 7, 2017)

mojo pixy said:


> _But if you eat any amount of meat or drink any amount of milk you're a heartless scumbag worthy of scorn and derision._
> 
> Nobody's come out and said it like that but that's the tone of many posts on this thread, and I for one have heard it said quite explicitly in real life. Shit, I've probably said it myself once or twice in my more impulsive days.


ah! the "a vegan once said so all vegans are..." argument
i'll ask again, who on this thread has told wookey what to put in his mouth?
this is a part of fragile carnist mentality is i think (seeing an attack where there isn't one)


----------



## ddraig (Nov 7, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> Why are you always so unpleasant to people with different views to you on these threads? His post was completely reasonable, considered and polite.
> 
> You really are the ultimate angry flower-scoffer.


awww, what was unpleasant about what i posted?
his post was not reasonable, he and you think it's considered


----------



## Spymaster (Nov 7, 2017)

You bang on about this carnist fragility nonsense but your own postings betray an extreme delicacy and defensiveness that's unparalleled anywhere else on the boards. The slightest challenge to your ways sets you off on a bender! 

What is it that makes you this way?


----------



## mojo pixy (Nov 7, 2017)

ddraig said:


> ah! the "a vegan once said so all vegans are..." argument



Not made by me. I'm relating personal experience that I know for a fact isn't _only_ my experience. I'm not going so far as to universalise it, but I am acknowledging that it's a widely-shared experience.

And so is having the piss ripped for being a vegan but hey, at least vegans get the moral high ground eh?


----------



## Spymaster (Nov 7, 2017)

ddraig said:


> what was unpleasant about what i posted?


Lol


----------



## ddraig (Nov 7, 2017)

what was unpleasant about my post to wookey?


----------



## Spymaster (Nov 7, 2017)

Read the first line of it
Why start the post that way?


----------



## Spymaster (Nov 7, 2017)

ddraig said:


> ah! the "a vegan once said so all vegans are..." argument


Same with this one!


----------



## ddraig (Nov 7, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> Read the first line of it
> Why start the post that way?


quite succinct i thought, what is offensive about it? why not start a post that way
he was bestowing judgement so it was a response to that
is this part of the "just be nicer about it and you'll maybe convince more people" shite argument?


----------



## ddraig (Nov 7, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> Same with this one!


it's true tho, the claim was wrong and an extrapolation of something else that once happened
gromit school of debate style


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Nov 7, 2017)

Wookey said:


> If everyone ate vegan for three days a week, that would be the _equivalent_ of half the population going vegan. A much more realistic goal than trying to get half the population to go vegan.
> 
> But the absolutist positioning of some vegans, for whom this is a black and white ethical issue, I believe prevents many people from exploring the possibilities of a partial transition to veganism - a failure which is ultimately resulting in more animal death rather than less.


Different things work for different people. There are also some fundamental principles which many people hold an absolutist position on, examples I can think of off the top of my head are rape and slavery. How about a rape free Wednesday as a compromise to appease those "extremists" that believe that all rape is wrong?

There are certain things that evolved and civilised people accept as just plain wrong. Vegans believe that unnecessary killing of animals falls into the "plain wrong" category. The current majority of the world may take some time before they catch up and come to their senses.



Wookey said:


> Meat production and consumption on a global scale has gone through the roof in the last 40 years and continues to rise. There is no revolution happening towards veganism on a global scale, if anything the direct opposite.


It depends on how you spin the numbers. On a global scale the human population is steadily increasing and as the majority of the world isn't vegan of course the numbers eating meat will also increase, I suspect that much of that increase is driven by the "Americanisation" of China and India's taste buds. Meanwhile in the west, which some would argue are "ahead of the curve" there has undoubtably been a significant momentum shift towards veganism.



Wookey said:


> The Welsh bloke off Googlebox recently provided a perfect example of how the effects of an 'all or nothing' attitude of some extremist vegans can actually prevent behaviour change... He was watching a show about veggie food, and he said: "I could do that, go veggie, that's an idea!"
> 
> Then he says... "Oh, but I do love beef stew. Oh well scrap that then, never going to work..."
> 
> And so the idea of perhaps eschewing meat for half the week just disappeared. Perhaps the single most important act he could have done for his health and that of the planet was thrown away, because he felt he couldn't switch partially - it had to be completely or wasn't worth it, wasn't possible, wasn't kosher.


Cool story bro', however I'm not sure what alleged "extremism" had to do with that Welsh blokes momentary thought about "going veggie". Were there vegan terrorists standing outside his door wielding placards? Probably not. Meat eaters love to find a way of blaming vegans for their own reluctance to stop eating meat. Might be better to just be honest and admit that you can't be that bothered to change...and imo that's at the heart of the issue here. People are very resistant to change especially if it means letting go of well established habits. Old habits die hard. Blaming "extremist vegans" is a bit of a buck passing cop out.



Wookey said:


> It's the extreme positioning of meat vs veganism that I think contributes to the entrenched habits that see us eat meat morning,  noon and night, far too much, too often and too cheap. By welcoming each and every instance of non-meat consumption as a victory and a step in the right direction, we could begin to have an impact.
> 
> By guilt-tripping people, using revulsion tactics and taking the moral high-ground, some (no doubt well-meaning) vegans are harming their own cause by alienating the very people they COULD be gently and gradually winning over.


I can only speak for myself, and I make no apology for believing that killing animals unnecessarily is wrong. The irony being that those who are in favour of,  or at least condoning, the killing of animals unnecessarily are somehow portraying themselves as the victims, and the vegans who are against slaughter are somehow seen as the "extremists", lol. Go figure.

Meat eaters that don't believe that there's anything wrong with what they're doing won't feel guilty when confronted with the reality of their food choices. Those that do feel guilty should perhaps ask themselves why. Either way, other peoples feelings of guilt is not a good enough reason for activists and commentators to stop speaking out and highlighting the injustices that are at the foundation of the meat, dairy, egg and fish industries.



Wookey said:


> Telling someone what to put in their own mouth to keep themselves alive is fraught with difficulties and bound to fail in most instances. If these kinds of vegans understood humans as well as they profess to understand the other animals,  they would get further in their quest, imo, and we would all be better off for it.


Yeah, that's where vegans have been going wrong. They need to just keep their mouths shut and keep their principles to themselves.

Well in spite of the fraught difficulties that come with being outnumbered by several orders of magnitude, the vegan message is doing a Leicester City 2016/2017 and punching above it's weight. The awareness and interest is growing steadily and hopefully will reach critical mass in my lifetime and become the new normal.


----------



## Spymaster (Nov 7, 2017)

ddraig said:


> is this part of the "just be nicer about it and you'll maybe convince more people" shite argument?


No. You''ll not convince anyone because your arguments are shit. Nothing to do with the way you make them really. My comment was based on your "debating" style and really just taking the piss out of you a bit. Are you really a veg-head? I think you've lapsed and are secretly firing down burgers and bacon sarnies. That's why you're like this. Guilt!


----------



## ddraig (Nov 7, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> No. You''ll not convince anyone because your arguments are shit. Nothing to do with the way you make them really. My comment was based on your "debating" style and really just taking the piss out of you a bit. Are you really a veg-head? I think you've lapsed and are secretly firing down burgers and bacon sarnies. That's why you're like this. Guilt!


oh dear oh dear oh dear
again, i'm not trying to convince anyone
nice try there spy! 
funny that you're starting to accept the premise of carnist guilt tho


----------



## Spymaster (Nov 7, 2017)

ddraig said:


> oh dear oh dear oh dear
> again, i'm not trying to convince anyone
> nice try there spy!
> funny that you're starting to accept the premise of carnist guilt tho


Yep, the guilt's killing me! The week before last I shot 7 pheasants and 14 partridge. Dunno how I'm going to live with myself. Break out the sackcloth and ashes.


----------



## ddraig (Nov 7, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> Yep, the guilt's killing me! The week before last I shot 7 pheasants and 14 partridge. Dunno how I'm going to live with myself. Break out the sackcloth and ashes.


ah the macho meat head shooter toff wannabe is back! all is well


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Nov 7, 2017)

Only peace on our table
We just feeling quite grateful
Plate full of vegetables
No waste no hate no pain at all
We connect with the empathy
More plants, more energy
And yes we got protein, see through the smokescreen
Vegan is exactly what we're meant to be
Animals are not here to be exploited
We should think about our choices
They say we always preach but we only want to teach
And we have to speak up for the voiceless
They trust us, we betray them
How would you like a taste
Of a lifetime spent in cages
Then an ending filled with pain
So can't we change, yeah can we not change
To only eat fruit & veg & grains
You don't really need to eat that meat
Just know that the truth would set you free
Cause we can't breathe when there's no trees
When there's no fish left in the seas
Don't pay for destruction, fight the corruption
Of greedy industries of disease
Compassion to action, we just make that happen
Meat, eggs and dairy declined, we keep our values aligned
Inspired by these vegans who choose love every single time that they're eating
If you hold the truth you can never be defeated
If you hold the truth you can never be defeated

James Aspey: "_We need to put ourselves in the animals position, speak up for animals the way you would want to be spoken for if it was you in their situation." _

No silence this year activism on the rise
We hear these animals cry
Look into their eyes and you might think twice
Look into your heart and you might ask why?
No single animal deserves any suffering, that's not right
And all these screens they poison our minds with conditioning, it's all lies
No time now for excuses
Go vegan and feel lucid, this year
We bring about revolution, this year
Have to fight the pollution, this year
Everybody to be thriving
Not killing the environment
Because there's only one planet and it has to be saved
And that starts on your plate

James Aspey: "_Because this is not some mundane diet choice. This is the difference between enslavement and freedom, between torture and peace, between death and life." _


----------



## Spymaster (Nov 7, 2017)

Toff


----------



## mojo pixy (Nov 7, 2017)

At least you've got a choice now: _Macho meat-head_ or_ Fragile Carnist_. It's like the beginnings of some sort of spectrum


----------



## Spymaster (Nov 7, 2017)

ddraig said:


> ah the macho meat head shooter toff wannabe is back! all is well


It's not macho either really. Even you could do it with a bit of practice


----------



## ddraig (Nov 7, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> Toff


wannabe toff not actual toff!


----------



## ddraig (Nov 7, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> It's not macho either really. Even you could do it with a bit of practice


the numbers and your prowess sire not the act


----------



## Spymaster (Nov 7, 2017)

mojo pixy said:


> At least you've got a choice now: _Macho meat-head_ or_ Fragile Carnist_. It's like the beginnings of some sort of spectrum


_Toff wannabe_ too. I'm going to use them all interchangeably.


----------



## Spymaster (Nov 7, 2017)

ddraig said:


> the numbers and your prowess sire not the act


Ahh, I see. Some of them shot back too. Proper hard I am. <flexes muscles>


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 7, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> Yep, the guilt's killing me! The week before last I shot 7 pheasants and 14 partridge. Dunno how I'm going to live with myself. Break out the sackcloth and ashes.


and the rest, pa, tell them the rest. 

the complete bag:

7 pheasants
14 partridge
2 dogs
4 beaters
1 phone box
and a teddy bear named aloysius


----------



## veganomics (Nov 7, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Only peace on our table
> We just feeling quite grateful
> Plate full of vegetables
> No waste no hate no pain at all
> ...



I'm not really into rap but thought that was quite good.


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Nov 7, 2017)

Wookey said:


> If everyone ate vegan for three days a week, that would be the _equivalent_ of half the population going vegan. A much more realistic goal than trying to get half the population to go vegan.
> 
> But the absolutist positioning of some vegans, for whom this is a black and white ethical issue, I believe prevents many people from exploring the possibilities of a partial transition to veganism - a failure which is ultimately resulting in more animal death rather than less.
> 
> ...



There is a section of the animal rights movement - known as 'reducitarians' - who encourage the reduction of animal products rather than boycotting them, largely for the reasons you have given. However, it is an empirical question as to which approach is more effective and I am not aware of any reliable studies on this matter. 

One concern with reducitarianism is that it does not challenge the acceptability of inflicting violence against animals, it only calls for its reduction. Some think that for veganism to be taken seriously as an ethical position it has to challenge the way we view animals and their moral status in society. Other anti-violence campaigns do not tend to argue for the reduction of violence but rather for the abolition of violent practices and institutions even though, in reality they know such practices will never be fully eliminated. Sometimes taking an 'absolutist' stance can be more effective than adopting a more moderate position. 

That said, given the scale of extreme and systematic human violence against the other animals, and how deeply entrenched these practices are, I am not adverse to adopting pragmatic advocacy strategies. I encourage people to eliminate animal products from their diets at a pace that they find sustainable, but I always make clear that I believe the end goal must be veganism. I have also found vegan mentoring programs to be very effective. I have assisted a number of people to go vegan: giving them tips, going shopping with them, sending them recipes and so forth. They have all told me that, with a little support and some commitment, they have found veganism is easy and felt much better - both in terms of their conscience and health - for having adopted it.


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Nov 7, 2017)

Jeff Robinson said:


> There is a section of the animal rights movement - known as 'reducitarians' - who encourage the reduction of animal products rather than boycotting them, largely for the reasons you have given. However, it is an empirical question as to which approach is more effective and I am not aware of any reliable studies on this matter.
> 
> One concern with reducitarianism is that it does not challenge the acceptability of inflicting violence against animals, it only calls for its reduction. Some think that for veganism to be taken seriously as an ethical position it has to challenge the way we view animals and their moral status in society. Other anti-violence campaigns do not tend to argue for the reduction of violence but rather for the abolition of violent practices and institutions even though, in reality they know such practices will never be fully eliminated. Sometimes taking an 'absolutist' stance can be more effective than adopting a more moderate position.
> 
> That said, given the scale of extreme and systematic human violence against the other animals, and how deeply entrenched these practices are, I am not adverse to adopting pragmatic advocacy strategies. I encourage people to eliminate animal products from their diets at a pace that they find sustainable, but I always make clear that I believe the end goal must be veganism. I have also found vegan mentoring programs to be very effective. I have assisted a number of people to go vegan: giving them tips, going shopping with them, sending them recipes and so forth. They have all told me that, with a little support and some commitment, they have found veganism is easy and felt much better - both in terms of their conscience and health - for having adopted it.


See ddraig - that’s how to answer things like that. Give it a try sometime.


----------



## ddraig (Nov 7, 2017)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> See ddraig - that’s how to answer things like that. Give it a try sometime.


don't tell me how to post
or by the same token try posting differently yourself with less of the "normal" and crying because a festy went vegi etc etc


----------



## Spymaster (Nov 7, 2017)

ddraig said:


> don't tell me how to post


 You do make me laugh fella.


----------



## ddraig (Nov 7, 2017)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> The idea of tofu and seaweed being served as an alternative to fish and chips genuinely makes me angry
> 
> Make all the arguments about veganism you want - talk about animal rights, environmental impact, health, whatever the fuck you like. Stick to arguments that are credible. But by the very definition of what you're doing you are making meals less interesting and restricting tastes available to you, so don't bloody well come out with crap along the lines of "oh but the food is just as good". Because it isn't.
> 
> You make fish and chips with a fucking fish. There's a clue in the name. Do it right and even the chips are a vegan no go area.


try a different reaction that this


----------



## ddraig (Nov 7, 2017)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> My personal arguments for eating meat:
> 
> 1 - I enjoy it
> 2 - That's it


or this


----------



## ddraig (Nov 7, 2017)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> Can we just call meat eaters "normal" instead?


or this
want anymore?


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Nov 7, 2017)

Jeff Robinson said:


> There is a section of the animal rights movement - known as 'reducitarians' - who encourage the reduction of animal products rather than boycotting them, largely for the reasons you have given. However, it is an empirical question as to which approach is more effective and I am not aware of any reliable studies on this matter.


I only became aware of the term "reducitarianism" after seeing this TED talk earlier this year.





Jeff Robinson said:


> One concern with reducitarianism is that it does not challenge the acceptability of inflicting violence against animals, it only calls for its reduction. Some think that for veganism to be taken seriously as an ethical position it has to challenge the way we view animals and their moral status in society. Other anti-violence campaigns do not tend to argue for the reduction of violence but rather for the abolition of violent practices and institutions even though, in reality they know such practices will never be fully eliminated. Sometimes taking an 'absolutist' stance can be more effective than adopting a more moderate position.


I do find it a little bit odd that people are willing to accept a reduced amount of torture,violence and slaughter are seen as moderate when compared to people who on principle don't accept any amount of unnecessary slaughter. 



Jeff Robinson said:


> That said, given the scale of extreme and systematic human violence against the other animals, and how deeply entrenched these practices are, I am not adverse to adopting pragmatic advocacy strategies. I encourage people to eliminate animal products from their diets at a pace that they find sustainable, but I always make clear that I believe the end goal must be veganism.


Indeed, it's a bit like alcohol prohibition, unrealistic to expect everybody to adopt it at a practical level, however I don't think there's anything wrong with advocating the ethical principle which is at the heart of veganism. I don't believe that expressing those opinions should be off putting. I try not to tell people what they should do however if I'm asked why I've made certain choices, I will explain. Sometimes there is genuine curiosity, sometimes indifference and sometimes the response is hostile and defensive.


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Nov 7, 2017)

ddraig said:


> or this


I’d say that’s as honest a view on meat eating as you’ll find, no?


----------



## Wookey (Nov 7, 2017)

Jeff Robinson said:


> There is a section of the animal rights movement - known as 'reducitarians' - who encourage the reduction of animal products rather than boycotting them, largely for the reasons you have given. However, it is an empirical question as to which approach is more effective and I am not aware of any reliable studies on this matter.
> 
> One concern with reducitarianism is that it does not challenge the acceptability of inflicting violence against animals, it only calls for its reduction. Some think that for veganism to be taken seriously as an ethical position it has to challenge the way we view animals and their moral status in society. Other anti-violence campaigns do not tend to argue for the reduction of violence but rather for the abolition of violent practices and institutions even though, in reality they know such practices will never be fully eliminated. Sometimes taking an 'absolutist' stance can be more effective than adopting a more moderate position.
> 
> That said, given the scale of extreme and systematic human violence against the other animals, and how deeply entrenched these practices are, I am not adverse to adopting pragmatic advocacy strategies. I encourage people to eliminate animal products from their diets at a pace that they find sustainable, but I always make clear that I believe the end goal must be veganism. I have also found vegan mentoring programs to be very effective. I have assisted a number of people to go vegan: giving them tips, going shopping with them, sending them recipes and so forth. They have all told me that, with a little support and some commitment, they have found veganism is easy and felt much better - both in terms of their conscience and health - for having adopted it.



Jeff, thanks for your thoughtful reply!

I imagine a very considerable percentage of meat-eaters will never give up their animal - based diets because they love eating meat, they're culturally wedded to it, and they see it as natural as breathing.

We also have a percentage of poor rural dwellers (about 70% of 880million people) who rely on their livestock for their food security - that's about 650million people who have no alternative to eating meat, because they don't live near a Lidl with three types of veggie sausage on offer. 

So between the ones who won't go vegan, and the ones who cannot because of their life situation, you have the ones who could and would. It's here that change could be made, potentially. But as I mentioned, more pork and more chicken is eaten now than last year, but not as much as next year...

China hasn't even reached its peak meat consumption yet...how do we even start to convince them that animals have feelings?

Edit: I don't do maths or percentages so my workings out might be wrong...


----------



## spanglechick (Nov 8, 2017)

Jeff Robinson said:


> There is a section of the animal rights movement - known as 'reducitarians' - who encourage the reduction of animal products rather than boycotting them, largely for the reasons you have given. However, it is an empirical question as to which approach is more effective and I am not aware of any reliable studies on this matter.
> 
> One concern with reducitarianism is that it does not challenge the acceptability of inflicting violence against animals, it only calls for its reduction. Some think that for veganism to be taken seriously as an ethical position it has to challenge the way we view animals and their moral status in society. Other anti-violence campaigns do not tend to argue for the reduction of violence but rather for the abolition of violent practices and institutions even though, in reality they know such practices will never be fully eliminated. Sometimes taking an 'absolutist' stance can be more effective than adopting a more moderate position.
> 
> That said, given the scale of extreme and systematic human violence against the other animals, and how deeply entrenched these practices are, I am not adverse to adopting pragmatic advocacy strategies. I encourage people to eliminate animal products from their diets at a pace that they find sustainable, but I always make clear that I believe the end goal must be veganism. I have also found vegan mentoring programs to be very effective. I have assisted a number of people to go vegan: giving them tips, going shopping with them, sending them recipes and so forth. They have all told me that, with a little support and some commitment, they have found veganism is easy and felt much better - both in terms of their conscience and health - for having adopted it.


A couple of responses to this excellent post.  


Firstly, harm reduction strategies exist in a number of fields.   Hitting children would be one (banned in schools, then guidelines on types of hitting that is deemed acceptable), another would be the gradual whittling away of which crimes invoked capital punishment.  In the other side of the political spectrum, those who seek to ban abortion often caveat with allowing it when there has been rape/incest... there are other examples.  And the thing they all have in common is that these issues don't have anything like a cultural consensus.   Campaigns against knife crime or bullying or DV can be absolutist because everyone bar the real pond scum knows those thing are bad.   

The other thing is, there are many excellent arguments for veganism that are nothing to do with believing eating animal products is unethical.  I don't feel uncomfortable with my position in the food chain, but I would like to be healthier and I'd like to be responsible for less environmental damage.  So for me, being encouraged to reduce my meat- eating by even a quarter seems like a really impactful thing to aspire to.  If four people achieve that, while l having no fundamental issues with eating animals, that's just as good as one person turning vegan 100%.  There's no point saying to those people that for you the end goal has to be absolute, because that only makes sense to people who share those ethics.


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Nov 8, 2017)

On topic, because it's probably vegan but uninspiring. In my ongoing no waste project I'm making some sort of pasta dinner today with corgette, onions, carrots stirfried with herbs, spices tin of kidney beans & tom puree after that my cupboard is bare. That will clear me out in more ways than one & force me to go to Lidls afterwards.


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Nov 8, 2017)

spanglechick said:


> A couple of responses to this excellent post.
> 
> 
> Firstly, harm reduction strategies exist in a number of fields.   Hitting children would be one (banned in schools, then guidelines on types of hitting that is deemed acceptable), another would be the gradual whittling away of which crimes invoked capital punishment.  In the other side of the political spectrum, those who seek to ban abortion often caveat with allowing it when there has been rape/incest... there are other examples.  And the thing they all have in common is that these issues don't have anything like a cultural consensus.   Campaigns against knife crime or bullying or DV can be absolutist because everyone bar the real pond scum knows those thing are bad.



Those are good examples. I am not adverse to engaging in single issue campaigns of that nature in the animal context. As I said to LBJ earlier in the thread, I'm all in favour of campaigning against things like 'the badger cull, fox hunting, vivisection, wild animal circuses' as well 'trying to get cruel practices banned, such as farrowing crates or mutilations without anaesthesia'. 

Ultimately though, these examples, and the ones you give, are campaigns around repealing laws or banning existing practices. What we are talking about in the vegan context is encouraging people to change their behaviour. In the corporal punishment example it would be something like requesting teachers to reduce caning students by 25% rather than trying to persuade them never to engage in caning because caning is wrong. The analogy obviously isn't a perfect one but it does highlight what I find wrong with reducetarianism as an end in itself rather than a means to the end of veganism: it does not challenge the acceptability of inflicting needless violence against animals, it only says we should do it less. One of my fears is that precisely because it does not fundamentally challenge violence against animals, it might actually be a counter-productive strategy, at least in the long term, to the goal of trying to promote a more just world for animals.



spanglechick said:


> The other thing is, there are many excellent arguments for veganism that are nothing to do with believing eating animal products is unethical.  I don't feel uncomfortable with my position in the food chain, but I would like to be healthier and I'd like to be responsible for less environmental damage.  So for me, being encouraged to reduce my meat- eating by even a quarter seems like a really impactful thing to aspire to.  If four people achieve that, while l having no fundamental issues with eating animals, that's just as good as one person turning vegan 100%.  There's no point saying to those people that for you the end goal has to be absolute, because that only makes sense to people who share those ethics.



There are already lots of nutritionists and environmentalists encouraging a reduction in the consumption of animal products for those reasons. And if people choose to consume less animals then I'm happy about that. But what I'm concerned with is animal rights: that's what matters to me. And promoting animal rights means challenging people's assumptions about the acceptability of inflicting or supporting needless violence against animals.

You seem to be suggesting that ethical argumentation is pointless, but I disagree. After all, it convinced me to go vegan and it has encouraged many others to do so too, and although the numbers are still very small, they are increasing at a rapid rate, especially amongst younger people. And, from the research I have seen, the reason why most people adopt a vegan diet is for animal-centred ethical reasons.


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Nov 8, 2017)

Wookey said:


> Jeff, thanks for your thoughtful reply!
> 
> I imagine a very considerable percentage of meat-eaters will never give up their animal - based diets because they love eating meat, they're culturally wedded to it, and they see it as natural as breathing.
> 
> ...



Culture changes. Bull baiting and cock fighting were fairly popular at one time. Although animal product consumption is largely accepted now, I suspect that in the future it will become far more controversial (for a whole variety of reasons).

As for the rural poor (i'm not sure what part of the world you are referring to there) and China, these evidently are not the people I am targeting my advocacy towards! But even the Chinese government are concerned about meat consumption and the UN FAO have been saying for over a decade now that the meat consumption habits of the West are undermining the food security of the global poor.


----------



## Yossarian (Nov 9, 2017)

I saw some idiot wearing this shirt yesterday, think it may have inspired me to get back on the vegan wagon.

 

Mind you, it was at an agricultural show so I guess a certain amount of pro-meat sentiment was inevitable.


----------



## gentlegreen (Nov 9, 2017)

I encountered a woman on youtube the other day who literally ate no plant material that hadn't been converted to an animal product - I thought you needed at least 500kcals of carbs to stay alive...
She maintained her health had never been better (she *looked *like a dead woman walking)
I dread to think what her bathroom smells like ...


----------



## gentlegreen (Nov 9, 2017)

Yossarian said:


> I saw some idiot wearing this shirt yesterday, think it may have inspired me to get back on the vegan wagon.
> 
> View attachment 120023
> 
> Mind you, it was at an agricultural show so I guess a certain amount of pro-meat sentiment was inevitable.


gathering veggies takes a lot of skill - and fire is just as important for veggy preparation.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Nov 9, 2017)

Responding to some of the recent points/criticisms in this thread...

1. Die hard ,eat eaters ain't gonna change. Well even if this is true it's not really my concern. I don't see it as my job to convert anybody. I'll share whatever information that I have with anyone who may be interested then it's up to them what they do.  (The futility of veganism - The world won’t go vegan – 55:16)

2. Rural poor relying on livestock. This is a bit like the "what about the Inuit/tribal peoples..." argument. Again, not really a concern of mine and not within my sphere of influence. Rural poor and tribal people are most likely not killing as many animals as us modern folk do with or industrialised techniques. This is another one of those "appeals to necessity" fallacies. (Isolated tribes need to eat animals – 11:40)

3. The "woulds and coulds", potential vegans. Well in the west it would appear that vegan activists, bloggers and vloggers have been increasingly effective in getting the vegan message across and more "woulds and coulds" are being exposed to good quality information. The momentum is building nicely.

4. Global meat consumption increasing because China. I've had this stat thrown at me quite a few times recently, almost as if it's something to gloat about.  Well, that increase is largely due to the heavy widespread meat consumption in China that is a relatively recent phenomenon assisted by the improved economic conditions. This has changed the status of meat from a luxury item that most Chinese could not regularly afford to a staple and has been fuelled by rising incomes and the adoption of (crappy?) western diet culture. Even with that growth, the average Chinese person consumes about half as much meat per year as the average Australian. There are concerns that if China's meat consumption were to reach western levels it would have dire environmental consequences. Herein lies an opportunity. It is possible that China's meat consumption could be "helped" to peak early and that attitudes take on more of a sensible and compassionate bias as they have already started to in some western countries and in Israel. Using the global reach of social media it could well be possible to change attitudes in China so that they change their course a lot quicker and earlier than happened in the west.

5. Vegan absolutism ain't going to work. Well as I said earlier, I don't feel the need to apologise for believing that it is wrong to kill animals unnecessarily. I don't believe that it is an extremist position at all. If others believe that it is ok to kill animals but would prefer to reduce the amount of killing then of course less killing is going to be better, but that still doesn't change the underlying principle.

6. If vegans stopped talking about the ethical side then more people might be persuaded to change. Well I disagree with this one. I believe the change is happening anyway and the main reason imo is that, similar to other justice movements, when truly compassionate people are exposed to injustices and it is explained to them they cannot help but see that it is wrong. Of course there will be those that dig their heels in and want to stick to their well established habits, a bit like Eugene Terreblanche at the end of apartheid, however as society evolves they will become relics of a bygone era. (hopefully)


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Nov 10, 2017)




----------



## Humirax (Nov 12, 2017)

Watermelon Man said:


> There's an argument between vegans that seems to be gathering pace.  Some vegans claim that you can be vegan and eat honey, drink beer with fish bladder in it... Other vegans think that you have to be 100% vegan or get to f***.  Those in the latter group tend to be quite militant/vegans.


These angry vegans clearly haven't put me off because I've recently gone vegan. I've been vegan for atleast a couple of months now and it was easier than I thought to change my diet. I thought I would miss my dairy, such as my butter on toast in the morning, and my dairy milk- but I really didn't, it took abit of time though to totally change but I wouldn't call it 'tough' or 'hard'. This, ofcourse, has been made easier by the improvement of vegan food, even vegan cheese, and there are a whole variety of decent alternatives to dairy now, and meat aswell.

As for this discussion in the vegan 'movement' you are referring to, I can't be in either category because I do believe that if you, for example, drink non-vegan beer etc then you are not vegan. However, being angry and tetchy and over emotional with people is just going to backfire and put people off and I firmly believe that using logical arguments (rather than emotional ones) is best. That said I still respect passion, but you can be passionate but logical.

I actually knew a vegan from years ago who was what I would describe as very dogmatic and she really did put me off of veganism at the time, at the time I was vegetarian. Now, I'm with people who have convinced me of the logical arguments and with the right sort of encouragement I've seen sense and made the change and would certainly say I feel healthier, this isn't just a feeling though- I've actually lost a bit of weight (I am rather tubsy, and due to a couple of health conditions I have, need to lose weight). I still enjoy my food though and eat really well and I and my girlfriend make sure we get the nutrition we need without any bother, the idea that it's difficult to be vegan is just a misconception.

I certainly enjoy drinking 'milk' that does not contain hormones, puss and blood that I am not supposed to consume and I like the fact that I am not contributing to the disgusting mass cruelty and murder of animals and the destruction of the environment.


----------



## ddraig (Nov 13, 2017)

Wish I could love your post @Humiax


----------



## veganomics (Nov 13, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


>



What the hell did you just make me listen to.  Now I cannot unhear it. I think my ears are bleeding.

Looks like you found that angry vegan.


----------



## extra dry (Nov 13, 2017)

ItWillNeverWork said:


> Say what now?



'Fish bladder beer'...That would make most people upset..


----------



## extra dry (Nov 13, 2017)

Thora said:


> I am put off being a vegan because I like to eat animal products.  The opinions and attitudes of vegans doesn't have an impact on me.



Can I shock you..I like cheese.


----------



## veganomics (Nov 13, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> 4. Global meat consumption increasing because China. I've had this stat thrown at me quite a few times recently, almost as if it's something to gloat about.  Well, that increase is largely due to the heavy widespread meat consumption in China that is a relatively recent phenomenon assisted by the improved economic conditions. This has changed the status of meat from a luxury item that most Chinese could not regularly afford to a staple and has been fuelled by rising incomes and the adoption of (crappy?) western diet culture. Even with that growth, the average Chinese person consumes about half as much meat per year as the average Australian. There are concerns that if China's meat consumption were to reach western levels it would have dire environmental consequences. Herein lies an opportunity. It is possible that China's meat consumption could be "helped" to peak early and that attitudes take on more of a sensible and compassionate bias as they have already started to in some western countries and in Israel. Using the global reach of social media it could well be possible to change attitudes in China so that they change their course a lot quicker and earlier than happened in the west.


China and India, the two most populous countries, will be influential in number of ways and the directions they take will have global environmental consequences. I agree with you in that there is an opportunity for those two countries and other developing countries to leapfrog the developed countries and to learn from some of the mistakes made in the western countries. This has already been identified in terms of things like pollution from factories and cars and also carbon emissions.  The Chinese government plans to try and cut meat consumption by 50%. It will be interesting to see if they can manage to achieve those targets and would be a step in the right direction. I'm not sure what is happening in India with regards to meat consumption. I know that India has the largest vegetarian population, however my understanding is that quite a lot of dairy is consumed in India. I am cautiously optimistic these countries will avoid some of the worst excesses of the west and will eventually even overtake, lead the way and become pioneering plant based nations.


----------



## NoXion (Nov 13, 2017)

extra dry said:


> 'Fish bladder beer'...That would make most people upset..



Would it really? When I found out about where isinglass came from, my reaction was "meh, so what?" I already knew there was a particular red food colouring (cochineal) derived from crushed bugs, and that didn't bother me.

The sort of person who would be disgusted or disturbed by discovering any of that about their food should perhaps remain entirely in ignorance about how any of their food is made these days. Like how there is actually a legally allowed proportion of insect parts per weight unit of flour.

Which means that pretty much any bread product isn't vegan.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Nov 13, 2017)

veganomics said:


> What the hell did you just make me listen to.  Now I cannot unhear it. I think my ears are bleeding.
> 
> Looks like you found that angry vegan.


lol, it's only a bit of fun. My daughter informed me that it is inspired by this...

...not really my kind of music either tbh. I just like the bloke sitting behind the singer with the cat in his lap.


----------



## AnnaKarpik (Nov 13, 2017)

veganomics said:


> <snip>
> I'm not sure what is happening in India with regards to meat consumption. I know that India has the largest vegetarian population, however my understanding is that quite a lot of dairy is consumed in India. I am cautiously optimistic these countries will avoid some of the worst excesses of the west and will eventually even overtake, lead the way and become pioneering plant based nations.



I can't remember where I read or heard about this, but India - allegedly - is the one country where rising wealth has not led to increasing meat consumption. Or not yet, anyway.


----------



## starfish2000 (Nov 13, 2017)

I’m not vegan, or even vegetarian. But I’m aware I eat too much processed food. I work shifts too.

I make this lentil ragu up with artichokes, garlic, onions, mushrooms & peppers. I have a big bowl of it to last 3 days. 

So day 1 I have pasta, day 2 I have it with a mashed potato & cheese topping like a Shepard’s pie. Day 3 I have it with 3 Gourmet style sausages. 

I’m not really influenced by others. I eat what I feel like.


----------



## gentlegreen (Nov 13, 2017)




----------



## PaoloSanchez (Nov 13, 2017)

Humirax said:


> These angry vegans clearly haven't put me off because I've recently gone vegan. I've been vegan for atleast a couple of months now and it was easier than I thought to change my diet. I thought I would miss my dairy, such as my butter on toast in the morning, and my dairy milk- but I really didn't, it took abit of time though to totally change but I wouldn't call it 'tough' or 'hard'. This, ofcourse, has been made easier by the improvement of vegan food, even vegan cheese, and there are a whole variety of decent alternatives to dairy now, and meat aswell.


You've hit the nail on the head with one of the more common myths that it is hard to go vegan. Even without the processed vegan alternatives to meat and dairy, there's an abundance of fruit, veg, grains, nuts, seeds, herbs and spices that are available. I think it's the societal norms that makes it a lot easier and a lot less hassle to just eat anything going so as not to be seen as an oddball fussy eater and to fit in with everyone else especially at social functions. (btw, congrats on going vegan, hope you are able to stay the course)



Humirax said:


> As for this discussion in the vegan 'movement' you are referring to, I can't be in either category because I do believe that if you, for example, drink non-vegan beer etc then you are not vegan. However, being angry and tetchy and over emotional with people is just going to backfire and put people off and I firmly believe that using logical arguments (rather than emotional ones) is best. That said I still respect passion, but you can be passionate but logical.


Some people do get a bit hung up and nit picky on the fine details regarding what is and isn't vegan. I try to do my best to make purchasing decisions that minimise the amount of harm caused to both human and animal as is practicable. It is impossible to live 100% completely harm free in a non vegan world. Unfortunately you will always find somebody who will try to pick holes in your choices with silly arguments like, "you eat bread, the flour from that bread might have bits of insects in it, therefore you can't call yourself a vegan".  (Is being fully vegan possible – 1:01:04)

It's probably best to ignore the naysayers and haters and do whatever you're comfortable with.



Humirax said:


> I actually knew a vegan from years ago who was what I would describe as very dogmatic and she really did put me off of veganism at the time, at the time I was vegetarian. Now, I'm with people who have convinced me of the logical arguments and with the right sort of encouragement I've seen sense and made the change and would certainly say I feel healthier, this isn't just a feeling though- I've actually lost a bit of weight (I am rather tubsy, and due to a couple of health conditions I have, need to lose weight). I still enjoy my food though and eat really well and I and my girlfriend make sure we get the nutrition we need without any bother, the idea that it's difficult to be vegan is just a misconception.


I've been a vegan for nearly 20 years and a vegetarian for 15 years before that, and I can honestly say that I haven't met a dogmatic angry vegan. I've been told mainly by non vegans that they do exist and there are supposed to be loads of them around,, so they must be out there somewhere, perhaps I haven't been looking hard enough, lol.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Nov 13, 2017)

veganomics said:


> China and India, the two most populous countries, will be influential in number of ways and the directions they take will have global environmental consequences. I agree with you in that there is an opportunity for those two countries and other developing countries to leapfrog the developed countries and to learn from some of the mistakes made in the western countries. This has already been identified in terms of things like pollution from factories and cars and also carbon emissions.  The Chinese government plans to try and cut meat consumption by 50%. It will be interesting to see if they can manage to achieve those targets and would be a step in the right direction. I'm not sure what is happening in India with regards to meat consumption. I know that India has the largest vegetarian population, however my understanding is that quite a lot of dairy is consumed in India. I am cautiously optimistic these countries will avoid some of the worst excesses of the west and will eventually even overtake, lead the way and become pioneering plant based nations.


It would be nice if your optimistic vision came to pass and that developing countries like the BRICS nations stop short of the excessive consumption of countries like the US and Australia.



AnnaKarpik said:


> I can't remember where I read or heard about this, but India - allegedly - is the one country where rising wealth has not led to increasing meat consumption. Or not yet, anyway.


You could be right, it's hard to tell because the stats appear to be all over the place and don't seem to be that reliable. From what I recall reading, meat consumption was increasing in both India and China, and that poultry was where most of the increase would be in India.


----------



## veganomics (Nov 14, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> I've been a vegan for nearly 20 years and a vegetarian for 15 years before that, and I can honestly say that I haven't met a dogmatic angry vegan. I've been told mainly by non vegans that they do exist and there are supposed to be loads of them around,, so they must be out there somewhere, perhaps I haven't been looking hard enough, lol.


There are certainly vegans out there who are a bit "in your face" and passionate about what they believe in, however I do think the "angry vegan" stereotype is an exaggeration and for some a rather convenient distraction as it shifts the discussion away from the topic itself and becomes more about the personalities.


----------



## mojo pixy (Nov 14, 2017)

It's not an exaggeration, I'd say you don't see it because you're already vegan so there's no need for another vegan to be pissed off at you.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Nov 14, 2017)

veganomics said:


> There are certainly vegans out there who are a bit "in your face" and passionate about what they believe in, however I do think the "angry vegan" stereotype is an exaggeration and for some a rather convenient distraction as it shifts the discussion away from the topic itself and becomes more about the personalities.


Indeed, and a gross exaggeration at that. I think that some of the folks who don't particularly care much for vegans need to have some perceived negative trait to cling onto when all the rational and logical arguments fall short. So they project the few "bad" vegans from the internet and pretend that to be what vegans are in real life. They need it to be true because they don't have much else in the way of arguments. They can't play the ball so they try to play the man.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Nov 14, 2017)

gentlegreen said:


> I'm not anticipating eating out much when I move to France - even as a seagan (vegan plus fish) - though dairy intolerance is probably fairly widely accepted.


gentlegreen did you move to france and if so are you still there? How is it going? 

I saw this video of a presentation at the animal rights talk in Luxembourg, and there was stuff that might be of interest to you french based folk :-


tl;dr it is a talk by a VegoResto ambassador. VegoResto is like HappyCow but proactively reaching out to restaurants who don't currently have a plant based option on their menu and encouraging/helping them to do so.

I liked her story about the family visit to Barcelona


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Nov 15, 2017)

veganomics said:


> There are certainly vegans out there who are a bit "in your face" and passionate about what they believe in, however I do think the "angry vegan" stereotype is an exaggeration and for some a rather convenient distraction as it shifts the discussion away from the topic itself and becomes more about the personalities.



I agree, though there's also nothing wrong with being angry about in injustice. I've just seen this video of a poor mother cow, still weak from just giving birth, desperately trying to keep up with a trailer dragging her baby away: 

Cow chases her calves as they're driven away from her | Daily Mail Online

Imagine the psychological trauma that both the mother and the baby are feeling. 

Imagine life for the mother living in a permanent cycle of forced pregnancy and lactation, the only real reward for such exhausting bodily labour is being able to love and rear your children. And this one reward is what the dairy industry rob the mother of. When she is "spent" she will be packed off to a slaughterhouse and turned into pet food. 

Imagine the fate of the calve: if they are "lucky" they will be male and will be shot in the head at an early age, if they are female they will subject to the same relentless cycle of forced pregnancies that their mother had to endure.

And what's the point of all this violence, exploitation and abuse? So that people can consume this mother's milk? Milk that is not meant for them but for the children that the dairy industry abduct. I'd like to know a single good reason why anyone shouldn't be angry about the existence of this bizarre and cruel industry.


----------



## gentlegreen (Nov 15, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> gentlegreen did you move to france and if so are you still there? How is it going?


Another 3 years to go yet.

It will be an interesting exercise - given that I very much want to integrate - and may even want to sell them veggies / let them holiday gites ...
I will be playing on the "conseil du médecin" angle rather a lot I suspect.

To be honest I really am no longer "vegan" - the true test will be whether I can resist the fish once I get a whiff of the sea ...


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Nov 15, 2017)

Jeff Robinson said:


> I agree, though there's also nothing wrong with being angry about in injustice. I've just seen this video of a poor mother cow, still weak from just giving birth, desperately trying to keep up with a trailer dragging her baby away:
> 
> Cow chases her calves as they're driven away from her | Daily Mail Online
> 
> ...


Unfortunately, for many, that's just some kind of remote and distant sob story that nobody wants to hear. 





We collectively don't really give a shit.



Jeff Robinson said:


> And what's the point of all this violence, exploitation and abuse? So that people can consume this mother's milk? Milk that is not meant for them but for the children that the dairy industry abduct. I'd like to know a single good reason why anyone shouldn't be angry about the existence of this bizarre and cruel industry.


It is our superior status that gives us permission to treat those lesser beings in any way we see fit, because we can. I can understand why some people get angry about such injustice, however as long as there is still a widespread disregard and lack of respect for the other creatures that we share this planet with, those angry people will not have the support of the majority and in fact will most likely continue to be mocked, ridiculed and dismissed as extremists.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Nov 15, 2017)

gentlegreen said:


> Another 3 years to go yet.


Oops, sorry my bad, I should have paid a bit more attention. 



gentlegreen said:


> It will be an interesting exercise - given that I very much want to integrate - and may even want to sell them veggies / let them holiday gites ...
> I will be playing on the "conseil du médecin" angle rather a lot I suspect.


I get the impression that things are progressing quite nicely in France, especially with this VegoResto initiative which appears to be fairly well organised, so hopefully you'll have no problems integrating.


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Nov 15, 2017)

More horror from the UK pig torture industry. I can't imagine that there are sadder, more wretched places than these mass torture chambers that we call "farms".

Undercover Pig Farm Investigation Raises Concerns About Red Tractor Certified Farms


----------



## gentlegreen (Nov 15, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> I get the impression that things are progressing quite nicely in France, especially with this VegoResto initiative which appears to be fairly well organised, so hopefully you'll have no problems integrating.


They're fairly sparse in the area I'm aiming for, but I won't be eating out much living on a pension - I will have to grow as much of my own food as possible.
I've confirmed that the local supermarkets do soy milk etc, but they're big  on "bio" (organic) over there, so I may be looking to buy bulk beans in from somewhere or other and make my own.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Nov 21, 2017)

gentlegreen said:


> They're fairly sparse in the area I'm aiming for, but I won't be eating out much living on a pension - I will have to grow as much of my own food as possible.
> I've confirmed that the local supermarkets do soy milk etc, but they're big  on "bio" (organic) over there, so I may be looking to buy bulk beans in from somewhere or other and make my own.


From what I can remember the farmers markets had excellent produce, so you should be alright if you have one of those near you.


----------



## veganomics (Nov 21, 2017)

Jeff Robinson said:


> I agree, though there's also nothing wrong with being angry about in injustice. I've just seen this video of a poor mother cow, still weak from just giving birth, desperately trying to keep up with a trailer dragging her baby away:


For some people, getting angry is what works for them, it fires them up and gives them the drive and energy to confront and challenge the injustice. For other people a more calm and considered approach might be what works for them. I don't think there's a "right" or "wrong" way to bring about change. It depends on the circumstances and the people involved.

Sometimes being quiet and diplomatic might be appropriate and in other situations that won't work. Using the US civil rights movements as an example, MLK was the quieter one, and Malcom X was more militant. Similarly there are vegans who go out of their way, treading on eggshells in order to try and not upset any of the more sensitive meat eating folks around them, and other vegans who will just "tell it like it is" and won't hold back. I would be more on the MLK side of the fence, however I do think that sometimes there does need to be a bit of force and passion involved in order to effect change especially when there's widespread and powerful opposition defending the injustice. Sometimes you have to fight fire with fire.

One of the main roadblocks at the moment is that the majority are either not aware of the injustices that deliver the meat to their plates or they don't really care/would rather not know. I don't think there's anything wrong with vegans sharing that information in order to increase the awareness. This is already happening and is probably one of the reasons behind the growth in interest in vegan issues.

I am optimistic and believe in the medium to long term, the increasing awareness of the issues involved will see more people tap into their compassionate nature and that there will be fewer cows chasing after their babies being dragged away soon after birth.


----------



## ddraig (Nov 21, 2017)

BBC Radio 4 - The Food Programme, Young and Vegan

*Young and Vegan*
The Food Programme
The number of young people turning vegan is rising. Grace Dent meets some of the people opening vegan eateries and finds out how creatives are using social media to further the "vegangelical" cause.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Nov 22, 2017)

veganomics said:


> For some people, getting angry is what works for them, it fires them up and gives them the drive and energy to confront and challenge the injustice. For other people a more calm and considered approach might be what works for them. I don't think there's a "right" or "wrong" way to bring about change. It depends on the circumstances and the people involved.
> 
> Sometimes being quiet and diplomatic might be appropriate and in other situations that won't work. Using the US civil rights movements as an example, MLK was the quieter one, and Malcom X was more militant. Similarly there are vegans who go out of their way, treading on eggshells in order to try and not upset any of the more sensitive meat eating folks around them, and other vegans who will just "tell it like it is" and won't hold back. I would be more on the MLK side of the fence, however I do think that sometimes there does need to be a bit of force and passion involved in order to effect change especially when there's widespread and powerful opposition defending the injustice. Sometimes you have to fight fire with fire.
> 
> ...


Sometimes I think there are things in life worth getting angry about, or at least passionate if not angry.  If you perceive that there is some sort of injustice going on and that there's not a lot being done to stop it, then I think it's perfectly fine to highlight and bring awareness by whatever means you have at your disposal and whatever you're comfortable with. Hopefully it will be peaceful and not cause harm to others, but a bit of "disruption" can help to get things moving. It can take the form of peaceful protests, petition, lobbying, strikes, debates etc.

The "angry vegan" negative stereotype is being used as a tool to justify all manner of bad behaviour, mockery and abusive language as can be seen clearly in some of the posts in this thread.


----------



## 8ball (Nov 22, 2017)

AnnaKarpik said:


> I can't remember where I read or heard about this, but India - allegedly - is the one country where rising wealth has not led to increasing meat consumption. Or not yet, anyway.



Might be partly because culturally in much of India where they do eat meat, the meat is often more like a seasoning as opposed to the 'centre' of a dish.
Might also be partly because it's not hard with the staple veggie ingredients to get enough Omega-3 and zinc.

Both of which can make you angry if you don't get enough of them.


----------



## Spymaster (Nov 22, 2017)




----------



## veganomics (Nov 23, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> gentlegreen did you move to france and if so are you still there? How is it going?
> 
> I saw this video of a presentation at the animal rights talk in Luxembourg, and there was stuff that might be of interest to you french based folk :-
> 
> ...



I had not heard of that conference before seeing this post. Apparently it has been going since 2010 and they have been recording the talks and publishing them on youtube since 2013. I watched a few of the videos and there were some quite good ones. This is a talk that I watched last night by Marloes Boere who comes from a family of dairy farmers and is a philosophy student describing how she relates to the people around her who do not share her morals. As English isn't her first language the talk isn't as fluent as it could be but nevertheless I thought that it was good enough to share here.


----------



## veganomics (Nov 23, 2017)

mojo pixy said:


> It's not an exaggeration, I'd say you don't see it because you're already vegan so there's no need for another vegan to be pissed off at you.


I will have to disagree with you here, based on what I've observed so far. There aren't that many vegans around and of the ones that are I've been probably interacted with more of them than the average omnivore would, and I have never seen anybody getting "pissed off" and angry other meat eaters, in fact it's been quite the opposite. As soon as it becomes apparent that there's someone in the room who does not fit in with the dietary norms (unless you have a medical reason), you are more likely to get the eyes rolling, tutting and ridiculous questioning. I have seen far more hostility and defensive posturing in the other direction. It's almost as if some omnivores feel that they have some sort of entitlement to mock, poke fun and abuse. They're only vegans, it's acceptable.


----------



## veganomics (Nov 23, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Sometimes I think there are things in life worth getting angry about, or at least passionate if not angry.  If you perceive that there is some sort of injustice going on and that there's not a lot being done to stop it, then I think it's perfectly fine to highlight and bring awareness by whatever means you have at your disposal and whatever you're comfortable with. Hopefully it will be peaceful and not cause harm to others, but a bit of "disruption" can help to get things moving. It can take the form of peaceful protests, petition, lobbying, strikes, debates etc.
> 
> The "angry vegan" negative stereotype is being used as a tool to justify all manner of bad behaviour, mockery and abusive language as can be seen clearly in some of the posts in this thread.


I do have admiration for people who are able to stand up for what they believe in when the odds are stacked against them.  That takes courage. Now Gary Yourofsky might not be everyone's cup of tea and to some he does appear to be a bit in your face, but I admire his passion I agree with much of what he says, even though some of the things might be a bit over the top.


----------



## mojo pixy (Nov 23, 2017)

veganomics said:


> I will have to disagree with you here, based on what I've observed so far.



Of course you will, I wouldn't expect you not to.



veganomics said:


> It's almost as if some vegans feel that they have some sort of entitlement to mock, poke fun and abuse. They're only meat-eaters, it's acceptable.


FIFY 

EtA, In case my point is too subtle, it's this: everyone needs to shut the fuck up and stop judging each others diets as if their own diet and that alone makes them a special kind of person. Me, I don't care what people eat, I'm more interested in how they treat their fellow humans. I don't eat meat because _it's what I prefer_. I don't need to justify my diet to anyone. Nobody does.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Nov 23, 2017)

veganomics said:


> I had not heard of that conference before seeing this post. Apparently it has been going since 2010 and they have been recording the talks and publishing them on youtube since 2013. I watched a few of the videos and there were some quite good ones. This is a talk that I watched last night by Marloes Boere who comes from a family of dairy farmers and is a philosophy student describing how she relates to the people around her who do not share her morals. As English isn't her first language the talk isn't as fluent as it could be but nevertheless I thought that it was good enough to share here.



The conference was a recent discover for me too. There seems to be quite a few interesting talks there which I've skimmed through but haven't had the time to watch. I'll have to set aside a Sunday afternoon for a binge watching session. One of the speakers that caught my eye was Stijn Bruers who appears to be a regular at the conference who calls himself a "rational ethisist" (accurate in beliefs, effective in means, consistent in ends).  His stuff seems to be a bit heavy and technical but interesting (to me anyway) nontheless, and I might make a bit of time to wade though his stuff and might even read through his PHD thesis.

In general, I'm liking the direction that things appear to be heading. There are a lot of positive people around getting stuff done and as a result there is increasing awareness (along with a bit of resistance).


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Nov 23, 2017)

veganomics said:


> I will have to disagree with you here, based on what I've observed so far. There aren't that many vegans around and of the ones that are I've been probably interacted with more of them than the average omnivore would, and I have never seen anybody getting "pissed off" and angry other meat eaters, in fact it's been quite the opposite. As soon as it becomes apparent that there's someone in the room who does not fit in with the dietary norms (unless you have a medical reason), you are more likely to get the eyes rolling, tutting and ridiculous questioning. I have seen far more hostility and defensive posturing in the other direction. It's almost as if some omnivores feel that they have some sort of entitlement to mock, poke fun and abuse. They're only vegans, it's acceptable.


tbh, it's probably not worth bothering with timewasting trolls like mp.


----------



## mojo pixy (Nov 23, 2017)

Timewasting troll, yeah that's me.

I prefer to think of myself as a non-judgemental human who keeps my dietary preferences more or less to myself because I'm not a massive egomaniac who thinks the whole world should be like me.

AKA, advocate for animal rights all you like, I sure do, but leave the abuse out. If you want to be seen as someone with superior ethics and morals, don't react to insults from stupid people. It's not difficult.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Nov 23, 2017)

veganomics said:


> I do have admiration for people who are able to stand up for what they believe in when the odds are stacked against them.  That takes courage. Now Gary Yourofsky might not be everyone's cup of tea and to some he does appear to be a bit in your face, but I admire his passion I agree with much of what he says, even though some of the things might be a bit over the top.


GY is more on the Malcolm X end of the spectrum...


----------



## veganomics (Nov 23, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> tbh, it's probably not worth bothering with timewasting trolls like mp.


Thanks for the heads up, I'll bear that in mind. I haven't had time to wade through all the posts in the thread and to be able to recognise the "trolls", although some appear to be a bit more obvious than others.


----------



## mojo pixy (Nov 23, 2017)

_Nudge-nudge, wink-wink_


----------



## NoXion (Nov 23, 2017)

Surely the vegan equivalent of Malcolm X or MLK would be a non-human?

Because otherwise it's like white people claiming to speak for black people.


----------



## veganomics (Nov 23, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> In general, I'm liking the direction that things appear to be heading. There are a lot of positive people around getting stuff done and as a result there is increasing awareness (along with a bit of resistance).


Indeed, things are on the up and there's been a lot of progress and a lot of things happening. I've missed out on a few conferences and gatherings this year which seemed to have been very well organised with a good line up of quality speakers and activists.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Nov 24, 2017)

NoXion said:


> Surely the vegan equivalent of Malcolm X or MLK would be a non-human?
> 
> Because otherwise it's like white people claiming to speak for black people.


It's about the style of advocacy. Should it be all happy clappy, Kumbayah milord, only post recipes or a bit more strident and shouty and militant? Both MalcolmX and GY were at the more militant end of the spectrum. 

As for the "white people claiming to speak for black people". Hmmm...well not quite, because now black people are able to speak for themselves...although in the US it took a while before they earned that right as they were not viewed as proper citizens, so white lawyers and abolitionists would have been instrumental in helping those who were not really in a position to help themselves. Similarly with animals, with them not being in a position to "speak for themselves", they need the assistance of benevolent humans to help take care of their interests and protect them from some of the worst human excesses and atrocities .


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 24, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> It's about the style of advocacy. Should it be all happy clappy, Kumbayah milord, only post recipes or a bit more strident and shouty and militant? Both MalcolmX and GY were at the more militant end of the spectrum.
> 
> As for the "white people claiming to speak for black people". Hmmm...well not quite, because now black people are able to speak for themselves...although in the US it took a while before they earned that right as they were not viewed as proper citizens, so white lawyers and abolitionists would have been instrumental in helping those who were not really in a position to help themselves. Similarly with animals, with them not being in a position to "speak for themselves", they need the assistance of benevolent humans to help take care of their interests and protect them from some of the worst human excesses and atrocities .


Not even close to true. You've just written  the many black slaves or former slaves who fought slavery around the world out of history.


----------



## mojo pixy (Nov 24, 2017)

(((Harriet Tubman)))
(((Frederick Douglass)))

just off the top of my head, like.

Also, ''benevolent humans'' lol. Not seeing much benevolence on this thread.


----------



## Yossarian (Nov 24, 2017)

NoXion said:


> Surely the vegan equivalent of Malcolm X or MLK would be a non-human?



Step forward, Lone Star tick.

A Tick Bite Could Make You Allergic to Meat—and It's Spreading


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Nov 24, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Not even close to true. You've just written  the many black slaves or former slaves who fought slavery around the world out of history.


lol, what nonsense...


PaoloSanchez said:


> .although in the US it took a while before *they earned that right* as they were not viewed as proper citizens,


How is that writing them out of history?  Saying that there were white people who helped black people to help themselves doesn't in any way diminish the roles of those blacks who fought slavery...

...that is unless you're somebody who's desperately searching for a gotcha.


----------



## mojo pixy (Nov 24, 2017)

Black abolitionists ''earned the right'' by escaping from slavery, not by asking nicely.


----------



## NoXion (Nov 24, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> It's about the style of advocacy. Should it be all happy clappy, Kumbayah milord, only post recipes or a bit more strident and shouty and militant? Both MalcolmX and GY were at the more militant end of the spectrum.
> 
> As for the "white people claiming to speak for black people". Hmmm...well not quite, because now black people are able to speak for themselves...although in the US it took a while before they earned that right as they were not viewed as proper citizens, so white lawyers and abolitionists would have been instrumental in helping those who were not really in a position to help themselves. Similarly with animals, with them not being in a position to "speak for themselves", they need the assistance of benevolent humans to help take care of their interests and protect them from some of the worst human excesses and atrocities .



Black people have always been able to speak for themselves, that's why you had escaped slaves telling their stories to those who would listen, even at the height of slavery. There's no equivalent to that for animal husbandry.


----------



## NoXion (Nov 24, 2017)

Yossarian said:


> Step forward, Lone Star tick.
> 
> A Tick Bite Could Make You Allergic to Meat—and It's Spreading


You do realise that ticks don't bite people to spread diseases, but to feed themselves, right?


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Nov 24, 2017)

And the “bellend of the week” award goes to...

Why this vegan plans to BRAND herself with red hot irons


----------



## 8ball (Nov 24, 2017)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> And the “bellend of the week” award goes to...
> 
> Why this vegan plans to BRAND herself with red hot irons



Gotta have a hobby...


----------



## mojo pixy (Nov 24, 2017)

When it goes wrong and the burns turn septic they'll end up in hospital being treated at taxpayer's expense with medications and dressings which have all been tested on animals.

They've thought it through though, it's certainly not just a shameless publicity grab


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 24, 2017)

mojo pixy said:


> (((Harriet Tubman)))
> (((Frederick Douglass)))
> 
> just off the top of my head, like.
> ...


Then of course there was the slave revolt in Haiti, whose reverberations were felt all around the slave-owning world. 

The comparison of farm animals to human slaves is absurd.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Nov 24, 2017)

NoXion said:


> Black people have always been able to speak for themselves, that's why you had escaped slaves telling their stories to those who would listen, even at the height of slavery. There's no equivalent to that for animal husbandry.


Again, not quite. Black people who were part of the transatlantic slave trade and their descendants may have always been in possession of vocal chords, but that does not mean that their voices were always heard or had any power to change much, otherwise they would not have been slaves in the first place. It would appear that in some parts of colonial world that any concerns that they may have voiced would have largely fallen on unsympathetic and deaf ears, especially amongst those who benefited from the huge profits. Believe it or not, there were white people who risked the wrath of members of their own race to further the cause, so some white people DID speak for black people and well done to them for doing so. 

So the example I used was not outrageous or absurd at all. There are precedents of members of the powerful helping to fight for the powerless. Depending on the circumstances and personalities involved sometimes using more quiet and passive methods or more direct action/militant action. 

Refusing Racism
The Abolitionists: The Abolition of Slavery Project
In March on Washington, white activists were largely overlooked but strategically essential

I presume one of the reasons for the naysayers in this thread scoffing at the concept of animal rights activists speaking on behalf of the welfare of animals is the idea that us humans are better than them and therefore can do with them whatever we want. They are just property for us to use and abuse., which is a similar kind of superiority complex mentality that was behind the slave trade.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 24, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> I presume one of the reasons for the naysayers in this thread scoffing at the concept of animal rights activists speaking on behalf of the welfare of animals is the idea that us humans are better than them and therefore can do with them whatever we want. They are just property for us to use and abuse., which is a similar kind of superiority complex mentality that was behind the slave trade.


You keep repeating this line, despite the fact that nobody has said it and various people have specifically denied it.


----------



## mojo pixy (Nov 24, 2017)

It's the argument he wants to have, because it's easier than the ones he's getting.


----------



## NoXion (Nov 24, 2017)

There's more to telling stories than vocal cords.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Nov 25, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> You keep repeating this line, despite the fact that nobody has said it and various people have specifically denied it.


 I'm not sure what your problem is tbh. I've made it clear that I've no interest in engaging with you especially after your rage quit strop sessions, and yet you keep chasing me about and quoting me. If you don't like the content of my posts they are quite easy to avoid. Let it go.

"Nobody said it"?? Really? You appear to have rather convenient selective vision or have been looking in a different thread.. The fact that we think that it's perfectly ok to kill animals when we don't need to do so makes it self evident that they are not worthy of the same right to life that humans enjoy. Our superiority is implicit in our beliefs,actions and behaviours. Where has any of the meat eating advocates/supporters in this thread "specifically denied it"? In fact it's been the opposite.

If you can manage to conduct yourself in a civil manner and still want to engage then I might reconsider, however if you're going to carry on with petty nit picking of side issues and silly accusations then I'm really not interested. I'm not sure how many times I have to say "go away" before the message gets through. You appear to be still smarting at the fact that you can't get any vegan to agree that it's ok to kill animals. That is not something that I can see myself ever agreeing to, so if that is something that causes you stress, it may be better for your blood pressure to avoid my posts.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Nov 25, 2017)

NoXion said:


> There's more to telling stories than vocal cords.


I don't really know what you're getting at tbh, You appear to imply that it would be absurd for white people to speak for or on behalf of black people, and yet it happened at various times in history and did play a part in helping to end the transatlantic slave trade. That does not diminish in any way the part that blacks played in their own emancipation whatsoever, so I'm not sure why you folks claim that it does, and again seems more to do with trying to divert and nit pick away from the main issues and get the discussion bogged down in some kind of semantic swamp.


----------



## NoXion (Nov 25, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> I don't really know what you're getting at tbh, You appear to imply that it would be absurd for white people to speak for or on behalf of black people, and yet it happened at various times in history and did play a part in helping to end the transatlantic slave trade. That does not diminish in any way the part that blacks played in their own emancipation whatsoever, so I'm not sure why you folks claim that it does, and again seems more to do with trying to divert and nit pick away from the main issues and get the discussion bogged down in some kind of semantic swamp.



You seriously don't see anything dodgy with comparing vegan activism, which is done entirely by humans on the behalf of non-humans, with black liberation? Yes white people have played a role, but a signficant part of that was done by listening to what black people had to say. Vegans cannot claim that the voicelessness of non-humans is equivalent to the fact that black voices were present but not heard.


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 25, 2017)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> And the “bellend of the week” award goes to...
> 
> Why this vegan plans to BRAND herself with red hot irons


'  want to say I’ll take it well (the branding) but I probably won’t -it’s going to be about 500 degrees.'


wuss. It'll burn all your nerve endings out so it'll sting but to be hardcore you have to get roasted at low temps


----------



## Spymaster (Nov 25, 2017)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> And the “bellend of the week” award goes to...
> 
> Why this vegan plans to BRAND herself with red hot irons


The bloke doing the branding here needs to think again. Consent is not a defence to a charge of assault occasioning bodily harm. He could find himself nicked.


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Nov 25, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> The bloke doing the branding here needs to think again. Consent is not a defence to a charge of assault occasioning bodily harm. He could find himself nicked.



It is in some instances. e.g. In _R v Wilson_ (1996) where a man engraved his initials on his wife's buttocks with a hot knife. He was acquitted of the charge of ABH on the basis that his wife consented (or at any rate it wasn't proved that she did not consent). The Court of Appeal found that the knife carvings were 'personal adornment' akin to tattooing. In the unlikely event this ever got to court, It seems that a comparable defence could be mounted.


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 25, 2017)

yeah there's lots of cauterizing/branding that goes on these days, tatooo/body mod people. They use electro-cauterizing pens rather than irons though, but its the same deal.


----------



## bimble (Nov 25, 2017)

My downstairs neighbour's invited me to thanksgiving lunch and all the moral issues added together don't make it smell any less amazing as it wafts up the stairs.


----------



## Spymaster (Nov 25, 2017)

Jeff Robinson said:


> It is in some instances. e.g. In _R v Wilson_ (1996) where a man engraved his initials on his wife's buttocks with a hot knife. He was acquitted of the charge of ABH on the basis that his wife consented (or at any rate it wasn't proved that she did not consent). The Court of Appeal found that the knife carvings were 'personal adornment' akin to tattooing. In the unlikely event this ever got to court, It seems that a comparable defence could be mounted.


I was thinking of those sadomasochists who tortured each other’s knobs, filmed it, got nicked, and lost two appeals.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 25, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> I'm not sure what your problem is tbh. I've made it clear that I've no interest in engaging with you especially after your rage quit strop sessions, and yet you keep chasing me about and quoting me. If you don't like the content of my posts they are quite easy to avoid. Let it go.
> 
> "Nobody said it"?? Really? You appear to have rather convenient selective vision or have been looking in a different thread.. The fact that we think that it's perfectly ok to kill animals when we don't need to do so makes it self evident that they are not worthy of the same right to life that humans enjoy. Our superiority is implicit in our beliefs,actions and behaviours. Where has any of the meat eating advocates/supporters in this thread "specifically denied it"? In fact it's been the opposite.
> 
> If you can manage to conduct yourself in a civil manner and still want to engage then I might reconsider, however if you're going to carry on with petty nit picking of side issues and silly accusations then I'm really not interested. I'm not sure how many times I have to say "go away" before the message gets through. You appear to be still smarting at the fact that you can't get any vegan to agree that it's ok to kill animals. That is not something that I can see myself ever agreeing to, so if that is something that causes you stress, it may be better for your blood pressure to avoid my posts.


Nobody has said it, no. You are projecting arguments and points of view onto others. That a person thinks it's ok to kill other animals for various reasons does not necessarily mean they think humans are superior to other animals (superior by what measure?), nor that they think other animals are here for our benefit to use as we please. You should try to get your head round that and not to presume what others think - others think very differently from you and you don't even begin to engage with that. 

As for the rest of it, you really need to start owning your shit. You said:



> white lawyers and abolitionists would have been *instrumental in helping those who were not really in a position to help themselves*



That's what people reacted to. It is ahistorical shit, misrepresenting anti-slavery movements and the drive behind them. When you say something stupid, don't just try to bluff your way through or pretend you didn't say it.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 25, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> I was thinking of those sadomasochists who tortured each other’s knobs, filmed it, got nicked, and lost two appeals.



The Spanner trial.  A couple of the defendants nailed their scrotums to boards.


----------



## fishfinger (Nov 25, 2017)

ViolentPanda said:


> The Spanner trial.  A couple of the defendants nailed their scrotums to boards.


You sure you're not thinking of the scene in Maîtresse?


----------



## bellaozzydog (Nov 25, 2017)

How do you explain you are vegan but for health reasons rather than moral/ethical reasons without offending everybody

Just keep Schtum ?


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 25, 2017)

fishfinger said:


> You sure you're not thinking of the scene in Maîtresse?



Nope. definitely thinking of the Spanner trial!


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 25, 2017)

bellaozzydog said:


> How do you explain you are vegan but for health reasons rather than moral/ethical reasons without offending everybody
> 
> Just keep Schtum ?



"I am a vegan because I have a bowel disorder that results in explosive projectile defecation if I eat meat" should work.


----------



## fishfinger (Nov 25, 2017)

ViolentPanda said:


> Nope. definitely thinking of the Spanner trial!


Then that is at the very mild end of what they were up to.


----------



## coley (Nov 25, 2017)

bellaozzydog said:


> How do you explain you are vegan but for health reasons rather than moral/ethical reasons without offending everybody
> 
> Just keep Schtum ?


Why bother telling anyone? Unless you are in the habit of going to 'dinner parties'
And if so, possibly you are on the wrong  forum /site?
I've been a vegetarian for donkeys and by and large I haven't had to explain/inform my choices to any bugger.


----------



## coley (Nov 26, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> You've hit the nail on the head with one of the more common myths that it is hard to go vegan. Even without the processed vegan alternatives to meat and dairy, there's an abundance of fruit, veg, grains, nuts, seeds, herbs and spices that are available. I think it's the societal norms that makes it a lot easier and a lot less hassle to just eat anything going so as not to be seen as an oddball fussy eater and to fit in with everyone else especially at social functions. (btw, congrats on going vegan, hope you are able to stay the course)
> 
> Some people do get a bit hung up and nit picky on the fine details regarding what is and isn't vegan. I try to do my best to make purchasing decisions that minimise the amount of harm caused to both human and animal as is practicable. It is impossible to live 100% completely harm free in a non vegan world. Unfortunately you will always find somebody who will try to pick holes in your choices with silly arguments like, "you eat bread, the flour from that bread might have bits of insects in it, therefore you can't call yourself a vegan".  (Is being fully vegan possible – 1:01:04)
> 
> ...



Rest assured they do exist, but "loads of them"? Naw, not really.
Think of the quote "there is no prude so great as a reformed whore" and you have your vegan 'warrior' in a nutshell.
Always worried about 'falling off the wagon'


----------



## coley (Nov 26, 2017)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> And the “bellend of the week” award goes to...
> 
> Why this vegan plans to BRAND herself with red hot irons


Silly bugger, she should just have a couple of tags stapled onto her lugs.


----------



## coley (Nov 26, 2017)

bimble said:


> My downstairs neighbour's invited me to thanksgiving lunch and all the moral issues added together don't make it smell any less amazing as it wafts up the stairs.



Thanksgiving? .That's when the white colonials give thanks to their imagined sky pixie for firearms, smallpox and alcohol and the other tools said 'Sky pixie' supplied them with to get rid of those bothersome indigenous types?
Sorry for the derail, but a tad annoyed that that 'Black Friday' coincides with 'indigenous Native American day''


----------



## coley (Nov 26, 2017)

ViolentPanda said:


> "I am a vegan because I have a bowel disorder that results in explosive projectile defecation if I eat meat" should work.



Take your problems to their next conference, why don't you


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 26, 2017)

coley said:


> Take your problems to their next conference, why don't you



Not my problem.  I have explosive projectile defecation *whatever* I eat!


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Nov 26, 2017)

NoXion said:


> You seriously don't see anything dodgy with comparing vegan activism, which is done entirely by humans on the behalf of non-humans, with black liberation?


The only thing dodgy is the elaborate and seemingly disingenuous attempts to try and create some sort of artificial outrage as if the suggestion is some kind of crime against humanity. As I said earlier but perhaps you were not listening, the comparison was with the style of advocacy. Passive vs militant. The activism STYLE of Yourfosky was compared to the STYLE of Malcolm X, and not who (or what) they happen to be representing.  



NoXion said:


> Yes white people have played a role, but a signficant part of that was done by listening to what black people had to say.


...and? What's your point? Some concerned, compassionate and ethical white people were willing and able to empathise with and in some cases help black people. Yes that actually happened and it doesn't demean or diminish the role of the black people involved so I'm not sure why you're still labouring that moot point.



NoXion said:


> Vegans cannot claim that the voicelessness of non-humans is equivalent to the fact that black voices were present but not heard.


Well for a start, I am not "vegans" and have never claimed to represent the opinions of all vegans. Secondly I can express any opinion I want. If you disagree with my opinion that's perfectly ok, that's your prerogative and it's not really any of my business.
Some concerned, compassionate and ethical animal rights folk are willing and able to empathise with and in some cases help the interests of animals. Some of them choose to do that in a quiet way and some a bit more noisily and that was the point.

Just out of interest, seeing as you appear to be blowing this irrelevant side issue way out of proportion, would you happen to be a white person trying to school me on how I should be interpret black history. Now that would be ironic.


----------



## mojo pixy (Nov 26, 2017)

Are you a non-farm animal trying to school us on how to interpret the needs of farm animals?

That's literally where you've just put yourself with that delicious piece of exclusivity


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Nov 26, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Nobody has said it, no.


Oh yes they did. Yes, yes and yes.  You better go and get your eyes checked.



littlebabyjesus said:


> That a person thinks it's ok to kill other animals for various reasons does not necessarily mean they think humans are superior to other animals (superior by what measure?), nor that they think other animals are here for our benefit to use as we please.


Or how about you get your head around that the idea claiming to love animals and yet being ok with them being killed unnecessarily is as ridiculous as a rapist claiming that he loves the women/men that he rapes. Animals lives are clearly viewed by the majority as being of less value and less importance than our own. It's called speciesism, go look it up. 



littlebabyjesus said:


> You should try to get your head round that and not to presume what others think - others think very differently from you and you don't even begin to engage with that.


That didn't even make any sense. It's not about presuming what others think, it is what their actions and beliefs demonstrate. In my opinion, you cannot claim to love animals and also be ok with killing them. Those things are IN MY OPINION not compatible and doesn't make sense. Ok, some other people have a different opinion. That''s up to them. What you won't find me doing is relentlessly stalking, harassing and abusing people just because they disagree with me, which is precisely what you've done and are doing now. 

I've long since accepted that you believe that killing animals is ok. Of course I disagree with that view and believe it to be wrong, and I have no problem saying so. The fact that I disagree with you appears to raise your heckles and you appear to be unable to control yourself.  I've tried to say it nicely several times now, but the message clearly isn't penetrating that thick skull of yours. GO AWAY. I'm not interested, don't quote me, don't butt into my conversations with others and don't include me in yours. You've had your opportunity and you've blown it. GO AWAY. I might have to get an ASBO or restraining order because you are clearly not getting it.


----------



## Spymaster (Nov 26, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Oh yes they did. Yes, yes and yes.  You better go and get your eyes checked.
> 
> 
> Or how about you get your head around that the idea claiming to love animals and yet being ok with them being killed unnecessarily is as ridiculous as a rapist claiming that he loves the women/men that he rapes. Animals lives are clearly viewed by the majority as being of less value and less importance than our own. It's called speciesism, go look it up.
> ...


Define “love” as in this supposed love for animals.

I love my wife and family. I like most animals, they are nice to have around, to look at, sometimes to pet, but I’ll still eat most of them with fava beans and a nice Chianti. There’s no contradiction there. This is just made up nonsense isn’t it?


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Nov 26, 2017)

bellaozzydog said:


> How do you explain you are vegan but for health reasons rather than moral/ethical reasons without offending everybody
> 
> Just keep Schtum ?


That's a good question. It will depend on what situation you are in and what relationship you have with those around you. It is not something that I usually openly declare when I meet people out and about and usually comes up in passing. I don't think you should be scared to share any of your beliefs for fear of offending others, in the same way that a gay person should not be scared to share their sexual orientation for fear of offending Christians or Muslims who may believe homosexuality to be wrong. 

It will also depend on what you believe being a vegan is. My own interpretation of being a vegan includes morals and ethics, health, environment, economics,  so for me simply eating like a vegan doesn't necessarily make you a vegan. It is more than "just a fad diet" imo. Others may have a different outlook.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Nov 26, 2017)

coley said:


> Rest assured they do exist, but "loads of them"? Naw, not really.
> Think of the quote "there is no prude so great as a reformed whore" and you have your vegan 'warrior' in a nutshell.


In the absence or reliable demography, and based on the fact that I haven't personally met any, I can't really take it as read that they exist based on other peoples anecdotes and nice sounding parables, but like Shaw Taylor used to say, I'll keep 'em peeled. 



coley said:


> Always worried about 'falling off the wagon'


Not really sure what that meant tbh Who's always worried about falling off the wagon?


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Nov 26, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Animals lives are... of less value and less importance than our own


Correct. I would gladly slaughter a million cows if it would save but one human life.


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Nov 26, 2017)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> Correct. I would gladly slaughter a million cows if it would save but one human life.



Gosh, that it principled. Seeing as most humans aren't even prepared to give a little extra of their money to, say, a malaria net charity that could actually save human lives at no notable cost to themselves, the fact that you'd devote yourself to the arduous task of massacring a million gentle females to save a single human is surely praiseworthy (any human I note: Assad, Trump, Mugabe... all human life is valuable). Apparently the UK kills about 2.6 million cattle a year. Given that about half of them will be calves and bulls, we can estimate that about 1.3 million cows are killed per annum to satisfy the British publics cow flesh/milk consumption preferences.

And you'd take on the task of single-handedly killing almost as many all by yourself? You dedication is truly outstanding. And you wouldn't just do it, but you'd *gladly* do it? Wow such steadfastness. Especially given the documented high rates of PTSD and other serious mental health problems found amongst people who's job it is to take the lives of large numbers of innocent, defenceless individuals in a ruthless, machine like manner. That you'd risk these sort of long term physical and mental health problems to save the life of but one human... well... sir I take my hat off to you.

Just as no doubt you would slaughter a million female non-human mammals to save one human, I take it you would also abstain from killing cows and other animals if you could save human lives by so doing? If, to take a purely hypothetical and fanciful example, say the UN Food and Agriculture Organisation and numerous UN special rapporteurs on the right to food had been arguing for years out that the mass consumption of meat in the West is 'entirely unsustainable' and 'diverts food away from poor people who are unable to afford anything but cereals'. No doubt you would encourage, at the least, a reduction in the number of animals killed in help prevent the global poor from staving. Or, maybe you are only prepared to save human lives when doing so - though some strange, unspecified causal mechanism - involves killing animals? bessonthewhatnow works in mysterious ways.

Apologies if I have taken your statement at face value. It's just that I don't think of you as the sort of poster who would make a cheap, glib, ill-thought-out and insincere post is all.


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Nov 26, 2017)

Jeff Robinson said:


> Gosh, that it principled. Seeing as most humans aren't even prepared to give a little extra of their money to, say, a malaria net charity that could actually save human lives at no notable cost to themselves, the fact that you'd devote yourself to the arduous task of massacring a million gentle females to save a single human is surely praiseworthy (any human I note: Assad, Trump, Mugabe... all human life is valuable). Apparently the UK kills about 2.6 million cattle a year. Given that about half of them will be calves and bulls, we can estimate that about 1.3 million cows are killed per annum to satisfy the British publics cow flesh/milk consumption preferences.
> 
> And you'd take on the task of single-handedly killing almost as many all by yourself? You dedication is truly outstanding. And you wouldn't just do it, but you'd *gladly* do it? Wow such steadfastness. Especially given the documented high rates of PTSD and other serious mental health problems found amongst people who's job it is to take the lives of large numbers of innocent, defenceless individuals in a ruthless, machine like manner. That you'd risk these sort of long term physical and mental health problems to save the life of but one human... well... sir I take my hat off to you.
> 
> ...


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Nov 26, 2017)

beesonthewhatnow said:


>



More flawless logic. You are a true sage <3


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Nov 26, 2017)

Jeff Robinson said:


> More flawless logic. You are a true sage <3


I’d rather hope you’d manage to take my post as an indicator of how I view human life over that of other animals, but if you really must be so literal, carry on.


----------



## NoXion (Nov 26, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> The only thing dodgy is the elaborate and seemingly disingenuous attempts to try and create some sort of artificial outrage as if the suggestion is some kind of crime against humanity. As I said earlier but perhaps you were not listening, the comparison was with the style of advocacy. Passive vs militant. The activism STYLE of Yourfosky was compared to the STYLE of Malcolm X, and not who (or what) they happen to be representing.



Why not then just use "passive vs militant"? Why the name-dropping? It's not like the end result of the process of animal liberation will involve their meaningful participation in the political processes of society, will it? I think you're brushing over a very fundamental and thus important difference between humans and other animals. One which you implicitly acknowledge, unless you think the other animals should get a vote on things.


----------



## Spymaster (Nov 26, 2017)

mojo pixy said:


> It's the argument he wants to have, because it's easier than the ones he's getting.


I think Sanchez is probably the worst poster that’s ever discussed the subject here. He’s arguing random points that he’s comfortable with and completely ignoring the substantive bits of the thread. Then, when he’s getting his arse handed to him he makes stuff up (animal loving?) and pretends to be aggrieved. He thinks he’s clever but he’s just cheap and evasive. Everyone should just stick him on ignore.


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Nov 26, 2017)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> I’d rather hope you’d manage to take my post as an indicator of how I view human life over that of other animals, but if you really must be so literal, carry on.



Your post is an indicator of you using empty rhetorical bluster instead of thinking critically or reflectively on this subject. If you can't be bothered to write anything remotely intelligent or interesting on these animal rights/veganism threads, why do you keep bothering to post on them? It's quite bizarre.


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Nov 26, 2017)

Jeff Robinson said:


> Your post is an indicator of you using empty rhetorical bluster instead of thinking critically or reflectively on this subject. If you can't be bothered to write anything remotely intelligent or interesting on these animal rights/veganism threads, why do you keep bothering to post on them? It's quite bizarre.


*sigh*

I’ve clearly stated in the past that I’m happy to discuss veganism if framed in terms of environmental impact, sustainability, food supplies etc. From that POV, yep, probably a good idea to cut back on the meat a bit.

But the moment you try to do it in moral terms, take the line that killing animals for food is wrong, well, I’m out. We exist as a species far above anything else on this planet. I have no problem whatsoever with us using animals for food or for anything that can save human lives. So yeah, while I’m being kinda flippant with that million deaths statement, it pretty much encapsulates my position.


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Nov 27, 2017)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> *sigh*
> 
> I’ve clearly stated in the past that I’m happy to discuss veganism if framed in terms of environmental impact, sustainability, food supplies etc. From that POV, yep, probably a good idea to cut back on the meat a bit.
> 
> But the moment you try to do it in moral terms, take the line that killing animals for food is wrong, well, I’m out. We exist as a species far above anything else on this planet. I have no problem whatsoever with us using animals for food or for anything that can save human lives. So yeah, while I’m being kinda flippant with that million deaths statement, it pretty much encapsulates my position.



And yet again, not a single argument and a totally useless post.

You’re happy to discuss veganism - an ethical commitment against animal exploitation - if it’s redefined on your own terms to not mean veganism at all? How magnanimous of you! 

Nobody is forcing you to discuss anything. Again if you can’t be bothered to think about this issue seriously, then why waste your and everybody else’s time on these vegan/animal rights threads posting such illiterate, incoherent bollocks?


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Nov 27, 2017)

Sigh. Again. OK, I’m happy to discuss “not eating animals or products derived from them”, that better? Is the term so - to use a word being banded rounded here a lot lately - fragile? 

Interesting that you you seem to think coming to the conclusion that humans rank way above any other species somehow can’t have involved any serious thought though. You’re slipping towards the religious dogma end of the debate here, of all the usual suspects on these threads you’re usually better than that.


----------



## Spymaster (Nov 27, 2017)

Jeff Robinson said:


> And yet again, not a single argument and a totally useless post.
> 
> You’re happy to discuss veganism - an ethical commitment against animal exploitation - if it’s redefined on your own terms to not mean veganism at all? How magnanimous of you!
> 
> Nobody is forcing you to discuss anything. Again if you can’t be bothered to think about this issue seriously, then why waste your and everybody else’s time on these vegan/animal rights threads posting such illiterate, incoherent bollocks?



Oh come on, Jeff. His posts have at least been on topic. You’re trying to limit the discussion to what suits you. We've Got that Sanchez  dickhead comparing meat eating with the slave trade, ffs, which puts Bees’ posts completely into context.


----------



## xenon (Nov 27, 2017)

I can’t believe people are still at this.  Of course the vegans here aren’t going to argue for  a reduction in meat consumption as a moral good. It’s all wrong to them.  So why people keep bringing up the environment. Misses the point.  Us meat eaters should eat less meat and be more choosy about that which we do. Yeah fine.   Idea logically committed vegans would see that as  arguing it’s okay to murder just a little bit. 

 See you next month.


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Nov 27, 2017)

xenon said:


> I can’t believe people are still at this.  Of course the vegans here aren’t going to argue for  a reduction in meat consumption as a moral good. It’s all wrong to them.  So why people keep bringing up the environment. Misses the point.  Us meat eaters should eat less meat and be more choosy about that which we do. Yeah fine.   Idea logically committed vegans would see that as  arguing it’s okay to murder just a little bit.


Well, they’re gonna be forever disappointed then, aren’t they?

Meanwhile, maybe it’s possible to have a sensible debate about farming methods, consumption and environmental impact that may convince even the staunchest of carnivores to reduce their intake?


----------



## ddraig (Nov 27, 2017)

start a fucking thread for that then bees


----------



## ddraig (Nov 27, 2017)

and anything you don't like in the slightest is jumped on, Jeff has gone from sensible poster to outrageous and unreasonable just because some of you can't handle them going off what you're comfortable with, even a tiny bit
bollocks to carnists controlling the debate on veganism


----------



## Spymaster (Nov 27, 2017)

ddraig said:


> bollocks to carnists controlling the debate on veganism


 But that's how it is. You're the ones who are trying to convince others of your moral superiority so it falls you to detail it. The fact that none have been able to and you all just deflect and obfuscate speaks volumes, doesn't it?


----------



## ddraig (Nov 27, 2017)

no
this thread is about veganism and people going vegan and apparently angry vegans

if you and bees want a cosy thread about reducing meat that is acceptable to you, fucking start one


----------



## Spymaster (Nov 27, 2017)

ddraig said:


> this thread is about veganism and people going vegan and apparently angry vegans


No it's not. The thread is specifically addressed to non-vegans. It questions whether or not meat eaters have considered going over to flower-munching, and if so have we been put off by the nutty-nut-roasters.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 27, 2017)

Jeff Robinson said:


> You’re happy to discuss veganism - an ethical commitment against animal exploitation - if it’s redefined on your own terms to not mean veganism at all? How magnanimous of you!


tbf you're defining terms here in your particular way as well, creating something called a veganist. So while all veganists may be vegan, not all vegans are veganist.


----------



## ddraig (Nov 27, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> No it's not. The thread is specifically addressed to non-vegans. It questions whether or not meat eaters have considered going over to flower-munching, and if so have we been put off by the nutty-nut-roasters.


yeah, going over to, not reducing their carcass and decaying flesh munching

oh and here's lbj, again, sigh


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 27, 2017)

ddraig said:


> yeah, going over to, not reducing their carcass and decaying flesh munching
> 
> oh and here's lbj, again, sigh


what? 

Who made you fucking thread-monitor?


----------



## Spymaster (Nov 27, 2017)

ddraig said:


> yeah, going over to, not reducing their carcass and decaying flesh munching


Well it's over 80 pages now. You can't expect it not to spawn tangential discussions. Why should the nutbars call the tune?


----------



## ddraig (Nov 27, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> what?
> 
> Who made you fucking thread-monitor?


  oh dear, of course you are, who could forget!!
never tried or wanted to be son


----------



## mojo pixy (Nov 27, 2017)

ddraig said:


> bollocks to carnists controlling the debate on veganism



Bollocks to this being an identity thing.


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Nov 27, 2017)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> Well, they’re gonna be forever disappointed then, aren’t they?
> 
> Meanwhile, maybe it’s possible to have a sensible debate about farming methods, consumption and environmental impact that may convince even the staunchest of carnivores to reduce their intake?



Let's be honest, you're not in the least bit interested in 'a sensible debate about farming methods, consumption and environmental impact'. If you were, you'd actually discuss these things, rather than use them only as a red herring to avoid substantively addressing animal rights arguments made by vegans. I remember when there was a thread on Shambala going meat-free for environmental reasons you did not engage in a 'a sensible debate about farming methods, consumption and environmental impact'. You did exactly what you and Spymaster are doing on this thread - resort to ad hominem abuse and no actual arguments. So please spare me the pompousness that you are wrapping your low-grade trolling up in.


----------



## Spymaster (Nov 27, 2017)

Jeff Robinson said:


> You did exactly what you and Spymaster are doing on this thread - resort to ad hominem abuse...


Eh?


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Nov 27, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> Eh?



For example, your last two posts, 'flower-munching', 'nutty-nut-roasters', 'nutbars'.


----------



## Spymaster (Nov 27, 2017)

Jeff Robinson said:


> For example, your last two posts, 'flower-munching', 'nutty-nut-roasters', 'nutbars'.


Oh, that. That's just a response to _carnist _and the other childish nonsense you lot have been chucking about. No more or less ad hominem either.


----------



## tonysingh (Nov 27, 2017)

just popping in to see if anyone fancies a bacon sandwich?


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Nov 27, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> Oh, that. That's just a response to _carnist _and the other childish nonsense you lot have been chucking about. No more or less ad hominem either.



I haven't once used the term 'carnist'. You just liked a post saying 'Bollocks to this being an identity thing' and now you're making it an identity thing.


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Nov 27, 2017)

tonysingh said:


> just popping in to see if anyone fancies a bacon sandwich?



2003 just called, they want their internet banter back.


----------



## Spymaster (Nov 27, 2017)

Jeff Robinson said:


> I haven't once used the term 'carnist'.


And I haven't once used any of those supposed _ad hominems_ in response to _you_. You are generally worth reading and engaging with but you're losing it recently and certainly on this thread.


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Nov 27, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> And I haven't once used any of those supposed _ad hominems_ in response to _you_. You are generally worth reading and engaging with but you're losing it recently and certainly on this thread.



Well, at least I'm generally worth reading and engaging with I suppose.


----------



## ddraig (Nov 27, 2017)

tonysingh said:


> just popping in to see if anyone fancies a bacon sandwich?


groan, grow up eh Tony


----------



## Spymaster (Nov 27, 2017)

Jeff Robinson said:


> Well, at least I'm generally worth reading and engaging with I suppose.


Not today though unfortunately.


----------



## 8ball (Nov 27, 2017)

ddraig said:


> groan, grow up eh Tony



Tofacon?


----------



## ddraig (Nov 27, 2017)

think there is somethign called fakon or similar, nasty stuff from what i've heard
things have moved on since then mind


----------



## 8ball (Nov 27, 2017)

ddraig said:


> think there is somethign called fakon or similar, nasty stuff from what i've heard
> things have moved on since then mind



They've almost nailed vegan eggs, so I'm hoping it all comes together soon.


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Nov 27, 2017)

ddraig said:


> no
> this thread is about veganism and people going vegan and apparently angry vegans
> 
> if you and bees want a cosy thread about reducing meat that is acceptable to you, fucking start one


The entire thread is aimed at those who aren’t vegan. Get a grown up to slowly read the title to you maybe.

So, let’s say perhaps I should be aiming for one vegan meal a week, rather than my usual meat with almost every meal approach. Small steps and all that. But that isn’t enough for certain types. It’s all or nothing. At which point my answer will always be, fuck you, it’s nothing then.

Which to take on board Jeff Robinson point about Shambla from whatever year it was, was precisely my problem with their approach. Their way or nothing. This isn’t an approach to win people over.


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Nov 27, 2017)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> The entire thread is aimed at those who aren’t vegan. Get a grown up to slowly read the title to you maybe.
> 
> So, let’s say perhaps I should be aiming for one vegan meal a week, rather than my usual meat with almost every meal approach. Small steps and all that. But that isn’t enough for certain types. It’s all or nothing. At which point my answer will always be, fuck you, it’s nothing then.
> 
> Which to take on board Jeff Robinson point about Shambla from whatever year it was, was precisely my problem with their approach. Their way or nothing. This isn’t an approach to win people over.



So, you think that "in terms of environmental impact, sustainability, food supplies etc" it probably is "a good idea to cut back on the meat a bit"... but you're not going to because a vegan online told you that they don't think that's good enough? That makes absolutely no sense... unless you think its worth sticking it to the environment and the global poor to teach vegans a lesson?  

As for not winning people over, apparently 70% of Shambala attendees reported ‘not missing meat and fish at all’ and 77% voted to keep the festival vegetarian with 33% of non-vegetarians and vegans saying that they had reduced their meat consumption after the festival.


----------



## ddraig (Nov 27, 2017)

he'll go vegan at some point if he takes his long distance cycling seriously, if only to keep up with others 
see Matthew Prithcard


----------



## mojo pixy (Nov 27, 2017)

People calling meat-eaters names like _Carnist_  and being self-righteous isn't what's driving the popularity of vegetarian and vegan diets though. Maybe it is, among the kinds of people who already like calling other people names and being self-righteous - but the actual veggie / vegan behaviour is being driven by things like, health concerns, environmental issues, growing awareness of animal welfare and / or animal rights, also IME food prices.

Here's the thing; meat-eating is the norm in a lot of the world. Meat eaters like vegans take affront when their diet is challenged because _we hate it when people challenge our diet_ and it does become about identity .. hey look, _you are what you eat_. But ffs it's just what you eat.

Then comes advocacy, and labels and _positions_ are no help there. 
So anyway. I'm a timewasting fucking troll trying to point out bridges


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Nov 28, 2017)

NoXion said:


> Why not then just use "passive vs militant"? Why the name-dropping? It's not like the end result of the process of animal liberation will involve their meaningful participation in the political processes of society, will it? I think you're brushing over a very fundamental and thus important difference between humans and other animals. One which you implicitly acknowledge, unless you think the other animals should get a vote on things.


Why are you making such a big fuss over me referring to MLK/Malcom X as an illustration of the difference between different types of activism? I'm perfectly happy with it and would happily use similar examples in the future if I felt it appropriate. I get the impression that it wouldn't matter what form of words or examples I used, you and your buddies would find a way of taking offence, and a rather convenient diversion away from the topic. I suppose it saves the energy involved in trying to construct a half decent argument of your own. 

I'm assuming that you are a white person pretending to be outraged oh behalf of the blacks. Right?


----------



## ddraig (Nov 28, 2017)

"the blacks" wtf?! fucks sake
sort it out

PaoloSanchez sort out your post!


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Nov 28, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Why are you making such a big fuss over me referring to MLK/Malcom X as an illustration of the difference between different types of activism? I'm perfectly happy with it and would happily use similar examples in the future if I felt it appropriate. I get the impression that it wouldn't matter what form of words or examples I used, you and your buddies would find a way of taking offence, and a rather convenient diversion away from the topic. I suppose it saves the energy involved in trying to construct a half decent argument of your own.
> 
> I'm assuming that you are a white person pretending to be outraged oh behalf of the blacks. Right?


Wow.


----------



## NoXion (Nov 28, 2017)

"the blacks"

I rest my case.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Nov 28, 2017)

NoXion said:


> "the blacks"
> 
> I rest my case.


lol, What case? You don't have one.

Are you a white person or not?  A yes or no answer would suffice.


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Nov 28, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> lol, What case. You don't have one.
> 
> Are you a white person or not?  A yes or no answer would suffice.


Are you really this fucking stupid?


----------



## NoXion (Nov 28, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> lol, What case. You don't have one.
> 
> Are you a white person or not?  A yes or no answer would suffice.



I have pale skin, if that's what you're asking.


----------



## ddraig (Nov 28, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> lol, What case? You don't have one.
> 
> Are you a white person or not?  A yes or no answer would suffice.


seriously
what you have posted is VERY offensive
why can't you see that? 

and if you can't then it makes it more fucked up


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Nov 28, 2017)

ddraig said:


> seriously
> what you have posted is VERY offensive
> why can't you see that?
> 
> and if you can't then it makes it more fucked up


Anything that puts me in agreement with ddraig on a vegan thread _must_ be bad


----------



## Spymaster (Nov 28, 2017)

Is English your first language PaoloSanchez ? You've certainly not struck me as racist before so I assume this is accidental. Are you not aware that referring to "the blacks" is totally out of order?


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Nov 28, 2017)

NoXion said:


> I have pale skin, if that's what you're asking.


I'll take that as a yes then.

There's a reason that I've asked you that question, which I will elaborate on after I've had my lunch.


----------



## ddraig (Nov 28, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> I'll take that as a yes then.
> 
> There's a reason that I've asked you that question, which I will elaborate on after I've had my lunch.


don't be a prick, edit your post before lunch please


----------



## 8ball (Nov 28, 2017)

NoXion said:


> I have pale skin, if that's what you're asking.



That's not really what he was asking.


----------



## 8ball (Nov 28, 2017)

Not sure what's so wrong with the term '_carnist_', though.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Nov 28, 2017)

8ball said:


> Not sure what's so wrong with the term '_carnist_', though.


Did you not know that it after being filtered through this thread that word went from benign the most offensive word known to mankind. #trueStory


----------



## NoXion (Nov 28, 2017)

I'm making a fuss over the Malcolm X/MLK comparison because black people and white people are both, well... People. They can work together as equals.

Even if I were to accept the notion of Animal Liberation as being valid, they can never be in an equal partnership with humans.

To me that's a big difference, not something that can be just brushed under the carpet.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Nov 28, 2017)

I'm still having my lunch, be patient...


----------



## 8ball (Nov 28, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Did you not know that it after being filtered through this thread that word went from benign the most offensive word known to mankind. #trueStory



I might be missing some connotations.  I was just going by the Wikipedia definition because I had not seen it before.

Talking of connotations, I see you're back from lunch...


----------



## 8ball (Nov 28, 2017)

NoXion said:


> I'm making a fuss over the Malcolm X/MLK comparison because black people and white people are both, well... People. They can work together as equals.
> 
> Even if I were to accept the notion of Animal Liberation as being valid, they can never be in an equal partnership with humans.
> 
> To me that's a big difference, not something that can be just brushed under the carpet.



Ah, I thought Paulo was maybe coming round to this point.  That the solution has to be a cow version of Malcolm X to lead the bovine massive in revolt against their oppressors.
This might take a certain degree of genetic engineering, which is sometimes a no-no, but ends and means etc.


----------



## 8ball (Nov 28, 2017)

ddraig said:


> he'll go vegan at some point if he takes his long distance cycling seriously, if only to keep up with others
> see Matthew Prithcard



Obviously with some nutritional assistance in terms of refined proteins and chemical supplements...


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Nov 28, 2017)

8ball said:


> Talking of connotations, I see you're back from lunch...


Not quite...I'm a slow eater, I'm busy chewing my cud.


----------



## 8ball (Nov 28, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Not quite...I'm a slow eater, I'm busy chewing my cud.



With your typing fingers?


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Nov 28, 2017)

8ball said:


> With your typing fingers?


Dhal and roti innit. I'm typing with my elbows.


----------



## 8ball (Nov 28, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Dhal and roti innit. I'm typing with my elbows.



Nice as that sounds, it comes over like you don't much care about people's sensitivities regarding racist terms considering you've managed 4 posts which you have prioritised over either an edit or an explanation.


----------



## ddraig (Nov 28, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> I'm still having my lunch, be patient...


not acceptable
this shit isn't funny or a game, you've managed to post a couple of times when "having lunch" so you can edit your stupid fucking post


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 28, 2017)

PS inadvertently illustrates the wrongness of his comparison with his crass racism. The offensive nature of racism is due to the fact that it is an attitude towards human beings. You can't demonstrate an equivalent form of ignorance towards cows.


----------



## 8ball (Nov 28, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> PS inadvertently illustrates the wrongness of his comparison with his crass racism. The offensive nature of racism is due to the fact that it is an attitude towards human beings. You can't demonstrate an equivalent form of ignorance towards cows.



Maybe elevating the moral status of farm animals and seeing humans as the bad guys in the moral play does something to your conception of the moral status of humans.
Cognitive dissonance can work both ways.


----------



## ddraig (Nov 28, 2017)

8ball said:


> Obviously with some nutritional assistance in terms of refined proteins and chemical supplements...



"obviously"??
evidence?
do you mean using vegan food efficiently and vegan huel??


----------



## 8ball (Nov 28, 2017)

ddraig said:


> "obviously"??
> evidence?
> do you mean using vegan food efficiently and vegan huel??



Yes, "obviously".

I was expecting refined brown rice protein shakes (the protein is biochemically extracted from the rice) or similar, since there is fairly good evidence (as these things go) that brown rice protein works for athletic performance near-as-dammit as well as animal protein.

But refined brown rice protein is a major constituent of Huel, so you gave me half the answer yourself.

And if he's not taking creatine in some form I'll eat my trousers (I believe vegans are fine with the ingestion of petroleum-derived chemicals - it's not like anyone is going to kill more dinosaurs to top up the supply).  Bog standard supplement for athletic types.


----------



## Spymaster (Nov 28, 2017)

Is PaoloSanchez still eating his lunch?


----------



## 8ball (Nov 28, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> Is PaoloSanchez still eating his lunch?



Is he Lig Lury Jnr or something?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 28, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> Is PaoloSanchez still eating his lunch?


I fear he may be preparing a long-winded, sententious apologia.


----------



## 8ball (Nov 28, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I fear he may be preparing a long-winded, sententious apologia.



Ooh - had to look up "_sententious_".  I'll be using that.


----------



## ddraig (Nov 28, 2017)

8ball said:


> Yes, "obviously".
> 
> I was expecting refined brown rice protein shakes (the protein is biochemically extracted from the rice) or similar, since there is fairly good evidence (as these things go) that brown rice protein works for athletic performance near-as-dammit as well as animal protein.
> 
> ...


but nothing made of animals, so all vegan then
glad we got that sorted


----------



## 8ball (Nov 28, 2017)

ddraig said:


> but nothing made of animals, so all vegan then
> glad we got that sorted



Which part of "refined proteins and chemical supplements" implied animal products?

Although technically not _entirely_ made from plants (some vegans might stipulate that, though I think we're getting into "nutritional puritan" territory there.  Perhaps a case of being a vegan _and_ a nutritional puritan rather than being anything to do with the veganism). 

So more of a technologically-enhanced vegan diet, with some compounds of distant animal origin if you want to be really pedantic.

Not that there's anything wrong with that; perfectly ethical imo.


----------



## ddraig (Nov 29, 2017)

not read it but thought some here would appreciate it
Beyond Carnism


----------



## Spymaster (Nov 29, 2017)

ddraig said:


> not read it but thought some here would appreciate it
> Beyond Carnism


Is that what you want for xmas?


----------



## ddraig (Nov 29, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> Is that what you want for xmas?


dunno, not read it, like i said


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Nov 29, 2017)

As a ‘flexitarian’ I can enjoy the smugness of vegetarianism while still eating meat


----------



## Spymaster (Nov 29, 2017)

ddraig said:


> dunno, not read it, like i said


Well if you had, you wouldn't want it, would you?


----------



## ddraig (Nov 29, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> Well if you had, you wouldn't want it, would you?


still dunno!


----------



## Humirax (Nov 29, 2017)

NoXion said:


> Surely the vegan equivalent of Malcolm X or MLK would be a non-human?
> 
> Because otherwise it's like white people claiming to speak for black people.


You are missing the elephant in the room, that being that animals can't speak up or stand up for themselves and therefore need us to speak up and stand up for them.


----------



## 8ball (Nov 29, 2017)

Humirax said:


> You are missing the elephant in the room, that being that animals can't speak up or stand up for themselves and therefore need us to speak up and stand up for them.



You’ve not met my Mum’s cat.


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Nov 29, 2017)

8ball said:


> You’ve not met my Mum’s cat.


----------



## NoXion (Nov 30, 2017)

Humirax said:


> You are missing the elephant in the room, that being that animals can't speak up or stand up for themselves and therefore need us to speak up and stand up for them.



No, they don't.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Nov 30, 2017)

Black Vegans Step Out, for Their Health and Other Causes

Aph Ko got tired of hearing that eating vegan was something only white people did. So in 2015, she created a list of 100 black vegans for a website. It included pioneering figures like Dick Gregory and Coretta Scott King and younger, less famous writers, filmmakers, cooks and activists.

“When you say ‘vegan,’ a lot of people tend to only think of PETA, which doesn’t reflect the massive landscape of vegan activism,” said Ms. Ko, 28, a Floridian whose favorite dish at the moment is the spinach pie in “The Vegan Stoner Cookbook.” “The black vegan movement is one of the most diverse, decolonial, complex and creative movements.”

So many other people wanted to be included on the list after it appeared, she started a website, Black Vegans Rock. That spawned a Twitter hashtag (#blackvegansrock) and a T-shirt business. In June, she published ”Aphro-ism: Essays on Pop Culture, Feminism, and Black Veganism from Two Sisters,” a book she wrote with her older sister, Syl Ko.

Vegan cooking and eating are having a renaissance among black Americans, driven in part by movements like Black Lives Matter, documentaries like “What the Health,” and a growing cadre of people who connect personal health, animal welfare and social justice with the fight for racial equality. Athletes like Kyrie Irving of the Boston Celtics and pop stars like the singer Jhené Aiko are bringing a certain pop culture cachet. Cookbook authors and a new breed of vegan soul food restaurants offer culinary muscle.


----------



## Spymaster (Nov 30, 2017)

What does that have to do with your use of the term “the blacks”?


----------



## ddraig (Nov 30, 2017)

yeah, still need to sort that post out ps!
come on


----------



## 8ball (Nov 30, 2017)

ddraig said:


> yeah, still need to sort that post out ps!
> come on



Yeah, that was one of the longest lunch breaks in history.

Was thinking of getting a mod to update your status to “Missing, Presumed Fed”.

Chop chop!


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Dec 1, 2017)

ddraig said:


> yeah, still need to sort that post out ps!
> come on


I had and still have NO INTENTION of changing my post. Deal with it.
It's much ado about fkin nothing. Looks like "the whites" are revolting.
There was nothing remotely racist in that post.
Perhaps there's a bit too much of this going on here...


----------



## Spymaster (Dec 1, 2017)

Fuck off


----------



## ddraig (Dec 1, 2017)

well you are a right dick then, sad as fuck


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Dec 1, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> I had and still have NO INTENTION of changing my post. Deal with it.
> It's much ado about fkin nothing. Looks like "the whites" are revolting.
> There was nothing remotely racist in that post.
> Perhaps there's a bit too much of this going on here...



You fucking prick.


----------



## 8ball (Dec 1, 2017)

Well, that's made the thread a lot less divisive, I guess...


----------



## IC3D (Dec 1, 2017)

Here you go everyone can appropriate this and move on 






More importantly I'm vegan again after a bout of illness, feel awesome physically and mentally strong, only dropped dairy and fish anyway


----------



## 8ball (Dec 1, 2017)

IC3D said:


> More importantly I'm vegan again after a bout of illness, feel awesome physically and mentally strong, only dropped dairy and fish anyway



Is that a general vegan pattern?  Drop it when you're poorly then get back on it?
Not wanting to draw any causative inferences obviously...


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Dec 1, 2017)

IC3D said:


> Here you go everyone can appropriate this and move on


loool..."appropriate" being the appropriate word to describe the nonsense "racism" distraction.
btw...David Haye...vegan. (although you never know how long celebs will stay the course)



IC3D said:


> More importantly I'm vegan again after a bout of illness, feel awesome physically and mentally strong, only dropped dairy and fish anyway


I'm confused. You were vegan, then stopped, then started again, then dropped dairy and fish from your vegan diet? Or have I got that wrong? Anyway, regardless, enjoy whatever journey you happen to be on.


----------



## Spymaster (Dec 1, 2017)

Fuck off


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Dec 1, 2017)

Humirax said:


> You are missing the elephant in the room, that being that animals can't speak up or stand up for themselves and therefore need us to speak up and stand up for them.


Ah, but you see the thing is, you must remember animals are lesser beings and not as deserving of the right to live as us, the far superior humans are (and that includes the elephant in the room). This means we have given ourselves the right to do with them whatever we wish. Apparently any attempt to elevate the status of animals is demeaning to humans, especially "the IC3's". (that is according to some of the more patronising IC1's).

Of course I don't agree with that and my feelings are more in line with the following...



> We do not and should not treat those humans who are impaired as resources for other humans. And if we really believe that animals have morally significant interests, then we ought to apply the principle of equal consideration and not treat them as resources as well. The argument for animal rights does not decrease respect for human life; it increases respect for all life.


----------



## mojo pixy (Dec 1, 2017)

PaoloSanchezQuote said:


> We do not and should not treat those humans who are impaired as resources for other humans. And if we really believe that animals have morally significant interests, then we ought to apply the principle of equal consideration and not treat them as resources as well. The argument for animal rights does not decrease respect for human life; it increases respect for all life.



Equating "impaired humans" (and wtf are they exactly?) with animals for the purposes of propaganda is extremely dubious.

Sure you'll claim I've missed the point, if so what is your point with that quote?


----------



## ddraig (Dec 1, 2017)

For all the angry vegans in our lives


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Dec 1, 2017)

Amazing


----------



## sleaterkinney (Dec 1, 2017)

8ball said:


> You’ve not met my Mum’s cat.


Everyone has met your Mum's cat.


----------



## mojo pixy (Dec 2, 2017)

PaoloSanchez .. what is an _impaired human_, as per the quote you posted?


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Dec 2, 2017)

A vegan made me angry at a christmas fair today. Vegan food van 6 quid for a spinach burger.


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Dec 4, 2017)

The Radical Left’s Top 10 Objections to Veganism (And Why They Suck)


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Dec 4, 2017)

Jeff Robinson said:


> The Radical Left’s Top 10 Objections to Veganism (And Why They Suck)





> a practicing ethical vegan... refuse to sit at a table where animal products are being consumed


So, I invite a P.E.V. to a dinner party and offer to cook something vegan for them. But no, thats not enough, every other fucker there has to jump in line as well?

My response would be "well, fucking stay at home then you precious twat".

Can't be arsed reading beyond that tbh.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Dec 4, 2017)

Jeff Robinson said:


> The Radical Left’s Top 10 Objections to Veganism (And Why They Suck)



I bet telling people that their beliefs and ethical judgements 'suck' is going to start working any day now.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Dec 4, 2017)

SaskiaJayne said:


> A vegan made me angry at a christmas fair today. Vegan food van 6 quid for a spinach burger.



I'm sure everything else at this christmas fair was reasonably priced too.


----------



## mojo pixy (Dec 4, 2017)

Jeff Robinson said:


> The Radical Left’s Top 10 Objections to Veganism (And Why They Suck)





beesonthewhatnow said:


> ''a practicing ethical vegan... refuse to sit at a table where animal products are being consumed''
> My response would be "well, fucking stay at home then you precious twat".
> 
> Can't be arsed reading beyond that tbh.



I did read the whole thing (and my thought at that point was, ''OK bye then!'') but as I read the same thought kept coming into my mind: _What if someone just doesn't want to eat vegan all the time?_ What then? Is that person_ evil, immoral, unethical?_ After all, food choices are not really logical; emotion, instinct, even sheer habit goes into diet. All the arguments may stack up but in the end if someone just doesn't want to, where do you go from there?

My experience is, this is where namecalling begins.


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Dec 4, 2017)

I still object to the seemingly prevailing thought from our lentil munching friends that by not choosing to go vegan I've somehow not thought this through properly, or have some sort of cognitive dissonance as to the processes involved that get meat on my plate.

Eating meat involves killing animals, which, due to the volumes involved for the society around us is often a bit of a brutal and rather unpleasant process. But, here's the thing. _I am OK with that._


----------



## mojo pixy (Dec 4, 2017)

That's what I mean. Beyond all the arguments - even if they're accepted to be true - there's a point which a lot of people get to which is essentially, _I'm OK with it_. No arguments can go beyond that point, which is why the namecalling begins there IMO.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 4, 2017)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> I still object to the seemingly prevailing thought from our lentil munching friends that by not choosing to go vegan I've somehow not thought this through properly, or have some sort of cognitive dissonance as to the processes involved that get meat on my plate.
> 
> Eating meat involves killing animals, which, due to the volumes involved for the society around us is often a bit of a brutal and rather unpleasant process. But, here's the thing. _I am OK with that._


it's not just the killing, is it, it's the use of great volumes of resources to feed the animal which is killed and served up to you. are you ok with the with the environmental degradation the meat habit causes?


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Dec 4, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> it's not just the killing, is it, it's the use of great volumes of resources to feed the animal which is killed and served up to you. are you ok with the with the environmental degradation the meat habit causes?


That's the trickier part. I guess I'm at the "necessary evil" point but want to see a reduction in consumption and better/more ethical/whatever farming methods being used. 

Would be so much easier if they'd just hurry up and perfect lab grown burgers...


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Dec 4, 2017)

mojo pixy said:


> I did read the whole thing (and my thought at that point was, ''OK bye then!'') but as I read the same thought kept coming into my mind: _What if someone just doesn't want to eat vegan all the time?_ What then? Is that person_ evil, immoral, unethical?_ After all, food choices are not really logical; emotion, instinct, even sheer habit goes into diet. All the arguments may stack up but in the end if someone just doesn't want to, where do you go from there?
> 
> My experience is, this is where namecalling begins.



Are you suggesting that people shouldn't advocate for something they believe in because they will not always be able to persuade others to change? That's rather bizarre. And I have more confidence than you that people can make rational choices about their consumption habits. People change their diets for health reasons all the time, there's no reason why they can't change them for ethical reasons too, indeed, many people do.


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Dec 4, 2017)

SpookyFrank said:


> I bet telling people that their beliefs and ethical judgements 'suck' is going to start working any day now.



Tell me, if the article was titled ''The Radical Right’s Top 10 Objections to Feminism (And Why They Suck)' would you have made a similar hand-wringing objection?


----------



## 8ball (Dec 4, 2017)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> Eating meat involves killing animals, which, due to the volumes involved for the society around us is often a bit of a brutal and rather unpleasant process. But, here's the thing. _I am OK with that._


----------



## 8ball (Dec 4, 2017)

Jeff Robinson said:


> Tell me, if the article was titled ''The Radical Right’s Top 10 Objections to Feminism (And Why They Suck)' would you have made a similar hand-wringing objection?



I think it would have read very strangely if it had that title.


----------



## gentlegreen (Dec 4, 2017)

Personally I found the whole thing rather cringy - and I'm highly sympathetic to vegan principles - though I will probably be consciously going against them in my golden years.


----------



## gentlegreen (Dec 4, 2017)

8ball said:


> I think it would have read very strangely if it had that title.


Indeed. It should have been "The Radical Right’s Top 10 Objections to flying the national flag at home (And Why They Suck)' or something similar - i.e. something one might expect them to embrace or at least support ...


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 4, 2017)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> So, I invite a P.E.V. to a dinner party and offer to cook something vegan for them. But no, thats not enough, every other fucker there has to jump in line as well?
> 
> My response would be "well, fucking stay at home then you precious twat".
> 
> Can't be arsed reading beyond that tbh.


It's nothing new, that. Straight-laced vegan policeman types have been a thing in post-punk circles for decades. TBH they're unlikely to be your friend in the first place if you eat meat.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Dec 4, 2017)

Jeff Robinson said:


> Tell me, if the article was titled ''The Radical Right’s Top 10 Objections to Feminism (And Why They Suck)' would you have made a similar hand-wringing objection?



I read a thing yesterday, ten reasons spittle-flecked vegan keyboard warriors need to think of a way to make a point without using irrelevant and often offensive comparisons to human social issues.

It was pretty good, although the author shot herself in the foot by restricting herself to only ten things.


----------



## ddraig (Dec 4, 2017)

look at the anger!! the fragility!! the venom!! awwww


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 4, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> It's nothing new, that. Straight-laced vegan policeman types have been a thing in post-punk circles for decades. TBH they're unlikely to be your friend in the first place if you eat meat.


strait-laced.


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Dec 4, 2017)

SpookyFrank said:


> I read a thing yesterday, ten reasons spittle-flecked vegan keyboard warriors need to think of a way to make a point without using irrelevant and often offensive comparisons to human social issues.
> 
> It was pretty good, although the author shot herself in the foot by restricting herself to only ten things.



That article sounds amazing. Shame you didn't read it before you wrote “the fact that saying you're a vegetarian when you sometimes eat fish is like saying you're a feminist but you still grope women in nightclubs on the the third friday of every month.”


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Dec 4, 2017)

ddraig said:


> look at the anger!! the fragility!! the venom!! awwww


Where


----------



## gentlegreen (Dec 4, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> strait-laced.



Or "straight-edge" - they're even less fun at parties ...


----------



## 8ball (Dec 4, 2017)

ddraig said:


> look at the anger!! the fragility!! the venom!! awwww



Poor form to admire your own posts so blatantly.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Dec 4, 2017)

Jeff Robinson said:


> That article sounds amazing. Shame you didn't read it before you wrote “the fact that saying you're a vegetarian when you sometimes eat fish is like saying you're a feminist but you still grope women in nightclubs on the the third friday of every month.”



Notice the edit to that post.


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Dec 4, 2017)

SpookyFrank said:


> I read a thing yesterday, ten reasons spittle-flecked vegan keyboard warriors need to think of a way to make a point without using irrelevant and often offensive comparisons to human social issues.
> 
> It was pretty good, although the author shot herself in the foot by restricting herself to only ten things.



I'm surprised Franky that you consider it to be "offensive" (boohoo) to compare the violent abuse of nonhuman animals to the violent abuse of human animals. I had actually thought that you were nonhuman yourself. The sheer lack of spine you've demonstrated on this thread and others, I had assumed you were an invertebrate of some sort.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Dec 4, 2017)

ddraig said:


> look at the anger!! the fragility!! the venom!! awwww



As I've explained already, I don't eat meat and so I don't have any fragility about it. 

As for anger, 'here is everything you think and why it's shit' is pretty clearly an anger-led, and thus completely ineffective way of communicating. And I'm sure as usual the defence to that is 'but I don't care if people agree with me', to which I will again say that you should care about it if you actually want fewer animals to get eaten and you're willing to put that goal before your own bullshit virtue signalling.

The reason this stuff pisses me off is not because I want to eat animals without feeling guilty, exactly the opposite. I want a reduction in use of animal products to be a widespread thing, not just a club I can join to make myself feel special.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Dec 4, 2017)

Jeff Robinson said:


> I'm surprised Franky that you consider it to be "offensive" (boohoo) to compare the violent abuse of nonhuman animals to the violent abuse of human animals. I had actually thought that you were nonhuman yourself. The sheer lack of spine you've demonstrated on this thread and others, I had assumed you were an invertebrate of some sort.



And here we have it in black and white. _You're not like me so you're not a real person. _It's not about the animals at all is it? It's about your being superior.


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Dec 4, 2017)

SpookyFrank said:


> And here we have it in black and white. _You're not like me so you're not a real person. _It's not about the animals at all is it? It's about your being superior.



I didn't say you were not a real person, I implied that on these threads you adopt a cowardly position in which you would rather shit on an embattled minority actually fighting and arguing for an end to the violent abuse of animals than take a principled stand yourself.

As for your claim of 'superiority' - precisely the opposite. I think all sentient animals (including humans) are of equal moral value and I don't think any of them should be violently abused. You display supremacist thinking when you say it is offensive to compare the other animals to us.


----------



## rubbershoes (Dec 4, 2017)

SpookyFrank said:


> And here we have it in black and white. _You're not like me so you're not a real person. _It's not about the animals at all is it? It's about your being superior.



We had that months ago from another vegan claiming moral superiority


----------



## SpookyFrank (Dec 4, 2017)

Jeff Robinson said:
			
		

> I'm surprised Franky that you consider it to be "offensive" (boohoo) to compare the violent abuse of nonhuman animals to the violent abuse of human animals. I had actually thought that you were nonhuman yourself. The sheer lack of spine you've demonstrated on this thread and others, I had assumed you were an invertebrate of some sort.




As for offensive things, Viva recently co-opted the #metoo hashtag created by survivors of sexual abuse and harassment to make a point about cows. This is just the latest example I've seen of a strategy of deliberately upsetting people with deliberately callous and idiotic behaviour. I objected to it because for one thing it's specifically targetting vulnerable people and that's always a cunt's trick, but also because it just doesn't work. And I don't believe it is even designed to 'work', it's designed like all other forms of trolling to create division between people. It's designed to reinforce the illusion of a handful of righteous warriors locked in battle with the evil hordes of untermenschen outside their little Helm's Deep of virtue.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Dec 4, 2017)

Jeff Robinson said:


> I implied that on these threads you adopt a cowardly position in which you would rather shit on an embattled minority actually fighting and arguing for an end to the violent abuse of animals than take a principled stand yourself.



There you go again illustrating my point for me. You're not an embattled minority. You can eat what you like, nobody is forcing lamb chops down your throat. The 'embattled' part comes not from what you choose to eat but from how you choose to pick fights with others about what they eat, and even then it's a battle you could end by simply shutting up, or just making an effort to be reasonable.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Dec 4, 2017)

Jeff Robinson said:


> I didn't say you were not a real person,



You literally used the word 'nonhuman'.


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Dec 4, 2017)

SpookyFrank said:


> There you go again illustrating my point for me. You're not an embattled minority. You can eat what you like, nobody is forcing lamb chops down your throat. The 'embattled' part comes not from what you choose to eat but from how you choose to pick fights with others about what they eat, and even then it's a battle you could end by simply shutting up, or just making an effort to be reasonable.



Oh I see we should shut up about the violent abuse of animals or else we deserve whatever we receive? You truly are utterly spineless and cowardly Spooky.


----------



## 8ball (Dec 4, 2017)

SpookyFrank said:


> You literally used the word 'nonhuman'.



But in a series of posts that were weirdly creating equivalences between human and nonhuman.
Cognitive dissonance sure is a crazy ting...


----------



## SpookyFrank (Dec 4, 2017)

Jeff Robinson said:


> Oh I see we should shut up about the violent abuse of animals that non-vegans contribute to then or else we deserve whatever we receive? You truly are utterly spineless and cowardly Spooky.



Again with the persecution complex. What exactly is it that you receive? Because if it's just valid criticism of your methods of communication, I don't think that's worthy of self-identification as an 'embattled minority'.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 4, 2017)

Jeff Robinson said:


> I think all sentient animals (including humans) are of equal moral value


I think this bit is worth pulling out because it is something a lot of people will disagree with. I'd be interested to know where you see sentience extending to - I would happily allow a degree of sentience quite a long way out into the animal kingdom, and for me, extending equal moral value that widely is simply unworkable.


----------



## 8ball (Dec 4, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I think this bit is worth pulling out because it is something a lot of people will disagree with. I'd be interested to know where you see sentience extending to - I would happily allow a degree of sentience quite a long way out into the animal kingdom, and for me, extending equal moral value that widely is simply unworkable.



Rascist!!


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Dec 4, 2017)

SpookyFrank said:


> Again with the persecution complex. What exactly is it that you receive? Because if it's just valid criticism of your methods of communication, I don't think that's worthy of self-identification as an 'embattled minority'.



let me be clear, it is the animals who are the victims, not the vegans. But vegans are standing up for victims and are getting pushback as a result. That's what I mean by an embattled minority. I am not implying vegans are oppressed, we are not. But that you would rather nitpick vegans than stand up against animal abuse just demonstrates what a gutless coward you are.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Dec 4, 2017)

8ball said:


> But in a series of posts that were weirdly creating equivalences between human and nonhuman.
> Cognitive dissonance sure is a crazy ting...



We arthropods are the real victims here. Even the so called animal rights people use us as a byword for cowardice and moral weakness. It doesn't even make any sense, our nervous systems are too simplistic to process subtle moral concepts or even allow for an awareness of the self, never mind the selfhood of other beings.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Dec 4, 2017)

Jeff Robinson said:


> let me be clear, it is the animals who are the victims, not the vegans.



Shut the fuck up about being an embattled minority then I would. There are real embattled minorities in the world you know.


----------



## 8ball (Dec 4, 2017)

SpookyFrank said:


> We arthropods are the real victims here. Even the so called animal rights people use us as a byword for cowardice and moral weakness. It doesn't even make any sense, our nervous systems are too simplistic to process subtle moral concepts or even allow for an awareness of the self, never mind the selfhood of other beings.



They're just jealous because they can't even replace their own limbs.  "Ooh, look at us, we're so _delicate_."
One decent-sized asteroid and we'll see who's still around in hundred thousand years...


----------



## SpookyFrank (Dec 4, 2017)

8ball said:


> They're just jealous because they can't even replace their own limbs.  "Ooh, look at us, we're so _delicate_."
> One decent-sized asteroid and we'll see who's still around in hundred thousand years...



I'm looking forward to watching all the vegans gleefully turn to cannibalism within 45 minutes of the impact.


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Dec 4, 2017)

SpookyFrank said:


> Shut the fuck up about being an embattled minority then I would. There are real embattled minorities in the world you know.



There are also embattled majorities too - like the billions of animals of who being slaughtered every year and who you will do fuck all to speak up for. Far easier to troll the plant munchers eh?


----------



## SpookyFrank (Dec 4, 2017)

Jeff Robinson said:


> There are also embattled majorities too - like the billions of animals of who being slaughtered every year and who will do fuck all to speak up for. Far easier to troll the plant munchers eh?



You're not a cow, so you're still not the victim here.


----------



## mojo pixy (Dec 4, 2017)

Jeff Robinson said:


> Are you suggesting that people shouldn't advocate for something they believe in because they will not always be able to persuade others to change? That's rather bizarre.



It would be bizarre, if that's what I'd posted or meant. Advocate away, everyone who feels strongly should IMO, but at the point where you encounter_ the end of reason_, the point where arguments are useless, I _advocate _stepping away and moving on elsewhere more receptive. You yourself may even agree, but there _are _people who _do _relish getting up people's noses about it all, I've met them and I have no doubt so have you. I used to be like that, a bit. But no actual animals benefit from it. Advancing the cause of animal rights isn't even the point of doing it. IMO that anger born of frustration is better used in some form of direct action rather than just having a go at people. I've made the same point already upthread and it got me called a troll.


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Dec 4, 2017)

mojo pixy said:


> It would be bizarre, if that's what I'd posted or meant. Advocate away, everyone who feels strongly should IMO, but at the point where you encounter_ the end of reason_, the point where arguments are useless, I _advocate _stepping away and moving on elsewhere more receptive. You yourself may even agree, but there _are _people who _do _relish getting up people's noses about it all, I've met them and I have no doubt so have you. I used to be like that, a bit. But no actual animals benefit from it. Advancing the cause of animal rights isn't even the point of doing it. IMO that anger born of frustration is better used in some form of direct action rather than just having a go at people. I've made the same point already upthread and it got me called a troll.



Thanks for clarifying. I am in full agreement with you on this. In fact, in my own life there are many people who I do not even bother to broach this topic with, because I know it will be fruitless. Likewise there are some people on these boards who it is completely pointless to engage with. I sometimes partake in these discussions not necessarily out of the hope of changing my interlocutor's mind but rather because my arguments might be useful to readers. I was gratified to receive an PM once from someday who said that my contributions to a thread about fox hunter had persuaded her to go vegetarian and maybe vegan in the future. I receive PMs every now and then asking about issues relating to veganism. And there are some posters that I find it illuminating to engage with - LBJ for example, and these discussions can help me to clarify my own thoughts.

But I suspect that often engagement on threads like these is time that could have been more productively spent elsewhere.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Dec 5, 2017)

Jeff Robinson said:


> Thanks for clarifying. I am in full agreement with you on this. In fact, in my own life there are many people who I do not even bother to broach this topic with, because I know it will be fruitless. Likewise there are some people on these boards who it is completely pointless to engage with. I sometimes partake in these discussions not necessarily out of the hope of changing my interlocutor's mind but rather because my arguments might be useful to readers.


Indeed. One of the reasons for being on a forum is to share ideas and learn new things from others and bounce ideas around. Similarly to what you said there, I have no real interest in persuading anybody or changing other peoples minds. I post links to articles, videos that I think are interesting/informative or give an interesting perspective on the subject and leave it to others to make up their own minds. 



Jeff Robinson said:


> I was gratified to receive an PM once from someday who said that my contributions to a thread about fox hunter had persuaded her to go vegetarian and maybe vegan in the future. I receive PMs every now and then asking about issues relating to veganism.


Over the years I have had many people contact myself and my wife both online and out in the real world, and as you said it can be very satisfying getting feedback from some of those folks and success stories from people who took the time to take on board some of the ideas and information that was shared and use it to make positive changes of their own.



Jeff Robinson said:


> And there are some posters that I find it illuminating to engage with - LBJ for example, and these discussions can help me to clarify my own thoughts.
> 
> But I suspect that often engagement on threads like these is time that could have been more productively spent elsewhere.


Some people consider any kind of participation on forums to be a bit of a waste of time, and sometimes it can be, depending on who you're dealing with. I assume that people engaged in a discussion with me are being sincere until they demonstrate otherwise, and if I believe they are arguing in bad faith or trolling, then I'm well within my rights to "switch them off" and move on. There are a number of "bad faith" posters in this thread who appear to be far more interested in nit-picking side issues and feuding, and I cba wasting my time with that.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Dec 5, 2017)

Jeff Robinson said:


> The Radical Left’s Top 10 Objections to Veganism (And Why They Suck)


Some good stuff in there. I liked this :-

_"As Audre Lorde famously said “There is no hierarchy of oppression”. All systems of oppression and injustice are intertwined, they stem from the same mentality of dominance and power. We cannot hope for justice for humans if we continue to participate in systems of violence towards our animal siblings. Our liberation is bound up together."_


----------



## mojo pixy (Dec 5, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> I assume that people engaged in a discussion with me are being sincere until they demonstrate otherwise, and if I believe they are arguing in bad faith or trolling, then I'm well within my rights to "switch them off" and move on. There are a number of "bad faith" posters in this thread who appear to be far more interested in nit-picking side issues and feuding, and I cba wasting my time with that.



Speak up! we can't hear you at the back when yer muttering like that


----------



## 8ball (Dec 6, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Some good stuff in there. I liked this :-
> 
> _"As Audre Lorde famously said “There is no hierarchy of oppression”. All systems of oppression and injustice are intertwined, they stem from the same mentality of dominance and power. We cannot hope for justice for humans if we continue to participate in systems of violence towards our animal siblings. Our liberation is bound up together."_



Truthyness.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Dec 7, 2017)

Blatant vegan propaganda...



...more people "going vegan". Not sure how many people are being turned against, but the momentum is growing and long may it continue.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Dec 8, 2017)

BBC Radio 4 - The Food Programme, Young and Vegan

_"...and one thing that's leaping out at me right now is how veganism is exploding, with dishes available in high street restaurants and a myriad of choice in the supermarkets. This fascinates me because I was a vegetarian in the 80's thanks to Morrisey, and I remember those dark days of nut roasts that resembled and tasted like a house brick, AND OF ACTIVE HOSTILITY IF YOU ASKED WHAT THE VEGETARIAN OPTION WAS WHEN DINING OUT.  ...and as for vegans...they were from another planet. But in 2017, it feels like the vegans are making some serious progress and taking over planet earth."_

Active hostility indeed, sounds familiar.


----------



## OzT (Dec 8, 2017)

It's good that veganism and vegeterianisms (both spelling errors probably by me) are getting more popular, but do you think their food, when eating out, is way over priced? As in the raw material, plant based, would have had a huge mark up when presented in a resturante?

I'm not a vegeterian but looking at that section of the menu sometimes I think so in places I have been to.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Dec 8, 2017)

OzT said:


> It's good that veganism and vegeterianisms (both spelling errors probably by me) are getting more popular, but do you think their food, when eating out, is way over priced? As in the raw material, plant based, would have had a huge mark up when presented in a resturante?
> 
> I'm not a vegeterian but looking at that section of the menu sometimes I think so in places I have been to.


I'm not sure if veg*n food is marked up any more than non veg food. I'm not one for eating out anyway so I may be out of touch with what's going on in the real world. I'm pretty sure that nowadays if you really wanted to and you were hungry you could find somewhere reasonably local that serves good value veg*n food.

Top 10 Budget Vegetarian Restaurants in London - Broke in London


----------



## xenon (Dec 8, 2017)

OzT said:


> It's good that veganism and vegeterianisms (both spelling errors probably by me) are getting more popular, but do you think their food, when eating out, is way over priced? As in the raw material, plant based, would have had a huge mark up when presented in a resturante?
> 
> I'm not a vegeterian but looking at that section of the menu sometimes I think so in places I have been to.



Of course, restaurant prices aren't about the raw ingredients, meat or otherwise. For most dishes. Kobe beef or exotic stuff aside.


----------



## OzT (Dec 9, 2017)

Oh I agree restaurants markups are not just the raw ingredients, I just woudl have thought be cheaper dishes than meat as the raw is cheaper, and, this is just my ignorance, I would have thought veggie dishes requires less cooking than meat dishes?

I reckon it's just restaurants making a larger percentages on veggie dishes for the moment, until maybe whenit becomes mainstream?


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Dec 11, 2017)

OzT said:


> Oh I agree restaurants markups are not just the raw ingredients, I just woudl have thought be cheaper dishes than meat as the raw is cheaper, and, this is just my ignorance, I would have thought veggie dishes requires less cooking than meat dishes?
> 
> I reckon it's just restaurants making a larger percentages on veggie dishes for the moment, until maybe whenit becomes mainstream?


I don't believe that there's any significant additional markup (if any at all) for veg*n restaurants or that they are overcharging their customers. Of course I could be wrong but I haven't seen or heard evidence of this. Any place that is ripping off customers whether they be veg or non-veg will get poor ratings and lose customers so I would have thoutht that it makes more sense for them to provide good service and value.


----------



## hipipol (Dec 11, 2017)

Perhaps I have lived a very sheltered life but I have yet to be attacked by an angry vegan, are their great herds of them filling the streets with anti-carnivore, anti-pescatarian and anti-non-vegan vegetarians slogans and demos, cos I've missed them all. The vegans I know are self controlled people who are less likely than most to flip out - tbf the methodology used to promote veganism seems mainly designed to bore the recipient into submission.....the length of this thread, many, many pages and no short but massive burn out rage I claim, however feebly, is representative of such techniques......


----------



## William of Walworth (Dec 11, 2017)

As a very readable piece about veganism at this time of year, I recommend this. Very far from angry (the reverse in fact) with some humour (yes, really!  ), and a bit of self-pisstaking, and what I thought was quite a laid-back way of pointing out how to get around some common Xmas annoyances  .... 

* ‘Pretend your food is disgusting’: Romesh Ranganathan’s Christmas survival guide for vegans *


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Dec 11, 2017)

William of Walworth said:


> As a very readable piece about veganism at this time of year, I recommend this. Very far from angry (the reverse in fact) with some humour (yes, really!  ), and a bit of self-pisstaking, and what I thought was quite a laid-back way of pointing out how to get around some common Xmas annoyances  ....
> 
> * ‘Pretend your food is disgusting’: Romesh Ranganathan’s Christmas survival guide for vegans *


You beat me to it by about 10 seconds, I had that lined up ready to post...


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Dec 11, 2017)

hipipol said:


> Perhaps I have lived a very sheltered life but I have yet to be attacked by an angry vegan, are their great herds of them filling the streets with anti-carnivore, anti-pescatarian and anti-non-vegan vegetarians slogans and demos, cos I've missed them all. The vegans I know are self controlled people who are less likely than most to flip out -


Well apparently, they're out there somewhere. You just need to look a bit harder. If tilt your head 27.13 degrees to the left and squint your eyes, the imaginary demon vegan will physically manifest in front of you. True story bro.



hipipol said:


> tbf the methodology used to promote veganism seems mainly designed to bore the recipient into submission.....the length of this thread, many, many pages and no short but massive burn out rage I claim, however feebly, is representative of such techniques......


If you ever do manage to wade through the posts in this thread, you'll no doubt see that if there is any rage to be found here, most of it is from angry non-veg*ns.


----------



## mojo pixy (Dec 12, 2017)

...though there's always that misanthropic vegan with his well dodge references to _the blacks_ and_ impaired humans_. He's a total trip.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Dec 12, 2017)

...nope, can't see any of those. Yet another made up concoction, looks like someone's "tripping" on silly psy bins again.

What I can see is a persistent troll regularly getting his digs and jibes in and posting weird gibberish riddles. He also appears to have some kind of visual impairment which transforms benign words like "carnist" into some kind of massive slur, while conveniently ignoring the genuine abusive slurs in the opposite direction.  

I suggest that he step away and move to another more troll compatible thread where you can get up peoples noses (and yes you still are like that). In the meantime I shall continue to mostly ignore or disregard his nonsensical mumblings.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Dec 12, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> What I can see is a persistent troll regularly getting his digs and jibes in and posting weird gibberish riddles.



I know you are but what am I?


----------



## Spymaster (Dec 12, 2017)

mojo pixy said:


> ...though there's always that misanthropic vegan with his well dodge references to _the blacks_ and_ impaired humans_. He's a total trip.


I'm surprised anyone's still responding to him here. He's pretty much been sent to Coventry on the cricket forum.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Dec 12, 2017)

lol, looks like there's been a job lot at the numpty factory, they're reproducing faster than bacteria on an Ashton Agar dish. The trolls seem to be far more interested in me than I am of them, I have mostly ignored them but they keep butting in. One particularly sad individual had a rather pathetic meltdown like an angry spurned lover might, (jilted jesus?) transferring beef over to the cricket thread for no good reason, before withdrawing his last pitiful post. How embarrassing, lol.  I wonder how many more attempts MI5 will try to rally fellow trolls to stop responding? He's had about 10 attempts already it would appear without much success. If only they would stop, it would be doing me a massive favour. Hurry up lads.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Dec 12, 2017)

...and speaking of cricket, Aggers interview with Jason "Dizzy" Gillespie, coach to the likes of England players Joe Root, Gary Ballance, Jonny "headbutt" Bairstow, Adil Rashid, Liam Plunkett, Adam Lyth, on TMS last week reminded me of his wonderfully principled "fuck the sponsors" stance...

Yorkshire’s Jason Gillespie on cricket, family and why he’s batting for veganism
_“Yes, they are a sponsor,” he says. “But it doesn’t mean I agree with what they do. It’s out of my control, just like the fact that cricket balls are made of leather. I’ll have it out with people, I don’t care. There’s nothing wrong with standing up for what you believe in.”
_
Well done Dizzy. 




Spoiler: Article



“That year after he died I was kind of in no man’s land. I just started to do a bit of research on health and nutrition, then I watched a couple of documentaries.

“There was one in particular, Earthlings (the Joaquin Phoenix-endorsed film looking at mankind’s use of animals). It started as a health thing, but after watching that I couldn’t be a part of a society which treats animals the way we do.”

It’s now nearly two years since he consumed any animal products, his only regret being that he didn’t make the change sooner.

“It’s made me look at all aspects of my life. Things like clothing for instance. I’ll go to the St Gemma’s Hospice shop if I need a new shirt. That money goes to charity, I get a recycled shirt and I know someone’s not in a sweatshop getting 10 cents an hour to allow me to wear a T-shirt with a logo on it.

“My wife and I often talk about it, because she’s vegan as well. I feel like I’m looking through eyes without blinkers on. We treat animals like s**t, we really do. And in my opinion there’s no justification for that.

“These slaughterhouses, dairies and piggeries, zoos. It’s cruel and it’s speciesism (the idea humans have greater moral rights than animals) at its very worst and I don’t want to be part of it.

“Hopefully one day the dairy industry can be shut down. I think it’s disgusting and wrong on so many levels. Slaughterhouses too. There are a lot of things we say in this world that are bulls**t. ‘Humane slaughter’. No one’s been able to explain that to me. How is killing humane?”

Gillespie’s views will offer food for thought in a county proud of its farming heritage. Not to mention the fact the Yorkshire players’ shirts are emblazoned with the logo of cheese firm The Wensleydale Creamery.

“Yes, they are a sponsor,” he says. “But it doesn’t mean I agree with what they do. It’s out of my control, just like the fact that cricket balls are made of leather. I’ll have it out with people, I don’t care. There’s nothing wrong with standing up for what you believe in.”

A similar passion is being poured into Yorkshire’s pursuit of a place in the history books. He knows how much a third championship in a row would mean to the players and everyone connected to a club he is proud to call “the most famous in the world”.


----------



## mojo pixy (Dec 12, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> In the meantime I shall continue to mostly ignore or disregard his nonsensical mumblings.



I'm amazed you bothered to post then. And in the third person too, so like you're telling me "dude I'm ignoring you" but you do it by announcing it to .. well, to whom exactly?


----------



## SpookyFrank (Dec 12, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> I'm surprised anyone's still responding to him here. He's pretty much been sent to Coventry on the cricket forum.



And you have to go some to get people's backs up on the cricket forum.

The racism helps of course.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Dec 12, 2017)

<sniff <sniff> there's a terrible stench of troll in this thread. I wonder if this will work...


----------



## ddraig (Dec 12, 2017)

you've disgraced yourself and failed to correct it
grow the fuck up


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Dec 12, 2017)

...anyway, in other more positive news. 

Fat Gay Vegan is throwing a three day Christmas vegan market | Metro News


----------



## ddraig (Dec 12, 2017)

PaoloSanchez don't fucking send me threatening PM's you idiot
again, grow the fuck up


----------



## veganomics (Dec 12, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> ...anyway, in other more positive news.
> 
> Fat Gay Vegan is throwing a three day Christmas vegan market | Metro News
> 
> View attachment 122894


I might try and get to this if I'm in the area.


----------



## Spymaster (Dec 12, 2017)

ddraig said:


> PaoloSanchez don't fucking send me threatening PM's you idiot
> again, grow the fuck up


FFS, PaoloSanchez  you've managed to alienate ddraig, who was your biggest supporter and now you're threatening him?

Very poor form.


----------



## xenon (Dec 12, 2017)

What is going on here?


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Dec 12, 2017)

veganomics said:


> I might try and get to this if I'm in the area.


I'm going to be there on the Friday...


----------



## mojo pixy (Dec 12, 2017)

A vegan gravy train, y'might say


----------



## Sue (Dec 12, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> I'm going to be there on the Friday...
> View attachment 122903


Went to this a few weeks ago (well the Saturday one). Expensive.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Dec 12, 2017)

Sue said:


> Went to this a few weeks ago (well the Saturday one). Expensive.


tbh, I'm not really one for eating out much, I'm mainly going to case out the joint and check the vibe. 
Was everything there expensive? Was there anything there that you liked? Was the whole market full of "angry vegans".  (or hungry vegans that couldn't afford the food)


----------



## Sue (Dec 12, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> tbh, I'm not really one for eating out much, I'm mainly going to case out the joint and check the vibe.
> Was everything there expensive? Was there anything there that you liked? Was the whole market full of "angry vegans".  (or hungry vegans that couldn't afford the food)


There weren't that many stalls when i was there and mainly hot takeaway food. Some stuff wasn't too bad but there were doughnuts at £3.50 each... (Was there with my sister who's been vegan for 30 years. Seemed like a pretty typical non-angry vegan crowd...)

(The Black Cat vegan café which is reasonably priced is pretty close too.)


----------



## 8ball (Dec 13, 2017)

Sue said:


> ...there were doughnuts at £3.50 each... (Was there with my sister who's been vegan for 30 years. Seemed like a pretty typical non-angry vegan crowd...)



If you’re not angry about £3.50 for a doughnut you might be lacking selenium.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Dec 13, 2017)

Sue said:


> There weren't that many stalls when i was there and mainly hot takeaway food. Some stuff wasn't too bad but there were doughnuts at £3.50 each... (Was there with my sister who's been vegan for 30 years. Seemed like a pretty typical non-angry vegan crowd...)
> 
> (The Black Cat vegan café which is reasonably priced is pretty close too.)


I got the impression that there's only about a dozen stalls but that they are quite popular.  



(she must have spent a fortune on those doughuts if they're £3.50 each.)


----------



## veganomics (Dec 13, 2017)

Coach them when they're young.


----------



## 8ball (Dec 13, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> (she must have spent a fortune on those doughuts if they're £3.50 each.)



Hipsters got cash.


----------



## RainbowTown (Dec 13, 2017)

8ball said:


> Hipsters got cash.



And beards too. You know, those trendy little bits of bum-fluff sprouting from their moisturized chins. 

That's why they're so very, very cool. Urban style, man.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Dec 13, 2017)

8ball said:


> Hipsters got cash.


Or as that famous vegan JME might say, "bare p's".


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Dec 13, 2017)

veganomics said:


> Coach them when they're young.



Marvellous isn't it? 
This reminded me of those various "children not wanting to eat animals" youtube videos. This one in particular...



...and it's apparently the vegans who "force their beliefs on their children."


----------



## 8ball (Dec 13, 2017)

The 'Santa argument' is a pretty nice touch tbf.

I wouldn't have been able to make her eat it personally.
I think I'd have been Googling 'best vegan diet for growing child' and riding out the moral fables at teatime til another kid had a birthday party at McDonald's...


----------



## hipipol (Dec 13, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> If you ever do manage to wade through the posts in this thread, you'll no doubt see that if there is any rage to be found here, most of it is from angry non-veg*ns.


Well, most seems positive re the UKs first Vegan Football team to get into the bottom league of the "proper" FA  - there is a contrarian view to come but just look at this bits first........








The FGR vegan football pie scores top three in the British Pie Awards / 2017 / First Team News / News / Home - Forest Green Rovers Football Club
Forest Green Rovers: the (almost) 100% vegan football club

Oh dear, I was going to post a link to a base level sarcasm driven classic little Englander "no strength without British Beef" article in The Fail but the page wont open properly, keeps causing Explorer to collapse and close - I didn't realise that this old Dell Desktop was able to express such good taste!!! Seems fitting tho - anyway if you want the opposite view there are acres of it about, though, as you can see I am unable to provide as my PC seems to have moved into "Rage Reduction Mode" where it prevents me from seeing knee jerk reactionary tosh that will drive me Crazy
What a great machine!!!!!


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Dec 13, 2017)

8ball said:


> The 'Santa argument' is a pretty nice touch tbf.


Can't really argue with that logic. Santa got old on just cookies so why can't I? Pretty sound. 
(vegan cookies of course  )



8ball said:


> I wouldn't have been able to make her eat it personally.


Yeah that was tough to watch. I showed it to my daughter who said that she would have flat out refused if we had tried anything like that on her. I don't think we've ever pressured any of the kids to eat stuff that they really didn't want.

This little girl graduated from a refusal to a TED talk and beyond...


----------



## hipipol (Dec 13, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Can't really argue with that logic. Santa got old on just cookies so why can't I? Pretty sound.
> (vegan cookies of course  )
> 
> 
> ...



She's really good, but I'd hate to live with her in the family...I'd be hiding in the closet with her Mum, tho I'd be snaffling up real cheese ( I have yet to find a Vegan Cheese that replicates it properly....)


----------



## ddraig (Dec 13, 2017)

she is amazing

what vegan cheeses you tried?


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Dec 13, 2017)

hipipol said:


> She's really good, but I'd hate to live with her in the family...I'd be hiding in the closet with her Mum, tho I'd be snaffling up real cheese ( I have yet to find a Vegan Cheese that replicates it properly....)


I'm not sure I could have made such a good presentation even now muchless at the age of 10. She was excellent.

If you were a member of her family, I would have hoped that you'd be in a position where you are comfortable with your choices and based them on logic, reason and whatever makes sense to you rather than do something because you've been coerced or bullied into it.

Regarding cheese, in my 20 years of being a vegan, I've not really wanted to have cheese and don't miss it at all. Apparently, according to Neil Barnard, it's one of the most addictive foods (something to do with dopamine). There are probably some reasonable substitutes out there and no doubt they'll be improving so you might have to use a bit of trial and error before you find one that suits your taste buds.


----------



## 8ball (Dec 13, 2017)

I only tried vegan cheese once and I agree with what I was told - that it’s nice stuff (this was, anyway) but it’s stretching definitions to call it cheese.

It was as much like cheese as Marmite is like gravy.


----------



## ddraig (Dec 13, 2017)

They are much better these days
And they're called Gary not cheese


----------



## 8ball (Dec 14, 2017)

ddraig said:


> They are much better these days
> And they're called Gary not cheese



This was earlier this year that I tried it (vegan food van at a festival).  I think Gary is a good name for it.  Especially with the name Gary dying out (apparently).


----------



## ddraig (Dec 14, 2017)

There's one theory that you have to/should stop eating real cheese for a bit before trying gary


----------



## Wookey (Dec 14, 2017)

8ball said:


> Especially with the name Gary dying out (apparently).



One wonders why.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Dec 14, 2017)

8ball said:


> I only tried vegan cheese once and I agree with what I was told - that it’s nice stuff (this was, anyway) but it’s stretching definitions to call it cheese.
> 
> It was as much like cheese as Marmite is like gravy.


I'm not sure if I've ever tried it and if so I can't remember it. Perhaps it was part of another meal or something. I imagine that there'll be quite a few different substitutes with quite a few different flavours and textures to explore.


10 best vegan cheeses


----------



## Spymaster (Dec 14, 2017)

Wookey said:


> One wonders why.


Vegan cheese renamed 'Gary' after dairy-lover's rant goes viral


----------



## 8ball (Dec 14, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> Vegan cheese renamed 'Gary' after dairy-lover's rant goes viral


----------



## SpookyFrank (Dec 14, 2017)

8ball said:


> I only tried vegan cheese once and I agree with what I was told - that it’s nice stuff (this was, anyway) but it’s stretching definitions to call it cheese.
> 
> It was as much like cheese as Marmite is like gravy.



Italy has good vegan cheese. People should probably give up trying to recreate cheddar, the results are pretty depressing. Your softer cheeses though, mozarella even, there's some potential there.


----------



## 8ball (Dec 14, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> I'm not sure if I've ever tried it and if so I can't remember it...



If you eat out much it seems likely.  Though yeah, I'd hope there are more 'cheese like' ones about.  A nice vegan blue cheese would be good.  Though I think it would be a bigger impact to cut down on factory-farmed chicken first (work canteen sandwiches).

If something has been humanely culled on reasonable grounds I have few problems with eating it, and I don't see anything necessarily so bad about well-sourced milk, but those chickens don't have a good time of things.


----------



## Spymaster (Dec 14, 2017)

SpookyFrank said:


> Italy has good vegan cheese. People should probably give up trying to recreate cheddar, the results are pretty depressing. Your softer cheeses though, mozarella even, there's some potential there.


Mozzarella's not far off a ball of compressed tofu anyway. Soya gary could be interesting.


----------



## 8ball (Dec 14, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> Mozzarella's not far off a ball of compressed tofu anyway. Soya gary could be interesting.



I want a good, blue, Stilton Gary!


----------



## mojo pixy (Dec 14, 2017)

Consumerism has given us some weird shit, but vegan "cheese" is surely one of the weirdest. Like, I want cheese .. but I don't want cheese .. but I want cheese ..but I don't want cheese .. but I want cheese ..but I don't want cheese .. but I want cheese ..but I don't want cheese .. but I want cheese ..but I don't want cheese .. but I want cheese ..but I don't want cheese .. but I want cheese ..but I don't want cheese .. but I want cheese ..but I don't want cheese .. but I want cheese ..but I don't want cheese .. but I want cheese ..but I don't want cheese .. but I want cheese ..but I don't want cheese .. but I want cheese ..but I don't want cheese .. but I want cheese ..but I don't want cheese .. but I want cheese ..but I don't want cheese .. but I want cheese ..but I don't want cheese .. but I want cheese ..but I don't want cheese .. but I want cheese ..but I don't want cheese .. but I want cheese ..but I don't want cheese .. but I want cheese .. ok gimme that weird shit


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Dec 14, 2017)

8ball said:


> If you eat out much it seems likely.  Though yeah, I'd hope there are more 'cheese like' ones about.  A nice vegan blue cheese would be good.


Even before I was a vegan, Sainsbury's cheddar or Red Leicester was about as adventurous as I got. I wasn't much of a cheese connoisseur, and when I worked in Paris, found the smell of the stinky cheeses in the supermarkets there very off putting.



8ball said:


> Though I think it would be a bigger impact to cut down on factory-farmed chicken first (work canteen sandwiches).
> 
> If something has been humanely culled on reasonable grounds I have few problems with eating it, and I don't see anything necessarily so bad about well-sourced milk, but those chickens don't have a good time of things.


Yeah, humanely culled.  That well known contradiction. It's up to the individual what they feel comfortable with and what sort of killings they want to justify. So many people claim that they get their meat and dairy from good "humane" sources when the reality is that even if there was such a thing as humane slaughter, a tiny minority get their meat, dairy and fish from those sources.


----------



## gentlegreen (Dec 14, 2017)

I will have to treat myself to vegan cheese over the Yule hostilities.

It's a slippery slope, cheese. In 2003 after 20 years vegan, I decided I would start catching and eating fish. The catching part was necessarily a token gesture because I'm a long way from the sea and I didn't fancy what I could catch in the local river and canal ...

Cheese, eggs and dairy snuck in with fish products I bought, rather than made myself, and the seasonal Camembert that went so well with French wine turned into a regular indulgence. I even bought a few Margerita pizzas ...

I can see it being a significant issue when I move to France and get invited out for the odd aperitif (it's my intention to make an effort to be sociable).

(Eating fish is almost a given- I turn into dolphin mode just watching David Attenborough on TV - let alone when I'm living near the sea.)


----------



## Spymaster (Dec 14, 2017)

gentlegreen said:


> I will have to treat myself over the Yule hostilities.
> 
> It's a slippery slope, cheese. In 2003 after 20 years vegan, I decided I would start catching and eating fish. The catching part was necessarily a token gesture because I'm a long way from the sea and I didn't fancy what I could catch in the local river and canal ...
> 
> ...


What fish have you caught yourself and eaten?


----------



## ddraig (Dec 14, 2017)

mojo pixy said:


> Consumerism has given us some weird shit, but vegan "cheese" is surely one of the weirdest. Like, I want cheese .. but I don't want cheese .. but I want cheese ..but I don't want cheese .. but I want cheese ..but I don't want cheese .. but I want cheese ..but I don't want cheese .. but I want cheese ..but I don't want cheese .. but I want cheese ..but I don't want cheese .. but I want cheese ..but I don't want cheese .. but I want cheese ..but I don't want cheese .. but I want cheese ..but I don't want cheese .. but I want cheese ..but I don't want cheese .. but I want cheese ..but I don't want cheese .. but I want cheese ..but I don't want cheese .. but I want cheese ..but I don't want cheese .. but I want cheese ..but I don't want cheese .. but I want cheese ..but I don't want cheese .. but I want cheese ..but I don't want cheese .. but I want cheese ..but I don't want cheese .. but I want cheese ..but I don't want cheese .. but I want cheese .. ok gimme that weird shit


more weird than curd from secretions of cows and goats meant for their own offspring??

people want what they used to have without the cruelty and/or plant based, it's quite straightforward


----------



## gentlegreen (Dec 14, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> What fish have you caught yourself and eaten?


three pollack and a mackerel


----------



## Spymaster (Dec 14, 2017)

ddraig said:


> more weird than curd from excretions of cows and goats meant for their own offspring??


Secretions, not excretions. 

Even I wouldn't eat excretions.


----------



## ddraig (Dec 14, 2017)

ok 
edited


----------



## mojo pixy (Dec 14, 2017)

ddraig said:


> more weird than curd from secretions of cows and goats meant for their own offspring??



Yes, even more weird than that. A facsimilie of weirdness.


----------



## Spymaster (Dec 14, 2017)

gentlegreen said:


> three pollack and a mackerel


Aye, the usual suspects.

I haven't done too much sea fishing but I do enjoy beach casting on a wild and windy day. Pollack, mackerel, and bass is pretty much all I've caught but I did once hook a _fucking massive_ halibut that got away


----------



## 8ball (Dec 14, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Yeah, humanely culled.  That well known contradiction.



Well, if we're culling deer anyway and it's scientifically supported, I'm not going to lose any sleep over eating the results.
An alternative might be to introduce some predators...


----------



## 8ball (Dec 14, 2017)

Spymaster said:


> I haven't done too much sea fishing but I do enjoy beach casting on a wild and windy day. Pollack, mackerel, and bass is pretty much all I've caught but I did hook a _fucking massive_ halibut that got away



It's probably weird, but I feel a bit bad about catching a fish on a hook, whereas a good instant shot on a deer or rabbit followed by a hearty stew...


----------



## Spymaster (Dec 14, 2017)

8ball said:


> It's probably weird, but I feel a bit bad about catching a fish on a hook, whereas a good instant shot on a deer or rabbit followed by a hearty stew...


It's not weird and I've felt the same. When you shoot something it usually drops dead. Occasionally you may need to shoot it again (that's always bothered me a bit) but it'll always be dead when you handle it. With fish you hold the animal whilst it's still moving and very much alive and kill it with your hands, yet I have fishing friends who won't shoot.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Dec 14, 2017)

8ball said:


> Well, if we're culling deer anyway and it's scientifically supported, I'm not going to lose any sleep over eating the results.
> An alternative might be to introduce some predators...


Fair enough, whatever floats yer boat, although very little of the meat, dairy, eggs and fish consumed has much to do with scientfic culling. I've yet to see a Kentucky Fried Bambi takeaway anywhere yet.


----------



## 8ball (Dec 14, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Fair enough, whatever floats yer boat, although very little of the meat, dairy, eggs and fish consumed has much to do with scientfic culling. I've yet to see a Kentucky Fried Bambi takeaway anywhere yet.



This is true.  Hence me thinking of cutting the worst stuff first (which I'm guessing is the chicken).  
Just need to find something else with the right nutrient set for lunch...


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Dec 14, 2017)

Why do some vegans bother with fake meats. (and cheeses)

"The answer is quite simple once you understand why people choose to remove animal products from their lives in the first place. As it turns out, vegans did not stop eating animals because they didn’t enjoy the taste. Who doesn’t enjoy the taste of a juicy hamburger, or a few slices of bacon? However, vegans chose to stop consuming and using animals on an ethical basis. (It should be noted that there are some people who eat a plant-based diet for health reasons, but these people are not “vegan” as they still use animals in other ways.)

Vegans believe it is morally wrong to kill and use animals when it’s completely unnecessary to do so. So, it’s not that they didn’t like the taste, it’s that they didn’t like participating in the senseless killing of animals when we know that nutritionally, animal foods serve no purpose to live healthfully. In fact, it actually benefits us to avoid them. Not to mention it’s arguably the single-most important thing one person can do to protect the environment.

If the familiar tastes and textures of animal foods can be replicated from 100 percent plant-based sources, there then exists no moral dilemma against consuming the food at hand. (If you believe “plants have feelings too,” maybe you should read this.) Vegans are in no way being hypocritical, or proving they are suppressing their desires by eating “fake” meats. In fact, they are being morally consistent and enjoying their food just like everyone else, sans the animal products."


----------



## 8ball (Dec 14, 2017)

Not sure why you posted that, but I never had any issue with meat substitutes.  It's bollocks that animals foods serve no purpose to live healthfully, but that's a side point.

In terms of substitutes, though, where would you stand on something that was made from animal flesh that was entirely cultured in vitro?


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Dec 14, 2017)

8ball said:


> Not sure why you posted that, but I never had any issue with meat substitutes.  It's bollocks that animals foods serve no purpose to live healthfully, but that's a side point.


That wasn't aimed at you in particular, just a response to the common criticism that vegans really want to eat meat and cheese and are just in denial.



8ball said:


> In terms of substitutes, though, where would you stand on something that was made from animal flesh that was entirely cultured in vitro?


It is not something that appeals to me at all and I wouldn't touch it with a bargepole. Given that there is such a massive variety of tastes and textures available with fruits, veg, grains, nuts, seeds, legumes, herbs and spices, I don't really see the need for "cultured meat", and even the idea of it makes me want to heave.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Dec 14, 2017)

8ball said:


> This is true.  Hence me thinking of cutting the worst stuff first (which I'm guessing is the chicken).
> Just need to find something else with the right nutrient set for lunch...


Trust me it is a lot easier to do now that it was even 10 years ago. Once you've take the time to make an informed decision imo you will be more likely to seek out and pick the foods that line up with your ethics and morals. There's an overwhelming amount of resources out there to help you whenever you're ready to tap into it.


----------



## 8ball (Dec 14, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> That wasn't aimed at you in particular, just a response to the common criticism that vegans really want to eat meat and cheese and are just in denial.



Fair enough.  Though if I was vegan I *would* really want to eat meat and cheese.  
Fully aware that most don't, though.



PaoloSanchez said:


> It is not something that appeals to me at all and I wouldn't touch it with a bargepole. Given that there is such a massive variety of tastes and textures available with fruits, veg, grains, nuts, seeds, legumes, herbs and spices, I don't really see the need for "cultured meat", and even the idea of it makes me want to heave.



That's interesting.  Do you do other substitutes, and do you think that feeling would be shared among most vegans (substitutes or not).  Aand would it possibly be to do with associations you have with the actual meat?  Because for me it's the animal welfare and environmental shizz that would nudge me in a vegan-ish/veggie-ish direction and if I could eat the stuff I like without those issues then I would.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Dec 14, 2017)

gentlegreen said:


> I will have to treat myself to vegan cheese over the Yule hostilities.
> 
> It's a slippery slope, cheese. In 2003 after 20 years vegan, I decided I would start catching and eating fish. The catching part was necessarily a token gesture because I'm a long way from the sea and I didn't fancy what I could catch in the local river and canal ...
> 
> ...


Yeah dead fish and stinky cheese, such wonderful aromas. 
I guess not being a big fan of either of those made it easier for me to transition away and I don't miss them at all.

As for the social side, tbh I don't really see my food choices as being any kind of impediment to social interactions or a barrier to me fitting in. I've spent time working various European locations and it hasn't stopped me from mixing and has sometimes led to interesting conversations.


----------



## 8ball (Dec 14, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Yeah dead fish and stinky cheese, such wonderful aromas.



<gets tuna melt panini from canteen>...


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Dec 14, 2017)

8ball said:


> That's interesting.  Do you do other substitutes, and do you think that feeling would be shared among most vegans (substitutes or not).


tbh, I don't really think of veggie burgers, sausages as "substitutes", just food that tastes at least reasonable, isn't going to kill me and is in line with my ethics and morals. I don't really see them as meat alternatives, just as food. 

I'm not sure what most vegans feel, but I suspect that many would be a bit wary and have a preference for more natural foods that didn't originate in a petri dish or a laboratory produced by men/women in white coats. There are some who won't have a problem with it in principle if it means that no animals are harmed. There's the occasional bit of hype in the news about this but it's not something that I pay much attention to tbh and don't particularly find it interesting.



8ball said:


> Aand would it possibly be to do with associations you have with the actual meat?  Because for me it's the animal welfare and environmental shizz that would nudge me in a vegan-ish/veggie-ish direction and if I could eat the stuff I like without those issues then I would.


Indeed animal welfare is a major part of the deal for me too, but there are also other important considerations two of them being health and environment. If there is no need to consume animals products from a health perspective then I don't really see the need to try and artificially create meat, especially given that the characteristics of freshly killed "meat" is not that appealing to many of us anyway and we often end up changing it to make it more palatable.  (For reference The Biology of Disgust.)


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Dec 14, 2017)

8ball said:


> <gets tuna melt panini from canteen>...


By the time it gets to that stage most of the pongy smells have been cooked out. Walking past a fishmonger though makes me want to...

...vomit.

(edited for the squeamish  )


----------



## mojo pixy (Dec 14, 2017)

That's a horrible gif. Could you not just write ''It makes me want to puke'' ?


----------



## 8ball (Dec 14, 2017)

mojo pixy said:


> That's a horrible gif. Could you not just write ''It makes me want to puke'' ?



Though tbf the colour and texture does specify quite accurately that it is vegan puke.


----------



## mojo pixy (Dec 14, 2017)

I think it's fake puke really. Pretend puke, but not done quite well enough for that not to show.


----------



## mojo pixy (Dec 14, 2017)

To push that further away, and since it's the season, and to show willing for the cause, here is a site where you can check if your drinky is right on or filthy scum:

Barnivore: your vegan wine, beer, and liquor guide


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Dec 19, 2017)

_"Now if this was supposed to be food, natural food that we are supposed to eat, why does it make us feel sick to see how it's produced?"_


----------



## A380 (Dec 20, 2017)

What about honey?

Just asking.


----------



## gentlegreen (Dec 20, 2017)

I'm starting to dislike vegans as much as I do cyclists ...

I've unsubscribed from several youtubers recently.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Dec 20, 2017)

gentlegreen said:


> I'm starting to dislike vegans as much as I do cyclists ...


Well, looks like you'll find plenty of similarly minded folk in this forum. I have a rather thick skin and try to not pay too much attention to the vegan hate especially as there is so much that is positive to look forward to.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Dec 20, 2017)

A380 said:


> What about honey?
> 
> Just asking.


I was never a big fan of honey anyway. Some vegans are ok with honey and some aren't and don't consider it vegan. 

See what your ethics is comfortable with and go with that. Honey is one of those grey areas and not as clear cut as livestock, poultry, dairy, eggs and fish are. Even fish were fair game and it would appear that a lot of people consider them to be a bit like swimming vegetables. "Oh you're vegetarian...but you eat fish right? ...and what about chicken?" (fish and chicken...those well known vegetables )


----------



## bellaozzydog (Dec 20, 2017)

I went vegan for 18 months, no meat, dairy, fish, eggs. Also went glutton free.

It was for health reasons (psoriatic arthritis)

A side effect is that I feel ethically better that I'm not Helping the meat industry killing sentient creatures

However I moved back to eating fish recently. Either sustainable fish or fish I catch myself.

I mix with a lot of vegans and have basically stopped disclosing my diet at all as I just seem to upset them in one way or another whatever I tell them. A key point is that I was never vegan as I wear leather etc.

I also do a lot of yoga and meditation and in discussion seem to be a red flag to a lot of yoga and meditation goons. My position being yoga/meditation/breathing is very good for you but I don't accept the mumbo jumbo mysticism they bang on about.

I run in to trouble with the dog rescue crew as well having differing opinions

I'm not a contrary, argumentative type and not insensitive but there are a lot of passionate people out there

So I basically shut the fuck up and find something less controversial like the weather to chat about


----------



## NoXion (Dec 20, 2017)

I don't think that I could go glutton free, I enjoy pigging out too much.


----------



## 8ball (Dec 20, 2017)

bellaozzydog said:


> I mix with a lot of vegans and have basically stopped disclosing my diet at all as I just seem to upset them in one way or another whatever I tell them....
> 
> ... I do a lot of yoga and meditation and in discussion seem to be a red flag to a lot of yoga and meditation goons.



Veganism and yoga without the religion would be a good thing.


----------



## mojo pixy (Dec 20, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> See what your ethics is comfortable with and go with that.





Have you fallen ill suddenly?


----------



## gentlegreen (Dec 20, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> I was never a big fan of honey anyway. Some vegans are ok with honey and some aren't and don't consider it vegan.
> 
> See what your ethics is comfortable with and go with that. Honey is one of those grey areas and not as clear cut as livestock, poultry, dairy, eggs and fish are. Even fish were fair game and it would appear that a lot of people consider them to be a bit like swimming vegetables. "Oh you're vegetarian...but you eat fish right? ...and what about chicken?" (fish and chicken...those well known vegetables )



Unnatural Vegan is the only one I bother watching much these days - she gets so much crap for being OK with GM food and non-organic / non-raw etc.
What I hate most is the prevarication around B12 supplementation from the likes of the "Hippy Healthy vegans".
I've just stopped watching Pam Popper because she's started to stray into anti-vax territory.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Dec 20, 2017)

One of my friends has his _vegan mother-in-law _coming around for Christmas dinner.


----------



## 8ball (Dec 20, 2017)

gentlegreen said:


> Unnatural Vegan is the only one I bother watching much these days - she gets so much crap for being OK with GM food and non-organic / non-raw etc.
> What I hate most is the prevarication around B12 supplementation from the likes of the "Hippy Healthy vegans".
> I've just stopped watching Pam Popper because she's started to stray into anti-vax territory.



It's a shame in that it makes it so easy to discredit any decent arguments (such as the Santa Claus argument, obv) by pointing to the many associations with utter nonsense.


----------



## 8ball (Dec 20, 2017)

sleaterkinney said:


> One of my friends has his _vegan mother-in-law _coming around for Christmas dinner.



You say that as if it's odd that a mother in law would be vegan.


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Dec 20, 2017)

gentlegreen said:


> she gets so much crap for being OK with GM food and non-organic / non-raw etc.


Anti GM food types are some of the biggest wankers out there.

Technology that could help feed the planet but oh no, it’s bad because hippy cunts.

Point out to them that we’ve been fucking with the genetics of food since day one and hopefully their stupid fucking heads will explode.


----------



## 8ball (Dec 20, 2017)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> Point out to them that we’ve been fucking with the genetics of food since day one and hopefully their stupid fucking heads will explode.



Yeah, but not with pipettes and centrifuges and men in white coats and stuff.
And some of the attempts to ring-fence biology are pretty dodge tbf.


----------



## gentlegreen (Dec 20, 2017)

8ball said:


> And some of the attempts to ring-fence biology are pretty dodge tbf.


Expensively-bred genetics have always been copyright. I'm fairly certain it's illegal to sell cuttings of fancy geraniums at garden fetes.

PBR - What does it mean? - Cath's Garden Plants

I've also seen them attack Borlaug's Nobel prize-winning breeding from the 60s which has no convenient Monsanto-taint - on account of  MUTANT GLUTEN !!!! - and of course Americans getting obese on doughnuts ...


----------



## ddraig (Dec 20, 2017)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> Anti GM food types are some of the biggest wankers out there.
> 
> Technology that could help feed the planet but oh no, it’s bad because hippy cunts.
> 
> Point out to them that we’ve been fucking with the genetics of food since day one and hopefully their stupid fucking heads will explode.


oh dear! you want monsanto etc fucking and privatising food??


----------



## 8ball (Dec 20, 2017)

ddraig said:


> oh dear! you want monsanto etc fucking and privatising food??



I have no prob with GM necessarily, my beef is mostly with capitalism.

And my bacon.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Dec 20, 2017)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> Anti GM food types are some of the biggest wankers out there.
> 
> Technology that could help feed the planet but oh no, it’s bad because hippy cunts.
> 
> Point out to them that we’ve been fucking with the genetics of food since day one and hopefully their stupid fucking heads will explode.



I'm against GM foods and I have a degree in genetics, am I too a clueless wanker?

We have been fucking with the genetics of food for millenia, that much is true. Introducing new genes from unrelated species is something we have not been doing for millenia, but it may take millenia for the consequences to play out. And it's being done by people for whom 'consequences' do not extend beyond the end of the next financial year.

GM crops are mostly created to be better adapted to large scale, mechanised monoculture farming, the very process which is doing so much damage to food security, biodiversity and soil quality; as well as causing things like drought, erosion, desertification and flooding. It's pretty bad for humans too, particularly if it leaves a handful of businesses with a monopoly on food production.

You don't need scare stories or worst case scenarios to argue against GMO's, if everything goes exactly as Monsanto say it will then that's still pretty fucking bad.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Dec 20, 2017)

We already have everyting we need to feed everyone on the planet. The reason we don't is because there are powerful people who profit from scarcity. 

Why would agribusiness kill the goose that lays the golden eggs? Or genetically engineer it to lay enough gold for everyone? That's not how you make money.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Dec 20, 2017)

bellaozzydog said:


> I went vegan for 18 months, no meat, dairy, fish, eggs. Also went glutton free.
> 
> It was for health reasons (psoriatic arthritis)
> 
> ...


I assume you meant "gluten free" and were autocorrected. Another area where some vegans might also autocorrect is the idea that you can "go vegan" simply by eating the same food that vegans eat. A meat eater can eat vegan food for a whole year and still not necessarily be a vegan, because being vegan is more than just a faddy diet. Some are under the illusion that they are "being vegan" because they're eating vegan food when they don't really buy into or sometimes even know much about the philosophy behind veganism. If you don't have a problem with wearing animal skins then I can understand why that might be seen by some as something that isn't vegan, but if you're comfortable with doing that then others peoples opinions shouldn't really bother you, right?



bellaozzydog said:


> I'm not a contrary, argumentative type and not insensitive but there are a lot of passionate people out there
> 
> So I basically shut the fuck up and find something less controversial like the weather to chat about


Yeah well this covers several "controversial" topics. People also say that you shouldn't discuss things like politics, religion, football team, etc, they can all trigger a negative response depending on the people you happen to be interacting with. It's not something that I believe is a particular issue with vegans, and in my experience I have witnessed far more hostility and antagonism towards vegans than the other way around (this thread being an example of that). It's not a subject that I usually bring up when I'm out in the real world but if it ever does come up, I'm not afraid to discuss it.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Dec 20, 2017)

gentlegreen said:


> Unnatural Vegan is the only one I bother watching much these days - she gets so much crap for being OK with GM food and non-organic / non-raw etc.


I agree with some of the things she says and disagree with other things. She isn't one of my favourite vegan commentators. I disagree with her on GM foods and believe them to be corporate BS. 



gentlegreen said:


> What I hate most is the prevarication around B12 supplementation from the likes of the "Hippy Healthy vegans".


I'm not sure what this "prevarication around B12" you're on about there tbh. Most vegan commentators say if you have concerns about B12 then take a supplement, so what's the problem with that. Speaking of HHV, Ryan posted his blood work including (B12 levels both before and after supplementation).


----------



## 8ball (Dec 20, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Some are under the illusion that they are "being vegan" because they're eating vegan food when they don't really buy into or sometimes even know much about the philosophy behind veganism.



Must admit I took “being vegan” to be largely reducible to what you eat.  What would be the minimum level of “buying into” the vegan philosophy necessary to really be generally considered a vegan?


----------



## mojo pixy (Dec 20, 2017)

To be clear, if your diet includes no animal products of any kind, you're vegan. Sanctimony and self-righteousness are 100% optional.


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Dec 20, 2017)

mojo pixy said:


> To be clear, if your diet includes no animal products of any kind, you're vegan.


Noooooo, you have to errrr, _believe_, too. Apparently.


----------



## 8ball (Dec 20, 2017)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> Noooooo, you have to errrr, _believe_, too. Apparently.



But what?

I want to know what the minimum qualification set is.


----------



## 8ball (Dec 20, 2017)

mojo pixy said:


> To be clear, if your diet includes no animal products of any kind, you're vegan. Sanctimony and self-righteousness are 100% optional.



Except for fossilised animals, that’s ok.


----------



## bellaozzydog (Dec 20, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> I assume you meant "gluten free" and were autocorrected. Another area where some vegans might also autocorrect is the idea that you can "go vegan" simply by eating the same food that vegans eat. A meat eater can eat vegan food for a whole year and still not necessarily be a vegan, *because being vegan is more than just a faddy diet*. Some are under the illusion that they are "being vegan" because they're eating vegan food when they don't really buy into or sometimes even know much about the philosophy behind veganism. If you don't have a problem with wearing animal skins then I can understand why that might be seen by some as something that isn't vegan, but if you're comfortable with doing that then others peoples opinions shouldn't really bother you, right?
> 
> 
> Yeah well this covers several "controversial" topics. People also say that you shouldn't discuss things like politics, religion, football team, etc, they can all trigger a negative response depending on the people you happen to be interacting with. It's not something that I believe is a particular issue with vegans, and in my experience I have witnessed far more hostility and antagonism towards vegans than the other way around (this thread being an example of that). It's not a subject that I usually bring up when I'm out in the real world but if it ever does come up, I'm not afraid to discuss it.



"Being vegan is more than a faddy diet"

This is the point where you lose people by devaluing their choices/efforts. You are saying unless you drink the coolaid you aren't one of us.

Exactly the same as yogis insisting that unless you embrace mystic eastern philosophies you aren't  a "real" yogi

I benefit from not eating meat, stretching and meditating, don't throw me shade for not being as fundamental as you, my efforts/choices are, on balance positive in the universe and my pragmatic enthusiasm might bring more people into the fold than a judgemental holier than though approach


----------



## 8ball (Dec 20, 2017)

bellaozzydog said:


> "Being vegan is more than a faddy diet"
> 
> This is the point where you lose people by devaluing their choices/efforts. You are saying unless you drink the coolaid you aren't one of us.
> 
> ...



I think being a yogi involves more than a few stretches tbf.


----------



## bellaozzydog (Dec 20, 2017)

8ball said:


> I think being a yogi involves more than a few stretches tbf.



I rest my case.

Apologies I'm halfway into a box of wine


----------



## mojo pixy (Dec 20, 2017)

8ball said:


> Except for fossilised animals, that’s ok.



And honey, if your ethics can stand it, or something.


----------



## 8ball (Dec 20, 2017)

bellaozzydog said:


> I rest my case.
> 
> Apologies I'm halfway into a box of wine



Yoga has a bunch of elements.  It’s a bit like saying you’re a Catholic because you like the odd glass of wine.

The bit I’m confused about is what you need to believe or do to be vegan aside from make certain dietary choices.


----------



## gentlegreen (Dec 21, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> I agree with some of the things she says and disagree with other things. She isn't one of my favourite vegan commentators. I disagree with her on GM foods and believe them to be corporate BS.
> 
> 
> I'm not sure what this "prevarication around B12" you're on about there tbh. Most vegan commentators say if you have concerns about B12 then take a supplement, so what's the problem with that. Speaking of HHV, Ryan posted his blood work including (B12 levels both before and after supplementation).



I was referring to the earlier videos where he was being persuaded by others to actually supplement.
I see this video as confirmation of his prevarication.
In Ryan's case, I could well believe he was having B12 injections on the sly.

I don't see GM tech as the ultimate panacea for all our agricultural problems, but something that we reject at our peril.
I am seriously pissed off with Greenpeace. Such a shame that their ex-head resigned over their stance on climate change and not GM.


----------



## gentlegreen (Dec 21, 2017)

SpookyFrank said:


> particularly if it leaves a handful of businesses with a monopoly on food production.


Because all the other growers will be wiped out by pests, diseases and climatic change because they can't afford GM seeds ?


----------



## SpookyFrank (Dec 21, 2017)

gentlegreen said:


> Because all the other growers will be wiped out by pests, diseases and climatic change because they can't afford GM seeds ?



Or because producers will be outcompeted in the short term by those using GM crops, and will be left with little choice but to follow suit.


----------



## A380 (Dec 21, 2017)

bellaozzydog said:


> "Being vegan is more than a faddy diet"
> 
> This is the point where you lose people by devaluing their choices/efforts. You are saying unless you drink the coolaid you aren't one of us.
> 
> ...



This is the point, unless you are identical in every way you will never be properly ‘one of us’. Some people need, for reasons I’m not going to mock, to be ‘better’ than others who are like them.

It’s not just vegans, lots of religious people do it to and, of course, we on the left is riven with it (People’s Front of Judea, splitters).

There’s a term for it and everything.


----------



## gentlegreen (Dec 21, 2017)

Personally I like the no-till possibilities afforded by roundup-ready seeds of crops that are by necessity bulk crops.
I wonder if green manure cover crops could be sown as part of the technology ?

Not that the bad practices of the past are much justification, but I have only recently learned that land in the southern USA is contaminated with arsenic used against cotton weevils.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Dec 21, 2017)

8ball said:


> Must admit I took “being vegan” to be largely reducible to what you eat.  What would be the minimum level of “buying into” the vegan philosophy necessary to really be generally considered a vegan?


It is true that many believe that simply eating vegan makes them "a vegan". The eating takes care of the superficial "what" however there is a much deeper and fundamental set of "why's" which form a stronger foundation. Without the strong roots that the "why's" provide, it's a bit like building a big beautiful glass palace on sand. This might explain why vegan adoption is a bit like new years resolutions or many attempts to stop smoking, they often don't last very long and a high percentage give up fairly quickly.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Dec 21, 2017)

bellaozzydog said:


> "Being vegan is more than a faddy diet"
> 
> This is the point where you lose people by devaluing their choices/efforts. You are saying unless you drink the coolaid you aren't one of us.


Well imo if there is any "devaluation" going on here it would be the other way around, reducing veganism to just a mere diet and ignoring or dismissing the core tenets. It's a bit like wanting to be called a racing driver because you once sat in a passenger seat of a Lada ffs. "Don't you devalue my racing driver credentials". 



bellaozzydog said:


> I benefit from not eating meat, stretching and meditating, don't throw me shade for not being as fundamental as you, my efforts/choices are, on balance positive in the universe and my pragmatic enthusiasm might bring more people into the fold than a judgemental holier than though approach


No shade was being thrown, I think you are being a tad sensitive. I'm just describing it as it is. Being vegan is more that just a diet, that's just how it is.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Dec 21, 2017)

gentlegreen said:


> I was referring to the earlier videos where he was being persuaded by others to actually supplement.
> I see this video as confirmation of his prevarication.
> In Ryan's case, I could well believe he was having B12 injections on the sly.


tbh, I don't really know what you're getting at here. So what if he was being persuaded by others to supplement? Some people say "you must definitely supplement" and others say "supplement if you are concerned, check your results". As far as I'm concerned both are ok, it's up to the individual to use their brains, investigate for themselves and figure out what they think is best for them. 



gentlegreen said:


> I don't see GM tech as the ultimate panacea for all our agricultural problems, but something that we reject at our peril.
> I am seriously pissed off with Greenpeace. Such a shame that their ex-head resigned over their stance on climate change and not GM.


Fair enough, that's your belief, I don't share yours and Swayzee's enthusiasm for GM at all and believe there are far better natural and more sustainable solutions out there.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Dec 21, 2017)

A380 said:


> This is the point, unless you are identical in every way you will never be properly ‘one of us’. Some people need, for reasons I’m not going to mock, to be ‘better’ than others who are like them.


There is no exclusive club with bouncers at the door barring entry, however there are basic principles. Some noobs and first timers are not conversant with those principles and hence believe that it's exclusively about diet. Some even get quite aggressive and wish to dismiss the important ethical foundation as if it's nothing. This is what makes it more like "this years fashion" that has no substance to it.


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 21, 2017)

if you do enough yogaing you can slow your heart rate down through meditation- one of the few mind over body claims from yoga that is provable iirc. What special moves does advanced vegan philosophy get you? hadoken?


----------



## mr steev (Dec 21, 2017)

mojo pixy said:


> To be clear, if your diet includes no animal products of any kind, you're vegan. Sanctimony and self-righteousness are 100% optional.



So if you're diet includes no animal products, but you're wearing leather shoes, a fur coat, a silk scarf, use shampoo made with milk and fish products, and make-up tested on animals you're a vegan?

If you're diet includes no animal products you have a vegan diet.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Dec 21, 2017)

mr steev said:


> So if you're diet includes no animal products, but you're wearing leather shoes, a fur coat, a silk scarf, use shampoo made with milk and fish products, and make-up tested on animals you're a vegan?
> 
> If you're diet includes no animal products you have a vegan diet.


Some people don't want to look at the ethical side at all and in fact want to run a mile away from it. (don't mention the war). If you eat vegan food then you're a vegan. Nothing else to it, right?


----------



## 8ball (Dec 21, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Some people don't want to look at the ethical side at all and in fact want to run a mile away from it. (don't mention the war). If you eat vegan food then you're a vegan. Nothing else to it, right?



There’s been a good bit of question-dodging considering this stuff is meant to be so foundational...


----------



## 8ball (Dec 21, 2017)

DotCommunist said:


> if you do enough yogaing you can slow your heart rate down through meditation- one of the few mind over body claims from yoga that is provable iirc. What special moves does advanced vegan philosophy get you? hadoken?



That's not an exclusively yoga thing tbf.

I expect the vegan "power moves" are more subtle.  
Like, health, vigour, humility and a fine sense of humour.


----------



## gentlegreen (Dec 21, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> tbh, I don't really know what you're getting at here. So what if he was being persuaded by others to supplement? Some people say "you must definitely supplement" and others say "supplement if you are concerned, check your results". As far as I'm concerned both are ok, it's up to the individual to use their brains, investigate for themselves and figure out what they think is best for them.


It's like B12 is the great taboo subject for vegans, and I confess it steered me towards fish-eating - though it's actually omega3 that will clinch it for me - though I already eat flaxseed and seaweed and will be eating a lot more algae of various kinds in the future.


----------



## A380 (Dec 21, 2017)

gentlegreen said:


> ... will be eating a lot more algae of various kinds in the future.



That’s where you had me: at algae.


----------



## 8ball (Dec 21, 2017)

A380 said:


> That’s where you had me: at algae.



Laverbread.  Mmmm.

(not the tinned stuff, mind - that's hideous)


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Dec 21, 2017)

gentlegreen said:


> It's like B12 is the great taboo subject for vegans, and I confess it steered me towards fish-eating - though it's actually omega3 that will clinch it for me - though I already eat flaxseed and seaweed and will be eating a lot more algae of various kinds in the future.



I don't know any vegans for whom b12 is a 'taboo'. Plant milks and yogurts are fortified with roughly the same amounts you'd find in cow's milk and yogurt. Many cereals are fortified as are marmite and yeast. And a standard multivit contains 100% RDA. Couldn't be easier. As for omega 3 - you can get all your ALA needs from flaxseed, hempseed, walnuts and a number of other sources. As for DHA and EPA, you can get algae supplements for those too if you so wish. It's a much cleaner source too - much less saturated fat and none of the cholesterol and toxins that are found in fish.


----------



## 8ball (Dec 21, 2017)

That's a lot of flaxseed etc.  But there is algae so that's good.


----------



## bellaozzydog (Dec 21, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Well imo if there is any "devaluation" going on here it would be the other way around, reducing veganism to just a mere diet and ignoring or dismissing the core tenets. It's a bit like wanting to be called a racing driver because you once sat in a passenger seat of a Lada ffs. "Don't you devalue my racing driver credentials".
> 
> 
> No shade was being thrown, I think you are being a tad sensitive. I'm just describing it as it is. Being vegan is more that just a diet, that's just how it is.




That was rhetorical rather than directed at you


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Dec 21, 2017)

gentlegreen said:


> It's like B12 is the great taboo subject for vegans, and I confess it steered me towards fish-eating - though it's actually omega3 that will clinch it for me - though I already eat flaxseed and seaweed and will be eating a lot more algae of various kinds in the future.


Well that's not how I see it at all. I think it's been made out to be a much bigger deal than it actually is as if vegans have been dropping dead left right and centre from B12 deficiency. Hardly anyone knew what it was barely 10 years ago and now it's apparently such a big problem. 
Maybe if ever I were to eventually reject this whole vegan malarky I can use B12 as a convenient get out clause citing those invisible hordes of severely nutrient deficient vegans.


----------



## gentlegreen (Dec 21, 2017)

Jeff Robinson said:


> And a standard multivit contains 100% RDA. Couldn't be easier. As for omega 3 - you can get all your ALA needs from flaxseed, hempseed, walnuts and a number of other sources. As for DHA and EPA, you can get algae supplements for those too if you so wish. It's a much cleaner source too - much less saturated fat and none of the cholesterol and toxins that are found in fish.


Taking B12 and D pills annoys me already - I plan to solve the vitamin D problem by growing my own fungi with solar exposure.
Sardines and mackerel would supply omega 3, B12 and even more D.

My current diet delivers all the other essential nutrients in spades.
I couldn't eat more kale and carrots if I tried.

Multivits are never going to happen and I baulk at paying a significant amount for a daily fix of omega 3.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Dec 21, 2017)

8ball said:


> There’s been a good bit of question-dodging considering this stuff is meant to be so foundational...


I assume readers to be smart enough to do their own research if they're interested and are do not need to be spoonfed. There are plenty of resources out there for those that are genuine and not just here to mock and take the piss.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Dec 21, 2017)

Jeff Robinson said:


> I don't know any vegans for whom b12 is a 'taboo'. Plant milks and yogurts are fortified with roughly the same amounts you'd find in cow's milk and yogurt. Many cereals are fortified as are marmite and yeast. And a standard multivit contains 100% RDA. Couldn't be easier. As for omega 3 - you can get all your ALA needs from flaxseed, hempseed, walnuts and a number of other sources. As for DHA and EPA, you can get algae supplements for those too if you so wish. It's a much cleaner source too - much less saturated fat and none of the cholesterol and toxins that are found in fish.


B12 has replaced "b...b...but...where do you get your protein?" as the goto nutrient to launch a preemptive strike against vegans.
Whatever diet you are on, be it vegan or otherwise, if you have concerns get yourself tested and supplement if necessary. How difficult is that? I haven't taken any B12 supplementation (well not directly anyway) and after 20 years of being a vegan my blood tests are fine. I'm not sure what all the fuss is about tbh.  Much ado about nothing.


----------



## 8ball (Dec 22, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> I assume readers to be smart enough to do their own research if they're interested and are do not need to be spoonfed. There are plenty of resources out there for those that are genuine and not just here to mock and take the piss.



Was more interested in your take on it considering I can find a million weird opinions online if I want.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Dec 22, 2017)

8ball said:


> Was more interested in your take on it considering I can find a million weird opinions online if I want.


Fine then if you are genuinely curious and have a specific question that I haven't already covered in my nearly 400 posts in this thread, ask away. If you are a one of the many piss take posters looking for an attack angle then I'm not particularly interested.


----------



## 8ball (Dec 22, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Fine then if you are genuinely curious and have a specific question that I haven't already covered in my nearly 400 posts in this thread, ask away. If you are a one of the many piss take posters looking for an attack angle then I'm not particularly interested.



The question is there in one of my previous posts on this thread.  Which I couldn't be arsed to count, frankly.


----------



## mojo pixy (Dec 22, 2017)

mr steev said:


> So if you're diet includes no animal products, but you're wearing leather shoes, a fur coat, a silk scarf, use shampoo made with milk and fish products, and make-up tested on animals you're a vegan?
> 
> If you're diet includes no animal products you have a vegan diet.



Oh right.

And if the leather shoes, fur coat, silk scarf, milky shampoo and dodgy makeup were found / given / donated or otherwise acquired for free then........?

Getting leather shoes from a charity shop supports no leather industry but does support the charity who run the shop.

Vegan is a dietary thing. There are other aspects to supporting animal rights and if someone wants to call that stuff "veganism" then fine. But you don't need to adhere to all of it to be vegan. Just don't eat animal products.

I'll leave the vegan wearing second-hand leather to the fundamentalists to deal with. "You're not really vegan you hypocritical leather boots wearer" is definitely part of that non-angry vegan approach we've heard so much about in this thread


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Dec 22, 2017)

8ball said:


> The question is there in one of my previous posts on this thread.


Funny that, you've accused me of dodging questions when I have already answered the question that you posed and you can't be arsed to find the question that I'm supposed to have dodged. Yeah right. 



8ball said:


> Which I couldn't be arsed to count, frankly.


...and why should you need to count anything in order to find the allegedly dodged question? Looks like your another one of those time wasting PTP's.


----------



## 8ball (Dec 22, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Funny that, you've accused me of dodging questions when I have already answered the question that you posed and you can't be arsed to find the question that I'm supposed to have dodged. Yeah right.



No, you didn't.  Nor did you even seem to read my last post properly.

This exchange tells me enough, though.


----------



## mojo pixy (Dec 22, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Some people don't want to look at the ethical side at all and in fact want to run a mile away from it. (don't mention the war). If you eat vegan food then you're a vegan. Nothing else to it, right?



Well, regarding honey, you posted....



PaoloSanchez said:


> See what your ethics is comfortable with and go with that.



So why not apply that to leather, which is after all merely a by-product of the meat industry? Like say supporting a charity who do good work in the community, by buying items from their shop which are animal products (eg leather clothes or shoes) and thereby not supporting the actual meat/leather industry because of _not buying them new_.

"See what your ethics is comfortable with" ... or is this too complex now?


----------



## mr steev (Dec 22, 2017)

mojo pixy said:


> Oh right.
> 
> And if the leather shoes, fur coat, silk scarf, milky shampoo and dodgy makeup were found / given / donated or otherwise acquired for free then........?
> 
> ...



Veganisn is a lifestyle not just a diet.
Definition of veganism
Wearing second hand leather does not 'avoid the use of all animal products'


----------



## 8ball (Dec 22, 2017)

mr steev said:


> Veganisn is a lifestyle not just a diet.
> Definition of veganism
> Wearing second hand leather does not 'avoid the use of all animal products'



Best quote from that site "A dead vegan is no use to anyone".


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Dec 22, 2017)

8ball said:


> No, you didn't.  Nor did you even seem to read my last post properly.
> 
> This exchange tells me enough, though.


So, still not able to cite any of the question(s) that you claim were dodged. This exchange confirms your PTP status and I won't be bothering to waste any more time responding unless there's a drastic quality upgrade. Have a nice day, sir.


----------



## nuffsaid (Dec 22, 2017)




----------



## 8ball (Dec 22, 2017)

nuffsaid said:


>



No relation to anyone on this thread, obv.


----------



## bellaozzydog (Dec 22, 2017)

8ball said:


> Best quote from that site "A dead vegan is no use to anyone".



Having read the site and been educated, I now know I was never a vegan.

I'm currently a gluten and dairy free pescatarian who likes a boiled egg

Posted from my second hand leather sofa

This should solve my vegan annoyer status


----------



## mojo pixy (Dec 22, 2017)

mr steev said:


> Veganisn is a lifestyle not just a diet.
> Definition of veganism



A lifestyle, of course.




			
				Vegan Lifestyle said:
			
		

> With over 22,000 products and services registered with our Vegan Trademark alone, living a vegan lifestyle has never been easier. Browse online today.


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Dec 22, 2017)

mr steev said:


> Veganisn is a lifestyle not just a diet.
> Definition of veganism
> Wearing second hand leather does not 'avoid the use of all animal products'



I think there is some space for a discussion about wearing second-hand leather and veganism. I know somebody who’s been an ethical vegan for over 3 decades (and has set up his own animal rights NGO) and he is not against buying second hand leather goods. His reasoning is this: by buying these goods second-hand he is not financially supporting animal exploitation and is minimising his negative impact on the environment. 

Whilst I think that line of reasoning is plausible, I would not write off the opposing vegan viewpoint as ‘fundamentalist’ or dogmatic. There’s still a sense in which you are reinforcing to yourself and others that animals are resources for us to exploit. Imagine if you could buy products made of human skins. It wouldn’t make it acceptable to say that you brought them second hand or that they are the mere byproducts or forced organ extractions. 

I think if you do not have access to alternatives to leather, or cannot afford those alternatives, then buying second hand leather is within the ‘as far as practicable and possible’ qualifier in the Vegan Soc definition.


----------



## 8ball (Dec 22, 2017)

Jeff Robinson said:


> I think there is some space for a discussion about wearing second-hand leather and veganism.



There should be some cut-off point for how long animal matter has been dead for before you can use it.
We've worked out from this thread that it is probably somewhere between 50 years and 65 million years.

Maybe a points system like Weight Watchers - one leather item older than you are = 1 VegSyn point.  One leather item you could feasibly have bought in your lifetime = 10 points.

Or something. 

Then you can wear a badge with your number and the person with the lowest number gets to be smuggest.


----------



## mojo pixy (Dec 22, 2017)

I think the second-hand nature of an item is key, actually. The point is not to support the abuse of animals, buying a used pair of leather boots from (say) a PDSA charity shop actually benefits animals. It's all very well for fundamentalist veganists to condemn it but this is why veganism gets a reputation for encouraging elitism.


----------



## bellaozzydog (Dec 22, 2017)

8ball said:


> There should be some cut-off point for how long animal matter has been dead for before you can use it.
> We've worked out from this thread that it is probably somewhere between 50 years and 65 million years.
> 
> Maybe a points system like Weight Watchers - one leather item older than you are = 1 VegSyn point.  One leather item you could feasibly have bought in your lifetime = 10 points.
> ...



Are you just being a dick about it now?


----------



## 8ball (Dec 22, 2017)

mojo pixy said:


> I think the second-hand nature of an item is key, actually. The point is not to support the abuse of animals, buying a used pair of leather boots from (say) a PDSA charity shop actually benefits animals. It's all very well for fundamentalist veganists to condemn it but this is why veganism gets a reputation for encouraging elitism.



It's like the Jedi Council.


bellaozzydog said:


> Are you just being a dick about it now?



Maybe my zinc levels are low...


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Dec 22, 2017)

Jeff Robinson said:


> Whilst I think that line of reasoning is plausible, I would not write off the opposing vegan viewpoint as ‘fundamentalist’ or dogmatic. There’s still a sense in which you are reinforcing to yourself and others that animals are resources for us to exploit. Imagine if you could buy products made of human skins. It wouldn’t make it acceptable to say that you brought them second hand or that they are the mere byproducts or forced organ extractions.


Exactly. As I said earlier, go with feels right according to your ethics and your conscience regardless of whether others agree or disagree. In a largely non-vegan world it is going to be very difficult (and maybe impossible) to completely avoid using any animal products, including leather. I buy my shoes from vegetarian shoes and ethical wares and try my best to avoid leather wherever possible. I still have a pair of brown leather shoes I bought for a wedding and we have a leather sofa in the house (my father in laws), my car has leather trim around the steering wheel and gear lever. I will still go out of my way, whenever possible to buy things that are not made from exploited dead animals but won't beat myself up over it if it's not practical. I agree with your point to not right off the opposing viewpoint and "human leather". There are some who won't want to have ANYTHING to do with leather at all, first hand, second hand or fifth hand. That's a legitimate point of view imo.


----------



## bellaozzydog (Dec 22, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Exactly. As I said earlier, go with feels right according to your ethics and your conscience regardless of whether others agree or disagree. In a largely non-vegan world it is going to be very difficult (and maybe impossible) to completely avoid using any animal products, including leather. I buy my shoes from vegetarian shoes and ethical wares and try my best to avoid leather wherever possible. I still have a pair of brown leather shoes I bought for a wedding and we have a leather sofa in the house (my father in laws), my car has leather trim around the steering wheel and gear lever. I will still go out of my way, whenever possible to buy things that are not made from exploited dead animals but won't beat myself up over it if it's not practical. I agree with your point to not right off the opposing viewpoint and "*human leather*". There are some who won't want to have ANYTHING to do with leather at all, first hand, second hand or fifth hand. That's a legitimate point of view imo.



Tell me that's a typo


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Dec 22, 2017)

bellaozzydog said:


> Tell me that's a typo


No it wasn't. Your point?


----------



## bellaozzydog (Dec 22, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> No it wasn't. Your point?



I'm just not sure how ethical human leather is 

ETA I didn't read Jeff robinsons post which would have explained 

Carry on


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Dec 22, 2017)

bellaozzydog said:


> I'm just not sure how ethical human leather is


Yeah well you obviously haven't understood my reference to the point that Jeff made in his post. 

ybbxf yvxr lrg nabgure gvzr jnfgre


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 22, 2017)

I read a viewpoint that I had never considered but found hard to gainsay. All ivory trade should be banned, there is simply too much scope for poached ivory to enter into 'legitimacy'. Surely that'd be your problem with ethical leather and the reason why even if that mink coat IS from farmed aminals you might still get paint thrown on you


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Dec 22, 2017)

bellaozzydog said:


> ETA I didn't read Jeff robinsons post which would have explained


This is what happens when scoring points and trying to catch the other person out becomes the priority over having a reasonable discussion.


----------



## 8ball (Dec 22, 2017)

DotCommunist said:


> I read a viewpoint that I had never considered but found hard to gainsay. All ivory trade should be banned, there is simply too much scope for poached ivory to enter into 'legitimacy'. Surely that'd be your problem with ethical leather and the reason why even if that mink coat IS from farmed aminals you might still get paint thrown on you



Assuming you agree with the ivory trade premise to begin with.

And would that mean anything that *looks* like leather should also be banned?
Or stuff that *might* be wool (we haven't even got onto wool yet afaik...)?


----------



## bellaozzydog (Dec 22, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> This is what happens when scoring points and trying to catch the other person out becomes the priority over having a reasonable discussion.



You need to take life more seriously 

An honest mistake to make


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Dec 22, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> This is what happens when scoring points and trying to catch the other person out becomes the priority over having a reasonable discussion.



Be fair PS, I think it was an honest misunderstanding on his behalf.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Dec 22, 2017)

bellaozzydog said:


> You need to take life more seriously
> 
> An honest mistake to make


Yeah...wait, whut? 



Jeff Robinson said:


> Be fair PS, I think it was an honest misunderstanding on his behalf.


Well maybe it was, however the speed of the reply and the previous posts made it resemble another one of those tiresome "gotcha" posts. If it wasn't and if as you say it was a genuine response to a hasty misreading then I stand corrected.


----------



## bellaozzydog (Dec 22, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Yeah...wait, whut?
> 
> 
> Well maybe it was, however the speed of the reply and the previous posts made it resemble another one of those tiresome "gotcha" posts. If it wasn't and if as you say it was a genuine response to a hasty misreading then I stand corrected.



Nope it was a genuine mistake. 

My previous posts indicate a change of position/attitude after I read the vegan website link supplied not "another one of those tiresome "gotcha" posts"

Go back to page one, read the title of the thread and reflect


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Dec 22, 2017)

Tm9vYiBOdW1wdHkgYWxlcnQhISAK  Tm90IGdvaW5nIHRvIGJvdGhlciB3YXN0aW5nIGFueSBtb3JlIHRpbWUgd2l0aCB0aGlzIGlkaW90Lgo=


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Dec 22, 2017)

The words in a speech from the dude who came up with the word might be of interest to some of the "it's only a diet" brigade :-

The word "veganism" denotes a philosophy and way of living which seeks to exclude - as far as possible and practical - all forms of exploitation of, and cruelty to, animals for food, clothing or any other purpose; and by extension promotes the development and use of animal-free alternatives for the benefit of humans and the environment. 



Spoiler: Full extract from a Donald Watson Speech



The word "veganism" denotes a philosophy and way of living which seeks to exclude - as far as possible and practical - all forms of exploitation of, and cruelty to, animals for food, clothing or any other purpose; and by extension promotes the development and use of animal-free alternatives for the benefit of humans and the environment. 

In dietary terms it denotes the practice of dispensing with all products derived wholly or partly from animals.

If the Vegan ideal of non-exploitation were generally adopted it would be the greatest peaceful revolution ever known, abolishing vast industries and establishing new ones in the better interests of men and animals alike.

There is an obvious danger in leaving the fulfilment of our ideals to posterity, for posterity may not have our ideals. We do so without fear because we feel that a moral philosophy combined with a dash of common sense is a more rational guide than theories hatched in vivisection laboratories.

We will not accept that adequate nutrition need violate conscience. Few dieticians outside the Vegan movement had tried living without animal food, or had made any serious attempt to solve the diet problem philosophically. As it must be solved.

Without the guidance of philosophy scientific investigation soon floundered in a morass of error. 

A stricken conscience is not a health measure for anyone. We have to believe our finer feelings of this and proceed from there as stronger men and women. But one is reminded of the reply given by somebody when slavery was abolished and one of the people against abolition said... "What on earth is going to happen to the families of the people who make the whips if slavery is abolished?" Well the obvious answer to that -- they are given more profitable humane work to do!  And that is the great challenge facing mankind.

...and if I hadn't formed the Society, someone else may have done it, very soon, although it may have had a different name. 

I did appeal to my readers to suggest what the name might be, and I had a list of very bizarre suggestions, which some have already heard of - I won't list them now - but, in an inspired moment, I settled for the word "VEGAN" which was immediately accepted and over the years became part of our language and is now in almost every world dictionary, I suppose.

I think the genie is out of the bottle, no-one can every put it back to the ignorant days before 1944, when this seed was planted by people full of hope, full of aspiration that surely this idea would attract enough followers for it at least to survive. 

...the Vegan movement, which is now, of course, an ever-growing world movement, I like to think the greatest movement that ever was! Because it's the only one now, that can save Mankine. 

We don't know the spiritual advancements that long term Veganism - I mean not over years or even decades, but over generations, would have on human life. It would be certainly a different civilisation, and the first one in the whole of our history that would truly deserve the title of being a civilisation.


----------



## 8ball (Dec 22, 2017)

I've read that the definition of the word "vegan" is pretty much the original definition of "vegetarian" (which then got watered down a bit).


----------



## mojo pixy (Dec 22, 2017)

_It's a lifestyle, it's a philosophy. It includes everything, not just diet. _
It's barely a step away from an identity unto itself.
As a matter of fact it _is_ an identity.
If that's what you want.


----------



## 8ball (Dec 22, 2017)

mojo pixy said:


> _It's a lifestyle, it's a philosophy. It includes everything, not just diet. _
> It's barely a step away from an identity unto itself.
> As a matter of fact it _is_ an identity.
> If that's what you want.



Hey, I'm not one to knock people's hobbies.
Gotta have a hobby.


----------



## ddraig (Dec 23, 2017)

Happy xmas thread


----------



## fucthest8 (Dec 23, 2017)

ddraig said:


> Happy xmas thread




I do love that guy. "I'm 12% more spiritual than you"

(From a different vid by the way)


----------



## 8ball (Dec 23, 2017)

Merry Xmas ddraig! 

(Maybe give Tofurkey a go next year)


----------



## coley (Dec 24, 2017)

Buggerinell, 
How small, has the head of this particular pin become?
If you want to munch on dead protein, crack on, no need to justify your position, your in the majority, congratulate yourselves.
Your, otherwise socialist views and beliefs, have no relevance whatsoever to the rise of of a coke drinking burger munching, clueless twat?
Rest easy, the hungry masses of the world know you are tweeting on their behalf.


----------



## 8ball (Dec 24, 2017)

Pickman’s would be having an aneurysm at those commas..


----------



## mrs quoad (Dec 24, 2017)

So, 94 pages on, any converts?


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Dec 24, 2017)

The vegan Christmas dinner challenge, In Short - BBC Radio 5 live
One of them even had bacon socks on. 



Spoiler



I wonder of that chef is the original nutter?


----------



## SpookyFrank (Dec 24, 2017)

coley said:


> Buggerinell,
> How small, has the head of this particular pin become?
> If you want to munch on dead protein, crack on, no need to justify your position, your in the majority, congratulate yourselves.
> Your, otherwise socialist views and beliefs, have no relevance whatsoever to the rise of of a coke drinking burger munching, clueless twat?
> Rest easy, the hungry masses of the world know you are tweeting on their behalf.



Too many layers of sarcasm for me to unpick


----------



## hash tag (Dec 24, 2017)

mojo pixy said:


> _It's a lifestyle, it's a philosophy. It includes everything, not just diet. _
> It's barely a step away from an identity unto itself.
> As a matter of fact it _is_ an identity.
> If that's what you want.



Can't we just have a vegan diet without living the vegan lifestyle?
How many people use toothpaste where some of it's products have been tested on animals I wonder? Soap, shower gel, shampoo Etc?


----------



## mojo pixy (Dec 24, 2017)

SpookyFrank said:


> Too many layers of sarcasm for me to unpick



But not more than the thread deserves.



hash tag said:


> Can't we just have a vegan diet without living the vegan lifestyle?
> How many people use toothpaste where some of it's products have been tested on animals I wonder? Soap, shower gel, shampoo Etc?



Ask the fundies, they're the ones with the keys to the big old rulebook. The rest of us mere hypocrites just have to tug our forelocks humbly and accept we don't get a say.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Dec 24, 2017)

hash tag said:


> Can't we just have a vegan diet without living the vegan lifestyle?
> How many people use toothpaste where some of it's products have been tested on animals I wonder? Soap, shower gel, shampoo Etc?


There's nothing stopping you from doing whatever you like and describing yourself however you wish. Heck, you can even call yourself a meat eating vegan if you eat bacon every day and once spotted a piece of brocolli in Sainsbury's three years ago, it's nobody else's business.

If somebody wants to buy products that are "ethical" as far as they are aware, then good luck to them. I'm not sure why it should bother others so much.


----------



## smorodina (Dec 24, 2017)

Someone tried to force me (albeit lightheartedly, and I chose not to get upset about it) to eat an oyster last night. It made me think that even if I wasn't a vegetarian, I wouldn't find the texture of an oyster attractive enough to be tempted by it. That might well be due to some deep psychological stuff that I am not ready to dig out yet, but hell it makes me wince to think abut eating that thing. - - 

Signed: happy vegetarian (mostly vegan, but occasional cheese consumption prevents me from going all in) who is not on a mission to convert everyone else, and happy to date people who prefer tartar


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Dec 24, 2017)

smorodina said:


> Someone tried to force me (albeit lightheartedly, and I chose not to get upset about it) to eat an oyster last night.


We've had friends parents who know that we're vegan try to get our kids to eat ham sandwiches etc at the inevitable parties that they end up going to. One mother triumphantly reported to us how she managed to persuade our eldest to eat some of her sheperds pie.


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Dec 24, 2017)

mojo pixy said:


> Ask the fundies, they're the ones with the keys to the big old rulebook. The rest of us mere hypocrites just have to tug our forelocks humbly and accept we don't get a say.



Melodrama much?


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Dec 24, 2017)

Jeff Robinson said:


> Melodrama much?


Trolls on a mission.


----------



## smorodina (Dec 24, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> One mother triumphantly reported.....


 *sigh* i imagine how proud she felt, mission accomplished....


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Dec 24, 2017)

smorodina said:


> *sigh* i imagine how proud she felt, mission accomplished....


The beyotch had a grin on her face like a cheshire cat.


----------



## smorodina (Dec 24, 2017)

fucthest8 said:


> I do love that guy. "I'm 12% more spiritual than you"


 I love his instructional vid on how to become gluten intolerant


----------



## mojo pixy (Dec 24, 2017)

Jeff Robinson said:


> Melodrama much?



More so now than in the olden days.


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Dec 24, 2017)

mojo pixy said:


> More so now than in the olden days.



Wishing you a peaceful, vegan fundamentalist christmas anyhow!


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Dec 24, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> We've had friends parents who know that we're vegan try to get our kids to eat ham sandwiches etc at the inevitable parties that they end up going to. One mother triumphantly reported to us how she managed to persuade our eldest to eat some of her sheperds pie.


That’s bang out of order, what did you do?


----------



## mojo pixy (Dec 24, 2017)

Merry Xmas, remember what doesn't kill you makes you stronger.
Because if it doesn't kill you, you can kill it. And then eat it


----------



## 8ball (Dec 24, 2017)

hash tag said:


> Can't we just have a vegan diet without living the vegan lifestyle?



You could, but your lifestyle would be a sham.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Dec 24, 2017)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> That’s bang out of order, what did you do?


Yeah it was a bit off. This happened more than 10 years ago. I wasn't around at the time all this happened because I was working away and missus told me about it afterwards. We didn't do anything about it and kinda took it on the chin I suppose. In fact she's a very good friend of ours now so I guess we've forgiven her.


----------



## muscovyduck (Dec 24, 2017)

mrs quoad said:


> So, 94 pages on, any converts?



I actually converted back to vegetarianism from being a vegan after lurking on this thread lmao it's all so fucking uninspiring

"carnist" ffs  never heard that one before


----------



## coley (Dec 24, 2017)

smorodina said:


> Someone tried to force me (albeit lightheartedly, and I chose not to get upset about it) to eat an oyster last night. It made me think that even if I wasn't a vegetarian, I wouldn't find the texture of an oyster attractive enough to be tempted by it. That might well be due to some deep psychological stuff that I am not ready to dig out yet, but hell it makes me wince to think abut eating that thing. - -
> 
> Signed: happy vegetarian (mostly vegan, but occasional cheese consumption prevents me from going all in) who is not on a mission to convert everyone else, and happy to date people who prefer tartar



Years ago in the WMCs around here, between the bingo and the 'turn' we had people coming around selling dressed crabs, willicks etc, and one entrepreneur tried selling oysters, one oyster in a little plastic container, once you took the lid off, you were confronted with what looked like an eyeball floating in salty water.
Funnily enough the seafood enterprise (which had been booming) suffered a quick death shortly afterwards.


----------



## coley (Dec 25, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> We've had friends parents who know that we're vegan try to get our kids to eat ham sandwiches etc at the inevitable parties that they end up going to. One mother triumphantly reported to us how she managed to persuade our eldest to eat some of her sheperds pie.



Aye, been there, on the odd occasion, funerals weddings, council meetings etc where I have picked up a corned beef sandwich or similar and eaten it, its bliddy wonderous how that small fact has made it back to my family,,
Like they could give a stuff, but my apparent ,hypocrisy,,


----------



## 8ball (Dec 25, 2017)

Corned beef has meat in it now?


----------



## NoXion (Dec 25, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> We've had friends parents who know that we're vegan try to get our kids to eat ham sandwiches etc at the inevitable parties that they end up going to. One mother triumphantly reported to us how she managed to persuade our eldest to eat some of her sheperds pie.



I was fucking grateful for people like that when I was a kid, since it was one of the few times I got to eat meat. I hated being vegetarian.


----------



## mojo pixy (Dec 25, 2017)

I've known loads of kids made to be veggie or vegan by their hippy parents. Cook up some meat and they're on it like seagulls. No persuasion or coercion ever required.

Some are now veggie grown ups, but I'd say most aren't, not strictly anyway.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Dec 25, 2017)

NoXion said:


> I was fucking grateful for people like that when I was a kid, since it was one of the few times I got to eat meat. I hated being vegetarian.


Yeah, I wish I had people around to slip some alcohol into my Ribena when I was a kid, I fucking hated being teetotal. These nasty parents forcing their unreasonable beliefs on their kids, eh?


----------



## NoXion (Dec 25, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Yeah, I wish I had people around to slip some alcohol into my Ribena when I was a kid, I fucking hated being teetotal. These nasty parents forcing their unreasonable beliefs on their kids, eh?



You're seriously comparing meat to alcohol? Well, far be it from me to prevent vegans like you from taking up the mantle of the New Temperance Movement, although you might want to remember that the original one has ended up as a historical curiosity.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Dec 25, 2017)

NoXion said:


> You're seriously comparing meat to alcohol? Well, far be it from me to prevent vegans like you from taking up the mantle of the New Temperance Movement, although you might want to remember that the original one has ended up as a historical curiosity.


Actually they are now officially the best rock band. So stick that in your pipe.


----------



## NoXion (Dec 25, 2017)

Can't be, never heard of 'em.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Dec 25, 2017)

That's cos you need to get out more. Too busy slagging off vegans on forums innit. Ain't you got nuffink better to do?


----------



## NoXion (Dec 25, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> That's cos you need to get out more. Too busy slagging off vegans on forums innit. Ain't you got nuffink better to do?



I can do more than one thing at a time. Right now I'm also trying to work out why my ISV design keeps spontaneously auto-disassembling itself mid-warp.


----------



## NoXion (Dec 25, 2017)

NoXion said:


> I can do more than one thing at a time. Right now I'm also trying to work out why my ISV design keeps spontaneously auto-disassembling itself mid-warp.



I think I found the problem. The antimatter containment modules are running out of power, with entirely predictable results. Time for a re-design.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Dec 25, 2017)

NoXion said:


> I can do more than one thing at a time. Right now I'm also trying to work out why my ISV design keeps spontaneously auto-disassembling itself mid-warp.


Excellent, a multi tasking troll. Looks like the trauma of being vegetarian in your yoof has given you magical super powers.
Good job. 
Give yourself a medal.


----------



## smorodina (Dec 25, 2017)

Merry Christmas to all the happy and all the angry vegans and non-vegans!


----------



## NoXion (Dec 25, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Excellent, a multi tasking troll. Looks like the trauma of being vegetarian in your yoof has given you magical super powers.
> Good job.
> Give yourself a medal.



So I point out that you equivocation of meat with alcohol is ridiculous, and that somehow makes me the troll?


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Dec 25, 2017)

NoXion said:


> So I point out that you equivocation of meat with alcohol is ridiculous, and that somehow makes me the troll?


Er, no it's not just your ridiculous made up "equivocation" that makes you a troll, it's your posting pattern and tone. It's a dead giveaway.


----------



## mojo pixy (Dec 25, 2017)

You disagree = you're a troll. A simple claim for simple minds


----------



## NoXion (Dec 25, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Er, no it's not just your ridiculous made up "equivocation" that makes you a troll, it's your posting pattern and tone. It's a dead giveaway.



It's not made up, you were the one ranting about people slipping alcohol into your Ribena as a kid. Here, I'll even quote you:



PaoloSanchez said:


> Yeah, I wish I had people around to slip some alcohol into my Ribena when I was a kid, I fucking hated being teetotal. These nasty parents forcing their unreasonable beliefs on their kids, eh?



This was in response to my anecdote about being grateful for there being other adults willing to give me meat as a child. Clearly an equivocation between meat and alcohol.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Dec 25, 2017)

NoXion said:


> It's not made up, you were the one ranting about people slipping alcohol into your Ribena as a kid. Here, I'll even quote you:
> 
> This was in response to my anecdote about being grateful for there being other adults willing to give me meat as a child. Clearly an equivocation between meat and alcohol.


It's your wonderfully loaded use of language that helps to confirm your troll status. It was a parody of your "rant" against being forced to forego those deliciously tasty dead animal flesh by your unreasonable parents. Your magical superpowers have somehow converted that to MEAT = ALCOHOL. Give yerself another medal. You deserve it.


----------



## NoXion (Dec 25, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> It's your wonderfully loaded use of language that helps to confirm your troll status. It was a parody of your "rant" against being forced to forego those deliciously tasty dead animal flesh by your unreasonable parents. Your magical superpowers have somehow converted that to MEAT = ALCOHOL. Give yerself another medal. You deserve it.



The scorn you're heaping upon my experiences does nothing to refute them. 

Also, parody actually has to have some kind of resemblance to the original material. For example, I knew when I was getting meat, often because I would explicitly ask for it, whereas your "parody" has the child in question being given alcohol unknowingly ("slipped"). Plus the fact that there is considerable difference between the two in terms of the effects that consumption has.

You *know* this. If a child asked for a chicken kiev, hardly anyone would make a fuss over it. But if a child is slipped whiskey in their milkshake...


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Dec 25, 2017)

NoXion said:


> Also, parody actually has to have some kind of resemblance to the original material. For example, I knew when I was getting meat, often because I would explicitly ask for it, whereas your "parody" has the child in question being given alcohol unknowingly ("slipped"). Plus the fact that there is considerable difference between the two in terms of the effects that consumption has.


Perhaps because in your vegetarian traumatised state you were unable to see another (more adult?) perspective? Of course children are always going to want "forbidden" things that they don't normally have. More sweets than their parents usually allow, staying up later to watch "inappropriate" TV that their parents might not approve of. The point I was making (and parodying) was the deliberate "betrayal of trust" where people go out of their way to undermine the parents wishes, which is what happened in the example I gave earlier. If I had a Jewish or Muslim friend I would never even dream of trying to trick their children into eating a bacon butty and then report back to the parent with a satisfied grin on my face. That's sneaky, underhand and just not cricket, even if the child secretly loved the taste of murdered pig. 

Now it may be the case that because they're in the overwhelmingly dominant majority, meat eaters have the equivalent of white mans privilege which makes things a lot easier for them and much harder for the marginalised veg*ns, so I can understand veg*ns having a hard time in a non veg*n world where nearly everything is heavily biased towards carnivory, resulting in kids feeling "left out" if they don't fit in with the norm.  

My eldest (the subject in my earlier anecdote) is all grown up now and has kids of his own. As far as I know he's not a vegetarian and yes, he did have issues with "being too different" which he rebelled against to a certain extent, but then it's not unusual for kids/teenagers to do that. Out of our 3 kids, our middle child (daughter) is the most veganistic. Youngest son drinks lots of milk and probably eats meat when he's out and about.


----------



## NoXion (Dec 25, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Perhaps because in your vegetarian traumatised state you were unable to see another (more adult?) perspective? Of course children are always going to want "forbidden" things that they don't normally have. More sweets than their parents usually allow, staying up later to watch "inappropriate" TV that their parents might not approve of. The point I was making (and parodying) was the deliberate "betrayal of trust" where people go out of their way to undermine the parents wishes, which is what happened in the example I gave earlier. If I had a Jewish or Muslim friend I would never even dream of trying to trick their children into eating a bacon butty and then report back to the parent with a satisfied grin on my face. That's sneaky, underhand and just not cricket, even if the child secretly loved the taste of murdered pig.
> 
> Now it may be the case that because they're in the overwhelmingly dominant majority, meat eaters have the equivalent of white mans privilege which makes things a lot easier for them and much harder for the marginalised veg*ns, so I can understand veg*ns having a hard time in a non veg*n world where nearly everything is heavily biased towards carnivory, resulting in kids feeling "left out" if they don't fit in with the norm.
> 
> My eldest (the subject in my earlier anecdote) is all grown up now and has kids of his own. As far as I know he's not a vegetarian and yes, he did have issues with "being too different" which he rebelled against to a certain extent, but then it's not unusual for kids/teenagers to do that. Out of our 3 kids, our middle child (daughter) is the most veganistic. Youngest son drinks lots of milk and probably eats meat when he's out and about.



No trickery was required to get me to eat meat, I genuinely enjoyed it and sought it out. What you need to learn is that children aren't empty vessels into which you can pour your personal ideals, they do actually have some agency of their own, even if it isn't as well-informed as that of an adult.

The consequences of a child being slipped booze could include a lot of very negative shit, up to and including a hospital visit with free stomach pump on the side. It could even be done as a prelude to rape, heaven forfend.

The consequences of supplying a child with meat when they ask for it is...  a full belly? Well, I don't see what's wrong with that. But you hint at the real reason when you mention "betrayal of trust". You want other adults to collude in denying your kids meat, because otherwise how can you bend your kids' worldviews into the shapes that you desire? Well, I'm sorry to say that denying harmless experiences to your children because they don't jive with your lifestyle/identity doesn't speak well of your worldview. Much like with those unfortunate kids with fundie Christian parents who deny their kids fun, harmless things in order to perpetuate their ideology.

I see you're still going with the offensive comparisons. No, vegans are not oppressed and there is no such thing as carnist privilege. Get the fuck over yourself already.


----------



## spanglechick (Dec 26, 2017)

While I wouldn't try to persuade a normally veggie/vegan child to eat meat, if the child was old enough to express a considered preference (6ish), I wouldn't deny them.  I'd imagine such a child was probably able to get hold of meat/cheese/jelly sweets via playground swapsies anyway.  

In the same way, from a similar age, of a normally omnivorous child told me they wanted to try out being vegetarian I'd allow that too.  Kids of that age are absolutely able to make decisions of an ethical nature, and to experiment with who they are going to be, independent of their families.  

I experimented both with religion and vegetarianism at a similar age.  Both short lived, neither was a rebellion against my omnivorous atheist parents. I was just trying things out.


----------



## hash tag (Dec 26, 2017)

These have been appearing around wandsworth for months now...veganism is not extreme


----------



## rubbershoes (Dec 26, 2017)

PaoloSanchez said:


> The beyotch had a grin on her face like a cheshire cat.



Beyotch?

Don't tell me. Was she one of "the blacks"?


----------



## mather (Dec 26, 2017)

It seem being vegan does nothing for your intelligence if PaoloSanchez's incoherent, semi-literate, rants are anything to go by.


----------



## NoXion (Dec 27, 2017)

hash tag said:


> These have been appearing around wandsworth for months now...veganism is not extreme
> 
> View attachment 124033



Thing is, I don't "love animals". There have been particular animals that I have felt affection for, and even particular species that I would admit to being more likely to have feelings for (such as _felis silvestris catus_), but I would never say that such feelings are entirely unconditional.

Given the choice between saving a random human life and a random non-human life, I would choose the human every time.


----------



## mojo pixy (Dec 27, 2017)

I don't eat animals, but that has literally nothing to do with love. "We say we love animals'' seems to have been written either by or for kids.


----------



## Yossarian (Dec 27, 2017)

NoXion said:


> Thing is, I don't "love animals". There have been particular animals that I have felt affection for, and even particular species that I would admit to being more likely to have feelings for (such as _felis silvestris catus_)



I think I finally just figured out where Sylvester the Cat's name comes from.


----------



## gentlegreen (Dec 27, 2017)

Yossarian said:


> I think I finally just figured out where Sylvester the Cat's name comes from.


And me - massively facepalming myself


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Dec 27, 2017)

Yossarian said:


> I think I finally just figured out where Sylvester the Cat's name comes from.



Your gonna kick yourself when you find out that the correct name for yellow canary is _Tweetagra Pieventris._


----------



## ddraig (Dec 27, 2017)

righteous carnists being well righteous atm!! that time of year when the bloodlust is high!


----------



## rubbershoes (Dec 27, 2017)

ddraig said:


> righteous carnists being well righteous atm!! that time of year when the bloodlust is high!



Big lol at the meateaters being the self righteous ones


----------



## ddraig (Dec 27, 2017)

a whole hour!! sluggish are we??


----------



## SpookyFrank (Dec 27, 2017)

ddraig said:


> righteous carnists being well righteous atm!! that time of year when the bloodlust is high!



Converted anyone to non-carnism with this style of rhetoric yet have we?

Yeah, thought not.


----------



## ddraig (Dec 27, 2017)

did you want an answer or just the one you've given yourself?


----------



## SpookyFrank (Dec 27, 2017)

ddraig said:


> did you want an answer or just the one you've given yourself?



I'll rephrase the question: has the smug, hectoring tone you use to discuss these issues proven successful in making meat-eaters see the error of their ways?


----------



## ddraig (Dec 27, 2017)

what is smug and hectoring about my tone son?


----------



## 1927 (Dec 27, 2017)

Vegan chef 'shoots dead entire family' on Christmas Day hours after posting festive video with son


----------



## SpookyFrank (Dec 28, 2017)

ddraig said:


> what is smug and hectoring about my tone son?



Everything.


----------



## ddraig (Dec 28, 2017)

riiiight
sounds like you you got projection or fragility issues, maybe both!


----------



## editor (Dec 28, 2017)

mather said:


> It seem being vegan does nothing for your intelligence if PaoloSanchez's incoherent, semi-literate, rants are anything to go by.


Just think about what you just posted there.


----------



## editor (Dec 28, 2017)

1927 said:


> Vegan chef 'shoots dead entire family' on Christmas Day hours after posting festive video with son


Is there a point here? Are you going to do a post for every meat eater that goes on a shooting rampage? I fancy it's be a much, much, much longer list.


----------



## mather (Dec 28, 2017)

editor said:


> Just think about what you just posted there.



What is there to think about?


----------



## 1927 (Dec 28, 2017)

editor said:


> Is there a point here? Are you going to do a post for every meat eater that goes on a shooting rampage? I fancy it's be a much, much, much longer list.


No, I was just posting as an example of an angry vegan! No point being made. Sorry.


----------



## editor (Dec 28, 2017)

1927 said:


> No, I was just posting as an example of an angry vegan! No point being made. Sorry.


Has anyone claimed vegans don't ever get angry?


----------



## mojo pixy (Dec 29, 2017)

My favourite _angry vegan_ would be this individual...



...actually I don't know how angry he personally is, but _Black Metal_, y'know.
Anyway, he's done quite a few of these. I link to this one because at 2'45'' he mashes potatoes with a mace and you don't see that every day.


----------



## ddraig (Dec 29, 2017)

Here's Why You Should Turn Your Business Vegan In 2018


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Dec 29, 2017)

ddraig said:


> Here's Why You Should Turn Your Business Vegan In 2018


Only way my business is going vegan is if I ever end up on the road with Morrissey.

And I’d rather eat my old socks than do that


----------



## editor (Dec 29, 2017)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> Only way my business is going vegan is if I ever end up on the road with Morrissey.
> 
> And I’d rather eat my old socks than do that


That's a very progressive attitude. But the days of hideous animal exploitation and cruelty are in decline. Far too slowly sadly, but there's a definite shift taking place. If the vegan stuff tastes just as nice as meat, I can't see why meat eaters need get all bolshy about it. There's a shitload of reasons why meat consumption needs be massively reduced, and the more people eating less and - gasp! - being open to veggie/vegan alternatives, the better.


----------



## ddraig (Dec 29, 2017)

yeah but he's a "normal" "bloke" see


----------



## campanula (Dec 30, 2017)

My daughter has recently embraced a vegan (ish) lifestyle (I have definitely seen her sneaking a bite of cheese)...but I admit, my (huge) antipathy towards it is totally based on the imbecilic fella she has been seeing (a useless waster imo) so sadly, in true parental mode, my anti-vegan feelings (which existed nowhere before the arrival of idiot bloke) have roared into being. Thankfully, she is not insisting grand-daughter adopts a totally plant based existence (and avoids the inevitable arguments which would certainly arise as I know she has neither the time nor money to replace dairy products for a child who has been adapted to digest this easy nutritional addition.


----------



## ddraig (Dec 30, 2017)

campanula said:


> My daughter has recently embraced a vegan (ish) lifestyle (I have definitely seen her sneaking a bite of cheese)...but I admit, my (huge) antipathy towards it is totally based on the imbecilic fella she has been seeing (a useless waster imo) so sadly, in true parental mode, my anti-vegan feelings (which existed nowhere before the arrival of idiot bloke) have roared into being. Thankfully, she is not insisting grand-daughter adopts a totally plant based existence (and avoids the inevitable arguments which would certainly arise as I know she has neither the time nor money to replace dairy products for a child who has been adapted to digest this easy nutritional addition.


your poor daughter and grandaughter, how long do you propose to try and control what they eat based on the dislike of a partner?


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Dec 30, 2017)

ddraig said:


> your poor daughter and grandaughter, how long do you propose to try and control what they eat based on the dislike of a partner?


Yep, that’s _exactly_ what campanula said


----------



## campanula (Dec 30, 2017)

I don't do control of my adult offspring...but admit to being grateful that my daughter is still on board with allowing Grand-daughter to have milk and eggs - which have been vital parts of a small child's diet. I don't dispute the efficacy of a vegan diet but would expect some serious effort is required when feeding a growing six year old (whose bones and musculature are still developing).
It occurs to me that veganism (and vegetarianism) comes in a few different forms. My daughter, I think, embraces a compassionate anti-cruelty viewpoint but is not totally following a full-on, strict ethic...for which I am glad.

Yeah, it's true, I am a completely non-rational human...when it comes down to my deepest emotional commitments...so bite me.


----------



## A380 (Dec 30, 2017)

ddraig said:


> your poor daughter and grandaughter, how long do you propose to try and control what they eat based on the dislike of a partner?


This post has convinced me of the emotional maturity and lack of sanctimonious behaviour of at least one vegan.


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Dec 30, 2017)

A380 said:


> This post has convinced me of the emotional maturity and lack of sanctimonious behaviour of at least one vegan.


----------



## ddraig (Dec 30, 2017)

teehee


----------



## gentlegreen (Dec 31, 2017)

For anyone with *two hours* to spare ...

TOP 100 INFLUENTIAL VEGANS OF 2017 [PART 1/4] :-



Spoiler: youtube


----------



## Casual Observer (Dec 31, 2017)

gentlegreen said:


> For anyone with *two hours* to spare ...
> 
> TOP 100 INFLUENTIAL VEGANS OF 2017 [PART 1/4] :-
> 
> ...



Haven't got two hours to spare, Greeny. Can you give me the top 5?


----------



## gentlegreen (Dec 31, 2017)

Casual Observer said:


> Haven't got two hours to spare, Greeny. Can you give me the top 5?


I ain't about to actually watch it FFS


----------



## gentlegreen (Dec 31, 2017)

As chosen by PLANT BASED NEWS fans ... 	 	 		 		 	 

5. Jim Greenbaum,
4. Michael Greger
3. James Aspey
2. Miley Cyrus
1. Kip Anderson


----------



## Casual Observer (Dec 31, 2017)

gentlegreen said:


> I ain't about to actually watch it FFS


Greeny, I've helped you out this year. I've given you a few of totally boss vegan recipes and now you're not willing to help me out in return. I take a very dim view of this, Greeny. Had you down as one of the gooduns, very disappointed.

Edit: Just seen your last post. Always knew I could rely on you Greeny. You the man.

PS: Only heard of one of those cunts, Greeny, could you make it a top 10?


----------



## gentlegreen (Dec 31, 2017)




----------



## gentlegreen (Dec 31, 2017)

Casual Observer said:


> PS: Only heard of one of those cunts, Greeny, could you make it a top 10?



There are limits ...

Back in the 80s and 90s when I considered myself a vegan, I would have struggled to name a celebrity vegan.

Pretty well all the clickbait sites out there limit themselves to maybe 10 ...


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jan 1, 2018)

editor said:


> That's a very progressive attitude. But the days of hideous animal exploitation and cruelty are in decline. Far too slowly sadly, but there's a definite shift taking place. If the vegan stuff tastes just as nice as meat, I can't see why meat eaters need get all bolshy about it. There's a shitload of reasons why meat consumption needs be massively reduced, and the more people eating less and - gasp! - being open to veggie/vegan alternatives, the better.


Some of the more strident meat eaters need to get their retaliation in first as a deterrent to those self righteous vegan cunts polluting the planet with common sense. We can't be having that. 



The year veganism went mainstream


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jan 1, 2018)

campanula said:


> I don't do control of my adult offspring...but admit to being grateful that my daughter is still on board with allowing Grand-daughter to have milk and eggs - which have been vital parts of a small child's diet. I don't dispute the efficacy of a vegan diet *but would expect some serious effort is required when feeding a growing six year old (whose bones and musculature are still developing)*.


This is another one of those widely believed myths and tbh I'm not sure where it comes from. If children raised as vegan were shown to be significantly worse off wrt to health than "normal" children then perhaps there might be some substance to the myth, however it would appear that the opposite is more likely to be true. It is not at all difficult for anyone with half a brain to raise a healthy child as a vegan. 


Spoiler: Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics position




Position of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics: Vegetarian Diets.  - PubMed - NCBI



I'll accept that in our society there is less hassle involved if you are in the "I'll eat anything including McDonalds and KFC" majority, however intelligent and discerning parents will take the time and effort to make "good" choices for their kids. Choosing vegan is imo just another decent quality choice.


----------



## sim667 (Jan 2, 2018)

The things that puts me off going vegan most, is PETA.


----------



## Spymaster (Jan 2, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> I'll accept that in our society there is less hassle involved if you are in the "I'll eat anything including McDonalds and KFC" majority, however intelligent and discerning parents will take the time and effort to make "good" choices for their kids.


‘Parents who don’t foist veganism on their children are neither intelligent nor discerning’


----------



## purenarcotic (Jan 2, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> This is another one of those widely believed myths and tbh I'm not sure where it comes from. If children raised as vegan were shown to be significantly worse off wrt to health than "normal" children then perhaps there might be some substance to the myth, however it would appear that the opposite is more likely to be true. It is not at all difficult for anyone with half a brain to raise a healthy child as a vegan.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics position
> ...



Do you think it would be possible to do it on benefits living in a food desert?


----------



## UnderAnOpenSky (Jan 2, 2018)

purenarcotic said:


> Do you think it would be possible to do it on benefits living in a food desert?



I hear Aldi sell vegetables now.


----------



## purenarcotic (Jan 2, 2018)

UnderAnOpenSky said:


> I hear Aldi sell vegetables now.



Do you know what a food desert is?


----------



## campanula (Jan 2, 2018)

As far as I have read, the jury is still out on the benefits of a vegan lifestyle for growing children. At the simplest, nutritionists have always noted that children growing up with limited diets are always at risk of deficiencies...which definitely includes vegans. There are numerous caveats to be considered, not least time and money, before embracing a vegan lifestyle while bringing up small children (and I am especially referring to the pres-school to early adolescents here). In a perfect world, where money was always available, access to fresh fruits, vegetables, pulses and nuts,is not problematic and harassed parents always have the time to produce a balanced diet from scratch, then maybe...but this certainly does not apply to my daughter. Moreoever, at 6, Grand-daughter has already been eating a largely vegetarian diet but with dairy produce, honey and eggs off her menu, it is going to leave her very short served indeed. There is an enormous amount of doubt (amongst nutrition experts who are not following a personal agenda) that veganism is fraught with as many dangers as a sugar rich diet based on processed foods and chips...and the restrictive, almost cultish directives from the vegan fanatics does NOTHING to further the struggle for compassion in farming and access to healthy foods across the board (and not just in the small number of cash-rich middle class households (who have often been loud-voiced macrobiotic, fruitarians and other narcissistic self-important puffers of the nation's health).

Anecdotally, my d-i-l is an nursery nurse who has been less than impressed with the quality of immune systems, energy and even ability to stay warm, in the handful of children who are being raised with strict dietary rules (and she includes the massive surge in lactose and gluten intolerant claims...almost certainly based on no evidence other than peer pressure...but hey, I am convinced that the current obsession with food is just another vaguely decadent symptom of a bored society with a skewed individualistic value system...you know - the 'my body is a temple' fuckwits. I eat (everything and anything) I can afford to buy, grow, catch or scrounge...and can well remember hunger as being a defining aspect of my childhood).

Oh yeah, since becoming vegan, daughter also has to carry about a little bag of personal food at all times...and unless she limits herself to black tea, all those little afternoon socials and meets and lunches with friends have simply vanished for her...while shopping, with the endless scrutiny of labels for some sneakily included egg powder or gelatin  or such..is now an dreary chore. Will be interested to see how long she maintains this one- not as long as the bloody gluten free period, I'll bet.


----------



## 8ball (Jan 2, 2018)

ddraig said:


> what is smug and hectoring about my tone son?


----------



## ddraig (Jan 2, 2018)

why would athletes etc choose a vegan diet if there were doubts and deficiencies??


----------



## ddraig (Jan 2, 2018)

8ball said:


>


can you quote a hectoring post? 
e2a or a smug one?


----------



## ddraig (Jan 2, 2018)

sim667 said:


> The things that puts me off going vegan most, is PETA.


ignore them, I do


----------



## 8ball (Jan 2, 2018)

ddraig said:


> why would athletes etc choose a vegan diet if there were doubts and deficiencies??



Vegan athletes have a pretty "enhanced" diet.


----------



## ddraig (Jan 2, 2018)

lots of people report long term and other illnesses improving after going vegan, are they lying?


----------



## 8ball (Jan 2, 2018)

ddraig said:


> can you quote a hectoring post?
> e2a or a smug one?



I think the one you're just about to type has a pretty good chance of managing it, without me needing to quote anything.


----------



## 8ball (Jan 2, 2018)

ddraig said:


> lots of people report long term and other illnesses improving after going vegan, are they lying?



Lots of people report long-term and other illnesses improving after turning to homeopathy, are they lying?


----------



## NoXion (Jan 2, 2018)

The dietary habits of athletes in general are highly atypical.


----------



## ddraig (Jan 2, 2018)

campanula said:


> As far as I have read, the jury is still out on the benefits of a vegan lifestyle for growing children. At the simplest, nutritionists have always noted that children growing up with limited diets are always at risk of deficiencies...which definitely includes vegans. There are numerous caveats to be considered, not least time and money, before embracing a vegan lifestyle while bringing up small children (and I am especially referring to the pres-school to early adolescents here). In a perfect world, where money was always available, access to fresh fruits, vegetables, pulses and nuts,is not problematic and harassed parents always have the time to produce a balanced diet from scratch, then maybe...but this certainly does not apply to my daughter. Moreoever, at 6, Grand-daughter has already been eating a largely vegetarian diet but with dairy produce, honey and eggs off her menu, it is going to leave her very short served indeed. There is an enormous amount of doubt (amongst nutrition experts who are not following a personal agenda) that veganism is fraught with as many dangers as a sugar rich diet based on processed foods and chips...and the restrictive, almost cultish directives from the vegan fanatics does NOTHING to further the struggle for compassion in farming and access to healthy foods across the board (and not just in the small number of cash-rich middle class households (who have often been loud-voiced macrobiotic, fruitarians and other narcissistic self-important puffers of the nation's health).
> 
> Anecdotally, my d-i-l is an nursery nurse who has been less than impressed with the quality of immune systems, energy and even ability to stay warm, in the handful of children who are being raised with strict dietary rules (and she includes the massive surge in lactose and gluten intolerant claims...almost certainly based on no evidence other than peer pressure...but hey, I am convinced that the current obsession with food is just another vaguely decadent symptom of a bored society with a skewed individualistic value system...you know - the 'my body is a temple' fuckwits. I eat (everything and anything) I can afford to buy, grow, catch or scrounge...and can well remember hunger as being a defining aspect of my childhood).
> 
> Oh yeah, since becoming vegan, daughter also has to carry about a little bag of personal food at all times...and unless she limits herself to black tea, all those little afternoon socials and meets and lunches with friends have simply vanished for her...while shopping, with the endless scrutiny of labels for some sneakily included egg powder or gelatin  or such..is now an dreary chore. Will be interested to see how long she maintains this one- not as long as the bloody gluten free period, I'll bet.


 sooooo much to unpack here bloody hell!


----------



## 8ball (Jan 2, 2018)

editor said:


> That's a very progressive attitude. But the days of hideous animal exploitation and cruelty are in decline.



Isn't worldwide meat consumption still rising?


----------



## ddraig (Jan 2, 2018)

8ball said:


> I think the one you're just about to type has a pretty good chance of managing it, without me needing to quote anything.


i'll take that as a no then, thanks


----------



## 8ball (Jan 2, 2018)

ddraig said:


> i'll take that as a no then, thanks



You missed out the hectoring bit.  Have another go.


----------



## mojo pixy (Jan 2, 2018)

ddraig said:


> why would athletes etc choose a vegan diet if there were doubts and deficiencies??



Food supplements, as already mentioned.
But to take that further, I'd like to ask any vegans who read, if they do or do not take a nutritional supplement, vitamin pill, iron tablet, castor oil or whatever. _Carnists do it too_ is true btw, but not really an answer since a vegan diet is meant to be so much better than a meaty one or even one that includes eggs and milk.

EtA, I don't, though I have no doubt I'd benefit from one.


----------



## campanula (Jan 2, 2018)

ddraig said:


> sooooo much to unpack here bloody hell!



Feel free to do so then, DDraig. Personally, I tend not to subscribe to prescriptive eating habits - which I often consider to be an affectation based on moral superiority and which lacks any considered acceptance that society is heterogenous in every way, including eating habits and preferences. For myself, I have subjected the enthusiastic carnivores in my household to enforced meatless days as a small ethical and health based decision...and yep, while not being entirely happy, I will also respect the choices made by friends, neighbours and family...because often, just putting any nutritious meals on a plate, requires enough effort without berating people for their moral and financial choices.


----------



## ddraig (Jan 2, 2018)

are the food supplements not vegan then?

I don't take nutritional supplements just echinacea to try and avoid colds which i used to take before


----------



## ddraig (Jan 2, 2018)

campanula said:


> Feel free to do so then, DDraig. Personally, I tend not to subscribe to prescriptive eating habits - which I often consider to be an affectation based on moral superiority and which lacks any considered acceptance that society is heterogenous in every way, including eating habits and preferences. For myself, I have subjected the enthusiastic carnivores in my household to enforced meatless days as a small ethical and health based decision...and yep, while not being entirely happy, I will also respect the choices made by friends, neighbours and family...because often, just putting any nutritious meals on a plate, requires enough effort without berating people for their moral and financial choices.


is wanting to reduce/eliminate cruelty "prescriptive"??
you can consider it an an affectation if you like, is the massive rise in veganism all down to affectation?
why would you subject enthusiastic carnists to something you deem an affectation?


----------



## campanula (Jan 2, 2018)

Are you really being so simple as to see everything as being black or white? Is simply reducing the amount of meat (in our diets) so worthless because it does not follow a set of rules down to every little scrap of animal- derived products? Wanting to 'reduce cruelty' is not prescriptive...but issuing diktats regarding even by-products such as leather and glue most certainly is.
Um yes, whilst I accept your personal choices may have been motivated by compassion and other good things, I find the pushy delineation of rules and the frequently clamourous voices pointing sneery fingers (carnists ffs) to have more base roots in social shaming and virtue claiming.

But hey, I am certainly not claiming any moral high grounds for myself - when faced with daughter's outraged request 'have you not even got any avocado or houmous, when offering her a piece of toast, I (fleetingly) felt like pushing her face in it. She settled for Nutella (without the usual label scrutiny because it was either that or dunk the (dry) toast in her black tea!)


----------



## ddraig (Jan 2, 2018)

campanula said:


> Are you really being so simple as to see everything as being black or white? Is simply reducing the amount of meat (in our diets) so worthless because it does not follow a set of rules down to every little scrap of animal- derived products? Wanting to 'reduce cruelty' is not prescriptive...but issuing diktats regarding even by-products such as leather and glue most certainly is.
> Um yes, whilst I accept your personal choices may have been motivated by compassion and other good things, I find the pushy delineation of rules and the frequently clamourous voices pointing sneery fingers (carnists ffs) to have more base roots in social shaming and virtue claiming.


I do tend to see things in b&w and know this is a bad trait
one the one hand you see reducing meat as something good to do but think people who have reduced it to 0% are sneering and issuing diktats?? more contradiction
please tell me where i've been pushy and dishing out rules or "pointing sneery fingers"

I really don't understand why people can't see that veganism, which is to live with no animal products is so hard to understand when it comes to leather etc
do/would you wear fur?


----------



## 8ball (Jan 2, 2018)

ddraig said:


> are the food supplements not vegan then?



It depends on your personal ethics and what you want to call things. 

Where would you stand on zooplankton that have been dead for a really, really long time?


----------



## campanula (Jan 2, 2018)

DDraig...most people are trying to do the right thing, often under very difficult circumstances. Once again, my issue with the vegan movement (as opposed to individual vegans) is this very exclusive rule-based and completely prescriptive ideology...where only 100% fulfilment counts. As with the very worst aspects of the 'identity' themes which have been convulsing politics...the dissonance between the individual (food choices) and the collective (named groups based on those choices) does nothing to counter the very real problems of poor nutrition...from obesity to starvation with a plethora of unhappiness predicated on such 'choices'...but offers up a panaceae for anomie, desperation and loneliness based on belonging...but achieves fuck all when it comes down to systemic abuses.
Not so dissimilar to the discordances within  the 'ethical consumption' thing and the laughable 'carbon credits. On a personal level, great...but as any sort of egalitarian solution...well. less so.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jan 2, 2018)

my partner is vegan and im an omnivore with a particular dislike of a fair amount of green veg (cabbage, broccoli, sprouts, cauliflower etc)  - so no prizes for guessing one of the major faultlines in our relationship.
Its her house - so i dont cook meat there (but do keep cooked meat stashed at the back of the fridge). The kids eat mostly veggie - but have discovered meat and like it.
I do most of the cooking though - so im familiar with a range of vegan dishes.
Can vegan food be tasty and nutritious? yes of course it can - but it definitely does limit your options. Sayton is a pretty good meat substitute - but the others are pretty meh IMHO mainly due the lack of dense texture and fatty richness. No matter what you do with tofu, to me it always taste like marshmallow infused with dishwater.

Ethically and environmentally the case for not eating meat is pretty solid. However, whilst I  think could probably cope with vegetarianism - giving up dairy i would find very difficult - there is no equivalent for butter, milk and cheese. The fat in Butter gives a richness to things like mashed potatoes, soups and on bread and toast that cant be replicated. Vegan sponge cakes I find are generally too heavy and dense due to lack of eggs.  Vegan biscuits can be very tasty though.

All the vegan milk alternatives i find give an unpleasant chalky taste to tea and coffee - i'd rather drink it black.

Chips and roast spuds are def better in veg oil rather than animal fat - but living in yorkshire, most chippies cook in beef dripping (its cheaper)

AS for the health question - i am not remotely convinced that a vegan diet is automatically healthier - i would argue the more dietary options you have the better.  Its probably easier to eat a healthy omnivore diet than a healthy vegan one due to greater options - but its also easier to eat an unhealthy non-vegan diet due to the prevalence of  cheap, low quality processed food.

There has been  a streak of puritanism in a lot of vegan cooking where salt and sugar is frowned on and their is a misguided emphasis on raw or barely cooked vegetables. (yes you lose nutrients when you cook it -  but your stomach cant break down the cellulose in a lot of  raw veg so those nutrients pass straight through you anyway) . However this seems to be fading with the growing popularity of veganism.


----------



## sim667 (Jan 2, 2018)

8ball said:


> Isn't worldwide meat consumption still rising?



There's weird knock on effects. I mean I know Soya is a bad example, as soya is mainly used in cattle feed, but the increase in soya demand and price has had the effect that people in the areas where soya is green are switching to things like chicken for staple ingredients because its cheaper that soya.

I'd been interested to what vocal vegans/veggies would make of people switching to a lab grown meat diet.

I'll admit, its highly unlikely I'll ever be swayed to give up meat, but I do like the idea of ethical carnivorism, I just can't work out how to make it fit with my life.


----------



## UnderAnOpenSky (Jan 2, 2018)

UnderAnOpenSky said:


> I hear Aldi sell vegetables now.



Sorry. I was being slightly silly there. However if you do live in a place where you have no access to transport or decent shops, I think you'd struggle feed your self or your kids well on a tight budget, regardless of your diet.


----------



## mwgdrwg (Jan 2, 2018)

After a successfull month as a vegan late last year (before going back to meat) I am starting again slowly with vegan Monday (actually tuesday this week). I have a lot of changes I want to make into my life, so the plan is just to take it slowly.


----------



## purenarcotic (Jan 2, 2018)

UnderAnOpenSky said:


> Sorry. I was being slightly silly there. However if you do live in a place where you have no access to transport or decent shops, I think you'd struggle feed your self or your kids well on a tight budget, regardless of your diet.



That was my point - I found Paulo’s post pretty judgy and sneery. If you live in a food desert it’s difficult to get enough of anything, never mind a full range of fruit and veg.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jan 2, 2018)

purenarcotic said:


> Do you think it would be possible to do it on benefits living in a food desert?


It should not be any more difficult that it would be for a meat eater on benefits. (I have no idea what you mean by a food desert or if anybody that is posting on U75 is living under genuine "food desert" condititions. ).


----------



## gentlegreen (Jan 2, 2018)

Here - catch !


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jan 2, 2018)

UnderAnOpenSky said:


> Sorry. I was being slightly silly there. However if you do live in a place where you have no access to transport or decent shops, I think you'd struggle feed your self or your kids well on a tight budget, regardless of your diet.


One of the main arguments often used against veganism is that it is expensive and that only over indulgent middle class hippies that can afford to be vegan, which is not the case and has been debunked many times over. If you are in a position where you are struggling to feed yourself then that would be the case regardless of whether you were vegan or not.


----------



## UnderAnOpenSky (Jan 2, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> One of the main arguments often used against veganism is that it is expensive and that only over indulgent middle class hippies that can afford to be vegan, which is not the case and has been debunked many times over. If you are in a position where you are struggling to feed yourself then that would be the case regardless of whether you were vegan or not.



Yes, it can be many things, including poor cooking skills. However if all you've got is a small local shop then things like pulses and beans are disproportionately expensive.


----------



## ddraig (Jan 2, 2018)

is meat cheap then??


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jan 2, 2018)

UnderAnOpenSky said:


> Yes, it can be many things, including poor cooking skills. However if all you've got is a small local shop then things like pulses and beans are disproportionately expensive.


Not any more expensive for a vegan than it is for a meat eater, and in fact can be cheaper.

If you are unable to buy "fresh" produce, there are dried, tinned and frozen alternatives which are good enough.


----------



## UnderAnOpenSky (Jan 2, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Not any more expensive for a vegan than it is for a meat eater, and in fact can be cheaper.
> 
> If you are unable to buy "fresh" produce, there are dried, tinned and frozen alternatives which are good enough.




Except we weren't talking about proper supermarkets.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jan 2, 2018)

UnderAnOpenSky said:


> Except we weren't talking about proper supermarkets.


Proper or improper supermarkets, same thing applies. If you are buying from Aldi/Lidl (I presume those count as "proper" supermarkets) a vegan can feed themselves reasonably well for the same or less than a meat eater. If you only have a tiny Costcutter/Nisa/VG market then the food will be just as expensive for a meat eater and not necessarily any more expensive for a vegan. (although choice might be a bit limited)


----------



## ddraig (Jan 3, 2018)




----------



## NoXion (Jan 3, 2018)

Most non-vegans are apathetic because vegans don't have the power to get their wacky cult enacted into law.


----------



## AnnaKarpik (Jan 3, 2018)

ddraig said:


> lots of people report long term and other illnesses improving after going vegan, are they lying?



"Going vegan" and "adopting a vegan diet" - wasn't this discussed up-thread, don't vegans think generally that these are two different things? I guess here that you are referring to adopting a vegan diet as this has shown some benefits in some people with some illnesses.

What do you imagine is being demonstrated when an ill person becomes well again after a vegan diet? Logic suggests the following to me*
a) the ill person has a remitting disease
b) the person becomes well because of what they include in their diet (in increased quantity perhaps) rather than because of what they exclude
c) there is an as yet undiscovered correlation between a vegan diet and human health.

*I declare an interest; I did find my RA improved with a vegan diet but that is anecdote not evidence. RA is a remitting disease.
I know it is difficult to establish that a vegan diet has any particular health benefit because we're not allowed to experiment on people very rigourously and confounding factors easily lead to odd results. Who knows why Austrian vegetarians tend to visit the doctor and report more ill health than other Austrians, for example. It's only fair to note too, that lots of people report improvements in their health because they believe they are doing something that improves their health, regardless of whether that improvement can be detected objectively.


----------



## 8ball (Jan 3, 2018)

AnnaKarpik said:


> What do you imagine is being demonstrated when an ill person becomes well again after a vegan diet? Logic suggests the following to me*
> a) the ill person has a remitting disease
> b) the person becomes well because of what they include in their diet (in increased quantity perhaps) rather than because of what they exclude
> c) there is an as yet undiscovered correlation between a vegan diet and human health.



Aside from a slight re-wording of the last point, these are exactly the reasons that plausibly explain some people I know feeling better after packing in veganism (or vegetarianism in a couple of cases).


----------



## UnderAnOpenSky (Jan 3, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Proper or improper supermarkets, same thing applies. If you are buying from Aldi/Lidl (I presume those count as "proper" supermarkets) a vegan can feed themselves reasonably well for the same or less than a meat eater. If you only have a tiny Costcutter/Nisa/VG market then the food will be just as expensive for a meat eater and not necessarily any more expensive for a vegan. (although choice might be a bit limited)



I guess if by feed your self then you mean eat enough kcals then of course you are right. As you say though, choice is a bit limited. 

I do eat meat, but we're trying for various reasons to eat more meals without it. To get more intresting stuff like dried beans, lentils, tofu at sensible prices you do have to shop around more then for meat as I guess there is less interest in compition.


----------



## campanula (Jan 3, 2018)

ddraig said:


>



'Here's why we are going to win'...what? The Tosspot Award for Hectoring Gobshites?
It's all very...confrontational...and tbh, there would be far more noticeable global effect if everyone just made a small effort to consider the provenance of their food choices, making small incremental changes rather than wholesale adoption of a food cult which is largely untenable for the vast majority of the world population (that being the 99% of people who are not obsessing over their bio-dynamic wheatgrass smoothies). I see NOTHING particularly ethical about the importing of avocados, the careless consumption of out of season fruits and vegetables, grown under market imperatives, regardless of ecological utility, to infuse an entitled generation with righteousness, eating foods which are not, and never will be locally available without intensive agriculture and a global import business. But yep, carry on with your almond milk and rice consumption..because without a huge transport network, British vegans would be munching on stored carrots, wrinkly apples, salted beans and parsnips right now (in the 'hungry gap').


----------



## 8ball (Jan 3, 2018)

Hmmm.  Avocadoes or bacon.  Which is more ethical?


----------



## campanula (Jan 3, 2018)

gentlegreen said:


> Here - catch !



Bit of a rubbish statement though GG. Just exactly how much (edible) food have you managed to grow this year? (even allowing for the (ahem) watercress experiments). Even with a couple of allotments, I am not providing much more than a 3month seasonal glut and a whole lot of jam and ketchup. I only managed Xmas roasties by making an effort at rationing.
Parsley and leeks - that's pretty much it at the moment...and of course, I am fortunate enough to actually have access to soil and space.

Have to applaud Bulldog tools though.


----------



## UnderAnOpenSky (Jan 3, 2018)

campanula said:


> 'Here's why we are going to win'...what? The Tosspot Award for Hectoring Gobshites?
> It's all very...confrontational...and tbh, there would be far more noticeable global effect if everyone just made a small effort to consider the provenance of their food choices, making small incremental changes rather than wholesale adoption of a food cult which is largely untenable for the vast majority of the world population (that being the 99% of people who are not obsessing over their bio-dynamic wheatgrass smoothies). I see NOTHING particularly ethical about the importing of avocados, the careless consumption of out of season fruits and vegetables, grown under market imperatives, regardless of ecological utility, to infuse an entitled generation with righteousness, eating foods which are not, and never will be locally available without intensive agriculture and a global import business. But yep, carry on with your almond milk and rice consumption..because without a huge transport network, British vegans would be munching on stored carrots, wrinkly apples, salted beans and parsnips right now (in the 'hungry gap').



I guess we'd have to go back to eating lots of fermented foods.


----------



## 8ball (Jan 3, 2018)

UnderAnOpenSky said:


> I guess we'd have to go back to eating lots of fermented foods.



Beer counts, right?


----------



## campanula (Jan 3, 2018)

UnderAnOpenSky said:


> I guess we'd have to go back to eating lots of fermented foods.



Yep, definitely a lot of brining and pickling. Truth is, I don't really have a dog in this race and it doesn't even concern me overmuch, apart from a vague unease about restrictive rules impacting on grand-daughter. I am not oblivious to the politics of food but as always, the issues are complex and not helpfully addressed by the adoption of faddy, self-absorbed eating trends of a privileged minority.


----------



## campanula (Jan 3, 2018)

8ball said:


> Beer counts, right?



Of course. Worried about sweetheart's perilously skinny frame, I laughingly suggested a beer diet...which he took to like the proverbial duck in water. Gained not a single ounce but I know for sure he sleeps well, owing to the somnolent effects of 2 nightly bottles of Broadside.


----------



## lazythursday (Jan 3, 2018)

campanula said:


> 'Here's why we are going to win'...what? The Tosspot Award for Hectoring Gobshites?
> It's all very...confrontational...and tbh, there would be far more noticeable global effect if everyone just made a small effort to consider the provenance of their food choices, making small incremental changes rather than wholesale adoption of a food cult which is largely untenable for the vast majority of the world population (that being the 99% of people who are not obsessing over their bio-dynamic wheatgrass smoothies). I see NOTHING particularly ethical about the importing of avocados, the careless consumption of out of season fruits and vegetables, grown under market imperatives, regardless of ecological utility, to infuse an entitled generation with righteousness, eating foods which are not, and never will be locally available without intensive agriculture and a global import business. But yep, carry on with your almond milk and rice consumption..because without a huge transport network, British vegans would be munching on stored carrots, wrinkly apples, salted beans and parsnips right now (in the 'hungry gap').


But food miles are a small proportion of overall carbon costs of food, and it is arguably much less environmentally damaging to eat imported vegetables / pulses than eat locally reared meat.


----------



## campanula (Jan 3, 2018)

It isn't just food miles though is it? The global food market also presides over desperately poor use of water and  topsoil as land which would have been used to grow indigenous crops or even for pastoral farming, is set aside to comply with a middle class demand for everyday salads, green beans and Christmas strawberries - not to mention the insane cutflower market.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jan 3, 2018)

UnderAnOpenSky said:


> I guess if by feed your self then you mean eat enough kcals then of course you are right. As you say though, choice is a bit limited.


If you're on benefits and you live in the middle of nowhere outside the catchment area of a supermarket then your choice is likely to be more limited (and possibly more expensive) regardless of whether you are a vegan or not, same conditions apply. I'm not sure if there are such things as "food deserts" in the UK and I imagine that most people who are on low income or on benefits have access to supermarkets and can therefore get reasonably priced and reasonable quality food.

How to Eat Healthy on a Budget (The Complete Guide)
Veganism on a student budget
Vegan on a budget
Vegan on a Budget: Money-Saving Tips from The Stingy Vegan





UnderAnOpenSky said:


> I do eat meat, but we're trying for various reasons to eat more meals without it. To get more intresting stuff like dried beans, lentils, tofu at sensible prices you do have to shop around more then for meat as I guess there is less interest in compition.


I believe we've had this conversation already somewhere in this thread. If you want food for sensible prices, you'll have to shop around anyway, being a vegan doesn't change that. The thing that might make it a bit more of a challenge in the initial stages is more to do with unfamiliarity, especially if you've been used to shopping in a particular way. Folks that are genuinely interested will seek out the knowledge and explore their new food terrain, and on that journey might discover new tastes and flavours that they never knew existed. Others may prefer to stick to their familiar, comforting non threatening foods like chicken and chips errday. Whatever floats peoples boats I suppose.


----------



## gentlegreen (Jan 3, 2018)

I personally base my diet around broccoli and sprouts cooked from fresh, but I wonder how the nutrient profile would compare if someone was eating bargain bin turkey twizzlers versus cheap veggie stodge and few fresh greens.


----------



## 8ball (Jan 3, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> The thing that might make it a bit more of a challenge in the initial stages is more to do with unfamiliarity, especially if you've been used to shopping in a particular way. Folks that are genuinely interested will seek out the knowledge and explore their new food terrain, and on that journey might discover new tastes and flavours that they never knew existed.



I tried black garlic at Christmas - amazing stuff (though expensive).

Gives some of the flavour balance of meat without being an "attempted meat replacement", which I always find disappointing.


----------



## 8ball (Jan 3, 2018)

gentlegreen said:


> I personally base my diet around broccoli and sprouts cooked from fresh, but I wonder how the nutrient profile would compare if someone was eating bargain bin turkey twizzlers versus cheap veggie stodge and few fresh greens.



I believe a test of this (or something similar) was done in the Bible and the latter won out.


----------



## UnderAnOpenSky (Jan 3, 2018)

campanula said:


> Yep, definitely a lot of brining and pickling. Truth is, I don't really have a dog in this race and it doesn't even concern me overmuch, apart from a vague unease about restrictive rules impacting on grand-daughter. I am not oblivious to the politics of food but as always, the issues are complex and not helpfully addressed by the adoption of faddy, self-absorbed eating trends of a privileged minority.



I don't either, but I do find the greater conversation about food supplies interesting, partly as my other half is a small scale farmer as well as having a bit of an interest in lacto fermentation. 

Not sure if you're intrested, but there is a company called Hodmedod that has started supplying UK grown pules & grains and won a food and farming award for it this year. I've got some of their blue split peas in the cupboard I keep meaning to experiment with. 

About Hodmedod


----------



## 8ball (Jan 3, 2018)

UnderAnOpenSky said:


> Not sure if you're intrested, but there is a company called Hodmedod...



Presumably named after the founder was sat in the bath struggling to think of a name, and then farted?


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Jan 3, 2018)

Why I Have A Problem With Veganuary


----------



## UnderAnOpenSky (Jan 3, 2018)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> Why I Have A Problem With Veganuary



Why shouldnt people promote ideas that they believe in? I mean I don't want to see pictures of tortured animals, but it's not like anyone has taken away her choice.

I'm not doing it, but am making a big effort to eat a lot less meat this month. By doing this, rather then just one day a week, I've learnt some cool new things to cook. Most of us can knock up a few decent veggie dishes, doing it for longer makes you think a bit more.


----------



## 8ball (Jan 3, 2018)

UnderAnOpenSky said:


> Why shouldnt people promote ideas that they believe in?



Why shouldn't people have a problem with how they promote them?


----------



## campanula (Jan 3, 2018)

UnderAnOpenSky said:


> I don't either, but I do find the greater conversation about food supplies interesting, partly as my other half is a small scale farmer as well as having a bit of an interest in lacto fermentation.
> 
> Not sure if you're intrested, but there is a company called Hodmedod that has started supplying UK grown pules & grains and won a food and farming award for it this year. I've got some of their blue split peas in the cupboard I keep meaning to experiment with.
> 
> About Hodmedod



Yeah, I know them, through the small farming network. I did some work on growing beans for another friend out in Downham Market (which ended up in tins for Waitrose) and also have a friend using a small council farm as a market garden (although he does 'buy in' stuff at this time of year. What is the acreage farmed by your friend?
I don't grow as many veggies as I could (because flowers) but I have been a little irked by the huge Grow your Own craze...which is basically punting out dead easy plug plants of sweetcorn and such and urging folk to grow lettuce in a window box (better off with a few herbs but).
In fairness, I would as happily consume a food pill after 50 years of (resentful) family cooking. Left to my own devices, Toast would be my main food item.
Soz - no idea what happened to your quote.


----------



## purenarcotic (Jan 3, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> If you're on benefits and you live in the middle of nowhere outside the catchment area of a supermarket then your choice is likely to be more limited (and possibly more expensive) regardless of whether you are a vegan or not, same conditions apply. I'm not sure if there are such things as "food deserts" in the UK and I imagine that most people who are on low income or on benefits have access to supermarkets and can therefore get reasonably priced and reasonable quality food.
> 
> How to Eat Healthy on a Budget (The Complete Guide)
> Veganism on a student budget
> ...




The Three Estates in Kings Norton in Birmingham are not served by a single supermarket - it’s been a source of huge frustration for those living there and has caused problems for the kids and schools who know they have to promote healthy eating but feel its daft when for a lot of their kids it’s not doable for their families. I’m acutely aware that vegan or not, the choices are hard and limited, my issue with your post was that it read to me very condescending towards parents, as though they don’t care. Perhaps some don’t, a lot do though but structural difficulties make it hard. Shitting on people already struggling isn’t fair.


----------



## campanula (Jan 3, 2018)

Why has January been chosen as an ideal month to embrace a plant based lifestyle...when there is precious little available at this time of year? Logic fail.


----------



## lazythursday (Jan 3, 2018)

UnderAnOpenSky said:


> I don't either, but I do find the greater conversation about food supplies interesting, partly as my other half is a small scale farmer as well as having a bit of an interest in lacto fermentation.
> 
> Not sure if you're intrested, but there is a company called Hodmedod that has started supplying UK grown pules & grains and won a food and farming award for it this year. I've got some of their blue split peas in the cupboard I keep meaning to experiment with.
> 
> About Hodmedod


I love the Hodmedod pea flours which I've been using a lot recently. Nicer, but similar to gram/chickpea flour. About double the cost though...


----------



## UnderAnOpenSky (Jan 3, 2018)

campanula said:


> Why has January been chosen as an ideal month to embrace a plant based lifestyle...when there is precious little available at this time of year? Logic fail.



It's the only time of year I'm allowed to buy what veg I want from the supermarket, so its a time of plenty for me.


----------



## purenarcotic (Jan 3, 2018)

campanula said:


> Why has January been chosen as an ideal month to embrace a plant based lifestyle...when there is precious little available at this time of year? Logic fail.



It’s the new year thing innit - people give up fags, drink, gym membership sky rockets.... new year new me thing.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jan 3, 2018)

UnderAnOpenSky said:


> Why shouldnt people promote ideas that they believe in? I mean I don't want to see pictures of tortured animals, but it's not like anyone has taken away her choice.


It would appear that even the sight of the word "vegan" is to some a kind of triggering word that creates a knee jerk reaction in some folk. I personally don't have a problem with people promoting whatever their interests are. If it's something that doesn't interest me then I will simply ignore it, so I can't understand why meat eaters get so het up and unnecessarily involved in vegan discussions that they could also easily ignore. What's that all about?


----------



## ddraig (Jan 3, 2018)

NoXion said:


> Most non-vegans are apathetic because vegans don't have the power to get their wacky cult enacted into law.


not eating meat/attempting to eliminate cruelty is a wacky cult?


----------



## ddraig (Jan 3, 2018)

from this


campanula said:


> 'Here's why we are going to win'...what? The Tosspot Award for Hectoring Gobshites?
> It's all very...confrontational...and tbh, there would be far more noticeable global effect if everyone just made a small effort to consider the provenance of their food choices, making small incremental changes rather than wholesale adoption of a food cult which is largely untenable for the vast majority of the world population (that being the 99% of people who are not obsessing over their bio-dynamic wheatgrass smoothies). I see NOTHING particularly ethical about the importing of avocados, the careless consumption of out of season fruits and vegetables, grown under market imperatives, regardless of ecological utility, to infuse an entitled generation with righteousness, eating foods which are not, and never will be locally available without intensive agriculture and a global import business. But yep, carry on with your almond milk and rice consumption..because without a huge transport network, British vegans would be munching on stored carrots, wrinkly apples, salted beans and parsnips right now (in the 'hungry gap').


through this


campanula said:


> Yep, definitely a lot of brining and pickling. Truth is, I don't really have a dog in this race and it doesn't even concern me overmuch, apart from a vague unease about restrictive rules impacting on grand-daughter. I am not oblivious to the politics of food but as always, the issues are complex and not helpfully addressed by the adoption of faddy, self-absorbed eating trends of a privileged minority.


and this


campanula said:


> It isn't just food miles though is it? The global food market also presides over desperately poor use of water and  topsoil as land which would have been used to grow indigenous crops or even for pastoral farming, is set aside to comply with a middle class demand for everyday salads, green beans and Christmas strawberries - not to mention the insane cutflower market.


to this!!


campanula said:


> Yeah, I know them, through the small farming network. I did some work on growing beans for another friend out in Downham Market (which ended up in tins for Waitrose) and also have a friend using a small council farm as a market garden (although he does 'buy in' stuff at this time of year. What is the acreage farmed by your friend?
> I don't grow as many veggies as I could (because flowers) but I have been a little irked by the huge Grow your Own craze...which is basically punting out dead easy plug plants of sweetcorn and such and urging folk to grow lettuce in a window box (better off with a few herbs but).
> In fairness, I would as happily consume a food pill after 50 years of (resentful) family cooking. Left to my own devices, Toast would be my main food item.
> Soz - no idea what happened to your quote.


so not just carrots and wrinkly parsnips then as you well know!

i'm not rich or privileged particularly, currently signing on with no work so please stop about rich/middles class/posh types and veganism, it's lazy and wrong

also for everyone, it's not a cult, Veganism has been around for decades and probably longer, it isn't going to go away and is getting broader accelerated support for ethical, humane, health and environmental reasons, these are facts
people have a go at vegans for absolutism and then have a go because they're not self sufficient expert farmers who have to buy imported foods, again damned either way

as always, thread appears to be going round and round a bit now
Vegan Sidekick is not hectoring, they point out the absurdity of the carnists, their attacks on vegans and the excuses people use for continued consumption of flesh
e2a - I presume they mean "winning the argument"as that what it clearly is, a constant argument as illustrated right here in almost a 100 pages


----------



## ddraig (Jan 3, 2018)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> Why I Have A Problem With Veganuary


woah!! lot's of fragility there! it's all about them isn't it and making them feel bad
and while they throw in a few caveats in about how they've "got no problem with vegans" and "can see the benefits" etc, they clearly have a MASSIVE problem with it
of course a marketing campaign is going to 'hard sell' the message, that's is fucking aim for fucks sake
no one is being forced to sign up, it's a fucking choice people make and if people feel guilty when they see the ads etc then that's their look out


----------



## Spymaster (Jan 3, 2018)

ddraig said:


> ... if people feel guilty when they see the ads etc then that's their look out


But they don't, that's the point. They just feel browbeaten and annoyed. You need to get off this thing about meat eaters feeling _guilty_. Very few actually do.


----------



## UnderAnOpenSky (Jan 3, 2018)

Spymaster said:


> But they don't, that's the point. They just feel browbeaten and annoyed. You need to get off this thing about meat eaters feeling _guilty_. Very few actually do.



She obviously had a touch of it.


----------



## Spymaster (Jan 3, 2018)

UnderAnOpenSky said:


> She obviously had a touch of it.


I don't think so. She's just trying to be polite and putting the boot into her own case as a result.


----------



## ddraig (Jan 3, 2018)

Spymaster said:


> I don't think so. She's just trying to be polite and putting the boot into her own case as a result.


 haha! nice one
poor her having to look at adverts in tube stations


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Jan 3, 2018)

UnderAnOpenSky said:


> She obviously had a touch of it.



Countless animals being tortured and brutally killed to supply this woman and others like her with luxury food items they don't need and yet _she's_ the victim because she has to see a vegan advert every now and then on the side of the bus (amongst the endless stream of adverts for meat and other animal products). The arrogance, self-entitlement and self-pity of such people is truly staggering.


----------



## campanula (Jan 3, 2018)

[QUOTE="ddraig, post: 15383584, member: 1246"

so not just carrots and wrinkly parsnips then as you well know!

I do indeed know that there will be a choice of leeks and stored root vegetables...and not much else until March, when we can add broccoli to the list...if we are referring to locally grown food as opposed to a globally sourced market.

'i'm not rich or privileged particularly, currently signing on with no work so please stop about rich/middles class/posh types and veganism, it's lazy and wrong'

No, it is not. Are you raising a growing family...or feeding just yourself...because the differences between my self-imposed austerity diet and the nutritional needs for a family (especially with various allergies and other pressures) are too wide apart to usefully compare.

Still, might go and carve a last slice of the Xmas ham since it is fair to say that I have not been persuaded, converted or guilted by the foaming hyperbole of vegans...do carry on with your self-referential convo though.


----------



## Spymaster (Jan 3, 2018)

ddraig said:


> haha! nice one
> poor her having to look at adverts in tube stations


 Again you miss the point spectacularly.

Why do you feel it necessary to insist on this guilt that meat eaters are all apparently feeling? You do it a lot and it's absolute nonsense. It clearly illustrates the fragility of your own position that you need to make up things that are blatantly false.


----------



## NoXion (Jan 3, 2018)

ddraig said:


> not eating meat/attempting to eliminate cruelty is a wacky cult?



Veganism is about more than "not eating meat/attempting to eliminate cruelty".


----------



## 8ball (Jan 3, 2018)

Spymaster said:


> But they don't, that's the point. They just feel browbeaten and annoyed. You need to get off this thing about meat eaters feeling _guilty_. Very few actually do.



I think that's the thing, that article was pretty supportive of people not eating meat and gave references to why cutting down or cutting out meat could be a good thing, but...  but well it's all group dynamics stuff, I can't much be arsed with picking it apart.

In vegans' defense, there are worse things to be than a bit annoying.


----------



## ddraig (Jan 3, 2018)

campanula said:


> [QUOTE="ddraig, post: 15383584, member: 1246"
> 
> so not just carrots and wrinkly parsnips then as you well know!
> 
> ...


you are referring to locally produced food, honing in attempting to find any hypocrisy or unrealistic part of veganism
vegans, the same as meat eaters and vegis import food and out of season, guess what, no one is perfect.

are you still saying it's cheaper to feed a family with meat? an added ingredient for pleasure
why not just post "bacon tho" or a gif, almost the same thing 





why do you think I and others are trying to convert you? still. you carry on, gorge yourself on the pig flesh, enjoy it and make sure it didn't die in vain


----------



## ddraig (Jan 3, 2018)

Spymaster said:


> Again you miss the point spectacularly.
> 
> Why do you feel it necessary to insist on this guilt that meat eaters are all apparently feeling? You do it a lot and it's absolute nonsense. It clearly illustrates the fragility of your own position that you need to make up things that are blatantly false.


why do the adverts bother her so much?? why not just sail on by?? there's obviously something there

and as Jeff said, it's fuck all compared to all the adverts for meat all year round everywhere you go
meat marketed at children, dressed up in different ways to keep the consumption and massive industry going


----------



## Spymaster (Jan 3, 2018)

ddraig said:


> why do the adverts bother her so much??


I doubt they do. She's a columnist looking for stuff to write about. A quick search of that site shows she's penned dozens of articles from bra sizing to gift advice via recipe suggestions (including a defence of veganism). That article is actually pretty reasonable.


----------



## Calamity1971 (Jan 3, 2018)

This is how you make vegans angry
Probe After Restaurant Chef ‘Boasts Of Spiking A Vegan’


----------



## Spymaster (Jan 3, 2018)

Calamity1971 said:


> This is how you make vegans angry
> Probe After Restaurant Chef ‘Boasts Of Spiking A Vegan’


She was a massive fuckwit, tbf.


----------



## ddraig (Jan 3, 2018)

Spymaster said:


> I doubt they do. She's a columnist looking for stuff to write about. A quick search of that site shows she's penned dozens of articles from bra sizing to gift advice via recipe suggestions (including a defence of veganism). That article is actually pretty reasonable.


right so not browbeaten or guilted then, just a journo
the article is not reasonable it's mostly about them, shoddy "journalism"


----------



## ddraig (Jan 3, 2018)

Calamity1971 said:


> This is how you make vegans angry
> Probe After Restaurant Chef ‘Boasts Of Spiking A Vegan’


resigned apparently, despite being a co owner


----------



## Spymaster (Jan 3, 2018)

ddraig said:


> right so not browbeaten or guilted then, just a journo
> the article is not reasonable it's mostly about them, shoddy "journalism"


It's an opinion piece. Why does her opinion bother you so much?


----------



## ddraig (Jan 3, 2018)

Spymaster said:


> It's an opinion piece. Why does her opinion bother you so much?


it doesn't it's pathetic, transparent shoddy journalism and tired crap
the fact it was quoted here is telling of the arguments used however


----------



## ddraig (Jan 3, 2018)

Calamity1971 said:


> This is how you make vegans angry
> Probe After Restaurant Chef ‘Boasts Of Spiking A Vegan’


loads of serious backpedalling and lies in there!
why would you resign if not done anything wrong?? 
and having a go at someone for ordering a non vegan pizza yet saying later on that they may well have been vegetarian so no issue with them ordering it


----------



## keybored (Jan 3, 2018)

ddraig said:


>


----------



## Spymaster (Jan 3, 2018)

ddraig said:


> it doesn't it's pathetic, transparent shoddy journalism and tired crap
> the fact it was quoted here is telling of the arguments used however


It's not journalism it's a blog post. The points she makes aren't much different to many that have been made here on this thread. The fact that you don't like them doesn't make them less pertinent.


----------



## ddraig (Jan 3, 2018)

Spymaster said:


> It's not journalism it's a blog post. The points she makes aren't much different to many that have been made here on this thread. The fact that you don't like them doesn't make them less pertinent.


which ones are pertinent then? they are patently bollocks


----------



## mojo pixy (Jan 3, 2018)

Jeff Robinson said:


> Countless animals being tortured and brutally killed to supply this woman and others like her with luxury food items they don't need and yet _she's_ the victim because she has to see a vegan advert every now and then on the side of the bus (amongst the endless stream of adverts for meat and other animal products). The arrogance, self-entitlement and self-pity of such people is truly staggering.





ddraig said:


> why do the adverts bother her so much?? why not just sail on by?? there's obviously something there



I don't know, I got the impression that the adverts for a vegan diet were a minor point for the writer, it was certainly left till the very end of the article to mention that aspect.


----------



## ddraig (Jan 3, 2018)

what were the main points then?


----------



## mojo pixy (Jan 3, 2018)

Did you not read it?

It seemed to me her main bones of contention were
1. Promoters using _vegan_ to mean _healthy_
2. The notion of pledging / signing up, which she characterized as _hard sell_
3. The risk that a vegan diet as promoted to people with eating disorders may end up exacerbating the disorder
4. That veganism is promoted as something to adopt wholesale and this may put people off. She feels it's presented as _all-or-nothing_, when many people would be happy to make some effort this is considered hypocritical or insufficient.
5. Graphic adverts are unnecessary and counter productive.

I didn't consider point 5 to be her main argument. And none of the above are _my_ arguments.


----------



## UnderAnOpenSky (Jan 3, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> Did you not read it?
> 
> It seemed to me her main bones of contention were
> 1. Promoters using _vegan_ to mean _healthy_
> ...



That's a very good summery. Even as a meat eater I thought most of it was bollocks.


----------



## Spymaster (Jan 3, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> Did you not read it?
> 
> It seemed to me her main bones of contention were
> 1. Promoters using _vegan_ to mean _healthy_
> ...


Cheers. I was just about to do the same, point by point.


----------



## Spymaster (Jan 3, 2018)

UnderAnOpenSky said:


> That's a very good summery. Even as a meat eater I thought most of it was bollocks.


And this is why the subject is untenably polarised!


----------



## mojo pixy (Jan 3, 2018)

UnderAnOpenSky said:


> That's a very good summery. Even as a meat eater I thought most of it was bollocks.



It is, and so is "veganuary", as already mentioned, promoting a 100% veg diet in the middle of winter when almost nothing is in season looks a bit dim.


----------



## ddraig (Jan 3, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> Did you not read it?
> 
> It seemed to me her main bones of contention were
> 1. Promoters using _vegan_ to mean _healthy_
> ...


thanks
1. of course promoters are going to use the best bits, you can be an unhealthy vegan of course but the vast majority agree it is a healthy thing to do, even they and people on this thread do
2. so what? just don't sign up, some posters in a tube station or on buses is not hard sell, people stopping you in the street to sign you up or phoning you is 'hard sell'
3. errr then that is a risk with anything then, people with eating disorders need to be careful with any change in their diet, nothing to do with veganism. And is there any actual evidence of this other than "it could so shouldn't be promoted"?
4. How is getting people to try it for a month, ONE MONTH making people adopt it "wholesale", if it was all or nothing it would be "go vegan" and not encouraging people to do it for just a month. And again why the fuck do people care what the campaign says if it's not for them ignore it.
5. do Veganuary do any graphic adverts then?? or is this the lumping of every vegan org into one thing to point and sneer at, hypocrisy hunt and catch out??

lots of people have done it in the past and felt benefits, lots of people have continued to be vegan after the month, some have gone back to eating meat and everything they used to do in December or before, whoopee


----------



## ddraig (Jan 3, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> It is, and so is "veganuary", as already mentioned, promoting a 100% veg diet in the middle of winter when almost nothing is in season looks a bit dim.


ffs we've already covered this
do meat eaters just eat seasonal meat in January then? nothing imported at all? no veg, nothing??
it may look dim to those looking to demonise veganism but it's clearly a thing that is working to expand veganism and a way of getting more people clued up on it and giving them an experience of it.

It's not just adverts and "DO IT NOW YOU FUCKING CARNIST OR YOU'RE A CUNT" it's backed up with many recipes, advice and even mentors


----------



## UnderAnOpenSky (Jan 3, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> It is, and so is "veganuary", as already mentioned, promoting a 100% veg diet in the middle of winter when almost nothing is in season looks a bit dim.



Yeah, that's a fair point, but how many people buy all their food from farmers markets and eat seasonly? My partner runs a small veg box scheme and even I don't mange that.


----------



## mojo pixy (Jan 3, 2018)

ddraig said:


> ffs we've already covered this
> do meat eaters just eat seasonal meat in January then? nothing imported at all? no veg, nothing??
> it may look dim to those looking to demonise veganism but it's clearly a thing that is working to expand veganism and a way of getting more people clued up on it and giving them an experience of it.
> 
> It's not just adverts and "DO IT NOW YOU FUCKING CARNIST OR YOU'RE A CUNT" it's backed up with many recipes, advice and even mentors



Why not July then? Why January? It's a marketing scam like all diets are, promoted in January cos people feel fat and will spend extra money then to slim down. Yay marketing.


----------



## 8ball (Jan 3, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> It is, and so is "veganuary", as already mentioned, promoting a 100% veg diet in the middle of winter when almost nothing is in season looks a bit dim.



It also distracts from “Fanuary” (the women’s version of “Movember”).


----------



## ddraig (Jan 3, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> Why not July then? Why January? It's a marketing scam like all diets are, promoted in January cos people feel fat and will spend extra money then to slim down. Yay marketing.


or people are looking to maybe try something new and change something in their life so why not? maybe like lots of people, including here, some are looking to reduce their meat eating and this is a way for them to try it

I'd not seen it as a diet thing, more of a health thing, reduction of cruelty thing and an environmental thing
do you have a go at gyms who advertise in January? slimfast and other companies?

who is it scamming and who is benefiting from this scam?
i've only seen good reports from people who have done it, do you have any bad ones to counter?


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Jan 3, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> Why not July then? Why January? It's a marketing scam like all diets are, promoted in January cos people feel fat and will spend extra money then to slim down. Yay marketing.



Or maybe because January is just after people make New Year’s Resolutions and is seen by many as the perfect time to make a fresh start in life?


----------



## mojo pixy (Jan 3, 2018)

ddraig said:


> do you have a go at gyms who advertise in January? slimfast and other companies?



Yes.



ddraig said:


> who is it scamming and who is benefiting from this scam?



Companies benefit, unhappy people pay. Usual fad/diet mechanics.


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Jan 3, 2018)

ddraig said:


> or people are looking to maybe try something new and change something in their life so why not? maybe like lots of people, including here, some are looking to reduce their meat eating and this is a way for them to try it
> 
> I'd not seen it as a diet thing, more of a health thing, reduction of cruelty thing and an environmental thing
> do you have a go at gyms who advertise in January? slimfast and other companies?
> ...



Yeah but sneering cycnism is so much more fun than doing anything positive or constructive.


----------



## ddraig (Jan 3, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> Yes.
> 
> 
> 
> Companies benefit, unhappy people pay. Usual fad/diet mechanics.


what company is behind veganuary then? or what companies will benefit?


----------



## mojo pixy (Jan 3, 2018)

Jeff Robinson said:


> Or maybe because January is just after people make New Year’s Resolutions and is seen by many as the perfect time to make a fresh start in life?



Yes, exploitation of good will for profit, happens every year the same.


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Jan 3, 2018)

ddraig said:


> what company is behind veganuary then? or what companies will benefit?



The broccoli industry of course.


----------



## ddraig (Jan 3, 2018)

Jeff Robinson said:


> The broccoli industry of course.



and Gary, they benefit loads!


----------



## mojo pixy (Jan 3, 2018)

I'm one of those crazy people who does what I want and need to do without an advertising campaign to keep me feeling fresh.


----------



## mojo pixy (Jan 3, 2018)

Who will profit? Those ever so bourgeois little startups promoting lifestyle consumption. Just what we need more of.


----------



## ddraig (Jan 3, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> I'm one of those crazy people who does what I want and need to do without an advertising campaign to keep me feeling fresh.


well done you
let's sneer at those not as strong and sensible than you, those that need a bit of encouragement or help along their way


----------



## ddraig (Jan 3, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> Who will profit? Those ever so bourgeois little startups promoting lifestyle consumption. Just what we need more of.


such as? and how are they connected?


----------



## purenarcotic (Jan 3, 2018)

The ED stuff comes from the ‘clean eating’ shite - believe the term now coined for it is orthorexia. I know there has been concern from BEAT about how the obsession with clean eating from lifestyle folk on social media was affecting those with and at risk of developing eating disorders and they are watching things quite carefully. I don’t think veganism is really the same thing - my vegan friends don’t moan on about ‘refined’ sugar whilst hoofing maple syrup down without a hint of irony.


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Jan 3, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> I'm one of those crazy people who does what I want and need to do without an advertising campaign to keep me feeling fresh.



Next time you accuse a vegan of being self-righteous or up themselves please remember that you wrote that. ^^^


----------



## ddraig (Jan 3, 2018)

purenarcotic said:


> The ED stuff comes from the ‘clean eating’ shite - believe the term now coined for it is orthorexia. I know there has been concern from BEAT about how the obsession with clean eating from lifestyle folk on social media was affecting those with and at risk of developing eating disorders and they are watching things quite carefully. I don’t think veganism is really the same thing - my vegan friends don’t moan on about ‘refined’ sugar whilst hoofing maple syrup down without a hint of irony.


indeed

a quote from a young woman elsewhere that story was posted


> i HATE it when people (namely people who aren't vegan) make connections between the lifestyle and 'restrictive' eating. there's nothing restrictive about it! i see it as absolute abundance, coming from a past of restrictive eating and calorie counting i love vegan food because i don't have to count the cals cause god damn a full belly on veggies & grains is a lot less damaging to the waistline than that of steak!


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Jan 3, 2018)

Yep, there’s definitely nothing restrictive about a vegan diet. Apart from it hugely restricting the the things you can eat


----------



## mojo pixy (Jan 3, 2018)

Jeff Robinson said:


> Next time you accuse a vegan of being self-righteous or up themselves please remember that you wrote that. ^^^



I sure will, as long as you remember that one bit of self-righteousness doesn't excuse another


----------



## 8ball (Jan 3, 2018)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> Yep, there’s definitely nothing restrictive about a vegan diet. Apart from it hugely restricting the the things you can eat



Then again, if you start planning before Christmas I guess going vegan for Jan might mean finding some things you like that you might not otherwise try.


----------



## ddraig (Jan 3, 2018)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> Yep, there’s definitely nothing restrictive about a vegan diet. Apart from it hugely restricting the the things you can eat


round of applause for bees, knew someone would jump on that part! take a bow for getting in first

restricting clearly by restricting the cruelty and flesh on your plate but how is it "hugely" restricting?


----------



## mojo pixy (Jan 3, 2018)

ddraig said:


> well done you
> let's sneer at those not as strong and sensible than you, those that need a bit of encouragement or help along their way



Let's sneer at people who need encouragement themselves but who in turn sneer at people who didn't make the same dietary choice as them. 

Sneering, eh? Who mentioned that then? Takes one to know one, I reckon.


----------



## ddraig (Jan 3, 2018)

oh dear, scraping the barrel now

where is the sneering at people who don't make the same dietary choices as them here?


----------



## NoXion (Jan 3, 2018)

ddraig said:


> round of applause for bees, knew someone would jump on that part! take a bow for getting in first
> 
> restricting clearly by restricting the cruelty and flesh on your plate but how is it "hugely" restricting?



It excludes an entire kingdom of life!


----------



## mojo pixy (Jan 3, 2018)

ddraig said:


> oh dear, scraping the barrel now
> 
> where is the sneering at people who don't make the same dietary choices as them here?



lol did you really type that in all seriousness?

OK, serious answer then  Pick a page on this thread and sneer it up..


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Jan 3, 2018)

ddraig said:


> restricting clearly by restricting the cruelty and flesh on your plate but how is it "hugely" restricting?


See all that food you can’t eat? That bit.

And that’s before I’d have to sacrifice most (actually thinking about it _all_ ) of my shoes


----------



## ddraig (Jan 3, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> lol did you really type that in all seriousness?
> 
> OK, serious answer then  Pick a page on this thread and sneer it up..


you made the point, can't you back it up?


----------



## ddraig (Jan 3, 2018)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> See all that food you can’t eat? That bit.
> 
> And that’s before I’d have to sacrifice most (actually thinking about it _all_ ) of my shoes


yeah i said the cruelty and flesh that vegans choose not to eat, they can eat it if they want

you don't have to do anything and you're not going to do it anyway so why piss about on here apart from the larks?
you don't have to change what you eat, get that into your big fat (meat  ) head


----------



## mojo pixy (Jan 3, 2018)

.


----------



## mojo pixy (Jan 3, 2018)

ddraig said:


> you made the point, can't you back it up?



There's a whole thread backing me up. Maybe you or PaoloSanchez could give us a few more examples.


----------



## ddraig (Jan 3, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> There's a whole thread backing me up. Maybe you or PaoloSanchez could give us a few more examples.


then it should be easy for you to find sneering posts surely? 
don't lump me in with them please, they disgraced themselves here and sent me threatening pm's


----------



## mojo pixy (Jan 3, 2018)

ddraig said:


> then it should be easy for you to find sneering posts surely?



Easy for me or anyone, really.

So you won't do it?
Anyone can do it.
So you won't do it?
Anyone can do it.
So you won't do it?
Anyone can do it.
So you won't do it?
Anyone can do it.
So you won't do it?
Anyone can do it.
So you won't do it?
Anyone can do it.
So you won't do it?
Anyone can do it.
So you won't do it?
Anyone can do it.
So you won't do it?
Anyone can do it.
So you won't do it?
Anyone can do it.

/bored


----------



## ddraig (Jan 3, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> Easy for me or anyone, really.
> 
> So you won't do it?
> Anyone can do it.
> ...


 oh my days!! are you fucking serious??!?! 
weak

unsubscribe, even ignore thread option is there for you


----------



## mojo pixy (Jan 3, 2018)

No, I think I'll stick around for the next round of sneering.


----------



## ddraig (Jan 3, 2018)

from the carnists i presume as there's a lot of that


----------



## ddraig (Jan 3, 2018)

lots of chains doing offers for Veganuary
https://veganuary.com/blog/the-best-chain-restaurants-to-check-out-in-veganuary/


----------



## mojo pixy (Jan 3, 2018)

It's a proper bandwagon. All Bar One serving vegan food so that conscious consumers can consume more consciously on the High St. Great stuff.

*waits for McDonalds to join in Jan 2019*


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Jan 3, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> It's a proper bandwagon. All Bar One serving vegan food so that conscious consumers can consume more consciously on the High St. Great stuff.
> 
> *waits for McDonalds to join in Jan 2019*



More people not wanting to fund the abuse of non-human animals and the market responding... how horrible!


----------



## 8ball (Jan 3, 2018)

Jeff Robinson said:


> More people not wanting to fund the abuse of non-human animals and the market responding... how horrible!



It’s like a re-run of the Atkins thing.  But with cauliflowers.

Yeah, actually pretty horrific when you put it that way.


----------



## editor (Jan 4, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> It's a proper bandwagon. All Bar One serving vegan food so that conscious consumers can consume more consciously on the High St. Great stuff.
> 
> *waits for McDonalds to join in Jan 2019*


You make it sound like a bad thing. How weird.


----------



## ddraig (Jan 4, 2018)

yes, even mcshite are jumping on the bandwagon (trialling a mcvegan in a couple of countries iirc)
i'll still never step food in one apart from to use the toilet


----------



## editor (Jan 4, 2018)

8ball said:


> It’s like a re-run of the Atkins thing.  But with cauliflowers.


In what way exactly?


----------



## mojo pixy (Jan 4, 2018)

Jeff Robinson said:


> More people not wanting to fund the abuse of non-human animals and the market responding... how horrible!



Yes, jumping on a bandwagon so as to make a little bit more money is horrible. Unless you really think these companies care about animals and aren't just on a short-term profit tip.



editor said:


> You make it sound like a bad thing. How weird.



It _is_ a bad thing, or at least it's an irrelevant thing. Just because a company sells veggie food doesn't make them good in any way. Are we five years old in our socioeconomic analysis now? Are we just promoting an assumption that _veg*n_ is another word for _virtuous?_ Because it isn't.


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Jan 4, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> Yes, jumping on a bandwagon so as to make a little bit more money is horrible. Unless you really think these companies care about animals and aren't just on a short-term profit tip.
> 
> It _is_ a bad thing, or at least it's an irrelevant thing. Just because a company sells veggie food doesn't make them good in any way. Are we five years old in our socioeconomic analysis now? Are we just promoting an assumption that _veg*n_ is another word for _virtuous?_ Because it isn't.



You can’t be serious? No these companies don’t give a shit about animals, evidenced by the fact that they sell animal products. As you say, all that motivates them is the bottom line. 

What is good is that more people are deciding to boycott products that require the torture and brutal slaughter of animals and that the market is responding with more vegan options, hence making it easier for more people to likewise boycott the products of animal cruelty, hence increasing the chances of sparing future animals miserable lives and hideous premature deaths. Remind me again what part of this is bad exactly?


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Jan 4, 2018)

I’d be interested to survey what the main motivation for people doing the veganuary thing is - I have a feeling the perceived health benefits would be a far higher driving force than the animal welfare side.


----------



## 8ball (Jan 4, 2018)

ddraig said:


> yes, even mcshite are jumping on the bandwagon (trialling a mcvegan in a couple of countries iirc)
> i'll still never step food in one apart from to use the toilet



Same here, though the McVegan burger seems to be getting good reviews.
Not rolled out here yet.


----------



## 8ball (Jan 4, 2018)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> I’d be interested to survey what the main motivation for people doing the veganuary thing is - I have a feeling the perceived health benefits would be a far higher driving force than the animal welfare side.



It's like 'dry January' and why the gyms will be packed for the next month - traditional post-binge asceticism.


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Jan 4, 2018)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> I’d be interested to survey what the main motivation for people doing the veganuary thing is - I have a feeling the perceived health benefits would be a far higher driving force than the animal welfare side.



Available survey data suggests otherwise:



> When asked why they took part in Veganuary, most 2016 participants selected animals (54%) followed by health (33%) and then the environment (13%). Note: participants were only able to select one of these three motivations.



https://veganuary.com/downloads/2016-full-survey-results/


----------



## mojo pixy (Jan 4, 2018)

Jeff Robinson said:


> What is good is that more people are deciding to boycott products that require the torture and brutal slaughter of animals and that the market is responding with more vegan options, hence making it easier for more people to likewise boycott the products of animal cruelty, hence increasing the chances of sparing future animals miserable lives and hideous premature deaths. Remind me again what part of this is bad?



None of that has anything at all to do with high st chains sticking a couple of (overpriced) vegan options on their menus for a few weeks.


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Jan 4, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> None of that has anything at all to do with high st chains sticking a couple of (overpriced) vegan options on their menus for a few weeks.



For a start, these companies are not sticking  “vegan options on their menus for a few weeks”, they are permanent items on the menu but are sold at discount for veganuary. Second, yes it does. The wider availability of vegan food makes it easier for people to adopt vegan diets and hence not contribute to the dystopian barbarism of the animal agribusiness industries.


----------



## UnderAnOpenSky (Jan 4, 2018)

Jeff Robinson said:


> For a start, these companies are not sticking  “vegan options on their menus for a few weeks”, they are permanent items on the menu but are sold at discount for veganuary. Second, yes it does. The wider availability of vegan food makes it easier for people to adopt vegan diets and hence not contribute to the dystopian barbarism of the animal agribusiness industries.



One thing about choosing the veggie option is that it can still be hit and miss, even somewhere the rest of the food is good, unless is makes a specific point of being veggie friendly. Hopefully this will also change.


----------



## mojo pixy (Jan 4, 2018)

Jeff Robinson said:


> For a start, these companies are not sticking  “vegan options on their menus for a few weeks”, they are permanent items on the menu but are sold at discount for veganuary. Second, yes it does. The wider availability of vegan food makes it easier for people to adopt vegan diets and hence not contribute to the dystopian barbarism of the animal agribusiness industries.



I disagree. Nothing is being boycotted by spending money on the high st. As for dystopian barbarism of agribusiness, where do you think the rest of the menu comes from?

This is tokenism for profit, nothing more. You like it because now you can eat at Zizzi? Good for you. But don't insult your own intelligence by making out it's more than that.


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Jan 4, 2018)

UnderAnOpenSky said:


> One thing about choosing the veggie option is that it can still be hit and miss, even somewhere the rest of the food is good, unless is makes a specific point of being veggie friendly. Hopefully this will also change.



Ime it already has changed. When I first went vegan restaurants simply didn’t have vegan options at all, it was always a case of modifying the vegetarian option in some way. Now most chains have a number of vegan options and even vegan menus. I think my favourite is Turtle Bay, the “ital run down” is soooo good!


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Jan 4, 2018)

Jeff Robinson said:


> Ime it already has changed. When I first went vegan restaurants simply didn’t have vegan options at all, it was always a case of modifying the vegetarian option in some way. Now most chains have a number of vegan options and even vegan menus. I think my favourite is Turtle Bay, the “ital run down” is soooo good!


Genuine question - when restaurants have the vegan options are they having to create separate areas of the kitchen for preparation and so on, use dedicated pans etc? 

I ask as many many years ago I knew of someone who wouldn’t even let others cook non vegan stuff on their campfire because it would “contaminate” it


----------



## lazythursday (Jan 4, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> I disagree. Nothing is being boycotted by spending money on the high st. As for dystopian barbarism of agribusiness, where do you think the rest of the menu comes from?
> 
> This is tokenism for profit, nothing more. You like it because now you can eat at Zizzi? Good for you. But don't insult your own intelligence by making out it's more than that.


I think it's a bigger step forward for veganism than you think. As some of campanula 's comments have alluded to, eating is a bonding social activity and one of the stronger arguments against veganism in some ways is the way that it leads people to miss out in joining in properly in various occasions. Vegan dishes widely available removes a big obstacle to wider veganism / plant-based eating. I have a food intolerance that prevents me from eating out most of the time - it's an incredibly isolating experience and one often shared by vegans.


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Jan 4, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> I disagree. Nothing is being boycotted by spending money on the high st. As for dystopian barbarism of agribusiness, where do you think the rest of the menu comes from?
> 
> This is tokenism for profit, nothing more. You like it because now you can eat at Zizzi? Good for you. But don't insult your own intelligence by making out it's more than that.



The animal products are being boycotted. Under present conditions it is virtually impossible to boycott everywhere that sells animals products (rules out all uk supermarkets for example). In the future when veganism is more popular it might be practically feesible to do so. In those circumstances the boycott should extend to companies and not merely products.

In the mean time, the greater availability of vegan options in restaurants is good because it makes being vegan easier for people, and hence helps grow the movement.


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Jan 4, 2018)

Has anyone ever tried/is there anything like a vegan supermarket? Chain or otherwise?


----------



## mojo pixy (Jan 4, 2018)

Eating a vegan option at an outlet that sells meat is not a boycott, it's supporting that outlet. Eating McDonald's veg burger is still eating at McDonald's ffs.


----------



## 8ball (Jan 4, 2018)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> I ask as many many years ago I knew of someone who wouldn’t even let others cook non vegan stuff on their campfire because it would “contaminate” it



On the same fire, or using the same pan/grill etc?


----------



## UnderAnOpenSky (Jan 4, 2018)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> Has anyone ever tried/is there anything like a vegan supermarket? Chain or otherwise?



Unicorn in Manchester. Massive success story and a co op with some pretty good ethics.


----------



## campanula (Jan 4, 2018)

lazythursday said:


> I think it's a bigger step forward for veganism than you think. As some of campanula 's comments have alluded to, eating is a bonding social activity and one of the stronger arguments against veganism in some ways is the way that it leads people to miss out in joining in properly in various occasions. Vegan dishes widely available removes a big obstacle to wider veganism / plant-based eating. I have a food intolerance that prevents me from eating out most of the time - it's an incredibly isolating experience and one often shared by vegans.



Otoh (have no problems being a 'devil's advocate here', one of the more agreeable things about cooking a vegan meal (which I did, at least once a week when I worked at Brighton Unemployed Centre) is the inclusivity. Apart from those with specific allergies, *everyone* was able to partake of a vegan meal...and my killer vegetable crumble was well popular.
Horses for courses, really, Apart from nutritional concerns (Vit B12, calcium), I welcome dietary diversity and have no beef (apols) with vegans whatsoever.


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Jan 4, 2018)

8ball said:


> On the same fire, or using the same pan/grill etc?


On the same fire


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Jan 4, 2018)

UnderAnOpenSky said:


> Unicorn in Manchester. Massive success story and a co op with some pretty good ethics.


Be nice to see if they expand.

I would be far more likely to try some vegan cooking if I could walk into a supermarket and know everything I picked up was OK, rather than having to check/think about every bloody label. I’m both a) far too busy and time short and b) lazy for that...


----------



## 8ball (Jan 4, 2018)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> On the same fire



Well, you know fires, sacrificial burnings etc.

Wouldn't want the animal spirits to get into the veg.


----------



## Sue (Jan 4, 2018)

My BIL did veganuary last year and is still keeping with it. Saying that, he'd been veggie for years and my sister is vegan so was way easier for him than it would be for most people.


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Jan 4, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> Eating a vegan option at an outlet that sells meat is not a boycott, it's supporting that outlet. Eating McDonald's veg burger is still eating at McDonald's ffs.



Bizarre logic. So the boycott of goods from Apartheid South Africa was not a boycott because it didn't extend to boycotting the shops that sold such goods?


----------



## 8ball (Jan 4, 2018)

'Boycott' seems to be a bizarre word to be using in this context.


----------



## mojo pixy (Jan 4, 2018)

Jeff Robinson said:


> Bizarre logic. So the boycott of goods from Apartheid South Africa was not a boycott because it didn't extend to boycotting the shops that sold such goods?



That is correct.


----------



## editor (Jan 4, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> It _is_ a bad thing, or at least it's an irrelevant thing. Just because a company sells veggie food doesn't make them good in any way. Are we five years old in our socioeconomic analysis now? Are we just promoting an assumption that _veg*n_ is another word for _virtuous?_ Because it isn't.


Was anyone making any claims, anywhere, that every company who sells vegan food is a "good" company?


----------



## editor (Jan 4, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> Eating a vegan option at an outlet that sells meat is not a boycott, it's supporting that outlet. Eating McDonald's veg burger is still eating at McDonald's ffs.


I don't now any vegans/veggies who frequent McD, btw, although the more common and mainstream vegan/veggie alternatives become, the better for a whole host of reasons. 

 I've never visited a McD in decades.


----------



## ddraig (Jan 4, 2018)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> Be nice to see if they expand.
> 
> I would be far more likely to try some vegan cooking if I could walk into a supermarket and know everything I picked up was OK, rather than having to check/think about every bloody label. I’m both a) far too busy and time short and b) lazy for that...


infinity in Brighton is amazing, bakery, decent shop, coop, cafe etc 
Foods - Infinity Foods


----------



## mojo pixy (Jan 4, 2018)

editor said:


> Was anyone making any claims, anywhere, that every company who sells vegan food is a "good" company?



I would certainly hope not.


----------



## Spymaster (Jan 4, 2018)

Jeff Robinson said:


> So the boycott of goods from Apartheid South Africa was not a boycott because it didn't extend to boycotting the shops that sold such goods?


Absolutely.


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Jan 4, 2018)

Animal agriculture is brutal and brutalising:

“If a pig came and nuzzled you like a puppy, would you be able to kill it just moments later?

“This is one of the scenarios faced by slaughterhouse workers on a daily basis. They see animals that are, in many ways, no different to those we welcome into our homes as family members.

“They then have to kill them. Hundreds, sometimes thousands of them a day.

“The psychological toll this takes on a person cannot be underestimated. Slaughterhouse work has been linked to a variety of disorders, including PTSD and the lesser-known PITS (perpetration-induced traumatic stress). It has also been connected to an increase in crime rates, including higher incidents of domestic abuse, as well as alcohol and drug abuse.”

The psychological effects of killing animals on slaughterhouse workers | Metro News


----------



## editor (Jan 4, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> I would certainly hope not.


The why did you imply it?


----------



## 8ball (Jan 4, 2018)

Spymaster said:


> Absolutely.



This seems different to the definitions of 'boycott' that I have read...


----------



## mojo pixy (Jan 4, 2018)

editor said:


> The why did you imply it?



More to the point, why did you infer it?


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Jan 4, 2018)

ddraig said:


> infinity in Brighton is amazing, bakery, decent shop, coop, cafe etc
> Foods - Infinity Foods


Some googling for Birmingham suggests there a vegan cafe/shop just round the corner from one of the venues I work at in the city centre. Will poke my nose in next time I'm there and see if there's anything edible


----------



## mojo pixy (Jan 4, 2018)

Bristol has some excellent veggie and vegan eateries. There's also a (IMO overpriced but that's the way things are on the scene I guess) mini supermarket in St.Werburghs that I believe is entirely meat-free.

betterfood.co.uk


----------



## purenarcotic (Jan 4, 2018)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> Be nice to see if they expand.
> 
> I would be far more likely to try some vegan cooking if I could walk into a supermarket and know everything I picked up was OK, rather than having to check/think about every bloody label. I’m both a) far too busy and time short and b) lazy for that...



I’ve not been but this place is getting rave reviews and is in City Arcade:

Our Menu – Fressh


----------



## purenarcotic (Jan 4, 2018)

There’s another vegan place somewhere, just down from the Mailbox, can’t remember what it’s called, they do a pay for the weight of your plate or something. Not dogs in the bit between bullring and grand central too.


----------



## editor (Jan 4, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> More to the point, why did you infer it?


Err, because you posted this: "Just because a company sells veggie food doesn't make them good in any way."

So did anyone suggest that prior to your post?


----------



## mojo pixy (Jan 4, 2018)

editor said:


> Err, because you posted this: "Just because a company sells veggie food doesn't make them good in any way."
> 
> So did anyone suggest that prior to your post?



"Err"

It was a response to the_ good news_ that a bunch of high st chains are selling vegan food for January. My point is, even if they do that, they're still high st chains. I'm not sure why you want me to answer for something I never posted. All Bar One etc can sell as much vegan food as they like, they're still shit (and so is their vegan food, no doubt) and their jumping on this trend doesn't make them one iota less shit.


----------



## editor (Jan 4, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> "Err"
> 
> It was a response to the_ good news_ that a bunch of high st chains are selling vegan food for January. My point is, even if they do that, they're still high st chains. I'm not sure why you want me to answer for something I never posted. All Bar One etc can sell as much vegan food as they like, they're still shit (and so is their vegan food, no doubt) and their jumping on this trend doesn't make them one iota less shit.


I don't think you'll find anyone disagreeing with that, but surely you'll agree that it IS a good thing for mainstream bars and restaurants to be offering more non-meat alternatives? Aside from the hideous cruelty and ethical issues, meat consumption has to be reduced because it's playing a major part in destroying the environment.


----------



## mojo pixy (Jan 4, 2018)

editor said:


> I don't think you'll find anyone disagreeing with that, but surely you'll agree that it IS a good thing for mainstream bars and restaurants to be offering more non-meat alternatives? Aside from the hideous cruelty and ethical issues, meat consumption has to be reduced because it's playing a major part in destroying the environment.



I think it's irrelevant. Even if these companies sold _only_ vegan food their mere existence is part of a bigger problem. Nobody in their right mind should be eating _anything_ at All Bar One, or drinking there either. THAT would be a boycott.

So what if you can't be vegan and eat the shite they sell on the hight st? That's a good thing, and for me was always part of the point. It's about changing the way we eat, not just adding to the menu.

Anyway. Yay to high st vegans. It's all for the cause, right? Right.


----------



## editor (Jan 4, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> I think it's irrelevant. Even if these companies sold _only_ vegan food their mere existence is part of a bigger problem. Nobody in their right mind should be eating _anything_ at All Bar One, or drinking there either. THAT would be a boycott.
> 
> So what if you can't be vegan and eat the shite they sell on the hight st? That's a good thing, and for me was always part of the point. It's about changing the way we eat, not just adding to the menu.


And part of that process is places now offering vegan choices and increasing demand. Whether you like the particular restaurant or not is irrelevant - people will still their money there. What is important that vegan food moves into the mainstream and is no longer seen as food for cranks and weirdos. And the more people eating non-meat meals, the better, full stop.


----------



## mojo pixy (Jan 4, 2018)

Vegan _food _is already mainstream; we in the UK buy and consume thousands of tonnes of hummous (and other vegan preparations) every year.
What's not mainstream is strict vegan_*ism*_.


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Jan 4, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> I think it's irrelevant. Even if these companies sold _only_ vegan food their mere existence is part of a bigger problem. Nobody in their right mind should be eating _anything_ at All Bar One, or drinking there either. THAT would be a boycott.
> 
> So what if you can't be vegan and eat the shite they sell on the hight st? That's a good thing, and for me was always part of the point. It's about changing the way we eat, not just adding to the menu.
> 
> Anyway. Yay to high st vegans. It's all for the cause, right? Right.



"So what if you can't be vegan" - so you don't see anything wrong with paying to have male chicks ground up alive, cows' babies ripped away from them shortly after birth and farm animals brutally killed in industrial slaughterhouses but you draw the line at a having a drink in All Bar One?


----------



## lazythursday (Jan 4, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> "Err"
> 
> It was a response to the_ good news_ that a bunch of high st chains are selling vegan food for January. My point is, even if they do that, they're still high st chains. I'm not sure why you want me to answer for something I never posted. All Bar One etc can sell as much vegan food as they like, they're still shit (and so is their vegan food, no doubt) and their jumping on this trend doesn't make them one iota less shit.





mojo pixy said:


> I think it's irrelevant. Even if these companies sold _only_ vegan food their mere existence is part of a bigger problem. Nobody in their right mind should be eating _anything_ at All Bar One, or drinking there either. THAT would be a boycott.
> 
> So what if you can't be vegan and eat the shite they sell on the hight st? That's a good thing, and for me was always part of the point. It's about changing the way we eat, not just adding to the menu.
> 
> Anyway. Yay to high st vegans. It's all for the cause, right? Right.


I'm not a fan of All Bar One but what's your general beef with chains? Some are better than others, in terms of food quality. I don't for a minute believe that the average independent artisan outlet treats their staff a lot better. And certainly if you have a food allergy or other dietary requirement the chains generally have well-labelled menus and standardised procedures for ingredient handling etc whereas plenty of independent cafes / restaurants simply don't understand or give a fuck, in my experience.


----------



## bellaozzydog (Jan 4, 2018)

Just dropped into my parents After spending two years telling me I was going to make myself ill and a vegan diet wasn't natural my old man has just started calling me out for not being a proper vegan and having no self discipline...

He eats pasties and pork pies. I can't fucking win I think he must read urban

My local veggie/vegan deli-store is pretty amazing and well worth a visit but the bastards plonk at least 1/3 on the price on everything, including stuff you can get round the corner in Sainsbury's and Waitrose 

In response to vegan food being healthy, there is a local vegan takeaway delivery service and everything on the menu is utterly filthy in the best unhealthy way. You almost have to be drunk to eat it (kebab stylee) wonderful.


Sorry just a brain fart on the thread, carry on


----------



## UnderAnOpenSky (Jan 4, 2018)

bellaozzydog said:


> My local veggie/vegan deli-store is pretty amazing and well worth a visit but the bastards plonk at least 1/3 on the price on everything, including stuff you can get round the corner in Sainsbury's and Waitrose



TBF to them it's quite hard to compete with big supermarkets on price.


----------



## mojo pixy (Jan 4, 2018)

Jeff Robinson said:


> "So what if you can't be vegan" - so you don't see anything wrong with paying to have male chicks ground up alive, cows' babies ripped away from them shortly after birth and farm animals brutally killed in industrial slaughterhouses but you draw the line at a having a drink in All Bar One?





mojo pixy said:


> So what if you can't be vegan and eat the shite they sell on the high st?



It would help with understanding if you didn't break the sentence in half.


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Jan 4, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> It would help with understanding if you didn't break the sentence in half.



Ah sorry, my apologies for misinterpreting you. (I thought you were saying that it would be better to eat an omnivorous diet from non-high street places than eating a vegan diet that includes some meals in high street restaurants).


----------



## mojo pixy (Jan 4, 2018)

lazythursday said:


> I'm not a fan of All Bar One but what's your general beef with chains? Some are better than others, in terms of food quality. I don't for a minute believe that the average independent artisan outlet treats their staff a lot better. And certainly if you have a food allergy or other dietary requirement the chains generally have well-labelled menus and standardised procedures for ingredient handling etc whereas plenty of independent cafes / restaurants simply don't understand or give a fuck, in my experience.



I'm not really concerned with food standards because that's an issue which can affect any food outlet no matter what they do. It's a question of socioeconomics, which is probably best not gone into here in detail. I try to avoid using any high st shop, I try as much as possible to use independents, luckily I live in a large city with plenty of those. I can't singlehandedly destroy capitalism but I can choose what to support and whether they sell meat only comes into it when I decide whether or not to buy something from a place that mainly sells meat.

 Say Burger King. They sell several veggie items (don't know about vegan) and I have eaten there in the past. But I don't, _because it's Burger King_ and I heartily disapprove of that kind of business, model, structure and the society that makes it exist as it does. Those companies trying to attract new customers by ''supporting veganuary'' are of that sort. I don't use them, ever, anti-capitalist killjoy that I am, and IMO nobody should. But the fact they sell meat is to me less of an issue than the fact they are (kinda) a symptom of Everything Bad In The World.

More vegan food around? Good. But there are bigger issues around those companies and giving them promotion and applause _for doing what they should have been doing anyway_ is a big distraction from the fact they should all be boycotted full stop.


----------



## lazythursday (Jan 4, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> I'm not really concerned with food standards because that's an issue which can affect any food outlet no matter what they do. It's a question of socioeconomics, which is probably best not gone into here in detail. I try to avoid using any high st shop, I try as much as possible to use independents, luckily I live in a large city with plenty of those. I can't singlehandedly destroy capitalism but I can choose what to support and whether they sell meat only comes into it when I decide whether or not to buy something from a place that mainly sells meat.
> 
> Say Burger King. They sell several veggie items (don't know about vegan) and I have eaten there in the past. But I don't, _because it's Burger King_ and I heartily disapprove of that kind of business, model, structure and the society that makes it exist as it does. Those companies trying to attract new customers by ''supporting veganuary'' are of that sort. I don't use them, ever, anti-capitalist killjoy that I am, and IMO nobody should. But the fact they sell meat is to me less of an issue than the fact they are (kinda) a symptom of Everything Bad In The World.
> 
> More vegan food around? Good. But there are bigger issues around those companies and giving them promotion and applause _for doing what they should have been doing anyway_ is a big distraction from the fact they should all be boycotted full stop.


Thanks. I used to broadly think and act the same way but I've become a bit disillusioned that it's really that achieving that much to only use independents. They're still capitalists, after all. But I'd draw the line well before Burger King.


----------



## mojo pixy (Jan 4, 2018)

lazythursday said:


> Thanks. I used to broadly think and act the same way but I've become a bit disillusioned that it's really that achieving that much to only use independents. They're still capitalists, after all.



I know, that's what I mean, I can't take down the whole system by myself. I try to support people who are more likely to fail if I don't, maybe. It'd take a lot more lost customers to make Sainsbury's fail, than it would to make my local greengrocer fail. Something like that anyway.



lazythursday said:


> But I'd draw the line well before Burger King.



Yeah fair enough


----------



## mojo pixy (Jan 4, 2018)

It's all a tricky balancing act, once ethics come into diet.

Take milk. You want cows to have the best lives, if you drink it, so you buy nice organic milk. That means supporting a supermarket, because a lot of independent shops don't stock organic or free-range milk.

Getting local milk these days that hasn't already been shipped to some central processing facility and back, is nigh-on impossible unless you actually live on a farm.

So you decide to cut it out altogether and move into substitutes. Then you're into a whole new mess of brands and companies, a whole new conception of food miles, with plantations and issues with cheap / forced labour in distant lands, deforestation and monoculturisation.

Somewhere between all this (and taste prefences, let's remember) you have to find a solution that fits your own conscience and budget.

And that's just milk.


----------



## editor (Jan 4, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> Vegan _food _is already mainstream; we in the UK buy and consume thousands of tonnes of hummous (and other vegan preparations) every year.


It's really not. It's not uncommon to see precisely vegan alternatives offered in restaurants/bars/pubs/cafes, and when there is something, it's incredibly rare to see more than one option on the menu. 

It's nowhere near mainstream yet but if crappy bars like All Bar One start offering vegan menus, that's all for the good.


----------



## editor (Jan 4, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> I'm not really concerned with food standards because that's an issue which can affect any food outlet no matter what they do. It's a question of socioeconomics, which is probably best not gone into here in detail. I try to avoid using any high st shop, I try as much as possible to use independents, luckily I live in a large city with plenty of those. I can't singlehandedly destroy capitalism but I can choose what to support and whether they sell meat only comes into it when I decide whether or not to buy something from a place that mainly sells meat.
> 
> Say Burger King. They sell several veggie items (don't know about vegan) and I have eaten there in the past. But I don't, _because it's Burger King_ and I heartily disapprove of that kind of business, model, structure and the society that makes it exist as it does. Those companies trying to attract new customers by ''supporting veganuary'' are of that sort. I don't use them, ever, anti-capitalist killjoy that I am, and IMO nobody should. But the fact they sell meat is to me less of an issue than the fact they are (kinda) a symptom of Everything Bad In The World.
> 
> More vegan food around? Good. But there are bigger issues around those companies and giving them promotion and applause _for doing what they should have been doing anyway_ is a big distraction from the fact they should all be boycotted full stop.


So you think it would be better if the big chain burger bars - which kids are under incredible peer pressure to go along to because everyone else does - should continue to offer zero vegan options, and thus make it even harder for kids who are interested in pursuing a vegan diet? You think that's the best way forward, yes?


----------



## mojo pixy (Jan 4, 2018)

editor said:


> So you think it would be better if the big chain burger bars - which kids are under incredible peer pressure to go along to because everyone else does - should continue to offer zero vegan options, and thus make it even harder for kids who are interested in pursuing a vegan diet? You think that's the best way forward, yes?



They all already offer veggie options, as I myself have mentioned.

EtA, I still maintain vegetarian and vegan food is completely mainstream and this has been increasing for years. Every brand you can name does veggie versions of something, as I said it's strict vegan_*ism*_ that's not mainstream. Vegetarian and vegan _food _is all over the place .. and we really do consume fuckloads of hummous.


----------



## editor (Jan 4, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> They all already offer veggie options, as I myself have mentioned.


Burger King can't guarantee *any* vegan food (except on promotions):


> However, our products may not be appropriate for a vegan diet as we cannot guarantee a 100% vegan-approved preparation._”_


You can't get a McD vegan burger either, and in many other chains you're left with the option of asking them to take stuff away from sandwiches etc to make them vegan.

Vegan options are still generally pitifully limited (if any) and far, far from being  'mainstream.'

Vegan Friendly Food Chains UK • Vegan Womble


----------



## mojo pixy (Jan 4, 2018)

It's changing though, as we're seeing. That is a good thing IMO, in case you missed where I said that before.

The question is, for me, _Why the fuck would a strict vegan want to eat at (say) Burger King anyway?_ They sell vegetarian food at least. If ethics are that important they won't stretch to the milk in a bun or a bit of gacky cheese (which can be taken out anyway) then there's a lot else about a company like BK that ought to be considered IMO, above and beyond the massive body count required to keep it going.

I'm not going to repeat previous posts, they're there already.

EtA, or critique consumer capitalism vis-a-vis fast food and chain brands' / their parent multinationals' business practices in full. Sorry about that.


----------



## Bird of prey (Jan 5, 2018)

I'm a temporary vegan, doing it for January (have also quit the booze). Loving the food, but some of the posts on the FB Veganuary page are batshit crazy.


----------



## Ralph Llama (Jan 5, 2018)

IMO -(dont ban me) the idea that you can change the society by what product range you buy is sumfink we saw through in the 90`s innit . Although it is possibe to make waves on xbox live if your avata looks rad ... 
*runs


----------



## mojo pixy (Jan 5, 2018)

Bird of prey said:


> I'm a temporary vegan, doing it for January (have also quit the booze). Loving the food, but some of the posts on the FB Veganuary page are batshit crazy.



Can't find anything really batshit there, but there sure are a lot of posts containing _bawwww baybee animaws_ and ads promoting Starbucks, Pret a Manger etc.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jan 5, 2018)

purenarcotic said:


> The Three Estates in Kings Norton in Birmingham are not served by a single supermarket - it’s been a source of huge frustration for those living there and has caused problems for the kids and schools who know they have to promote healthy eating but feel its daft when for a lot of their kids it’s not doable for their families.
> 
> I’m acutely aware that vegan or not, the choices are hard and limited, my issue with your post was that it read to me very condescending towards parents, as though they don’t care. Perhaps some don’t, a lot do though but structural difficulties make it hard. Shitting on people already struggling isn’t fair.


tbh, before you mentioned it I had never heard of the term "food desert" before and I'm not even sure that they really exist. Even if for argument sake, there are areas where there are no supermarkets and they are needed, then it's up to the locals in that area along with their political representatives and local business people to resolve the issue, just as they would need to for any "public transport deserts" that might exist in  areas of need.  So I don't accept your rather dramatic assertion I am shitting on struggling people by suggesting that it's no more difficult for a low income vegan to feed themselves than it would be for a low income meat eater.


----------



## seeformiles (Jan 5, 2018)

As a lapsed veggie (Mrs SFM is too much a committed carnivore) who returns to the fold about 4 days of the week, my vegan friends are certainly not angry but more encouraging than anything else. If they’re guilty of anything it’s overstating the quality of some vegan substitutes. My main stumbling block in going the full Vegan is a love of cheese. I’ve tried a lot of what my friends have termed “yummy vegan cheese” but I’ve yet to find any that comes even vaguely close to the taste and texture of the real thing. Once that’s sorted, I’m in  .


----------



## ddraig (Jan 5, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> tbh, before you mentioned it I had never heard of the term "food desert" before and I'm not even sure that they really exist. Even if for argument sake, there are areas where there are no supermarkets and they are needed, then it's up to the locals in that area along with their political representatives and local business people to resolve the issue, just as they would need to for any "public transport deserts" that might exist in  areas of need.  So I don't accept your rather dramatic assertion I am shitting on struggling people by suggesting that it's no more difficult for a low income vegan to feed themselves than it would be for a low income meat eater.


There are food deserts, it's a fact, just because you hadn't heard of them
Guess you've never lived anywhere rural, Or even on edges of some towns


----------



## 8ball (Jan 5, 2018)

Surely all deserts are food deserts.


----------



## mojo pixy (Jan 5, 2018)

It probably depends on how much you like eating snake...


----------



## hash tag (Jan 5, 2018)

Police have a FEB; vegans are furious. really?
Vegans furious after police share cooked breakfast photo to support farmers


----------



## 8ball (Jan 5, 2018)

hash tag said:


> Police have a FEB; vegans are furious. really?
> Vegans furious after police share cooked breakfast photo to support farmers


----------



## ddraig (Jan 5, 2018)

hash tag said:


> Police have a FEB; vegans are furious. really?
> Vegans furious after police share cooked breakfast photo to support farmers


omg!!! 3 people responded to a tweet!! ban veganism now

it is bollocks saying "the only way to start the day" obviously and why are they having a breakfast to support farmers? do they do that with other groups
most police tweets are bollocks tho

e2a the tweets in opposition are actually about the double standards of a cow getting shot with a crossbow

and lovely typical comments as per usual! sigh


----------



## ddraig (Jan 5, 2018)

and yes must be true if some vegans on twitter had a pop



> Farmer Jono Dixon fumed: "It’s pathetic... The vegans are ruling the roost. They are nothing more than a menace. We as carnivores or vegetarians don’t dictate about there preferred diet, so it's time they stopped trolling and whingeing about everyone's daily diets".


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jan 5, 2018)

ddraig said:


> There are food deserts, it's a fact, just because you hadn't heard of them


Well, before I accept your assertion that the existence of food deserts is indeed "a fact", definition of what exactly a "food desert" is would be helpful, but regardless, it doesn't change my original point, that if someone is actually living in a genuine bona fide food desert would have similar challenges whether they were vegan or meat eater.



ddraig said:


> Guess you've never lived anywhere rural, Or even on edges of some towns


I guess you don't really know much about where I've lived, and yes I have lived genuinely "out in the sticks" with no nearby proper roads, with no running mains water or electricity and no nearby supermarket. I guess that some would call that a "food desert" although that's not what I would call it.


----------



## seeformiles (Jan 5, 2018)

hash tag said:


> Police have a FEB; vegans are furious. really?
> Vegans furious after police share cooked breakfast photo to support farmers



What struck me was that the owner of the ketchup felt the need to write his name on the bottle. Sauce theft obv a problem in that police station.


----------



## Bird of prey (Jan 6, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> Can't find anything really batshit there, but there sure are a lot of posts containing _bawwww baybee animaws_ and ads promoting Starbucks, Pret a Manger etc.



I've read posts on whether it's ok to eat yeast, that cows are 'raped', lots of martyr-ish posts about how hard it is and some serious oversharing about bowel movements. One person asked if other people were also 'so scared of eating the wrong thing that they're not eating anything? Am starving.' That's more than batshit, it's actually quite offensive. This is a choice, people! Get over yourselves...


----------



## DotCommunist (Jan 6, 2018)

hash tag said:


> Police have a FEB; vegans are furious. really?
> Vegans furious after police share cooked breakfast photo to support farmers


“The creatures outside looked from pig to man, and from man to pig, and from pig to man again; but already it was impossible to say which was which.”


----------



## ddraig (Jan 6, 2018)

Bird of prey said:


> I've read posts on whether it's ok to eat yeast, that cows are 'raped', lots of martyr-ish posts about how hard it is and some serious oversharing about bowel movements. One person asked if other people were also 'so scared of eating the wrong thing that they're not eating anything? Am starving.' That's more than batshit, it's actually quite offensive. This is a choice, people! Get over yourselves...


 can you try that post again please? can't work out your point(s)


----------



## seeformiles (Jan 6, 2018)

Bird of prey said:


> I've read posts on whether it's ok to eat yeast, that cows are 'raped', lots of martyr-ish posts about how hard it is and some serious oversharing about bowel movements. One person asked if other people were also 'so scared of eating the wrong thing that they're not eating anything? Am starving.' That's more than batshit, it's actually quite offensive. This is a choice, people! Get over yourselves...



I worked with a lass whose boyfriend didn’t eat yeast - that (for me at least) is a bit on the batshit side.


----------



## gentlegreen (Jan 6, 2018)

IMHO, healthy bowel movements should be high on anyone's list of priorities - whatever their diet - though my daily experiences of what others leave behind seem to vindicate my choice for a very nearly all vegetable diet.


----------



## ddraig (Jan 6, 2018)

obvious (and not the best video you'll ever see!)
bit long mind
conditioning and culture


----------



## NoXion (Jan 6, 2018)

ddraig said:


> obvious (and not the best video you'll ever see!)
> bit long mind
> conditioning and culture




Regarding that rhetorical trick he opened up with, that's an example of what happens when people accept whatever someone else speaks with authority in front of a willing audience, which does nothing to really support the rest of his thesis since he's speaking with authority in front of a willing audience. One could in theory have actually measured the circles rather than guessing by eye, but the audience is never given that chance. However, there is no objective measurement that can be done to determine whether it's right to kill animals for food. Or whether whether it is right or wrong to enslave other humans, for that matter. Morality is not a matter of measurement, so this example he's using is total rubbish. This dude's rhetorical crap evaporates if you examine it closely.

Pointing out that the fancy packaging doesn't look like how the food is actually produced isn't news to anyone who is at least a semi-functioning adult.

Yeah, the US kills a lot of animals for food. That's what happens when you have a population of about 300 million people, with many of them living wealthy enough lives to eat meat and dairy products on a regular basis. Like anti-abortion types, veganists seem to love spouting large figures, while seemingly forgetting that meat eaters have no real reason to be concerned about the number of animals killed for food, because as far as meat eaters are concerned, there is nothing wrong with killing animals for food in the first place. "By the time I'm finished today, there'll be over a million animals that have been slaughtered" ...and?

Nobody told me I "had to" eat meat to get protein. Other sources are available. But meat *is* a good source of protein, as much as vegans might like to avoid that fact. Nor did anyone tell me that I *had* to consume cows' milk, and only cow's milk, to have a good source of calcium and thus strong and healthy bones. I enjoyed some rather nice cheeses this Christmas, one made from ewes' milk and one of them made from goats' milk.

Nobody told me my diet was "natural", and I know full well that it isn't. How many strawmen is this cunt going to roll out?

Oh my fuck, is he really going there with the pictures of strawberries and piglets? Yes, I think he is. Fruits are specialised parts of plants that have evolved to be eaten by animals, that's why (human tinkering aside) they smell nice you fucking weasel. Pigs evolved to *not* be eaten by predators, and our selective breeding after that didn't select for traits that make pigs easier to eat raw.

How animals are turned into meat is not a fucking secret, oh my fuck!  What a load of patronising wank! People participate in the process all the time, mainly because that's their fucking job.

People would have problem with butchering a hog in a lecture theatre mainly because it's not the right place to do it. Maybe they'll have welfare or hygiene concerns. Or maybe they would have come expecting a talk, not a demonstration of butchering technique. This guy really likes to make broad-brush assumptions about his audience. As for myself, I would have no problem with people coming to see a hog being butchered. In fact if anything, I think more people should at least try to get their hands dirty like that. So, no hypocrisy here, phew!

Few people seem to like the idea of cleaning sewers for a living, but that doesn't make them hypocrites for making use of indoor plumbing.

No, I would happily give dog meat a try. I don't judge other cultures harshly for eating animals that I would consider to be pets, because I'm mature enough to know that other cultures see things differently. What kind of fucking audience is he talking to, a bunch of schoolkids?! Nah, I reckon schoolkids would be bored by this dude's bullshit. So most people in the West see dogs as pets not food. So fucking what? Does this dude not know that animals can be domesticated for reasons other than being a food source, right?

Right and wrong aren't universal unless you're one of those who believe in some kind objective morality. Welcome to Moral Philosophy 101.

So culture isn't natural any more? What is, then? Also, this guy seems to be equating "natural" with "good" or "normal". That's a fallacy.

Three year old kids will pet pretty much any animal they can get their grubby little paws on. Why are you bringing this up when practically all human cultures will agree that a three year old child has yet to properly develop their moral faculties? Besides, if we decided on what to eat based on the preferences of most three year old kids, then vegetables would be banned and sweet shop items would feature heavily. Three year old children are not a useful guide for morality, you dumbshit.

Holy fucking shit, apparently this knob has a degree. It's in Humane Education, which sounds like bullshit if I ever heard it. I wonder what "institution" is handing out those.


----------



## ddraig (Jan 6, 2018)

TLR!


----------



## Ralph Llama (Jan 6, 2018)

Big up the Vegans as long as they dont market it as a solution to capitalism.... because its quite obviously not. In fact its all the rage with the social elite.


----------



## NoXion (Jan 6, 2018)

ddraig said:


> TLR!



Consider it a service for those who for whatever reason can't be bothered to watch a stupid clickbaity video.

You're welcome.


----------



## mojo pixy (Jan 6, 2018)

''Hands up if you think the red one is larger'' .. ''Hands up if you think the blue one is larger''

_Umm excuse me, I think they're the same._

''No, you have to choose - which one is larger??''

_OK then, eh,the blue one?_

''Wrong, Ha! They're the same lol''

_But you just said--_

''No I has a degree in this shit! U must listen!!11

What a prick.


----------



## Ralph Llama (Jan 6, 2018)

I once stood up in an anarchist social center when this vegan amarican hippy (parently famous or some shit) who was selling her book and giving a lecuture on the way PR uses sex to sell meat(which was great), suggested that if we all went vegan then we could overthrough global capitalsim. Cos it was not really an anarchist social center(The Cowly) you had  the entire fucking audience licking her bits about it. There was this self satisfying glow in the roomn of all these people IMO thinking..... YES! we are the ones , and we are doing enough... which smaks of a religion to me so I made the point that vegansim as a spiritual/ or health choice is great but its not going to do anything to global capitalism. In fact, you couldnt import all that shit for that price without borders and slavery . She didnt have anything to come back with at all! NOTHING.  I was dissapointed . Anyone here hold those notions .... cos i dontknow maybe she was tired and at the end of a long tour or summin :/


----------



## ddraig (Jan 6, 2018)

don't be comparing vegans to anti abortionists ffs
few vegans i know go out to challenge those dickheads


----------



## ddraig (Jan 6, 2018)

NoXion said:


> Regarding that rhetorical trick he opened up with, that's an example of what happens when people accept whatever someone else speaks with authority in front of a willing audience, which does nothing to really support the rest of his thesis since he's speaking with authority in front of a willing audience. One could in theory have actually measured the circles rather than guessing by eye, but the audience is never given that chance. However, there is no objective measurement that can be done to determine whether it's right to kill animals for food. Or whether whether it is right or wrong to enslave other humans, for that matter. Morality is not a matter of measurement, so this example he's using is total rubbish. This dude's rhetorical crap evaporates if you examine it closely.
> 
> Pointing out that the fancy packaging doesn't look like how the food is actually produced isn't news to anyone who is at least a semi-functioning adult.
> 
> ...


it's not about YOU, lots of I's in your response
of course it's broad brushes and a bit simplistic, more people can get with it then see.
a lot of children do not know where meat comes from as it is hidden from them, deliberately 
someone was even kicking off the other day about people standing in their city centre with videos of slaughterhouses etc as they didn't want their kids to see it even if it is the truth and that they were too young to know the truth, "one day they can find out for themselves"

are you denying that people are conditioned into what is a pet and what isn't and also that the reality of meat is generally hidden, especially from those of a young age?? and why isn't the meat called 'pig', 'cow' etc?
it's a fact that the film babe created a shitload of vegis as the kids saw the truth, and many parents etc were not happy about it

a 3yr old will pet anything, yes so? then they are told what is and what isn't food, where the fuck does that arbitrary line come from?


----------



## mojo pixy (Jan 6, 2018)

It's got fuck all to do with cuteness, that's for certain. By and large humans don't eat carnivorous animals, but that can be set aside in times of scarcity.


----------



## NoXion (Jan 6, 2018)

ddraig said:


> it's not about YOU, lots of I's in your response
> of course it's broad brushes and a bit simplistic, more people can get with it then see.
> a lot of children do not know where meat comes from as it is hidden from them, deliberately
> someone was even kicking off the other day about people standing in their city centre with videos of slaughterhouses etc as they didn't want their kids to see it even if it is the truth and that they were too young to know the truth, "one day they can find out for themselves"
> ...



There's a lot of I's because a lot of the shit that twat is just assuming applies to me, doesn't. It's a pretty fucking poor argument if it relies on making so many unfounded assumptions about its audience.

My parents never hid the origin of meat from me. The people who do that to their kids are idiots. Same thing with the parents who hide the origins of babies from their kids. But you don't have be a prude or an anti-natalist in order to object to people to stand around the city centre playing explicit videos of people having sex and giving birth, in order to make some political point. So when it comes to dietary ideologues trying to make their point in the most obnoxious and confrontational manner they can, I think people can be free to object without those same ideologues having good reason to whine about it.

The reason English-speakers tend to call it pork, rather than swineflesh, is because of the Norman invasion. Being a bunch of conquerors subjugating the native peasantry, they saw more of the meat on the plate than they did of the animal in the field. So as the Norman French language blended with that of the Anglo-Saxons, that class divide left its mark on what we would come to call Modern English. It's a bit older than a small group of soft-headed urban types being swayed by a film.

The point is that three year olds aren't exactly in the best position to determine what is and isn't food, so the attempt to appeal to their tendency to pet anything furry tells us nothing about the rights and wrong of what animals a particular culture eats or not.


----------



## muscovyduck (Jan 6, 2018)

Ralph Llama said:


> licking her bits about it.



Er, pardon?


----------



## mojo pixy (Jan 6, 2018)

NoXion said:


> The reason English-speakers tend to call it pork, rather than swineflesh, is because of the Norman invasion. Being a bunch of conquerors subjugating the native peasantry, they saw more of the meat on the plate than they did of the animal in the field. So as the Norman French language blended with that of the Anglo-Saxons, that class divide left its mark on what we would come to call Modern English.



Not the only example of the animal name being EnglishEnglish and the meat name being FrenchEnglish either. They just about all are.
Sheep - Mutton
Cow / Bull (Norse) - Beef
Chicken / Hen - Poultry
Calf - Veal
as well as Pig - Pork.

EtA, Horse is an interesting one. Some cultures eat them, some don't. eg, France (Oui s'il vous plait avec frites) and Britain (''So hungry I could...'' denoting that I normally wouldn't. Plus cultural taboos over eating horses, viz profuse Anglo-Saxon horse iconography etc)


----------



## Ralph Llama (Jan 6, 2018)

muscovyduck said:


> Er, pardon?


I know ! ... slightly compromising the Vegan principle ... or is it ? ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh


----------



## ddraig (Jan 6, 2018)

remember this ain't squatjuice or dirty circus now Ralph Llama


----------



## Ralph Llama (Jan 6, 2018)

I am not trolling or saying anything against vegans HONESTLY. was just a joke . I have been Vegan and lived on anarcho primitivist vegan co-ops for time.
Why would I change my behaviour cos i`m on a different forum  
(I have been trolled by 3 members of this forum already... one being the editor)


----------



## ddraig (Jan 6, 2018)

Ralph Llama said:


> I am not trolling or saying anything against vegans HONESTLY. was just a joke . I have been Vegan and lived on anarcho primitivist vegan co-ops for time.
> Why would I change my behaviour cos i`m on a different forum
> (I have been trolled by 3 members of this forum already... one being the editor)


no the crudeness 
nothing to do with vegans


----------



## Ralph Llama (Jan 6, 2018)

You cant be serious  I am a working class punk from the Valleys ..Scarred by industrial accidents , the gentrifacation of my culture, and too many violent evictions .... errr  guess this place aint for me then TBH. Oh well . Keep up the good work peeps


----------



## keybored (Jan 6, 2018)

Ralph Llama said:


> You cant be serious  I am a working class punk from the Valleys ..Scarred by industrial accidents , the gentrifacation of my culture, and too many violent evictions .... errr  guess this place aint for me then TBH. Oh well . Keep up the good work peeps


Oh no, please don't leave. You're _authentic._


----------



## ddraig (Jan 6, 2018)

Ralph Llama said:


> You cant be serious  I am a working class punk from the Valleys ..Scarred by industrial accidents , the gentrifacation of my culture, and too many violent evictions .... errr  guess this place aint for me then TBH. Oh well . Keep up the good work peeps


don't be silly now, just letting you know some shit don't fly here!
e2a might have worked out who ya are now too


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Jan 6, 2018)

keybored said:


> Oh no, please don't leave. You're _authentic._


----------



## gosub (Jan 7, 2018)

Veganuary  So the sanctimonious can dip their toe into providing facebook comment about their every fuck meal.


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Jan 7, 2018)

gosub said:


> Veganuary  So the sanctimonious can dip their toe into providing facebook comment about their every fuck meal.



... or maybe an initiative that provides assistance and encouragement to people who no longer want to support the violent abuses of the animal industrial complex? 

I’m sorry you have to see pictures of tofu stir fry and tarka daal on you FB wall tho.


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Jan 7, 2018)

Jeff Robinson said:


> tarka daal


The one that’s like normal daal, just a little ‘otter?


----------



## Bird of prey (Jan 7, 2018)

gosub said:


> Veganuary  So the sanctimonious can dip their toe into providing facebook comment about their every fuck meal.





Jeff Robinson said:


> ... or maybe an initiative that provides assistance and encouragement to people who no longer want to support the violent abuses of the animal industrial complex?
> 
> I’m sorry you have to see pictures of tofu stir fry and tarka daal on you FB wall tho.



I'm in it for the beach body myself lol.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jan 10, 2018)

Jeff Robinson said:


> ... or maybe an initiative that provides assistance and encouragement to people who no longer want to support the violent abuses of the animal industrial complex?
> 
> I’m sorry you have to see pictures of tofu stir fry and tarka daal on you FB wall tho.


Stoptober, Movember, Decembeard, Dry January...Veganuary...

...a bit gimmicky in some ways, but mostly harmless. I'm not sure why any of those should bother folks that aren't particularly interested. Veganuary has little impact on me personally I think as you said, it's good to see a bit of encouragement for those that want to give it a try.


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Jan 10, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Stoptober, Movember, Decembeard, Dry January...Veganuary...
> 
> ...a bit gimmicky in some ways, but mostly harmless. I'm not sure why any of those should bother folks that aren't particularly interested. Veganuary has little impact on me personally I think as you said, it's good to see a bit of encouragement for those that want to give it a try.



Piers Morgan delivers a powerful critique of veganuary and veganism with all the grace, dignity and intellectual rigour you'd expect from him:


----------



## Calamity1971 (Jan 10, 2018)

Jeff Robinson said:


> Piers Morgan delivers a powerful critique of veganuary and veganism with all the grace, dignity and intellectual rigour you'd expect from him:


																		  Well done to the vegan for such composure, not an easy task when sat opposite that stupid, ignorant shouty twat. My knuckles were white watching that.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jan 10, 2018)

Jeff Robinson said:


> Piers Morgan delivers a powerful critique of veganuary and veganism with all the grace, dignity and intellectual rigour you'd expect from him:



Well, vegans have Morrisey, meat eaters have Morgan.

Veganuary Hits Back At Piers Morgan As It Reaches 135,000 Sign Ups


----------



## editor (Jan 10, 2018)

Jeff Robinson said:


> Piers Morgan delivers a powerful critique of veganuary and veganism with all the grace, dignity and intellectual rigour you'd expect from him:



I'm not going to waste my time watching that because I don't give a shit about what that twat thinks about anything, ever.


----------



## Yossarian (Jan 10, 2018)

editor said:


> I'm not going to waste my time watching that because I don't give a shit about what that twat thinks about anything, ever.



I'm guessing it's something along the lines of "If people want to be vegan that's their business but I'm sick of them trying to shove their cucumbers down my throat" - or is that more Richard Littlejohn's style?


----------



## ddraig (Jan 10, 2018)

*lights touch paper
Imagine some of the comments there will match some on this thread
Yes, being vegan does make me a better person – and, deep down, I think you know it


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Jan 10, 2018)

ddraig said:


> *lights touch paper
> Imagine some of the comments there will match some on this thread
> Yes, being vegan does make me a better person – and, deep down, I think you know it


Can’t read the article without having to register...


----------



## ddraig (Jan 10, 2018)

Ah bollocks! Didn't check, oops


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Jan 10, 2018)

Although going on the title and name of the writer I could probably have a fair stab at working it out


----------



## mojo pixy (Jan 11, 2018)

ddraig said:


> *lights touch paper
> Imagine some of the comments there will match some on this thread
> Yes, being vegan does make me a better person – and, deep down, I think you know it



Can't read the whole article but tbh I think that attitude_ I am a better person than you and deep down you know it_ could come from any number of sources other than diet. _Eh you work in the media and I work as a nurse and that makes me a better person and you know it_, or _yes I ride a bike and you drive a car and that makes me a better person than you and you know it_, etc etc. Problem with that attitude is ultimately it can work against you as well as for you, whoever you are. Nobody's perfect etc. _But I am better than you cuz......._


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Jan 11, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> Can't read the whole article but tbh I think that attitude_ I am a better person than you and deep down you know it_ could come from any number of sources other than diet. _Eh you work in the media and I work as a nurse and that makes me a better person and you know it_, or _yes I ride a bike and you drive a car and that makes me a better person than you and you know it_, etc etc. Problem with that attitude is ultimately it can work against you as well as for you, whoever you are. Nobody's perfect etc. _But I am better than you cuz......._



Yes, on this I absolutely agree. Vegans should never claim they are morally superior people based solely on their avoidence of animal products first because that’s just terrible PR and confirms people’s worst stereotypes about vegans and second because, as you say, there is no single signifier of a ‘good’ person, all of us have our ethical strengths and weaknesses and it’s incredibly reductive to base judgements on one aspect of somebody’s life.

I’m not familiar with this author but I wonder if he actually wrote that title and strapline. Standardly authors do not have control over such matter and it sounds like perfect clickbait/trolling material for the torygraph.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jan 11, 2018)

Jeff Robinson said:


> Yes, on this I absolutely agree. Vegans should never claim they are morally superior people based solely on their avoidence of animal products first because that’s just terrible PR and confirms people’s worst stereotypes about vegans and second because, as you say, there is no single signifier of a ‘good’ person, all of us have our ethical strengths and weaknesses and it’s incredibly reductive to base judgements on one aspect of somebody’s life.


I hear where you're coming from on this and agree in part. The problem comes in separating the ACT from the PERSON. In my opinion, the ACT of killing and eating animals when there's no good reason for doing so IS an inferior act in a number of aspects including moral, environment and health. In this regard the act of avoiding animal products is a SUPERIOR act in comparison.

Does that mean that a vegan is necessarily superior to a meat eater? Of course not, because nobody is without some kind of fault. However, I have no problem with veganism itself being promoted as a better lifestyle choice for those that believe it to be one.
Folks who strongly disagree with that position can simply carry on with the normal day and ignore the vegans, unaffected by any potential moral conundrums.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jan 11, 2018)

_As far as eating is concerned, humans are the most stupid animals on the planet.
We kill billions of wild animals to protect the animals that we eat.
We are destroying our environment to feed to the animals we eat.
We spend more time, money and resources fattening up the animals that we eat, than we do feeding humans who are dying of hunger.
The greatest irony is that after all the expenses of raising these animals, we eat them; and they kill us slowly.
And rather than recognize this madness, we torture and murder millions of other animals trying to find cures to diseases caused by eating animals in the first place._

Mike Anderson


----------



## Spymaster (Jan 11, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> _As far as eating is concerned, humans are the most stupid animals on the planet.
> We kill billions of wild animals to protect the animals that we eat.
> We are destroying our environment to feed to the animals we eat.
> We spend more time, money and resources fattening up the animals that we eat, than we do feeding humans who are dying of hunger.
> ...


Mike Anderson is a fucking idiot.


----------



## rubbershoes (Jan 11, 2018)

Spymaster said:


> Mike Anderson is a fucking idiot.



But Thunderbirds was brilliant


----------



## Ralph Llama (Jan 11, 2018)

Vegansim is just as capitalist and wrong as buying any other product off the shelf . If you want to be up your own arse go bin diving FTW. I tried growing and processing my own crops .... even with Quinoa (easy to grow and process) it just took to much time out of the day. Theres only one 100% self sufficent vegan community that I know of on the planet and the turnover is high


----------



## gentlegreen (Jan 11, 2018)

Ralph Llama said:


> I tried growing and processing my own crops .... even with Quinoa (easy to grow and process) it just took to much time out of the day.


Where were you growing quinoa ?


----------



## NoXion (Jan 11, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> _As far as eating is concerned, humans are the most stupid animals on the planet.
> We kill billions of wild animals to protect the animals that we eat.
> We are destroying our environment to feed to the animals we eat.
> We spend more time, money and resources fattening up the animals that we eat, than we do feeding humans who are dying of hunger.
> ...



It's not just to protect livestock that wild animals are killed. Or does he really think that taking up space to grow crops doesn't cause wild animal deaths that would not have otherwise occurred? Same thing with environmental damage. The problem is that under capitalism food is a commodity and the companies that produce it can easily offload the negative externalities of their business decisions.

Enough food is being grown for people the world over to eat themselves sick. Again the problem is due to food being a commodity that most people have to pay for, rather than being a birthright for all.

Given that most people in the world aren't vegan and life expectancies have been historically increasing, it's exaggeration to the point of being disingenuous to say that eating meat is "killing us slowly":







As for animal testing, that is done for all kinds of diseases, and is very much a necessary part of medical research.

So yeah, Mike Anderson is a fucking idiot.


----------



## gentlegreen (Jan 12, 2018)

Personally I look to the outliers in the stats -like Okinawa.
That's the sort of diet I'm gravitating towards - though with oily fish in place of pork - and I doubt I'll be getting my carbs from sweet potatoes.


----------



## Ralph Llama (Jan 12, 2018)

gentlegreen said:


> Where were you growing quinoa ?



An anarcho-primitivist vegan co-op in Herefordshire, it grew well !


----------



## mojo pixy (Jan 12, 2018)

Ralph Llama said:


> An anarcho-primitivist vegan co-op in Herefordshire, it grew well !



I spy with my little eye, something beginning with B .. odenham?


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Jan 12, 2018)

"_we eat them; and they kill us slowly."
_
How do they do that then? Raise themselves from the dead and hunt us in our sleep?


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Jan 12, 2018)

gentlegreen said:


> Personally I look to the outliers in the stats -like Okinawa.


Yep, looking at outlying results in any statistical analysis is definitely the way to get a good grasp of the data.


----------



## NoXion (Jan 12, 2018)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> "_we eat them; and they kill us slowly."
> _
> How do they do that then? Raise themselves from the dead and hunt us in our sleep?



According to some vegetablists, humans are not "meant" to consume animal products, and this is supposedly reflected in the fact that us bloodmouths allegedly die earlier.

Which is of course why humans don't have canine teeth, never exhibit lactase persistence into adulthood, and certainly don't have the medium-length digestive tracts that indicate being an omnivore. Oh wait.


----------



## Ralph Llama (Jan 12, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> I spy with my little eye, something beginning with B .. odenham?



B ? Earthworms it was☺


----------



## ddraig (Jan 12, 2018)

NoXion said:


> According to some vegetablists, humans are not "meant" to consume animal products, and this is supposedly reflected in the fact that us bloodmouths allegedly die earlier.
> 
> Which is of course why humans don't have canine teeth, never exhibit lactase persistence into adulthood, and certainly don't have the medium-length digestive tracts that indicate being an omnivore. Oh wait.


Well done!! Few more ticked off the anti vegan bingo card there


----------



## Yuwipi Woman (Jan 12, 2018)

gentlegreen said:


> Personally I look to the outliers in the stats -like Okinawa.
> That's the sort of diet I'm gravitating towards - though with oily fish in place of pork - and I doubt I'll be getting my carbs from sweet potatoes.



Their sweet potato varieties are different than western ones anyway.  Theirs are more like this:

Murasaki 29 PP19955 Sweet Potato Seeds and Plants, Vegetable Seeds at Burpee.com


----------



## mr steev (Jan 12, 2018)

NoXion said:


> Which is of course why humans don't have canine teeth.


----------



## 8ball (Jan 12, 2018)

ddraig said:


> Well done!! Few more ticked off the anti vegan bingo card there



Didn't realise it was a vegan essential that humans are not "meant" to eat meat, thought that was just a woo-vegan thing (I found some anti-woo vegans on tinternet, so I know they exist).


----------



## 8ball (Jan 12, 2018)

mr steev said:


>



I haven't had a fight in months and now my canine teeth are 8 inches long.


----------



## NoXion (Jan 12, 2018)

mr steev said:


>



Good thing I listed more than one trait eh?


----------



## ddraig (Jan 12, 2018)

8ball said:


> Didn't realise it was a vegan essential that humans are not "meant" to eat meat, thought that was just a woo-vegan thing (I found some anti-woo vegans on tinternet, so I know they exist).


Did I say that? No
I meant the teeth argument/gotcha


----------



## 8ball (Jan 12, 2018)

ddraig said:


> Did I say that? No
> I meant the teeth argument/gotcha



I meant whatever the “bingo card” is. I guess you might have been just saying it’s something that comes up all the time, bit I thought you were trying to state the opposite, or at least that it is not “natural” to be eating meat.

The hippo argument is bunk if it is saying that canines are a totally invalid trait to quote because hippos use their canines for fighting.

But on the subject of woo, I think it must be frustrating for a lot of vegans that there is so much of it when vegans have some arguments that are very solid on multiple fronts.


----------



## ddraig (Jan 12, 2018)




----------



## 8ball (Jan 12, 2018)

ddraig said:


>



Having a bingo card is much less effort than engaging with people.


----------



## ddraig (Jan 12, 2018)

it just illustrates the boring and trite "arguments" brought up over and over


----------



## mojo pixy (Jan 12, 2018)

Ralph Llama said:


> B ? Earthworms it was☺



B for Brambles


----------



## 8ball (Jan 13, 2018)

ddraig said:


> it just illustrates the boring and trite "arguments" brought up over and over



It's a fair point.  On the other hand, it means you're speaking to someone who hasn't thought much about the matter, which is a good opportunity to bring out the good arguments.


----------



## Ralph Llama (Jan 13, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> B for Brambles


Wicked I met a fair few people from the states who said that co-ops are really good there because
Edit
Is it the same in Canada ?
Edit 
Error 303 .. my brain does not work today


----------



## bellaozzydog (Jan 13, 2018)

I find any sort of prosthelytism directed at me is a combat indicator that the perpetrator 

1. Doesn't know me at all
2. Is unable to read fairly straightforward negative body language
3. Shortly going to become upset at the direction of the conversation 

Lecturing anyone on anything is a fairly unattractive human behaviour, hectoring someone or calling their lifestyle out is just rude


----------



## editor (Jan 13, 2018)

Like: 

London Pub Goes 100% Vegan and Says Goodbye to The Meat Grinder


----------



## 8ball (Jan 13, 2018)

editor said:


> Like:
> 
> London Pub Goes 100% Vegan and Says Goodbye to The Meat Grinder



Islington.

Let's see one in Barking.


----------



## editor (Jan 13, 2018)

8ball said:


> Islington.
> 
> Let's see one in Barking.


What does that mean? Vegan restaurants operate all over in the country and not just in namby-pampy posh boroughs (if that is what you're suggesting).


----------



## 8ball (Jan 13, 2018)

editor said:


> What does that mean? Vegan restaurants operate all over in the country and not just in namby-pampy posh boroughs (if that is what you're suggesting).



Great.  Let's see a *pub* in Barking go 100% vegan, then.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jan 13, 2018)

8ball said:


> Having a bingo card is much less effort than engaging with people.


I don't have a problem engaging with genuine folks with genuine curiosity asking intelligent questions.
Disingenuous pisstake trolls are not people, and attempting to engage with can be a bit of a waste of valuable oxygen. Ain't nobody got time for that.



8ball said:


> It's a fair point.  On the other hand, it means you're speaking to someone who hasn't thought much about the matter, which is a good opportunity to bring out the good arguments.


The frequently recycled tired old arguments have been done many times over in this thread and elsewhere on the interwebs. Anybody that is really interested and has a reasonable level of intelligence can easily do the necessary basic research. Can't be bothered with the same old lame old "canines tho" type arguments.


----------



## editor (Jan 13, 2018)

8ball said:


> Great.  Let's see a *pub* in Barking go 100% vegan, then.


I'm still not getting your point. What is so special about Barking? I can't see why a decent enough pub serving fantastic vegan food would somehow be doomed to failure just because it's in Barking.


----------



## UnderAnOpenSky (Jan 13, 2018)

editor said:


> I'm still not getting your point. What is so special about Barking? I can't see why a decent enough pub serving fantastic vegan food would somehow be doomed to failure just because it's in Barking.



If your ever Glossop way you should go to Globe. Brew their own beer (sub £2.50 a pint in some cases) and cheap and simple food. You see variously old boys in there I suspect, not because of what they serve, but simply it's dam good value. 


The Globe Glossop


----------



## ddraig (Jan 13, 2018)

e2a to Ed's post 
cos it's in the "real world" with "normal people" seeeeee, gotcha!


----------



## 8ball (Jan 14, 2018)

editor said:


> I'm still not getting your point. What is so special about Barking? I can't see why a decent enough pub serving fantastic vegan food would somehow be doomed to failure just because it's in Barking.



Cool, let’s see one, then.


----------



## editor (Jan 14, 2018)

8ball said:


> Cool, let’s see one, then.


You still haven't explained why Barking is so special and its particular relevance to a discussion about veganism.


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Jan 14, 2018)

From the wasting bandwidth thread


----------



## Spymaster (Jan 14, 2018)

ddraig said:


>





ddraig said:


> it just illustrates the boring and trite "arguments" brought up over and over



Quite a few of those are perfectly valid, tbf.


----------



## Ralph Llama (Jan 14, 2018)

Indeed. What about the poor cows eh? And the plants ? Didnt think of that did you? Editor- His point is about class.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jan 15, 2018)

editor said:


> You still haven't explained why Barking is so special and its particular relevance to a discussion about veganism.


I suspect it's another yet another lazy regurgitation of the old "white middle class privilege" chestnut that some of the critics trot out when they're low on justifications.

Please don't forget that veganism hasn't always been a white, middle class thing | Metro News





> _‘I definitely think some of veganism has gone the way of yoga,’ Nurul Shamir, a North London-based vegan of 18 months tells Metro.co.uk.
> 
> ‘I think a lot of the issues come from non-vegans sometimes, thinking that veganism is elitist and exclusionary when in fact, its roots are in the poorest communities from all over the world.’_





> ‘The black vegan movement is one of the most diverse, decolonial, complex and creative movements.’


----------



## 8ball (Jan 15, 2018)

UnderAnOpenSky said:


> If your ever Glossop way you should go to Globe. Brew their own beer (sub £2.50 a pint in some cases) and cheap and simple food. You see variously old boys in there I suspect, not because of what they serve, but simply it's dam good value.
> The Globe Glossop



That really is good value (assuming its any good obv).


----------



## editor (Jan 15, 2018)

Oh look, another vegan pub has opened up. 

Beer-battered ‘tofish’: welcome to London’s first all-vegan pub


----------



## 8ball (Jan 15, 2018)

editor said:


> Oh look, another vegan pub has opened up.
> 
> Beer-battered ‘tofish’: welcome to London’s first all-vegan pub



In "a prime spot on a hipster artery", no less.


----------



## editor (Jan 15, 2018)

8ball said:


> In "a prime spot on a hipster artery", no less.


Ah, so you're going for the extra-tedious '_veganism is just for hipsters_' line.


----------



## 8ball (Jan 15, 2018)

editor said:


> Ah, so you're going for the extra-tedious '_veganism is just for hipsters_' line.



Oh, please do better than this.


----------



## editor (Jan 15, 2018)

8ball said:


> Oh, please do better than this.


You brought up the hipster comment. If I've got it wrong, please explain what you meant by it?


----------



## 8ball (Jan 15, 2018)

editor said:


> You brought up the hipster comment. If I've got it wrong, please explain what you meant by it?



I was just quoting the article.


----------



## editor (Jan 15, 2018)

Turns out there's quite a lot of vegan/veggie pubs in places like Oxford, Glasgow, Southend, Birmingham and elsewhere:

The UK's Top 10 Vegan-Friendly Pubs


----------



## editor (Jan 15, 2018)

8ball said:


> I was just quoting the article.


To make your point, presumably. Which was...?


----------



## 8ball (Jan 15, 2018)

editor said:


> Turns out there's quite a lot of vegan/veggie pubs in places like Oxford, Glasgow, Southend, Birmingham and elsewhere:
> 
> The UK's Top 10 Vegan-Friendly Pubs



First one I looked at was a regular-looking pub with some decent vegan and veggie options.
2/10

edit:  first two


----------



## editor (Jan 15, 2018)

8ball said:


> First one I looked at was a regular-looking pub with some decent vegan and veggie options.
> 2/10
> 
> edit:  first two


Why are you so fucking sneery? What is your problem exactly? And what's wrong with the first two pubs?


----------



## 8ball (Jan 15, 2018)

editor said:


> Why are you so fucking sneery? What is your problem exactly? And what's wrong with the first two pubs?



Were the first two in the list exclusively veggie?  I just picked two at random.  No reason to say there's anything wrong with them at all, and more vegan and veggie options on the menu can only be good.  I do think, though, that this is likely to be a food trend that gets moved on from, like the barbecue thing that is now dying down, and I think we have passed 'peak street food'.

These trends tend to be led by the young and moneyed leading the middle-classes by the nose (which they are usually happy to pay through).  You mentioned a pub in Islington, and one which the article itself described as in prime hipster territory, then a bunch of veggie pubs which weren't veggie at all.

There's not much here to allay my suspicions of this being the next thing that passes after a bit.

It's not a comment on vegetarianism or veganism as such.


----------



## editor (Jan 15, 2018)

8ball said:


> Were the first two in the list exclusively veggie?  I just picked two at random.  No reason to say there's anything wrong with them at all, and more vegan and veggie options on the menu can only be good.  I do think, though, that this is likely to be a food trend that gets moved on from, like the barbecue thing that is now dying down, and I think we have passed 'peak street food'.
> 
> These trends tend to be led by the young and moneyed leading the middle-classes by the nose (which they are usually happy to pay through).  You mentioned a pub in Islington, and one which the article itself described as in prime hipster territory, then a bunch of veggie pubs which weren't veggie at all.
> 
> ...


Are, so all the vegans are just_ faddy sorts_ who soon go back to lovely old meat because it's so much better? 

For the sake of the planet I hope there's a LOT less meat eating going on and the more people who take up vegetarianism and veganism the better. And that's not even commenting in the hideous barbaric practices that bring the meat your table.


----------



## 8ball (Jan 15, 2018)

editor said:


> Are, so all the vegans are just_ faddy sorts_ who soon go back to lovely old meat because it's so much better?



Well, give it 3 or 4 years to play out and I suppose we'll see.


----------



## editor (Jan 15, 2018)

8ball said:


> Well, give it 3 or 4 years to play out and I suppose we'll see.


Why are so dismissive of vegans? You do understand how patronising and condescending you sound when you suggest that the places won't last because it's all just a big fad that will soon go out of fashion.


----------



## 8ball (Jan 15, 2018)

editor said:


> Why are so dismissive of vegans? You do understand how patronising and condescending you sound when you suggest that the places won't last because it's all just a big fad that will soon go out of fashion.



I'm just saying the patterns of production, consumption and media attention follow previous food trends which wax and wane.  
Eating out as a veggie is way better than a decade or so ago, so I think some of it might stick - we're all becoming a little more conscious about meat consumption and the surrounding arguments, but so far the trend follows the pattern of others before it.

Maybe you're right, though, and I'll be able to get a really good bean burrito down my local greasy spoon in 3 years.
Like I said, we'll see.


----------



## editor (Jan 15, 2018)

8ball said:


> I'm just saying the patterns of production, consumption and media attention follow previous food trends which wax and wane.
> Eating out as a veggie is way better than a decade or so ago, so I think some of it might stick - we're all becoming a little more conscious about meat consumption and the surrounding arguments, but so far the trend follows the pattern of others before it.
> 
> Maybe you're right, though, and I'll be able to get a really good bean burrito down my local greasy spoon in 3 years.
> Like I said, we'll see.


It seems one of the biggest obstacles to veganism become more mainstream and widely accepted is the sometimes fiercely negative opinions and dismissive attitudes of the mainstream which you're doing a pretty good job of representing here.


----------



## 8ball (Jan 15, 2018)

editor said:


> It seems one of the biggest obstacles to veganism become more mainstream and widely accepted is the sometimes fiercely negative opinion and dismissive attitudes of the mainstream which you're doing a good of representing here.



I'm not fiercely negative at all.  You can find plenty of discussion among vegans over why it appears mostly represented by the white and privileged.
Are you trying to line things up so you can say it's because of 'people like me' if it dies down in a few years?


----------



## editor (Jan 16, 2018)

8ball said:


> I'm not fiercely negative at all.  You can find plenty of discussion among vegans over why it appears mostly represented by the white and privileged.
> Are you trying to line things up so you can say it's because of 'people like me' if it dies down in a few years?


It''s not going to 'die down'. People have to eat less meat for the sake of their health and for the sake of the planet. Sorry if that all seems so tediously faddish to you.


----------



## 8ball (Jan 16, 2018)

editor said:


> It#'s not going to 'die down'. People have to eat less meat for the sake of their health and for the sake of the planet. Sorry if that all seems so tediously faddish to you.



Eating less meat =/= veganism.
However, plenty of food industry and media sources have veganism down for the big food trend of 2018 (and had it down as so since last year).

That said, people are still doing paleo and other types of diet that went through a boom, so I expect there will be a lot more vegans in 5 years than there are now, just that the numbers might not be growing at the current rate by then (there was a big increase between 2005 and 2015), and the new big thing will be something else.

I'll allow that your emotional attachment to the subject keeps you from recognising who's being consistently sneery here.


----------



## editor (Jan 16, 2018)

8ball said:


> I'll allow that your emotional attachment to the subject keeps you from recognising who's being consistently sneery here.


Wow. It's not me declaring people with a diet you don't appear to approve of as faddish and likely to grow out of their dietary choices, neither have I been throwing around tosh about hipsters.


----------



## ddraig (Jan 16, 2018)

Yes it is a fad for a minority but for a lot of people it is a change in their life to stay, a realisation of the cruelty involved in the meat industry and the wide range (growing all the time) of vegan food available making it easier to transition
and the health benefits, seeing it in others
also the social media and recipe sites, vegan fairs all over the place

of course the press are going to write about a growing demand/ trend whatever
there has been a massive growth and it is still growing and not just with the youth/trendy/hipsters


----------



## ddraig (Jan 16, 2018)

8ball said:


> Eating less meat =/= veganism.
> However, plenty of food industry and media sources have veganism down for the big food trend of 2018 (and had it down as so since last year).
> 
> That said, people are still doing paleo and other types of diet that went through a boom, so I expect there will be a lot more vegans in 5 years than there are now, just that the numbers might not be growing at the current rate by then (there was a big increase between 2005 and 2015), and the new big thing will be something else.
> ...


where is this sneering?? post number(s)?


----------



## mr steev (Jan 16, 2018)

8ball said:


> Maybe you're right, though, and I'll be able to get a really good bean burrito down my local greasy spoon in 3 years.
> Like I said, we'll see.



Things are certainly changing. 2 New 100% veggie/vegan takeaways have opened in wolves in the last year (with the exception of a few curry houses, wolverhampton's only veggie takeaways) and a sports bar & grill here have just introduced a massive meat free menu even going to the effort of using different crockery for vegan customers. Even greasy spoons have started to sell veggie sausages (which was unheard of here even just a few years ago)
The takeaways are in Blakenhall and the bar is in Parkfields... Both areas very non-middle class even by wolverhampton's standards.


----------



## editor (Jan 17, 2018)

Good piece here. 

The Problems with the UK's New 'Big Vegan' Industry


----------



## 8ball (Jan 17, 2018)

editor said:


> Good piece here.
> 
> The Problems with the UK's New 'Big Vegan' Industry




It does seem like they're rushing things a bit.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jan 17, 2018)

editor said:


> Good piece here.
> 
> The Problems with the UK's New 'Big Vegan' Industry



Some reasonable points in that article. imo, regular punters should be the ones influencing the supermarkets mainly through their purchasing choices. The best way to counter things like the ridiculous "cauliflower steaks" is for people simply not to buy them, the supermarkets will soon get the message. I don't think this is anything that it particularly unique to the vegan market, I'm sure examples can be found of ridiculously priced and packaged non-vegan foods in supermarkets. Sure there is a bit of hype and excitement around especially with the Veganuary campaign, however it's up to the intelligent folk to separate the hype from the genuine substance that is there and vote with their wallets and purses.


----------



## RainbowTown (Jan 17, 2018)

editor said:


> Good piece here.
> 
> The Problems with the UK's New 'Big Vegan' Industry




I'm sorry, but if someone is thick enough to buy that piece of crap for £2.50 or whatever, then they deserved to be ripped off. Totally.


----------



## 8ball (Jan 17, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> The best way to counter things like the ridiculous "cauliflower steaks" is for people simply not to buy them, the supermarkets will soon get the message.



I suspect some marketing types may have made the error of assuming people don't know how to cook or how much vegetables cost.
You can get away with this to some extent with exotic ingredients that some people may not be familiar with, but cauliflowers ffs!


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jan 17, 2018)

8ball said:


> I suspect some marketing types may have made the error of assuming people don't know how to cook or how much vegetables cost.
> You can get away with this to some extent with exotic ingredients that some people may not be familiar with, but cauliflowers ffs!


tbf, there appears to be a fair number of folk who don't really know their way around a kitchen and are a bit nooby and clueless, so it wouldn't surprise me if those people might succumb to paying way over the odds for even basic non exotic ingredients even if it does appear to be a bit silly. As with all things important, I would recommend that people take the time to get the knowledge and wise up. If you're going to be lazy and not put in a least a bit of effort then you're more likely to be one of those that get conned out of their money paying £50 for 10 grams of goji berries.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jan 17, 2018)

The dairy Empire Strikes Back with...Febudairy... 

Dairy Farmers Invent 'Febudairy' In Attempt To Promote Cow's Milk

*Cow love*
According to Nortons Dairy: "Febudairy is a chance for everyone to be grateful for our special relationship with cows."

Animal Behavior Expert, Dr. Toni Shephard, told PBN: "We agree that cows are amazing, particularly the strong emotional connection between mother cows and their calves.

"Dairy farmers routinely break this bond by separating newborn calves from their mothers so the cow’s breast milk can be bottled and sold - that’s not an act of warmth or love. In fact it is one of the cruelest things you can do to any mother and baby.

"Our relationship with cows is indeed special - we abuse them in more ways than any other farmed animal.

"Not only do we take their babies and their milk, but after we've worked them to the point of exhaustion we take their lives as well - reducing them to the contents of a cheap frozen pie. Not much to be grateful for if you’re a cow."


----------



## ddraig (Jan 17, 2018)

"of course we know where it comes from" is the most likely response (of course)


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Jan 17, 2018)

ddraig said:


> "of course we know where it comes from" is the most likely response


Well, yeah 

I know where my food comes from. I know _exactly_ what’s involved. What’s your point?


----------



## 8ball (Jan 17, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> tbf, there appears to be a fair number of folk who don't really know their way around a kitchen and are a bit nooby and clueless, so it wouldn't surprise me if those people might succumb to paying way over the odds for even basic non exotic ingredients even if it does appear to be a bit silly. As with all things important, I would recommend that people take the time to get the knowledge and wise up. If you're going to be lazy and not put in a least a bit of effort then you're more likely to be one of those that get conned out of their money paying £50 for 10 grams of goji berries.



I think if you’re going to go vegan or even veggie and be optimally healthy, though, you need to know a bit about nutrition and cooking for yourself.

Vegan is a big step from an omnivore diet if you don’t know these things and want to plug any nutritional gaps.  Most people learn from their parents and most of them won’t be vegan.

This is assuming you’re starting from somewhere at least reasonably healthy, obv.


----------



## editor (Jan 17, 2018)

8ball said:


> I think if you’re going to go vegan or even veggie and be optimally healthy, though, you need to know a bit about nutrition and cooking for yourself.
> 
> Vegan is a big step from an omnivore diet if you don’t know these things and want to plug any nutritional gaps.  Most people learn from their parents and most of them won’t be vegan.
> 
> This is assuming you’re starting from somewhere at least reasonably healthy, obv.


Thankfully there's no shortage of useful dietary tips to be found on the internet - and, of course, some people's omnivore diets can be seriously lacking too.  It's not that hard to enjoy a perfectly healthy vegan diet.


----------



## 8ball (Jan 17, 2018)

editor said:


> Thankfully there's no shortage of useful dietary tips to be found on the internet - and, of course, some people's omnivore diets can be seriously lacking too.  It's not that hard to enjoy a perfectly healthy vegan diet.



Are you a vegan by the way? I thought you were a veggie.  Though I think moving from veggie to vegan is a lot easier than from full-on omni - fewer animal foods and fewer memories and associations tied up with them that you need to move away from or replace.

You say yourself about the internet- that’s still a fair amount of research for a meat eater to find a healthy varied diet that will be satisfying for them and tick all the boxes.

That might get better as more materials become available for people who have lived for years with a meat eaters’ palate, though.

And I did say I was assuming that was starting from a place that was at least *fairly* healthy.  Omni diets can of course be appalling.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jan 17, 2018)

8ball said:


> I think if you’re going to go vegan or even veggie and be optimally healthy, though, you need to know a bit about nutrition and cooking for yourself.
> 
> Vegan is a big step from an omnivore diet if you don’t know these things and want to plug any nutritional gaps.  Most people learn from their parents and most of them won’t be vegan.
> 
> This is assuming you’re starting from somewhere at least reasonably healthy, obv.


I disagree. Regardless of whether you are vegan or not, you should still know a bit about nutrition and cooking anyway. It just so happens that vegans on the whole tend to know a bit more than "omnis" which is reflected in their lower rates of all the major western diseases.

I believe that the opposite is true, if you are an omni, you need to pay a bit more attention to diet and nutrition given that veg*ns according to most of the metrics appear to be better off wrt health.


----------



## 8ball (Jan 17, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> I disagree. Regardless of whether you are vegan or not, you should still know a bit about nutrition and cooking anyway. It just so happens that vegans on the whole tend to know a bit more than "omnis" which is reflected in their lower rates of all the major western diseases.



The biggest thing that reduces your rate of having the major western diseases is being middle class (or further up the hierarchy), so I'd be interested to know how the stats have been interpreted - correlations can be misleading for all sorts of reasons.  I know you and some others don't like the class reference, but plenty of vegans are aware of it, and also how it can limit take-up of the diet/lifestyle (I use the word lifestyle because we had some discussion earlier about the boundaries of "being vegan" as opposed to just not eating foods of animal origin).

Note that I'm not disputing that eating lots of certain animal-based foods is bad for you, nor I am I making assumptions about your personal class background - I'm not trying to start a fight about it agin.


----------



## 8ball (Jan 17, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> I believe that the opposite is true, if you are an omni, you need to pay a bit more attention to diet and nutrition given that veg*ns according to most of the metrics appear to be better off wrt health.



Regardless of the truth or otherwise of that statement, I'm curious about the spelling there...


----------



## 8ball (Jan 17, 2018)

Or to put it another way, before the knives come out, it looks likely to me that vegans are probably doing a lot of other things, and living in particular situations generally, where they are likely to come out healthier, and disentangling the overall health outcomes and their causes when looking at a single well-correlated variable isn't easy.

edit:  Though I did find what looks like a decent meta-analysis suggesting reduced incidence of cancer and ischemic heart disease (with no significant effect on all-cause mortality, nor on cerebrovascular or all-cause cardiovascular disease).  Which isn't that surprising given bacon/carcinogens etc.  As more people take it up it should get easier to gather good evidence, though.


----------



## editor (Jan 17, 2018)

8ball said:


> and living in particular situations generally....


What do you mean by that? What particular living situations?


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jan 17, 2018)

8ball said:


> The biggest thing that reduces your rate of having the major western diseases is being middle class (or further up the hierarchy), so I'd be interested to know how the stats have been interpreted - correlations can be misleading for all sorts of reasons.  I know you and some others don't like the class reference, but plenty of vegans are aware of it, and also how it can limit take-up of the diet/lifestyle (I use the word lifestyle because we had some discussion earlier about the boundaries of "being vegan" as opposed to just not eating foods of animal origin).
> 
> Note that I'm not disputing that eating lots of certain animal-based foods is bad for you, nor I am I making assumptions about your personal class background - I'm not trying to start a fight about it agin.


Well, as you are the one making the claim that vegans need to pay more attention to getting the right nutrients than omnis, perhaps you can present the evidence showing veg*ns to have worse health than meat eaters, with the correction for their financial status.


----------



## 8ball (Jan 17, 2018)

editor said:


> What do you mean by that? What particular living situations?



The country you live in has a massive effect.  Your degree of social isolation/integration has a massive effect.  Education level has a massive effect.


----------



## 8ball (Jan 17, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Well, as you are the one making the claim that vegans need to pay more attention to getting the right nutrients than omnis, perhaps you can present the evidence showing veg*ns to have worse health than meat eaters, with the correction for their financial status.



There are some nutrients that are in few non-animal sources in the amounts required to be healthy.  I've known people try to go vegan and pack it in for health reasons.  I don't doubt they were 'doing it wrong' .  Those who stay doing it for a long time are likely to be doing it right and be really healthy.
It's not so much that _vegans_ need to pay particular attention, but when making a large change to your diet (one which hasn't been adjusted culturally to cover all the bases*) it's easy to miss these.  It would be the same for any big change to diet, I think.  People sometimes get deficiencies when moving country for the same reason.

The NHS agrees, as do many vegan sources - I don't think this is controversial.

I expect if I was to go vegan I'd rely on a few heavily-engineered products to cover the bases, which might make it a technically vegan diet but I don't think I'd be entirely up with the ideological requirements of all vegans.

* - though ours has been fucked up by culture - different argument, mind


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jan 17, 2018)

8ball said:


> There are some nutrients that are in few non-animal sources in the amounts required to be healthy.  I've known people try to go vegan and pack it in for health reasons.  I don't doubt they were 'doing it wrong' .  Those who stay doing it for a long time are likely to be doing it right and be really healthy. It's not so much that _vegans_ need to pay particular attention, but when making a large change to your diet (one which hasn't been adjusted culturally to cover all the bases*) it's easy to miss these.


Is this from your own personal experience? Have you actually tried it yourself or is this more in the way of speculation. Having spent most of my life as a meat eater, 10 years as a "vegetarian" and 20 years as a vegan, I think I have a reasonable grasp of what it takes. The concerns raised by some omnis regarding alleged missing nutrients and deficiencies appear to be at odds with the data. It would appear that it's even easier for omnis to "miss out" than veg*ns.


----------



## editor (Jan 17, 2018)

8ball said:


> The country you live in has a massive effect.  Your degree of social isolation/integration has a massive effect.  Education level has a massive effect.


I've assumed that this discussion has been UK based, so care to break the rest of that down?


----------



## 8ball (Jan 17, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Is this from your own personal experience? Have you actually tried it yourself or is this more in the way of speculation. Having spent most of my life as a meat eater, 10 years as a "vegetarian" and 20 years as a vegan, I think I have a reasonable grasp of what it takes. The concerns raised by some omnis regarding alleged missing nutrients and deficiencies appear to be at odds with the data. It would appear that it's even easier for omnis to "miss out" than veg*ns.



I wouldn't mind seeing this data.  But from personal experience I've seen quite a few people struggle with veganism, and a few with long-term vegetarianism.  A common issue seems to be "the cold that never goes away", as does feeling generally lethargic.  I've not tried it but I think I'd be more likely to struggle with the psychological and lifestyle aspects of it (finding a satisfying and varied diet, dealing with eating out with mates etc.) - I read a lot about nutrition after being ill a little while back -really needed to sort myself out.

And what's with the variant spellings of "vegan"?


----------



## editor (Jan 17, 2018)

Oh and let me just throw this in:


> *The number of vegans in Britain has risen by more than 360 per cent over the past decade,* according to a new survey that shows record numbers of people are avoiding food derived from animals.
> 
> Some 542,000 people aged 15 or over – more than one per cent of the population – have adopted a plant-based diet, up from 150,000 in 2006. According to the Vegan Society, the survey proves that veganism is now one of Britain’s “fastest growing lifestyle movements”.
> 
> ...


----------



## 8ball (Jan 17, 2018)

editor said:


> I've assumed that this discussion has been UK based, so care to break the rest of that down?



What would need breaking down exactly, are you seriously trying to dispute any of that?


----------



## 8ball (Jan 17, 2018)

editor said:


> Oh and let me just throw this in:



Yeah, I was aware of that and obliquely referred to it earlier.


----------



## editor (Jan 17, 2018)

8ball said:


> What would need breaking down exactly, are you seriously trying to dispute any of that?


Can you point me to some research supporting the "massive" effect education has on a person's decision to be vegan?  What kind of level of education is required for this to be noticeable?


----------



## 8ball (Jan 17, 2018)

editor said:


> Can you point me to some research supporting the "massive" effect education has on a person's decision to be vegan?  What kind of level of education is required for this to be noticeable?



Oh, I see.  You just misread my post.  Fair enough.


----------



## mojo pixy (Jan 17, 2018)

ddraig said:


>





Re. that picture of a chopped pig. Whoever made it, presumably in order to shock hasn't been watching horror or listening to hip hop or metal these last 20 years or so. A chopped pig is just, meh. So what? That never really happened because if it did someone would be in trouble for it, it's clearly photoshopped, so what's shocking?

EtA, the gatefold inside image from Carcass' 2nd album _Symphonies of Sickness_ (1990) for reference.


----------



## editor (Jan 17, 2018)

8ball said:


> Oh, I see.  You just misread my post.  Fair enough.


You said: "...vegans are probably doing a lot of other things, and living in particular situations generally, where they are likely to come out healthier, and disentangling the overall health outcomes and their causes when looking at a single well-correlated variable isn't easy."

I asked: "What do you mean by that? What particular living situations?"

You replied: "The country you live in has a massive effect. Your degree of social isolation/integration has a massive effect. Education level has a massive effect"

I asked you to provide some detail on this all these "massive" effects, and in particular asked you to elaborate on the connection between education and a vegan diet, which you failed to do.

I don't think I misread anything you said. You really do seem to be inordinately negative about people electing to eat a vegan diet, which earlier on you were doing your best to dismiss as being one big fad. Why is that?


----------



## ddraig (Jan 17, 2018)

8ball said:


> I wouldn't mind seeing this data.  But from personal experience I've seen quite a few people struggle with veganism, and a few with long-term vegetarianism.  A common issue seems to be "the cold that never goes away", as does feeling generally lethargic.  I've not tried it but I think I'd be more likely to struggle with the psychological and lifestyle aspects of it (finding a satisfying and varied diet, dealing with eating out with mates etc.) - I read a lot about nutrition after being ill a little while back -really needed to sort myself out.
> 
> And what's with the variant spellings of "vegan"?


are you serious?? do you want the stories of the many people who feel a lot better from going vegan, or those who've had long term health complaints go away or vastly improve? 
how better people feel, hear it all the time
or would that be preaching and selective?


----------



## ddraig (Jan 17, 2018)

oh dear mojo pixy oh dear oh dear
where's the whole cute little piggie in that pic?


----------



## mojo pixy (Jan 17, 2018)

What exactly is shocking about a cute photoshop chopped piggy? Is it aimed at kids?
tbf the pig doesn't seem to mind that half its leg is off.


----------



## editor (Jan 17, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> What exactly is shocking about a cute photoshop chopped piggy? Is it aimed at kids?
> tbf the pig doesn't seem to mind that half its leg is off.


I'm not shocked but it's not something I'd choose to look at.


----------



## mojo pixy (Jan 17, 2018)

Fair enough. I just think stuff like that is pointless, when we live in a world of Cannibal Corpse and The Human Centipede.


----------



## 8ball (Jan 17, 2018)

ddraig said:


> are you serious?? do you want the stories of the many people who feel a lot better from going vegan, or those who've had long term health complaints go away or vastly improve?
> how better people feel, hear it all the time
> or would that be preaching and selective?



I said data.  The data you mentioned earlier.


----------



## ddraig (Jan 17, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> What exactly is shocking about a cute photoshop chopped piggy? Is it aimed at kids?
> tbf the pig doesn't seem to mind that half its leg is off.


are you denying it won't make some people think?
if it makes a few thousand think and change their shopping and eating habits to cut out meat that's good enough


----------



## mojo pixy (Jan 18, 2018)

As if pictures of animals on the walls of butchers' shops didn't make the point already?


----------



## 8ball (Jan 18, 2018)

editor said:


> You said: "...vegans are probably doing a lot of other things, and living in particular situations generally, where they are likely to come out healthier, and disentangling the overall health outcomes and their causes when looking at a single well-correlated variable isn't easy."
> 
> ... I don't think I misread anything you said. You really do seem to be inordinately negative about people electing to eat a vegan diet, which earlier on you were doing your best to dismiss as being one big fad. Why is that?



I think people less clouded by their agendas might see where you misread what I said.

I’m learning something about the way at least some vegans believe things, at least.  

I have no quarrel with anyone’s hobbies, though, and I haven’t been inordinately negative about anyone’s food choices either.  I might cut out the meat at some point, there are some arguments for that, but I don’t think I’ll be subscribing to your newsletter.


----------



## 8ball (Jan 18, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> As if pictures of animals on the walls of butchers' shops didn't make the point already?



Last time I was in one they had *actual bits of animals* right there in the shop!


----------



## editor (Jan 18, 2018)

8ball said:


> I think people less clouded by their agendas might see where you misread what I said.
> 
> I’m learning something about the way at least some vegans believe things, at least.
> 
> I have no quarrel with anyone’s hobbies, though, and I haven’t been inordinately negative about anyone’s food choices either.  I might cut out the meat at some point, there are some arguments for that, but I don’t think I’ll be subscribing to your newsletter.


I've no idea what any of that means (what 'newsletter' are you on about?)  but I do know that you're doing a very good job of avoiding the points I raised.

And as for 'agendas', your earlier sneery and dismissive attitude rather betray you on that's score.


----------



## mojo pixy (Jan 18, 2018)

8ball said:


> Last time I was in one they had *actual bits of animals* right there in the shop!



I know, butchers shops here are tame aren't they. I've seen shops elsewhere in the world with live animals being slaughtered in the yard out back and brought in piecemeal during business hours. No fridges, meat can't just hang about all day gathering flies. I actually think the fact it's all so sterile here is rubbish, it _does _separate us from the reality of what's happening. I also think that knowing about all that doesn't necessarily make people want not to be part of it. It's just another brutal aspect to life we easily rationalise or ignore.


----------



## ddraig (Jan 18, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> As if pictures of animals on the walls of butchers' shops didn't make the point already?



do they have pics of actual cute pigs in butchers then? or maybe just the (clean and non bleeding nicely presented) parts they're selling?


----------



## ddraig (Jan 18, 2018)

8ball said:


> I think people less clouded by their agendas might see where you misread what I said.
> 
> I’m learning something about the way at least some vegans believe things, at least.
> 
> I have no quarrel with anyone’s hobbies, though, and I haven’t been inordinately negative about anyone’s food choices either.  I might cut out the meat at some point, there are some arguments for that, but I don’t think I’ll be subscribing to your newsletter.


"but"
all your caveats are worth nothing, just be like bees, far more honest


----------



## 8ball (Jan 18, 2018)

ddraig said:


> "but"
> all your caveats are worth nothing, just be like bees, far more honest



The Importance of Getting Enough Zinc in a Vegan Diet and How to Do it


----------



## ddraig (Jan 18, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> As if pictures of animals on the walls of butchers' shops didn't make the point already?


i'll ask again
are you denying it won't make some people think?


----------



## mojo pixy (Jan 18, 2018)

ddraig said:


> do they have pics of actual cute pigs in butchers then? or maybe just the (clean and non bleeding nicely presented) parts they're selling?



OK no, I have seen it but it's not everywhere. Still. I think you underestimate how much people are very well aware what meat is, even from quite a young age.



ddraig said:


> i'll ask again
> are you denying it won't make some people think?



I'm not denying that. _What _it will make them think, is another question.


----------



## ddraig (Jan 18, 2018)

8ball said:


> The Importance of Getting Enough Zinc in a Vegan Diet and How to Do it


your point?


----------



## 8ball (Jan 18, 2018)

ddraig said:


> your point?



Just trying to be generally helpful.


----------



## ddraig (Jan 18, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> OK no, I have seen it but it's not everywhere. Still. I think you underestimate how much people are very well aware what meat is, even from quite a young age.


and i think you underestimate (and doth protest toooo much) how much of an effect it can have
see babe the film and it's effect


----------



## ddraig (Jan 18, 2018)

8ball said:


> Just trying to be generally helpful.


how sweet
got it covered thanks ever so


----------



## mojo pixy (Jan 18, 2018)

ddraig said:


> and i think you underestimate (and doth protest toooo much) how much of an effect it can have
> see babe the film and it's effect



Yeak OK, manipulating kids is easy. A lot of people who go veg as kids don't go on doing it into adulthood.


----------



## editor (Jan 18, 2018)

8ball said:


> The Importance of Getting Enough Zinc in a Vegan Diet and How to Do it


So that article tells me it's piss easy to get zinc in a vegan diet because it's in fucking LOADS of everyday foods. So what was the point of you linking to that page?


----------



## ddraig (Jan 18, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> Yeak OK, manipulating kids is easy. A lot of people who go veg as kids don't go on doing it into adulthood.


mainpulating?!?!

by showing them the origin of their food?  

the meat industry do all the manipulating backed by advertising and loadsa money and "tradition" and "normal" etc etc
even little shapes for the kiddies
should it be hidden from people then? the origin of their food?
jeez


----------



## keybored (Jan 18, 2018)

ddraig said:


> should it be hidden from people then? the origin of their food?


I had no idea pork came from pigs, or chicken came from actual chickens. Those vegan campaigns changed that. Thanks.


----------



## mojo pixy (Jan 18, 2018)

_Babe _is a film, Films are emotionally manipulative, that's kind of the point. Using _Babe _as an example of how cutesy animaw stuff makes kids want to stop eating animals is flaunting the manipulation. Fine, manipulating kids _is _easy, they're kids, but admit it.

I don't think the origin of meat is at all hidden. Personally, I don't remember ever being in doubt what meat was and where it came from, it was animals and we were eating them._ Thank you animals!_ etc. I think you're underestimating the capability kids have for a) understanding where meat comes from and b) not being phased by it.


----------



## 8ball (Jan 18, 2018)

keybored said:


> I had no idea pork came from pigs, or chicken came from actual chickens. Those vegan campaigns changed that. Thanks.



It doesn’t just come from pigs.  It *is* the pig!


----------



## ddraig (Jan 18, 2018)

the "arguments" just get weaker by day, quite revealing

do you think the majority of kids know? honestly now


----------



## ddraig (Jan 18, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> _Babe _is a film, Films are emotionally manipulative, that's kind of the point. Using _Babe _as an example of how cutesy animaw stuff makes kids want to stop eating animals is flaunting the manipulation. Fine, manipulating kids _is _easy, they're kids, but admit it.
> 
> I don't think the origin of meat is at all hidden. Personally, I don't remember ever being in doubt what meat was and where it came from, it was animals and we were eating them._ Thank you animals!_ etc. I think you're underestimating the capability kids have for a) understanding where meat comes from and b) not being phased by it.


It's the realisation that that's what it is actually is and where it comes from, the truth
stop being so disingenuous

and again, what is manipulating about it??


----------



## keybored (Jan 18, 2018)

ddraig said:


> do you think the majority of kids know? honestly now


Honestly, yes.


----------



## mojo pixy (Jan 18, 2018)

ddraig said:


> do you think the majority of kids know? honestly now



I do, and I know quite a few kids so I say this with a reasonable degree of confidence. You feel they should be more horrified than they are, and you reckon the reason they aren't is because they just don't know.


----------



## mojo pixy (Jan 18, 2018)

ddraig said:


> i think you underestimate (and doth protest toooo much) how much of an effect it can have
> see babe the film and it's effect





ddraig said:


> and again, what is manipulating about it??



Maybe you'd like to explain, since you brought it up?


----------



## ddraig (Jan 18, 2018)

no 
you mentioned it first about kids being manipulated
what do you mean?


----------



## mojo pixy (Jan 18, 2018)

OK then, we can do this slowly.

_What _effect did Babe have, as you said it had an effect?


----------



## 8ball (Jan 18, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> OK then, we can do this slowly.
> 
> _What _effect did Babe have, as you said it had an effect?



I’ve never seen it, but I read they needed over 40 piglets because they grow so fast and filming takes a while.

It probably created some catering economies until the crew grew tired of hog roasts, though.


----------



## ddraig (Jan 18, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> Yeak OK, manipulating kids is easy. A lot of people who go veg as kids don't go on doing it into adulthood.


this is what you said
how were the kids manipulated?


----------



## ddraig (Jan 18, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> OK then, we can do this slowly.
> 
> _What _effect did Babe have, as you said it had an effect?


i'll answer your post
it had the effect that a lot of kids realised where the bacon/ham/pork came from and they then spurned it because they empathised with the pig
now answer mine


----------



## ddraig (Jan 18, 2018)

8ball said:


> I’ve never seen it, but I read they needed over 40 piglets because they grow so fast and filming takes a while.
> 
> It probably created some catering economies until the crew grew tired of hog roasts, though.


titter, hur hur
pleased with that one i'm guessing


----------



## 8ball (Jan 18, 2018)

I was like that when I saw Jaws.
Couldn’t eat fish for weeks.


----------



## keybored (Jan 18, 2018)

ddraig said:


> they empathised with the pig


That might have something to do with the anthropomorphism used throughout the film, in fairness.


----------



## mojo pixy (Jan 18, 2018)

ddraig said:


> i'll answer your post
> it had the effect that a lot of kids realised where the bacon/ham/pork came from and they then spurned it *because they empathised with the pig*
> now answer mine



_That's_ manipulation and I'm not even condemning it, I'm just calling it what it is.


----------



## ddraig (Jan 18, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> _That's_ manipulation and I'm not even condemning it, I'm just calling it what it is.


what is?


----------



## keybored (Jan 18, 2018)

To put it another way; if the movie were "Babe: A Documentary" and portrayed the actual day-to-day lives of pigs (eat whatever they get given, roll around in shit, make grunting noises; repeat) most kids would walk out via the hot dog stand after 10 minutes.


----------



## mojo pixy (Jan 18, 2018)

The film's emotional manipulation hinges on its anthropomorphism of a bunch of realistic farm animals, some of whom are themselves young (eg the eponymous hero). It's aimed at kids (Cert U).


----------



## ddraig (Jan 18, 2018)

keybored said:


> To put it another way; if the movie were "Babe: A Documentary" and portrayed the actual day-to-day lives of pigs (eat whatever they get given, roll around in shit, make grunting noises; repeat) most kids would walk out via the hot dog stand after 10 minutes.


so kids don't like pigs or realise they are sentient beings with feeling and emotional responses?


mojo pixy said:


> The film's emotional manipulation hinges on its anthropomorphism of a bunch of realistic farm animals, some of whom are themselves young (eg the eponymous hero). It's aimed at kids (Cert U).


so kids don't like pigs or realise they are sentient beings with feeling and emotional responses?

and what's more manipulative, what the connection made by the film is or the hiding of what the different meats are and their origin?


----------



## 8ball (Jan 18, 2018)

Always good to get enough zinc.
White spots on the fingernails can be a sign of deficiency.


----------



## mojo pixy (Jan 18, 2018)

ddraig said:


> so kids don't like pigs or realise they are sentient beings with feeling and emotional responses?



Cheesy fucking crisps. _Anthropomorphism_, right? It means that wasn't a pig, it was a person.



ddraig said:


> and what's more manipulative, what the connection made by the film is or the hiding of what the different meats are and their origin?



This is not hidden. You say it is but I disagree, what more can I say.


----------



## keybored (Jan 18, 2018)

ddraig said:


> so kids don't like pigs or realise they are sentient beings with feeling and emotional responses?



We're discussing "Babe" here.



ddraig said:


> the hiding of what the different meats are and their origin?



Where does this happen? I was aware of where meat came from roughly the exact time I was aware of where peas and potatoes come from. Same goes for my kids. If there is some meat-origin-hiding conspiracy going on out there, I need you to provide evidence.


----------



## 8ball (Jan 18, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> Cheesy fucking crisps.



Been vegan for years, I believe.

edit: except the posh ‘kettle chips’, I think


----------



## mojo pixy (Jan 18, 2018)

Just checked the crisps in my cupboard (Walkers) and they have _whey _in the list of ingredients.


----------



## 8ball (Jan 18, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> Just checked the crisps in my cupboard (Walkers) and they have _whey _in the list of ingredients.



Oops.  I might have been thinking of bacon crisps...


----------



## mojo pixy (Jan 18, 2018)

Apart from simple salted, which i believe are universally vegan, any other flavouring probably involves milk on some level. I think only expensive ''meat'' crisps actually have meat extracts in them though.

EtA, salt and vinegar are probably vegan everywhere too, at a guess.


----------



## keybored (Jan 18, 2018)

No whey!


----------



## 8ball (Jan 18, 2018)

Roast gammon Walkers and the cumberland sausage ones are vegan whereas smoky bacon aren’t, according to tinternet.

Crispa are a bit of a minefield.


----------



## 8ball (Jan 18, 2018)

keybored said:


> No whey!



Whey!


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Jan 18, 2018)

ddraig said:


> do you think the majority of kids know? honestly now


Of course the majority of kids know, probably a higher percentage in this day and age than, say 20 or 30 years ago. 

I think you underestimate a) the access to information kids have now and b) the remarkable ability kids have to not give a fuck about an awful lot of things


----------



## NoXion (Jan 18, 2018)

keybored said:


> We're discussing "Babe" here.
> 
> Where does this happen? I was aware of where meat came from roughly the exact time I was aware of where peas and potatoes come from. Same goes for my kids. If there is some meat-origin-hiding conspiracy going on out there, I need you to provide evidence.



Well apparently if you believe the "Humane Educator" (with a degree and everything!), the evidence consists of the fact that companies put idealistic imagery on the packaging of their products.

Nothing to do with marketing or anything like that.


----------



## kabbes (Jan 18, 2018)

I can confidently say the day I discover that pigs can talk in fully fledged RP English is the day I give up pork forever.  Don't eat anything that can have a conversation with you -- I'm afraid that I'm really quite strict on that one.


----------



## 8ball (Jan 18, 2018)

kabbes said:


> I can confidently say the day I discover that pigs can talk in fully fledged RP English is the day I give up pork forever.  Don't eat anything that can have a conversation with you -- I'm afraid that I'm really quite strict on that one.



What if it's been genetically engineered to want to be eaten?


----------



## kabbes (Jan 18, 2018)

8ball said:


> What if it's been genetically engineered to want to be eaten?


A brilliant piece of philosophical thought experiment by Douglas Adams.  I long ago came to the same conclusion as Arthur Dent -- if it is capable of asking me to eat it, I don't want to eat it.


----------



## 8ball (Jan 18, 2018)

kabbes said:


> A brilliant piece of philosophical thought experiment by Douglas Adams.  I long ago came to the same conclusion as Arthur Dent -- if it is capable of asking me to eat it, I don't want to eat it.



Would you rather it felt depressed and rejected?


----------



## kabbes (Jan 18, 2018)

8ball said:


> Would you rather it felt depressed and rejected?


It's not about the morality of the creature, it's about my morality.  Douglas Adams is tricking you into moral relativism.


----------



## 8ball (Jan 18, 2018)

kabbes said:


> It's not about the morality of the creature, it's about my morality.  Douglas Adams is tricking you into moral relativism.



It's still about your morality in my question.


----------



## kabbes (Jan 18, 2018)

8ball said:


> It's still about your morality in my question.


I explained my morality.  I won't eat anything that is capable of conversation.  End of story.  What the creature thinks about this is irrelevant, unless I want to adjust my morality in line with its cultural norms.  That's moral relativism.


----------



## Artaxerxes (Jan 18, 2018)

keybored said:


> Where does this happen? I was aware of where meat came from roughly the exact time I was aware of where peas and potatoes come from. Same goes for my kids. If there is some meat-origin-hiding conspiracy going on out there, I need you to provide evidence.








Not so much hiding I suppose as encouraging the continued persecution of Fairies and the consumption of their hearts to absorb their power.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jan 18, 2018)

8ball said:


> I wouldn't mind seeing this data.


Well for those that are genuinely interested there's plenty of data out there to play with and analyse. Of course it's not something that can be reduced to a single sentence or a marketing soundbite, and you'll need to do at least a bit of reading. As with many important life decisions, to get decent results it pays to put in a bit of effort, wise up and get the knowledge.



8ball said:


> But from personal experience I've seen quite a few people struggle with veganism, and a few with long-term vegetarianism.  A common issue seems to be "the cold that never goes away", as does feeling generally lethargic.


Well, having actually done it myself along with all the members of my immediate family, I have first hand experience and can compare the "before" and "after", based on real life experience as opposed to vague observations about other peoples persistent colds and "lethargy", or "my d-i-l is a nursery nurse and she said that vegetarian children are lame" etc.   In our family it was more like "the colds that never came back". My observation to date has been than at the very minimum veg*ns are no worse off wrt overall health when compared to their meat eating peers. The family and friends that predicted sickness and dire consequences 20 years ago have since changed their tune. 



8ball said:


> I've not tried it but I think I'd be more likely to struggle with the psychological and lifestyle aspects of it (finding a satisfying and varied diet, dealing with eating out with mates etc.) - I read a lot about nutrition after being ill a little while back -really needed to sort myself out.


I don't really get why the social aspects should be such a big obstacle for so many. Why should your mates opinions on food adversely affect eating out? If I'm out with people and we end up in a restaurant, I eat what I want and they eat whatever they want. If I don't fancy eating, I'll have a drink. Simple. In my experience, on the whole it has been meat eaters who appear to be more troubled by my choices than the other way around. I also read about nutrition, Amazon have taken a ton of money from me. Life long learning ftw. 



8ball said:


> And what's with the variant spellings of "vegan"?


The asterisk is a wildcard character.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jan 18, 2018)

8ball said:


> What if it's been genetically engineered to want to be eaten?


The brilliant Doug Adams, also happened to be veg*n. 
Just saying.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jan 18, 2018)




----------



## 8ball (Jan 18, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> The asterisk is a wildcard character.



You get vegens, veguns, vegins and vegons?


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jan 18, 2018)

8ball said:


> You get vegens, veguns, vegins and vegons?


I suppose if those were legit words then yes the wildcard would accomodate them, but they're not.

Wildcard character - Wikipedia
"In software, a wildcard character is a kind of placeholder represented by a single character, such as an asterisk (*), *which can be interpreted as a number of literal characters* or an empty string. It is often used in file searches so the full name need not be typed."

For example...


----------



## NoXion (Jan 18, 2018)

It's a special snowflake.


----------



## 8ball (Jan 18, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> I suppose if those were legit words then yes the wildcard would accomodate them, but they're not.
> 
> Wildcard character - Wikipedia
> "In software, a wildcard character is a kind of placeholder represented by a single character, such as an asterisk (*), *which can be interpreted as a number of literal characters* or an empty string. It is often used in file searches so the full name need not be typed."
> ...



I'm w*ll awar* of what a wildcard charact*r is, ju* hadn't s**n that formulation (to includ* v*g*tarian) us*d b*for*.

I've seen the 'o' in 'God' replaced for some nebulous religious reason, thought maybe this was something comparable.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jan 18, 2018)

Nope, no religious reasoning, it's just a convenient way of grouping vegetarians and vegans.


----------



## 8ball (Jan 18, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Nope, no religious reasoning, it's just a convenient way of grouping vegetarians and vegans.



I was thinking 'in group' rather than religious, really, but thanks for clarifying.


----------



## keybored (Jan 18, 2018)

Veg(an/etarian)s works better.


----------



## 8ball (Jan 18, 2018)

keybored said:


> Veg(an/etarian)s works better.



Though is almost as long as 'vegan/vegetarian'.
I vote for LMM (lentil-munchin' massive).


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jan 18, 2018)

keybored said:


> Veg(an/etarian)s works better.


Er...no it doesn't. Veg*ns works just fine, and there's much less typing involved.


----------



## keybored (Jan 18, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Er...no it doesn't. Veg*ns works just fine, and there's much less typing involved.


Most people aren't a computer and will assume a single * just replaces one character.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jan 18, 2018)

keybored said:


> Most people aren't a computer and will assume a single * just replaces one character.


It really isn't that much of a a steep learning curve for noobs and you don't need to be a computer to understand it.


----------



## 8ball (Jan 18, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> It really isn't that much of a a steep learning curve for noobs and you don't need to be a computer to understand it.



It isn't.  It's just unusual.  For instance, you see f**k but don't see f*k very often.


----------



## keybored (Jan 18, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> It really isn't that much of *a a* steep learning curve for noobs and you don't need to be a computer to understand it.


Syntax error.


----------



## Calamity1971 (Jan 19, 2018)

editor said:


> So that article tells me it's piss easy to get zinc in a vegan diet because it's in fucking LOADS of everyday foods. So what was the point of you linking to that page?





ddraig said:


> your point?


Think he's trying to teach you how to suck eggs  as it were.
My auntie was convinced I would get beri beri and would have to eat with padded knives and forks by the time I was 15


----------



## 8ball (Jan 19, 2018)

Calamity1971 said:


> Think he's trying to teach you how to suck eggs  as it were.



Vegans are allowed to suck, but not swallow.


----------



## no-no (Jan 19, 2018)

They make it easier for me to admit to them and myself, that I don't really care that much about animal welfare.That I'm fine with us killing animals for food and that I don't hold humans to a higher standard than any other animal.


----------



## ddraig (Jan 19, 2018)

8ball said:


> Vegans are allowed to suck, but not swallow.


why don't you grow up and stop this, it's very very unbecoming


----------



## 8ball (Jan 19, 2018)

ddraig said:


> why don't you grow up and stop this, it's very very unbecoming



You have a filthy mind.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jan 19, 2018)

Calamity1971 said:


> Think he's trying to teach you how to suck eggs  as it were.


editor's just calling out yet another piss-take time waster troll faking interest in vegan issues.  I tend to give them a couple of overs worth of line and length before switching them off.



Calamity1971 said:


> My auntie was convinced I would get beri beri and would have to eat with padded knives and forks by the time I was 15


All manner of plagues were forecast for our family, including scurvy, ebola and scarlet fever, all caused by "where the fuck you gonna get your protein?" and other stupid ignorance based questions.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jan 19, 2018)

Why I asked my family to be vegan



> Since our two weeks of living as a vegan family, we’ve cut out cow’s milk completely and switched to drinking soya milk. We still enjoy eating meat, but the experience has made me realise that we eat more than we need. As a compromise, we decided to eat vegetarian meals during the week and only eat meat over the weekend. That way, we have more balanced diets.
> 
> I never expected my 11-, 10- and seven-year-olds to understand supply and demand, but they do believe that, even if we can’t change the world, we can do our bit. I don’t know if we’ll ever give up meat completely, but this experience has given us all new appreciation for animals and for vegan foods.




Nadiya Hussain reveals she went vegan in BBC Good Food | Daily Mail Online


----------



## AnnaKarpik (Jan 19, 2018)

8ball said:


> Always good to get enough zinc.
> White spots on the fingernails can be a sign of deficiency.



Zinc wasn't on my radar until my brother mentioned a connection with the immune system; I have two autoimmune diseases and a range of allergies - why didn't the zinc police let me know?
Anyway, I shall eat more oats and nuts/seeds and report back in a year or so.


----------



## 8ball (Jan 19, 2018)

AnnaKarpik said:


> Zinc wasn't on my radar until my brother mentioned a connection with the immune system; I have two autoimmune diseases and a range of allergies - why didn't the zinc police let me know?
> Anyway, I shall eat more oats and nuts/seeds and report back in a year or so.



Pumpkin seeds and chickpeas FTW!


----------



## editor (Jan 19, 2018)

8ball said:


> Though is almost as long as 'vegan/vegetarian'.
> I vote for LMM (lentil-munchin' massive).


And that's not patronising at all, is is?


----------



## editor (Jan 19, 2018)

8ball said:


> Always good to get enough zinc.
> White spots on the fingernails can be a sign of deficiency.


No. Wrong in almost all cases. 



> Incidentally, in addition to the myth that white spots in fingernails are a sign of calcium deficiency, you may also have heard that they indicate a zinc deficiency. That isn’t true either.


White Spots on Nails - White Fingernails | Dr. Weil


----------



## 8ball (Jan 19, 2018)

editor said:


> No. Wrong in almost all cases.



Turns out you're half right!
Researchers seem to be split on this.

Stopped clocks and all that.


----------



## 8ball (Jan 19, 2018)

editor said:


> And that's not patronising at all, is is?



I don't suppose it's any worse than BaconMuncher.
YMMV in accordance with levels of personal sanctimony.


----------



## ddraig (Jan 19, 2018)

8ball said:


> I don't suppose it's any worse than BaconMuncher.
> YMMV in accordance with levels of personal sanctimony.


and it's just you who's posted that on this thread
urban75 forums
Is it worth asking what your issue is and why you've gone so purile on this thread recently?


----------



## 8ball (Jan 19, 2018)

ddraig said:


> and it's just you who's posted that on this thread
> urban75 forums
> Is it worth asking what your issue is and why you've gone so purile on this thread recently?



Not really looking very hard, are you? 
I'm adjusting to the intellectual level of thread.

Might start dropping some punctuation in a bit...


----------



## ddraig (Jan 19, 2018)

has someone else posted it then? can you link to the post?
you could ignore the thread and stop posting on it, making yourself look less of a dick as a bonus


----------



## 8ball (Jan 19, 2018)

ddraig said:


> has someone else posted it then? can you link to the post?
> you could ignore the thread and stop posting on it, making yourself look less of a dick as a bonus



Of course I can link to the post, but that's no fun.
You could also fuck off, you know.


----------



## ddraig (Jan 19, 2018)

8ball said:


> Of course I can link to the post, but that's no fun.
> You could also fuck off, you know.


is this a game for you then?
do you think the smiley adds or detracts to your aggressive "fuck off"? i'm an angry vegan so i'll be staying
there is no post saying bacon muncher so why say it? weird


----------



## 8ball (Jan 19, 2018)

ddraig said:


> is this a game for you then?
> do you think the smiley adds or detracts to your aggressive "fuck off"? i'm an angry vegan so i'll be staying
> there is no post saying bacon muncher so why say it? weird



Well, while posts are addressed to me, I'll answer them.  Otherwise will possibly pop in, just in case someone says something interesting.

I'm not too bothered by angry vegans so rant away.  On the other hand, I'll admit I was a little disappointed by how it seems to be compulsory to be a paranoid, sanctimonious cunt.  But I'm willing to see if the trend gets bucked any time soon.   

#3331


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jan 19, 2018)

You just  got to laugh at genuine cunts projecting their own traits onto others.


----------



## 8ball (Jan 19, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> You just  got to laugh at genuine cunts projecting their own traits onto others.



You have to laugh at the self-awareness, certainly.


----------



## ddraig (Jan 19, 2018)

8ball said:


> Well, while posts are addressed to me, I'll answer them.  Otherwise will possibly pop in, just in case someone says something interesting.
> 
> I'm not too bothered by angry vegans so rant away.  On the other hand, I'll admit I was a little disappointed by how it seems to be compulsory to be a paranoid, sanctimonious cunt.  But I'm willing to see if the trend gets bucked any time soon.
> 
> #3331


why the abuse and calling people paranoid sanctimonious cunts??? 
did someone upset you today and this is an easy place to lash out?
bit pathetic tbf

e2a who is being a "paranoid sanctimonious cunt" and where?


----------



## 8ball (Jan 19, 2018)

ddraig said:


> why the abuse and calling people sanctimonious cunts???
> did someone upset you today and this is an easy place to lash out?
> bit pathetic tbf



I was using the terms purely descriptively.

#NotAllVegans


----------



## ddraig (Jan 19, 2018)

8ball said:


> I was using the terms purely descriptively.
> 
> #NotAllVegans


so making shit up to have a pop then
you want to take a look at yourself


----------



## 8ball (Jan 19, 2018)

ddraig said:


> e2a who is being a "paranoid sanctimonious cunt" and where?



Yeah, cos that always calms things down.


----------



## 8ball (Jan 19, 2018)

ddraig said:


> so making shit up to have a pop then
> you want to take a look at yourself



Breathe.  Remember to breathe.
Who's escalating at the moment?


----------



## ddraig (Jan 19, 2018)

8ball said:


> Yeah, cos that always calms things down.


here's a tip
don't post shit you can't or won't back up


----------



## ddraig (Jan 19, 2018)

8ball said:


> Breathe.  Remember to breathe.
> Who's escalating at the moment?


you are by dishing out the insults
you can click on unsubscribe and even "ignore thread" these days


----------



## 8ball (Jan 19, 2018)

ddraig said:


> here's a tip
> don't post shit you can't or won't back up



Remember the question about who was escalating at the moment?


----------



## 8ball (Jan 19, 2018)

ddraig said:


> you are by dishing out the insults
> you can click on unsubscribe and even "ignore thread" these days



That was a few posts back and you've continued trying to have go since then.
If you were really, really hurt then I'm sorry, but it's fairly mild for Urban these days.


----------



## ddraig (Jan 19, 2018)

.


----------



## ddraig (Jan 19, 2018)

8ball said:


> That was a few posts back and you've continued trying to have go since then.
> If you were really, really hurt then I'm sorry, but it's fairly mild for Urban these days.


you're a joke poster


----------



## 8ball (Jan 19, 2018)

ddraig said:


> you're a joke poster



I do occasionally post jokes, it's true.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jan 19, 2018)

Editor gave his bs short shrift so now the genuine cunt is showing his true colours after a period of a very thinly disguised pretence to be interested in the subject. That's about the size of it.


----------



## 8ball (Jan 19, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Editor gave his bs short shrift so now the genuine cunt is showing his true colours after a period of a very thinly disguised pretence to be interested in the subject. That's about the size of it.



TAG TEAM!! 

Although I think you're doing yourself a disservice, I'd say you've been perfectly genuine.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jan 19, 2018)

In other news...

Cornetto launches vegan ice cream cone



> Vegans can now enjoy one of the nation’s favourite frozen treats as Wall’s launches a plant-based version of its best-selling ice cream.
> Vegan-friendly Cornetto’s are set to hit freezers in Sainsbury’s stores across Britain next month.
> Demand for the product with UK vegans has been high following the success of the Cornetto Veggy in Italy last year.
> The cone - which is also gluten free - is lined with dairy-free chocolate and filled with soya-based ice cream and topped with chopped nuts.


----------



## 8ball (Jan 19, 2018)

It does look almost like they’re saying the vegan Cornettos are causing a massive burden on health services around the world, but I’m guessing that’s a different story in the pic.


----------



## editor (Jan 19, 2018)

8ball said:


> I don't suppose it's any worse than BaconMuncher.
> YMMV in accordance with levels of personal sanctimony.


15,375,735 posts on this site and you're the ONLY person to have ever used that phrase. It's getting embarrassing now. What on earth is the matter with you?


----------



## editor (Jan 19, 2018)

8ball said:


> Well, while posts are addressed to me, I'll answer them.  Otherwise will possibly pop in, just in case someone says something interesting.
> 
> I'm not too bothered by angry vegans so rant away.  On the other hand, I'll admit I was a little disappointed by how it seems to be compulsory to be a paranoid, sanctimonious cunt.  But I'm willing to see if the trend gets bucked any time soon.
> 
> #3331


'Compulsory' you say? OK, so - please -  spit it out and name all these "paranoid, sanctimonious cunts" on this thread. 

I have to say you seem to be getting progressively more unhinged in this thread. It's supposed to be about these so called 'angry vegans' but at the moment you seem the most angry person here by a country mile.


----------



## 8ball (Jan 19, 2018)

editor said:


> I have to say you seem to be getting progressively more unhinged in this thread.



This really is comedy gold. 

If you're not angry, then great; if you are then chill a bit.  
Weekend's here.


----------



## 8ball (Jan 19, 2018)

editor said:


> 15,375,735 posts on this site and you're the ONLY person to have ever used that phrase. It's getting embarrassing now. What on earth is the matter with you?



Oh dear.  I even pointed out the post number.
As I said before, I'm not angry, just disappointed.


----------



## editor (Jan 19, 2018)

8ball said:


> This really is comedy gold.
> 
> If you're not angry, then great; if you are then chill a bit.
> Weekend's here.


You're making increasingly bizarre claims, throwing around random abuse and generally acting like a schoolboy who's had too many Haribos. Are you OK?
It's just a personal choice of diet you know, and much as it seems to upset you, it's a choice that is becomingly increasingly popular.


----------



## 8ball (Jan 19, 2018)

editor said:


> You're making increasingly bizarre claims, throwing around random abuse and generally acting like a schoolboy who's had too many Haribos. Are you OK?
> It's just a personal choice of diet you know, and much as it seems to upset you, it's a choice that is becomingly increasingly popular.



You don't even see where you're going off on one again, do you?

By the by, we were discussing earlier whether it was 'just a personal choice of diet' - you can find similar discussions on vegan forums.


----------



## editor (Jan 19, 2018)

8ball said:


> As I said before, I'm not angry, just disappointed.


In what exactly?: People having different dietary choices to you?
Ass you going to name all these "a paranoid, sanctimonious cunts" now? Spit it out!


----------



## editor (Jan 19, 2018)

8ball said:


> You don't even see where you're going off on one again, do you?
> 
> By the by, we were discussing earlier whether it was 'just a personal choice of diet' - you can find similar discussions on vegan forums.


It's not me calling all worked up and calling people 'paranoid, sanctimonious cunts'. You need to name names or wind your neck in.


----------



## 8ball (Jan 19, 2018)

editor said:


> It's not me calling all worked up and calling people 'paranoid, sanctimonious cunts'. You need to name names or wind your neck in.



Because naming names will de-escalate everything nicely won't it?
This would be one of the conflict resolution strategies you've learned from your extensive modding experience on a busy online forum, I suppose.

And I also suppose I'm the one who is _very calmly_ confusing "getting" with "calling" while doing their best to re-ignite a spat and also simultaneously telling someone to wind their neck in.

I don't think I'm being massively unfair in saying you lose a degree of insight when certain topics are under discussion.

Now, this is where you might start claiming I'm doing the troll trick of de-escalating just to re-escalate later for lols.  Which you can do, but me saying this means I'm aware of that game and you can credibly call me on that if I start doing that, especially if unprovoked.

So now you have an off-ramp and also a trump card for later on - I think that counts as a whole bunch of fig leaves.

edit:  olive branches, dammit!!


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jan 20, 2018)

editor said:


> 'Compulsory' you say? OK, so - please -  spit it out and name all these "paranoid, sanctimonious cunts" on this thread.
> 
> I have to say you seem to be getting progressively more unhinged in this thread. It's supposed to be about these so called 'angry vegans' but at the moment you seem the most angry person here by a country mile.


Has the twat gone yet? "Unexcpected dickhead in the vegan area". tbf, you called him fairly early. He had the opportunity to show that he was genuine but eventually came out as a fraud out to bait, mock and troll, and all this while protesting his innocence like Suarez.





"Waaaaah, wasn't me guvnor, honest....one of those fuckin' angry vegans broke my tooth"

I'm not sure why it is that certain meat eaters (#notAllMeatEaters) choose to attach themselves like leeches to this topic when they have no particular interest in it. What's that all about?


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jan 20, 2018)

I went vegan for 60 days - and it changed my life

"I hate vegans,” said my friend Simon over Sunday lunch on the first weekend. “I don’t mind vegetarians but I just don’t like vegans. What’s wrong with milk, anyway?” His response wasn't unusual: the most startling effect of my diet during the entire 60 days was just how upset meat eaters were by my vegan existence – and how vocal they were about it. 
(sounds familiar)


----------



## Artaxerxes (Jan 20, 2018)

Milk is the main reason I'd consider going Vegan, its fucking horrific the things they do to some cows. 

Sadly I am also addicted to Cheese in all its forms so even I don't eat much meat I must remain with the dairy.


----------



## 8ball (Jan 20, 2018)

Artaxerxes said:


> Milk is the main reason I'd consider going Vegan, its fucking horrific the things they do to some cows.



I’m afraid you’re in the vegan area - post titles can be deceiving. 

There is apparently a good vegan blue cheese mentioned earlier in the thread.  Not had it myself.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jan 20, 2018)

Artaxerxes said:


> Milk is the main reason I'd consider going Vegan, its fucking horrific the things they do to some cows.


Both dairy and beef cows also get a bit of a raw deal...


PaoloSanchez said:


> An excerpt from this excellent book...
> 
> 
> 
> ...






Artaxerxes said:


> Sadly I am also addicted to Cheese in all its forms so even I don't eat much meat I must remain with the dairy.


Well perhaps one day you might find a way to overcome your addiction. I used to eat cheese, and vegetarians probably have even more cheese and dairy than meat eaters in an attempt to compensate for the fabled "lack of protein". I don't miss it at all now and had no issues stopping the dairy, so I guess I wasn't addicted.


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Jan 20, 2018)

I think I’d find giving up dairy even harder than giving up meat


----------



## NoXion (Jan 20, 2018)

Yeah, fuck that. I honestly don't find food properly filling unless it has animal some kind of animal fat in it. I went to a vegan food fair once and I got hungry again a mere two hours later.


----------



## 8ball (Jan 20, 2018)

NoXion said:


> Yeah, fuck that. I honestly don't find food properly filling unless it has animal some kind of animal fat in it. I went to a vegan food fair once and I got hungry again a mere two hours later.



Might be a protein thing rather than a fat thing.  I had some cashew cheese and while the vegans I know all recognise it’s not really like cheese, it’s nice and it does fill you up quite well.  Fairly high in both protein and healthy fat.

Lots of calories, I believe, but that’s the way with lots of things that fill you up.


----------



## NoXion (Jan 20, 2018)

Yeah. I think saturated fat (from any source) has received an unnecessarily bad rap.


----------



## 8ball (Jan 20, 2018)

NoXion said:


> Yeah. I think saturated fat (from any source) has received an unnecessarily bad rap.



Maybe - from what I’ve read recently the jury was out on this and now they’ve come back in again.

There’s also a lot of disagreement over whether coconut oil is better than any other saturated fat.


----------



## NoXion (Jan 20, 2018)

8ball said:


> Maybe - from what I’ve read recently the jury was out on this and now they’ve come back in again.
> 
> There’s also a lot of disagreement over whether coconut oil is better than any other saturated fat.



I don't think it's a coincidence that obesity has become a serious problem since the demonisation of fats in the 1960s (which is (not-so-)coincidentally the last period in which most people smoked tobacco like chimneys), especially since then food companies have been replacing fat with sugar, which is both cheap and tasty.


----------



## 8ball (Jan 20, 2018)

NoXion said:


> I don't think it's a coincidence that obesity has become a serious problem since the demonisation of fats in the 1960s (which is (not-so-)coincidentally the last period in which most people smoked tobacco like chimneys), especially since then food companies have been replacing fat with sugar, which is both cheap and tasty.



No argument there.  Though there are more low-fat things about now which haven’t replaced the fat with sugar.  Cottage cheese is a notable example (in some cases).


----------



## editor (Jan 22, 2018)

Artaxerxes said:


> Milk is the main reason I'd consider going Vegan, its fucking horrific the things they do to some cows.
> 
> Sadly I am also addicted to Cheese in all its forms so even I don't eat much meat I must remain with the dairy.


I switched to soya milk years ago and it's pretty hard to tel the difference with even some of the cheaper supermarket soyas. I've often served up tea for visitors/workmen who were really surprised when I told them that they'd just had a tea with soya milk. The switch also helped clear up my eczema considerably with was a bonus.


----------



## Artaxerxes (Jan 22, 2018)

editor said:


> I switched to soya milk years ago and it's pretty hard to tel the difference with even some of the cheaper supermarket soyas. I've often served up tea for visitors/workmen who were really surprised when I told them that they'd just had a tea with soya milk. The switch also helped clear up my eczema considerably with was a bonus.



I might give it another go, the main reason I didn't mind starting up again was because substitute milk is shite with coffee and due to health reasons thats no longer on my menu.


----------



## editor (Jan 22, 2018)

Artaxerxes said:


> I might give it another go, the main reason I didn't mind starting up again was because substitute milk is shite with coffee and due to health reasons thats no longer on my menu.


Soya used to be terrible in coffee and often go lumpy but that's no longer the case unless you get really crap soya. I much prefer the taste of soya on cereals now too.


----------



## 8ball (Jan 22, 2018)

I had some almond milk in tea at a friend's house (she's just embarked on Veganuary) - wasn't expecting to like 'slightly nutty' tea, but it was really nice.  I thought it was the tea giving the different taste (more ‘Assammy’ than Assam iyswim).

Rice milk on the other hand... that was horrible, but I tried it neat so maybe not a fair test.


----------



## Artaxerxes (Jan 22, 2018)

editor said:


> Soya used to be terrible in coffee and often go lumpy but that's no longer the case unless you get really crap soya. I much prefer the taste of soya on cereals now too.



Almond milk is pretty nice and works well with me cereal.


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Jan 23, 2018)

Artaxerxes said:


> I might give it another go, the main reason I didn't mind starting up again was because substitute milk is shite with coffee and due to health reasons thats no longer on my menu.



Try oat milk for coffee. It works really well.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jan 24, 2018)

I've never really been a tea or coffee drinker so my milk and dairy consumption back in the day would mainly have been through milk on my cereal, cakes and biscuits and cheese related food. I never enjoyed cows milk "neat" anyway even before I stopped with the animal foods, but I was told that it was good for me so I'd have Nesquik which made it a bit more palatable.

My wife drinks several cups of tea a day and her preferred "milk" is one particular brand of oat milk, however if that's not available she will have other brands or have almond or soya milks. I don't remember rice milk really being on the agenda.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jan 24, 2018)

Even though Morgan is a bit of a dick (no surprises there), I think some interesting points were raised in this "discussion".


...unfortunately it became more of a shouting match than a discussion. 

tl;dr

Schools raises pigs and fattens them up for slaughter
One of the parents who happens to be a vegan objects to this and asks for the pigs to be sent to a sanctuary instead of being slaughtered.
The headmaster  says that vegans are in a minority the school will carry on with its pig fattening tradition.
Earthling Ed got involved and started a petition to save the pigs which got 37,000 signatures.
School decides to give pigs back to original owners
I'm not sure how I feel about this story. I admire the parent for speaking out and raising concerns, however the adverse publicity associated with the "death threats" sent to the school staff is a bit unsavoury.

School faces backlash after students raise pigs to send to slaughter
School where pigs were reared and sent for slaughter inundated with 'abuse'


----------



## 8ball (Jan 24, 2018)

Hmmm, it does teach them where the food comes from, which makes me wonder whether what the school did over the years might have led to more kids becoming veg*n.  There was a reference to the kids becoming quite attached to them.

It seems a bit spiteful to send them back to the farmer (and on to C&S Meats), rather than to the sanctuary that had offered to take them, and which was asked for in the petition.


----------



## NoXion (Jan 24, 2018)

Nah, Ed and the petitioners can go fuck themselves.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jan 24, 2018)

8ball said:


> Hmmm, it does teach them where the food comes from, which makes me wonder whether what the school did over the years might have led to more kids becoming veg*n.  There was a reference to the kids becoming quite attached to them.


Well imo there's a few pieces missing from this story. I'm wondering how complete the "where the food comes from" education is if the slaughtering and butchering bits are left out. Perhaps the piggies go into a magic box and come out ready made sausages like in that old Brazillian prank...





8ball said:


> It seems a bit spiteful to send them back to the farmer (and on to C&S Meats), rather than to the sanctuary that had offered to take them, and which was asked for in the petition.


It's possible that the headmaster didn't want to be seen to be caving in to "militant vegan" pressure, "they're going to become sausages whether you like it or not". Up middle finger I show them. NO NO NO Santuary!!!


----------



## 8ball (Jan 24, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> It's possible that the headmaster didn't want to be seen to be caving in to "militant vegan" pressure, "they're going to become sausages whether you like it or not". Up middle finger I tell them oxide and neutrino stylee.



I don’t see how that didn’t cause as big a fuss as the original story.  It’s not like the school could use the excuse of being out of pocket as I’d think a whip-roung for the original price of the piglets would sort that pretty quickly.

It reads like it was only the pigs, of all the animals, that were sent for slaughter too, which seems slightly odd.


----------



## ddraig (Jan 24, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> <snip>
> 
> </snip>



but but but, everyone knows don't they?!?!  , even small children!!  , almost everyone knows where their meat comes from and don't care!?! (apart from those who claim to know the farmer and what a nice life the pig had before getting to their plate)
we've had proof of the fact that almost all people know where their meat comes from on this very thread a few times and quite recently too


----------



## 8ball (Jan 24, 2018)

Interesting related article from a while back:

BBC - Hampshire - Nature - Priestlands Eco-school


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jan 24, 2018)

ddraig said:


> but but but, everyone knows don't they?!?!  , even small children!!  , almost everyone knows where their meat comes from and don't care!?! (apart from those who claim to know the farmer and what a nice life the pig had before getting to their plate)
> we've had proof of the fact that almost all people know where their meat comes from on this very thread a few times and quite recently too


I think the difference is in "knowing" that the sausages and t-bones were once little piggies and cows, and actually experiencing the process of turning those cute piggies and cows into sausages and burgers. I'd wager that a fair percentage of folks who would consider themselves to be reasonable compassionate will not want to see the inner workings of an abattoir, even among those parents at that school that are ok with the idea of fattening up the pigs for slaughter. I'm not sure that they'll be overly keen on their children having a front row seat in a slaughter viewing gallery. I could be wrong though.


----------



## ddraig (Jan 24, 2018)

I got/get that
"what the eyes don't see the heart don't grieve over"


----------



## 8ball (Jan 24, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> I'm not sure that they'll be overly keen on their children having a front row seat in a slaughter viewing gallery. I could be wrong though.



I don’t think you are.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jan 24, 2018)

I cut out dairy loads but have to work around my fussy son. 

But Angry Vegans stop me publicly agreeing with their stuff  


editor said:


> Soya used to be terrible in coffee and often go lumpy but that's no longer the case unless you get really crap soya. I much prefer the taste of soya on cereals now too.


Oh milk always tastes off to me now!


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jan 24, 2018)

*fussy son more of an issue with meat. Hard to get him to eat any alternatives to the point he started getting pale and had greeny boogers. Had to relent. I know other staunch veggies who had kids like that. Veggies who haven't don't believe you tried everything


----------



## Combustible (Jan 25, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Well imo there's a few pieces missing from this story. I'm wondering how complete the "where the food comes from" education is if the slaughtering and butchering bits are left out. Perhaps the piggies go into a magic box and come out ready made sausages like in that old Brazillian prank...



How about something like this?  I can't imagine that this sort of thing will make too many vegans.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 25, 2018)




----------



## 8ball (Jan 25, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> View attachment 126066



I'd think with that new vegan egg stuff that's probably not a lie any more.


----------



## JimW (Jan 25, 2018)

Bit of fermented tofu in your rice gruel is all you need anyway


----------



## UnderAnOpenSky (Jan 25, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> View attachment 126066



Just put enough sugar in and most "free from" stuff tastes alright. Noticed this when my other half went gluten free. It's all just seriously sweet and costs twice as much for the privilege.


----------



## UnderAnOpenSky (Jan 25, 2018)

JimW said:


> Bit of fermented tofu in your rice gruel is all you need anyway



I'd actually like to try that. 

Well the fermented tofu. I'm not sure about rice gruel. Is it a kind of porridge?


----------



## JimW (Jan 25, 2018)

UnderAnOpenSky said:


> I'd actually like to try that.
> 
> Well the fermented tofu. I'm not sure about rice gruel. Is it a kind of porridge?


Yeah, you just make it with a bit more water for breakfast, what they call xifan 稀饭, though we do other grains and beans too in the rice cooker. The tofu is really great, jar costs less than a quid (eta enough for several meals) and if it's only you in and you can't be arsed to cook makes a meal with rice or noodles. Keeps for ever too and tastes cheesier than any fake cheese I've ever tried. Not sure why it's not taken off in the West. Comes in various flavours too (including stinky tofu!)
Fermented bean curd - Wikipedia


----------



## 8ball (Jan 25, 2018)

JimW said:


> Bit of fermented tofu in your rice gruel is all you need anyway



Think I might have had that (the fermented tofu, not the gruel) at a Korean restaurant (there were a few things I didn't recognise, and the menu was in Korean).
Is it almost like a miso-like cheese?


----------



## UnderAnOpenSky (Jan 25, 2018)

JimW said:


> Yeah, you just make it with a bit more water for breakfast, what they call xifan 稀饭, though we do other grains and beans too in the rice cooker. The tofu is really great, jar costs less than a quid (eta enough for several meals) and if it's only you in and you can't be arsed to cook makes a meal with rice or noodles. Keeps for ever too and tastes cheesier than any fake cheese I've ever tried. Not sure why it's not taken off in the West. Comes in various flavours too (including stinky tofu!)
> Fermented bean curd - Wikipedia



I might look at making my own. I've got quite into fermenting things recently. Found a source a cheap tofu as well, although the other half is less keen to buy more as its probably GM.


----------



## Casual Observer (Jan 25, 2018)

UnderAnOpenSky said:


> I might look at making my own. I've got quite into fermenting things recently. Found a source a cheap tofu as well, although the other half is less keen to buy more as its probably GM.


Where are you getting the tofu from? I usually don't bother with it unless I'm lazy as it's stupidly overpriced.


----------



## UnderAnOpenSky (Jan 25, 2018)

Casual Observer said:


> Where are you getting the tofu from? I usually don't bother with it unless I'm lazy as it's stupidly overpriced.



Chinese supermarket called Wing Yip. Was £1.60 or so for 3 blocks or the firm stuff, so way way cheaper then supermarket stuff.


----------



## JimW (Jan 25, 2018)

8ball said:


> Think I might have had that (the fermented tofu, not the gruel) at a Korean restaurant (there were a few things I didn't recognise, and the menu was in Korean).
> Is it almost like a miso-like cheese?


Not very up on Korean food but wouldn't surprise me if they do similar. Wouldn't say miso, Bit more subtle but then there's various versions. Surprisingly creamy too.


----------



## NoXion (Jan 25, 2018)

UnderAnOpenSky said:


> Just put enough sugar in and most "free from" stuff tastes alright. Noticed this when my other half went gluten free. It's all just seriously sweet and costs twice as much for the privilege.



That's the same thing that modern commercial food production does to make up for a lack of fat; shove loads of sugar in it.

I don't think it's a coincidence that obesity has increased in recent decades. I thought veganism was supposed to be the healthier alternative?


----------



## editor (Jan 25, 2018)

NoXion said:


> I thought veganism was supposed to be the healthier alternative?


A balanced vegan diet is generally regarded as being healthier than a full-on meat one, but not if you're eating loads of shit.



> Research has shown that the average vegan diet is higher in vitamin C and fibre, and lower in saturated fat than one containing meat, all of which are beneficial. In addition, statistics show that vegans have a lower BMI (height-to-weight ratio) than meat eaters – in other words, they are skinnier.
> 
> A diet without any meat or dairy products is likely to contain a lot less saturated fat, which is related to increased cholesterol levels and increased risk of heart disease. We also know that fat contains more calories per gram than other foods, and so vegans may consume fewer calories as a result. Finally, a vegan diet is generally thought to contain more cereals, fruits, vegetables, nuts and seeds than a non-vegan diet.
> Is a vegan diet healthy? - Jamie Oliver | Features


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jan 25, 2018)

editor said:


> A balanced vegan diet generally regarded as being healthier than a full-on meat one, but not if you're eating loads of shit.


Precisely. A diet of coke and crisps is technically vegan, but isn't particularly healthy. That being said, vegans tend to be healthier than their meat eating peers, so some people automatically assume that vegan = healthy, when it ain't necessarily so.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jan 25, 2018)

8ball said:


> I don’t think you are.


It would be nice to get some sort of confirmation either way.

If it really is true that people should have a better appreciation of where their "food" comes from and if meat is an essential part of our food intake, then animal husbandry including slaughtering and butchering should surely be included in the school national curriculum, shouldn't it? That way they won't go soft by the time those kids become adults like those lightweights in the Brazilian piglet prank.

Perhaps one of the other omnivore parents at that school can organise a counter petition to have mandatory pig slaughter trips for non vegetarian children. I wonder how popular that would be.


----------



## 8ball (Jan 25, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> If it really is true that people should have a better appreciation of where their "food" comes from and if meat is an essential part of our food intake, then animal husbandry including slaughtering and butchering should surely be included in the school national curriculum, shouldn't it?



I wouldn't expect any more detail than, say, that of the refining of hydrocarbons to be necessary.
But it's a moot point in any case since I don't think anyone says meat is an essential part of human food intake.


----------



## Artaxerxes (Jan 25, 2018)

JimW said:


> Bit of fermented tofu in your rice gruel is all you need anyway



I think they served us rice gruel on an Air China flight.

It was proper minging.


----------



## 8ball (Jan 25, 2018)

Artaxerxes said:


> I think they served us rice gruel on an Air China flight.
> 
> It was proper minging.



Always wondered why you didn’t see gruel on many restaurant menus...


----------



## Artaxerxes (Jan 25, 2018)

8ball said:


> Always wondered why you didn’t see gruel on many restaurant menus...



Those weetabix breakfast drinks appear to be quite popular though.


----------



## 8ball (Jan 25, 2018)

Artaxerxes said:


> Those weetabix breakfast drinks appear to be quite popular though.



Then there’s Huel.

(Short for “hipster gruel”)


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jan 25, 2018)

8ball said:


> But it's a moot point in any case since I don't think anyone says meat is an essential part of human food intake.


Some people do indeed say that and it is that sort of thinking that was behind proposed legislation in some countries effectively outlawing veganism for children. For example...

Italy to consider law against vegan diets for children
Italy is considering jailing parents who force veganism on their children
Vegan parents targeted by Italy bill

French government 'banning vegetarianism' in school canteens



> “I just find it absurd that some parents are allowed to impose their will on children in an almost fanatical, religious way, often without proper scientific knowledge or medical consultation,” she said.
> 
> 
> “Do-it-yourself on these matters terrorises me.”
> ...


----------



## 8ball (Jan 25, 2018)

Got some almond milk in and it’s much nicer by itself than I expected.  Quite a lot like regular milk but without the very slight cheesiness. 

Way better than the soya milk I tried years ago.


----------



## UnderAnOpenSky (Jan 25, 2018)

8ball said:


> Got some almond milk in and it’s much nicer by itself than I expected.  Quite a lot like regular milk but without the very slight cheesiness.
> 
> Way better than the soya milk I tried years ago.



Still tastes a bit "thin" in my opinion.


----------



## 8ball (Jan 25, 2018)

UnderAnOpenSky said:


> Still tastes a bit "thin" in my opinion.



I think it’s just that slight cheesiness in the back of the throat that was missing, replaced with a slight nuttiness.  Def just a matter of taste as to which you’d prefer, I’d say.

Not thin, though (the soy milk I once tried certainly was).


----------



## 8ball (Jan 25, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Some people do indeed say that and it is that sort of thinking that was behind proposed legislation in some countries effectively outlawing veganism for children. For example...



The Italian situation was a response to some seriously malnourished children (a case of ‘doing it wrong’ you might say, if you were inclined to believe such things were possible), so a kneejerk proposal by a single politician, and the French case involved opt-outs where suitable substitutions are available, and seems largely concerned with practical matters.

None of these links serve very well in terms of direct evidence for a belief that meat specifically being essential to nutrition.  And in the case of relating this to that particular school in England with the pigs it’s less relevant still.  And on the secondary point of slaughter needing to be covered in schools on the subject of where food comes from, I’m not sure how much room would be left in a crowded curriculum after you had also covered the sourcing, and planting of seeds, crop rotation, hulling and processing of grain, logistics and import concerns and the workings of wholesale markets.


----------



## UnderAnOpenSky (Jan 25, 2018)

8ball said:


> The Italian situation was a response to some seriously malnourished children (a case of ‘doing it wrong’ you might say, if you were inclined to believe such things were possible), so a kneejerk proposal by a single politician, and the French case involved opt-outs where suitable substitutions are available, and seems largely concerned with practical matters.
> 
> None of these links serve very well in terms of direct evidence for a belief that meat specifically being essential to nutrition.  And in the case of relating this to that particular school in England with the pigs it’s less relevant still.  And on the secondary point of slaughter needing to be covered in schools on the subject of where food comes from, I’m not sure how much room would be left in a crowded curriculum after you had also covered the sourcing, and planting of seeds, crop rotation, hulling and processing of grain, logistics and import concerns and the workings of wholesale markets.



Don't forget the over use of pesticides and fertiliser, farmers being paid when they are doing fuck all with the land and everything else that is wrong with our food system.


----------



## 8ball (Jan 25, 2018)

UnderAnOpenSky said:


> Don't forget the over use of pesticides and fertiliser, farmers being paid when they are doing fuck all with the land and everything else that is wrong with our food system.



It’s like you could fill a whole slew of university courses with this stuff.


----------



## OzT (Jan 26, 2018)

JimW said:


> Bit of fermented tofu in your rice gruel is all you need anyway


 
Also they used to seve the gruel with long brown unknown food stuff they called skeletons you dip into the gruel in my time in Hong Kong, usually for breakie or before lunch anyway


----------



## JimW (Jan 26, 2018)

OzT said:


> Also they used to seve the gruel with long brown unknown food stuff they called skeletons you dip into the gruel in my time in Hong Kong, usually for breakie or before lunch anyway


There's a long deep fried dough stick bit like a doughnut you get but usually for dunking in soy milk.


----------



## OzT (Jan 26, 2018)

Those are the ones, dough sticks! Was in the early 80s I was there, and often big bowl of rice gruel, I think it was pronounced something like jook, and the dough sticks. I'm sure the Cantonese words for it was something like skeleton bones


----------



## Mordi (Jan 26, 2018)

JimW said:


> Bit of fermented tofu in your rice gruel is all you need anyway



Can I ask what you're making with it?

I'll stick it in soups but otherwise find it so intense that I'm worried about adding it to other things. It is super delicious though.


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Jan 26, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> View attachment 126066


----------



## JimW (Jan 26, 2018)

Mordi said:


> Can I ask what you're making with it?
> 
> I'll stick it in soups but otherwise find it so intense that I'm worried about adding it to other things. It is super delicious though.


I'm manfully buying it in a jar from the shop in the village 





I think you can make your own but you need to be a bit more of a cook than me.

ETA Just looked up a recipe and it actually sounds fairly straightforward, cut the doufu into small chunks, cook it for 15 minutes then put it to ferment on tissue paper somewhere warm and dark for a few days then add your marinade which you cook to taste. 自制豆腐乳的做法_自制豆腐乳怎么做_自制豆腐乳的家常做法【心食谱】


----------



## mojo pixy (Jan 26, 2018)

Fermented Tofu, just like Smoked Tofu, is fucking delicious.

Almond 'milk' is the best of the milk substitutes IMO. Soya is grainy and tart, even with sugar and vanilla added. Rice and oat 'milk' are basically water with a bit of whiteness in, pointless. Hazelnut 'milk' is OK in cooking, but IMO too bitter on its own. Almond 'milk' is baby-bear just right, sweet, smooth and just about thick enough to work as a milk substitute in any context. And then there's coconut milk/juice, which is lovely, but expensive and still full of saturated fats. I think there's also cashew 'milk' but I've never had it and though it'd probably be delicious I imagine it would be expensive and also pretty saturated.

Brain fart over, as y'were,


----------



## 8ball (Jan 26, 2018)

Alpro do cashew milk for the same price as the almond stuff (it was last night in Sainsbury's anyway).  Thought it was odd that they were called "almond drink" and "cashew drink" and avoided all references to milk/dairy.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jan 26, 2018)

8ball said:


> The Italian situation was a response to some seriously malnourished children (a case of ‘doing it wrong’ you might say, if you were inclined to believe such things were possible), so a kneejerk proposal by a single politician, and the French case involved opt-outs where suitable substitutions are available, and seems largely concerned with practical matters.
> 
> None of these links serve very well in terms of direct evidence for a belief that meat specifically being essential to nutrition.







In response to your assertion that NOBODY says meat is essential, it is clear that there are some who do say that, hence the push for legislation. I have had a fair number of encounters with family, friends, colleagues and acquaintances who believe that, so I don't think it's at all far fetched to state that there are people out there who believe that meat is an essential part of ones diet. It is amongst the "Four N's of justification" used by meat eaters, in particular the "Necessary - N" which I am reliably informed just happens to be a synonym of "essential".








8ball said:


> And in the case of relating this to that particular school in England with the pigs it’s less relevant still.


We'll just have to disagree on this. I believe it to be relevant because there are a fair number of folk who sincerely believe that meat is necessary for good health, and if that's the case including animal husbandry in the curriculum even if it's just an option would be reasonable imo.



8ball said:


> And on the secondary point of slaughter needing to be covered in schools on the subject of where food comes from, I’m not sure how much room would be left in a crowded curriculum after you had also covered the sourcing, and planting of seeds, crop rotation, hulling and processing of grain, logistics and import concerns and the workings of wholesale markets.


I'm sure room could be found to cover important aspects of our food supply chain, and slaughtering is quite an important big ticket item imo, so yeah find a way to squeeze it in. (ooh er missus). It's not as if there's anything to hide, right?


----------



## gentlegreen (Jan 27, 2018)




----------



## gosub (Jan 28, 2018)

This Shit Vegans Are Tired Of Hearing - TAPEPARADE: just appeared from my mate who has chocked up my facebook feed all month banging on about veganism....Doesn't cover THE question WHY DO YOU HAVE TO BANG ON ABOUT IT THE ENTIRE TIME?  Yes, you've made a personal lifestyle choice based on your moral outlook...but then so have the god squad lot and even they know better than to talk to you about Jesus every fucking day.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jan 28, 2018)

gosub said:


> This Shit Vegans Are Tired Of Hearing - TAPEPARADE: just appeared from my mate who has chocked up my facebook feed all month banging on about veganism....Doesn't cover THE question WHY DO YOU HAVE TO BANG ON ABOUT IT THE ENTIRE TIME?  Yes, you've made a personal lifestyle choice based on your moral outlook...but then so have the god squad lot and even they know better than to talk to you about Jesus every fucking day.


Dude, what is your point? Surely if you have an issue with your mate spamming/over sharing on fb, then either take it up with him/her or block them rather than moaning to us about it.


As for the link to the blog post, there were some reasonably good points in it, especially the one about the rescue dogs. You probably should have given it a like.


----------



## gosub (Jan 28, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Dude, what is your point? Surely if you have an issue with your mate spamming/over sharing on fb, then either take it up with him/her or block them rather than moaning to us about it.
> 
> 
> As for the link to the blog post, there were some reasonably good points in it, especially the one about the rescue dogs. You probably should have given it a like.


cos its a trait of every vegan I've ever come across, and my main problem with them.


----------



## Opera Buffa (Jan 28, 2018)

8ball said:


> Alpro do cashew milk for the same price as the almond stuff (it was last night in Sainsbury's anyway).  Thought it was odd that they were called "almond drink" and "cashew drink" and avoided all references to milk/dairy.




That's because of angry non-vegans, who violently object to it being called 'milk'. They had the same problem with vegan mayo.

They'll go after coconut milk next.


----------



## mojo pixy (Jan 28, 2018)

Opera Buffa said:


> That's because of angry non-vegans, who violently object to it being called 'milk'. They had the same problem with vegan mayo.
> 
> They'll go after coconut milk next.



Maybe, though _coconut milk_ is actually a thing, in contrast to coconut _juice_. It's called 'milk' when juice is mixed with extra coconut to thicken it up.


----------



## Opera Buffa (Jan 28, 2018)

MILK ONLY COMES FROM COWS RRRRAAAAHHHH!!!!


----------



## mojo pixy (Jan 28, 2018)

Well, 'milk' is a thing, a mammalian secretion. Do soy beans have nipples?


----------



## Opera Buffa (Jan 28, 2018)

It's thick white fluid you can call it milk without having a fucking heart attack 

I do think the opposition to calling it milk comes from people unaccountably very angry about veganism.


----------



## Opera Buffa (Jan 28, 2018)

Ditto vegan mayo.


----------



## Opera Buffa (Jan 28, 2018)

Coconut milk, almond milk, soy milk. There's no inconsistency here.


----------



## Opera Buffa (Jan 28, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> Do soy beans have nipples?



Also, Rule 34 I expect.


----------



## Sue (Jan 28, 2018)

editor said:


> Turns out there's quite a lot of vegan/veggie pubs in places like Oxford, Glasgow, Southend, Birmingham and elsewhere:
> 
> The UK's Top 10 Vegan-Friendly Pubs


Glasgow is great for vegan food and not just in veggie/vegan places either.


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Jan 28, 2018)

Opera Buffa said:


> It's thick white fluid you can call it milk without having a fucking heart attack
> 
> I do think the opposition to calling it milk comes from people unaccountably very angry about veganism.



Yeah, it comes from the dairy/kidnapping/forced pregnancy/abuse industry lobbying governments and the EU. In the US there is a bill going through congress called ‘the dairy pride act’ or to use its full title “Defending Against Imitations and Replacements of Yogurt, Milk, and Cheese To Promote Regular Intake of Dairy Everyday Act”.


----------



## Opera Buffa (Jan 28, 2018)

Oh yeah, lobbying from the dairy industry, definitely. Something like soy milk is a cheaper, healthier, more environmentally friendly version of their product, so they are trying to suppress it. It's no different from how the US sugar industry lobbied (successfully) against Stevia to get it banned as dangerous or some such bollocks. It was never dangerous, it was just a threat to their profit margin.


----------



## editor (Jan 28, 2018)

gosub said:


> cos its a trait of every vegan I've ever come across, and my main problem with them.


Every single one, eh? How many is that?


----------



## mojo pixy (Jan 28, 2018)

Opera Buffa said:


> It's thick white fluid you can call it milk without having a fucking heart attack



oh look, brush milk...








Opera Buffa said:


> I do think the opposition to calling it milk comes from people unaccountably very angry about veganism.



Nah, I think it's from vegans who object to having to still buy something called 'milk' .. and we'll never know, but it occurs to me that companies don't generally change policies based on what _non_-customers say.


----------



## Opera Buffa (Jan 28, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> Nah, I think it's from vegans who object to having to still buy something called 'milk'



No it categorically isn't this. It's pressure from lobbyists and politicians. See how vegan mayonnaise has started to be called 'vegannaise' or some such wank.


Dairy names for soya and tofu face new ban


----------



## editor (Jan 28, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> oh look, brush milk...
> 
> 
> 
> ...


That's clearly paint. What a weird point to make.


----------



## Opera Buffa (Jan 28, 2018)

The companies _want _to call their vegan products 'milk', 'cheese', 'mayonnaise' or whatever because they are trying to market vegan alternatives to these products. It's the companies who sell the original dairy versions of these things who are objecting because they don't want the competition.


Here's a German politician/lunatic on a similar meltdown:

German minister calls for ban on 'confusing' vegetarian sausages


----------



## Opera Buffa (Jan 28, 2018)

_He told German newspaper Bild: "These terms are completely misleading and unsettle consumers."
_
No they aren't; even a 90-year-old understands what a vegetarian schnitzel is and they don't find it in some way frightening. Some reactionary people just get _very angry_ about vegans and veganism.


----------



## gentlegreen (Jan 28, 2018)

There was fuss many years ago about Fry's Chocolate Cream - there was talk of rebranding to "Creme" - or that could just be my Tory dad bullshitting about the EU the way he would about nationalised rail losing whole wagons of chocolate up sidings ...


----------



## gosub (Jan 28, 2018)

editor said:


> Every single one, eh? How many is that?


At least 7 over the years.  If you're trying to pretend it isn't a thing.. Take it up with the Guardian who ran a column on it just last Friday Why vegans always have to tell you they’re vegan | Rebecca Jones


----------



## 8ball (Jan 28, 2018)

Opera Buffa said:


> That's because of angry non-vegans, who violently object to it being called 'milk'. They had the same problem with vegan mayo.
> 
> They'll go after coconut milk next.



Ah, I must have missed that memo.  If you’d said the dairy industry I guess that might have been plausible.


----------



## Opera Buffa (Jan 28, 2018)

Well, I did, and it is.


----------



## mojo pixy (Jan 28, 2018)

Opera Buffa said:


> No it categorically isn't this. It's pressure from lobbyists and politicians. See how vegan mayonnaise has started to be called 'vegannaise' or some such wank.
> 
> 
> Dairy names for soya and tofu face new ban



Not quite what you're claiming though. It was a case brought by a consumer group ("German consumer protection group VSW, which aims to combat unfair competition") who reckoned calling soy milk 'milk' was potentially misleading. So not the conspiracy of 'big dairy' you seem to want.



editor said:


> That's clearly paint. What a weird point to make.



Maybe the stuff made from soy beans isn't milk either. How weird would that be eh?


----------



## Opera Buffa (Jan 28, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> Not quite what you're claiming though. It was a case brought by a consumer group ("German consumer protection group VSW, which aims to combat unfair competition") who reckoned calling soy milk 'milk' was potentially misleading. So not the conspiracy of 'big dairy' you seem to want.



Don't ask me, ask them.

Meat and dairy sectors fight back - Meat Importers Council of America


The law they were appealing under was an EU one: _VSW was of the opinion that the promotion and distribution of the products under these names is contrary to the provision of § 3 a of the German Unfair Competition Act in conjunction with the regulations of Regulation (EU) No. 1308/2013 establishing a common organisation of the markets in agricultural products. That regulation provides, inter alia, that the name ‘milk’, as well as the names of other milk products, such as butter, cheese, cream, buttermilk, yoghurt etc., may in principle be used only for milk and milk products. 

ECJ: Use of product names such as “Tofu butter” or “Plant cheese” violates EU Law | Bettina Clefsen - Kanzlei für Marken-, Design- & Wettbewerbsrecht
_
EU agriculture law exists to protect traditional dairy farming, of course it does. If you think it is immune to lobbying you are being grossly naive.


----------



## 8ball (Jan 28, 2018)

Opera Buffa said:


> The companies _want _to call their vegan products 'milk', 'cheese', 'mayonnaise' or whatever...



I was a little confused when I bought the almond milk the other day because it looked right, was in the right section  of the supermarket etc. and everyone calls it almond milk, but it said ‘almond drink’ on the carton.


----------



## 8ball (Jan 28, 2018)

Opera Buffa said:


> even a 90-year-old understands what a vegetarian schnitzel is...



I had to look that one up.  Can’t say I’d be scared of one, though.


----------



## Opera Buffa (Jan 28, 2018)

Okay a 90-year-old _German _


----------



## 8ball (Jan 28, 2018)

Opera Buffa said:


> Okay a 90-year-old _German _



Couldn’t tell you.  Though it sounds like there are fewer veg*ns in Germany, so maybe some old folks might still not know...


----------



## Opera Buffa (Jan 28, 2018)

If my grandparents were still alive they probably wouldn't understand what Facebook was but that doesn't mean it should be made illegal in order to 'protect' them from it.


----------



## editor (Jan 29, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> Maybe the stuff made from soy beans isn't milk either. How weird would that be eh?


Put paint on your cereals and in your tea often then?


----------



## 8ball (Jan 29, 2018)

Opera Buffa said:


> If my grandparents were still alive they probably wouldn't understand what Facebook was but that doesn't mean it should be made illegal in order to 'protect' them from it.



Well, in the case of Facebook...


----------



## NoXion (Jan 29, 2018)

Personally I'm not bothered if that watery shite extracted from almonds/soy/oats is called "milk" by vegans. But only because they're so obviously deluding themselves if they think that such pale imitations taste anything like the real thing.


----------



## mojo pixy (Jan 29, 2018)

Opera Buffa said:


> Don't ask me, ask them.
> 
> Meat and dairy sectors fight back - Meat Importers Council of America
> 
> ...



OK fair enough, you really care about this, apologies for kicking the hobby horse. FWIW you can keep calling soy drink 'milk' if you like. Each time someone says "that grainy bitter shit isn't milk" you can get a little angrier about the dairy conspiracy. Who knows, in the end you might become the great angry vegan of legend...



editor said:


> Put paint on your cereals and in your tea often then?



No, and not soy drink either. Not every thick white liquid is worth drinking.


----------



## Artaxerxes (Jan 29, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> No, and not soy drink either. Not every thick white liquid is worth drinking.


----------



## gentlegreen (Jan 29, 2018)

NoXion said:


> Personally I'm not bothered if that watery shite extracted from almonds/soy/oats is called "milk" by vegans. But only because they're so obviously deluding themselves if they think that such pale imitations taste anything like the real thing.


I can remember when soy milk first appeared in the early 80s, I used to dilute it.

I'm very glad it *doesn't* taste like cow juice.


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Jan 29, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> OK fair enough, you really care about this, apologies for kicking the hobby horse. FWIW you can keep calling soy drink 'milk' if you like. Each time someone says "that grainy bitter shit isn't milk" you can get a little angrier about the dairy conspiracy. Who knows, in the end you might become the great angry vegan of legend...
> 
> 
> 
> No, and not soy drink either. Not every thick white liquid is worth drinking.



You have no substantive response to Opera's points so you have a passive-aggressive, sulky, hissy fit instead? Very mature.


----------



## 8ball (Jan 29, 2018)

Aaanyway....

Until I went to the supermarket last week I just thought it was called almond/soya/whatever milk because ime that's what everyone, vegan/veggie/omni/whatever calls it.  It's even called that on a lot of websites selling it (though not on the products).  It was called that 30 years ago if memory serves.

Aside from confusing the occasional person picking it up for the first time, I can't see any point in not calling it that.  Maybe it's a tiny concession to dairy farmers who are getting screwed by the supermarkets (obviously some lobbying input, but that's not really helping them with the supermarket issue).

Plus it's not even all vegans or all veggies who use the stuff - I know meat eaters who use it.


----------



## UnderAnOpenSky (Jan 29, 2018)

Almonds use a shed load of water to grow, which is far from ideal. Most Soya is GM, which probably doesn't bother most people. 

I tried that hemp milk stuff, but it was pretty vile.


----------



## mojo pixy (Jan 29, 2018)

Jeff Robinson said:


> You have no substantive response to Opera's points so you have a passive-aggressive, sulky, hissy fit instead? Very mature.



lol hissy fit? Come on, I'm sure you can do better than that 

Also, I don't need a substantive point, I don't much care about_ big dairy lobbying _and I'm not interested in whether pretend milk is called _milk _or something else on the packaging, any more than if someone sold a bike and called it a _two-wheeled car_  I would care. I have no emotional connection to the word _milk _or any other label. I can be facetious about it but in all seriousness, it doesn't matter does it?


----------



## gentlegreen (Jan 29, 2018)

UnderAnOpenSky said:


> Almonds use a shed load of water to grow, which is far from ideal. Most Soya is GM, which probably doesn't bother most people.
> 
> I tried that hemp milk stuff, but it was pretty vile.


I must be weird. I swig Tesco "value" soy milk out of the carton and am not at all keen on almond milk.

They managed to ruin hemp milk by adding vanilla and sweeteners - hopefully one day soon I will source bulk hempseeds and make my own.

As for GM - bring it on


----------



## gentlegreen (Jan 29, 2018)

Incidentally, I wish Thatcher had been around in the 60s to "steal" the vile third of a pint I was forced to drink every morning in primary school.


----------



## 8ball (Jan 29, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> Also, I don't need a substantive point, I don't much care about_ big dairy lobbying _and I'm not interested in whether pretend milk is called _milk _or something else on the packaging, any more than if someone sold a bike and called it a _two-wheeled car_  I would care. I have no emotional connection to the word _milk _or any other label. I can be facetious about it but in all seriousness, it doesn't matter does it?



Incidentally, according to the Online Etymology Dictionary, the word 'milk' (and prior versions thereof) has been applied to plant-based products since the 14th Century.  So no matter what the dairy marketing people want, I think that ship may have sailed.


----------



## mojo pixy (Jan 29, 2018)

Well yeah - _Coconut milk_, for example. And the _milk of human kindness_, which isn't even in liquid form


----------



## mojo pixy (Jan 29, 2018)

Same goes for the word _cheese _I guess, brawn used to be called _head cheese_. Maybe it still is. Delightful.


----------



## OzT (Jan 29, 2018)

8ball said:


> I was a little confused when I bought the almond milk the other day because it looked right, was in the right section  of the supermarket etc. and everyone calls it almond milk, but it said ‘almond drink’ on the carton.


 
Maybe it's because it is made from almonds and water without any milk as in usually accepted definition of milk from a cow?

I'm just guessing


----------



## gentlegreen (Jan 29, 2018)

8ball said:


> Incidentally, according to the Online Etymology Dictionary, the word 'milk' (and prior versions thereof) has been applied to plant-based products since the 14th Century.  So no matter what the dairy marketing people want, I think that ship may have sailed.



Indeed - including a whole genus of fungi ...

Milk-cap - Wikipedia


----------



## UnderAnOpenSky (Jan 29, 2018)

gentlegreen said:


> I must be weird. I swig Tesco "value" soy milk out of the carton and am not at all keen on almond milk.
> 
> They managed to ruin hemp milk by adding vanilla and sweeteners - hopefully one day soon I will source bulk hempseeds and make my own.
> 
> As for GM - bring it on



My issue with GM isn't so much the technology, but it's the complete opposite direction I think our food systems should be going.


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Jan 29, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> lol hissy fit? Come on, I'm sure you can do better than that
> 
> Also, I don't need a substantive point, I don't much care about_ big dairy lobbying _and I'm not interested in whether pretend milk is called _milk _or something else on the packaging, any more than if someone sold a bike and called it a _two-wheeled car_  I would care. I have no emotional connection to the word _milk _or any other label. I can be facetious about it but in all seriousness, it doesn't matter does it?



You seem to care enough to make utterly facetious arguments about the definition of milk. It doesn't matter that much no, because whatever lobbying strategies the violent animal-abusers of the  dairy industry use to protect the brand-identity of stolen baby calve growth fluid they sell, they will never be able to stop people calling plant-based milk 'milk'.


----------



## ddraig (Jan 29, 2018)

NoXion said:


> Personally I'm not bothered if that watery shite extracted from almonds/soy/oats is called "milk" by vegans. But only because they're so obviously deluding themselves if they think that such pale imitations taste anything like the real thing.


who says they are claiming it? it matters to some people, mostly non vegans who want it to taste like milk
most just want to cut out the puss, blood and cruelty in their drink and cereal


----------



## ddraig (Jan 29, 2018)

UnderAnOpenSky said:


> Almonds use a shed load of water to grow, which is far from ideal. Most Soya is GM, which probably doesn't bother most people.
> 
> I tried that hemp milk stuff, but it was pretty vile.


I've never had gm soya and provamel or alpro, the biggest and most widely available brands aren't
so that's your gotcha point stumped

again, most things that are grown with a lot of water are used to feed cattle that will be slaughtered for your plate
and you think the dairy industry is efficient and not energy/resource intensive??


----------



## mojo pixy (Jan 29, 2018)

Jeff Robinson said:


> You seem to care enough to make utterly facetious arguments about the definition of milk. It doesn't matter that much no, because whatever lobbying strategies the violent animal-abusers of the  dairy industry use to protect the brand-identity of stolen baby calve growth fluid they sell, they will never be able to stop people calling plant-based milk 'milk'.



In my world, facetious - don't care. YMMV.
Some vegans do seem greatly invested in the word 'milk' though, and I'm not sure I understand why.


----------



## UnderAnOpenSky (Jan 29, 2018)

ddraig said:


> I've never had gm soya and provamel or alpro, the biggest and most widely available brands aren't
> so that's your gotcha point stumped
> 
> again, most things that are frown with a lot of water are used to feed cattle that will be slaughtered for your plate
> and you think the dairy industry is efficient and not energy/resource intensive??



It really wasn't meant to be a gotcha post. I'd don't know if you've noticed, but that's not how I've contributed to the thread generally. I find some of it interesting as more broadly I'm interested in food and also sustainability and health. Which eating less/no meat can play a part in. 

I was expressing that its a pity that the most environmentaly friendly option doesn't taste great. 

Actually the dairy cattle one is another intresting point. Even if people are trying to avoid GM it doesn't mean that the animals they eat havnt been fed on it.


----------



## 8ball (Jan 29, 2018)

UnderAnOpenSky said:


> Almonds use a shed load of water to grow, which is far from ideal



Which things are efficient on water?  How about cashews (I was going to try cashew milk next)?


----------



## UnderAnOpenSky (Jan 29, 2018)

8ball said:


> Which things are efficient on water?  How about cashews (I was going to try cashew milk next)?



Stuff produced in the UK is the best, but of course that's hard. 

This article suggests coconut, but no mention of hemp and we've got zero chancen of findings locally sourced almonds.

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/www.wideopeneats.com/what-is-the-most-sustainable-milk-out-there/amp/


----------



## 8ball (Jan 29, 2018)

Interesting that they've listed sheep milk.

And that they haven't listed dog's milk...


----------



## editor (Jan 29, 2018)

8ball said:


> Plus it's not even all vegans or all veggies who use the stuff - I know meat eaters who use it.


That's because some people actually prefer the taste.


----------



## Epona (Jan 29, 2018)

I'm not vegan, or even vegetarian these days (although I was vegetarian for 20 years), and most of the rage I see is from people pushing vegetarians about why they don't eat meat, it's very rarely the other way around.  Except my husband, he is pescetarian (veggie + fish) and he's a complete pain in the arse about it


----------



## 8ball (Jan 29, 2018)

Epona said:


> I'm not vegan, or even vegetarian these days (although I was vegetarian for 20 years), and most of the rage I see is from people pushing vegetarians about why they don't eat meat, it's very rarely the other way around.  Except my husband, he is pescetarian (veggie + fish) and he's a complete pain in the arse about it



What, he gets angry about eating fish?  Or whether he shouldn't eat fish?  Or whether other people shouldn't eat rabbits?


----------



## Epona (Jan 29, 2018)

8ball said:


> What, he gets angry about eating fish?  Or whether he shouldn't eat fish?  Or whether other people shouldn't eat rabbits?



No, it's silly (IMO) -he eats fish, but doesn't eat other meat. He gets upset about me eating animal flesh from things that don't have gills (or somehow live in the sea).


----------



## 8ball (Jan 29, 2018)

editor said:


> That's because some people actually prefer the taste.



Well, obviously (plus maybe a few lactose-intolerant types), but the 'confused' smiley was  in the context of the post as a whole (ie. what's the issue with calling it 'milk'?).
Almond milk is certainly nice, though.

Cashew milk is next on the list to try.


----------



## ddraig (Jan 29, 2018)

won't someone think of the poor farmers 
counter terrorism police ffs 

and no i'm not condoning before anyone starts


> The National Pig Association claims its members "cannot sleep at night" because Save Movement members have allegedly turned up at farms and slaughterhouses at night.
> 
> The Association of Independent Meat Suppliers has met with the official National Counter Terrorism Police Operations Centre team to discuss how to respond to the movement.
> 
> ...


'Vegans call me murderer and rapist'


----------



## editor (Jan 29, 2018)

ddraig said:


> won't someone think of the poor farmers
> counter terrorism police ffs
> 
> and no i'm not condoning before anyone starts
> ...


"Alison says she objects to the suggestion that farmers exploit their animals."

I'm pretty sure that's what the entire industry is based on.


----------



## ddraig (Jan 29, 2018)

yes, truth hurts

don't know if we've had this on this thread
'Vegans have got the British farming industry rattled’


----------



## 8ball (Jan 29, 2018)

But not condoning it.
Obviously.


----------



## NoXion (Jan 29, 2018)

ddraig said:


> won't someone think of the poor farmers
> counter terrorism police ffs
> 
> and no i'm not condoning before anyone starts
> ...



It's an entirely logical extension of the kind of worldview behind ethical veganism. Unless you're a pacifist of some kind, why would you have a problem with activists putting the fear into those carrying out wrongdoing as you call it?


----------



## 8ball (Jan 29, 2018)

NoXion said:


> It's an entirely logical extension of the kind of worldview behind ethical veganism. Unless you're a pacifist of some kind, why would you have a problem with activists putting the fear into those carrying out wrongdoing as you call it?



I'd agree, but I'm not sure it's really an extension to a certain worldview.
Vegans aren't a monolithic group though, there are lots of strands there.


----------



## NoXion (Jan 29, 2018)

8ball said:


> I'd agree, but I'm not sure it's really an extension to a certain worldview.
> Vegans aren't a monolithic group though, there are lots of strands there.



Not much room for grey areas when it comes to murder and slavery though, is there?


----------



## 8ball (Jan 29, 2018)

NoXion said:


> Not much room for grey areas when it comes to murder and slavery though, is there?



Well, no. 
The Jackfruit Jihadi Front aren't the whole story, though, and if veganism keeps up the current momentum* I don't think they'll be on the winning side of the coming civil war as it goes mainstream.

* - which is far from a foregone conclusion, obviously


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Jan 29, 2018)

ddraig said:


> won't someone think of the poor farmers
> counter terrorism police ffs
> 
> and no i'm not condoning before anyone starts
> ...



Labelling non-violent animal rights activists as 'terrorists' is an old strategy for the animal exploitation industries and their political puppets. In the US they have been very successful and even got a federal law passed - the Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act - which classifies activists who liberate animals from their tormentors as 'terrorists'. Dunno if they'll push in a similar way in the UK but they're fighting a losing battle now. People won't be duped into believing that the people protesting outside slaughterhouses are the _violent extremists. _


----------



## gentlegreen (Jan 29, 2018)

*voms*


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jan 29, 2018)

gosub said:


> cos its a trait of every vegan I've ever come across, and my main problem with them.


loooool, wow, just wow. I'm calling bs on this one. It's in the same category as... "women drivers are crap", "Scottish are tight", "Muslims are terrorists", "black men have big dicks", "Irish people are thick", "Welsh men shag sheep",  "bmw drivers are shit"...<<Insert any other lazy stereotyped generalisation here>> 

I'm not a fb user, it's not really my thing tbh,  but I am aware that lots of people share all sorts of stuff on fb and twitter. Some people post whatever interests them and if they spam stuff that you're not interested in or irritates you or find annoying simply activate the off switch. It's not a trait that is unique to vegans and you can easily avoid reading things from people who you disagree with if it bothers you that much. (or you can moan about it on another forum ) It seems that some people get annoyed with vegans because they are unable to come up with rational counter arguments to the main points that vegans make, so they go for the "low blows" and attack their character and made up intangibles... "self righteous", "smug", "preachy" and other bollocks accusations. 

This dude that I referenced earlier summed this up quite nicely...



PaoloSanchez said:


> The distastefulness of vegans – 51:28


----------



## 8ball (Jan 29, 2018)

So was it mycoprotein, then?


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jan 29, 2018)

Epona said:


> I'm not vegan, or even vegetarian these days (although I was vegetarian for 20 years), and most of the rage I see is from people pushing vegetarians about why they don't eat meat, it's very rarely the other way around.


Funnily enough, this has been my experience too. If there is any hectoring to be had it usually comes from the very people accusing vegans of hectoring. One thing you won't see is vegans camped in burger threads dicking around and making a nuisance of themselves.


----------



## 8ball (Jan 29, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Funnily enough, this has been my experience too. If there is any hectoring to be had it usually comes from the very people accusing vegans of hectoring. One think you won't see is vegans camped in burger threads dicking around and making a nuisance of themselves.



Yeah, bloody chavs!

Oh, hang on...


----------



## ddraig (Jan 29, 2018)

Vegan debate proves hot NFU election topic - Farmers Weekly
the poor farmers, again



> *Failure to win the argument would risk “losing a whole generation,” he added.*




*"Positive message*
West Midlands dairy farmer Michael Oakes, who is also standing for the NFU deputy and vice-president roles, said a positive message would help counter vegan arguments.

It is important the whole supply chain target people who were considering whether they should stop eating meat or give up dairy products altogether, suggested Mr Oakes.

Failure to win the argument would risk “losing a whole generation,” he added.

Somerset farmer James Small, who is standing for the post of NFU vice-president, said it was important to challenge vegans on the facts rather than fanning the flames.

Although there had been a lot of media coverage, it was important to recognise that vegans were relatively few in number, Mr Small told NFU members.

“We have to be careful how we handle this as a farming sector,” he said. “I don’t think we should be responding like for like.”

But Mr Small said it was important to challenge incorrect information.

“When something is demonstrably, absolutely categorically wrong, then we do need to challenge that. But other than that, we would simply be adding fuel to the fire.” "


----------



## ddraig (Jan 29, 2018)

8ball said:


> Yeah, bloody chavs!
> 
> Oh, hang on...


eh??


----------



## 8ball (Jan 29, 2018)

Cashew milk review: v v similar to the almond milk.  Maybe a teeny bit less nutty and a teeny bit more creamy...

Not 100% sure I could tell them apart in a blind taste test.

Edit: actually I can tell them apart pretty easily in a blind taste test


----------



## editor (Jan 29, 2018)

Like workers from a zillion other jobs and industries, the dairy business has to learn to adapt to changing tastes and practices and find new markets. Whining about vegans and dreaming up daft anti-vegan arguments isn't going to help them.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jan 29, 2018)

editor said:


> Like workers from a zillion other jobs and industries, the dairy business has to learn to adapt to changing tastes and practices and find new markets. Whining about vegans and dreaming up daft anti-vegan arguments isn't going to help them.


Desperate times call for desperate measures.


----------



## 8ball (Jan 29, 2018)

editor said:


> Like workers from a zillion other jobs and industries, the dairy business has to learn to adapt to changing tastes and practices and find new markets. Whining about vegans and dreaming up daft anti-vegan arguments isn't going to help them.



Are you talking about the NFU guy?


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jan 29, 2018)

pbn edit


----------



## UnderAnOpenSky (Jan 29, 2018)

Even if the number of vegans double in the next few years I can't see how it would make that much difference to the demand for animal products. 

And if it did get to that point then maybe they do something else, like grow salad.


----------



## bellaozzydog (Jan 29, 2018)

ddraig said:


> Vegan debate proves hot NFU election topic - Farmers Weekly
> the poor farmers, again
> 
> 
> ...



I'm struggling with the BBC countryfile pro live stock farming slant. They were filming gamekeepers killing hares on moors because they spoilt the grouse shooting and there is a real push on the BBC to present livestock farming as a Worthy honourable thing to young minds looking for a career

It seems strange that they love animals so much they send them off to the abattoir for killing and butchering

Likewise the vets that shore up the livestock industry (as I think has been mentioned in the thread previously)


----------



## 8ball (Jan 29, 2018)

UnderAnOpenSky said:


> Even if the number of vegans double in the next few years I can't see how it would make that much difference to the demand for animal products.



A lot of change in meat demand isn’t likely to be down to vegans; there are a lot of people looking to reduce intake generally, have more veggie days etc.

Worldwide, meat demand is likely to continue growing for some time.  I’d suspect those producing certain premium products may do well with the export markets and some of the massive factory farming industry may see more of a downturn over time.


----------



## UnderAnOpenSky (Jan 29, 2018)

8ball said:


> A lot of change in meat demand isn’t likely to be down to vegans; there are a lot of people looking to reduce intake generally, have more veggie days etc.
> 
> Worldwide, meat demand is likely to continue growing for some time.  I’d suspect those producing certain premium products may do well with the export markets and some of the massive factory farming industry may see more of a downturn over time.



World wide it's certainly growing. That said I'd shed no tears if those involved in factory farming suffed.


----------



## editor (Jan 29, 2018)

UnderAnOpenSky said:


> Even if the number of vegans double in the next few years I can't see how it would make that much difference to the demand for animal products.
> 
> And if it did get to that point then maybe they do something else, like grow salad.


It's not the same all around the world, but in the UK there's plenty of meat eaters who are cutting back on their meat consumption.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jan 29, 2018)

UnderAnOpenSky said:


> Even if the number of vegans double in the next few years I can't see how it would make that much difference to the demand for animal products.
> 
> And if it did get to that point then maybe they do something else, like grow salad.


People who make a living from outdated or dodgy practices will simply have to find other ways of making a living. Adapt to survive. Humans are supposed to be very adaptable, which is one of the reasons for our "success" in dominating the planet. Complacency and arrogance due to that dominance is possibly what might lead to our demise.

As for the seemingly negligible impact that the number of vegans might have, well I am optimistic. The arguments in favour of veganism imo already have a strong foundation and just like the chinese bamboo tree parable I reckon it will be able to support rapid growth once critical mass has been reached. It may still take a while for that to happen or it could be sped up a bit by some sort of catalysts. 10% would be a good milestone to reach. In any case as far as I'm concerned I don't believe it to be a futile exercise to strive to do the "right thing".



PaoloSanchez said:


> The futility of veganism – 54:52


About - The Vegan Strategist


----------



## UnderAnOpenSky (Jan 29, 2018)

editor said:


> It's not the same all around the world, but in the UK there's plenty of meat eaters who are cutting back on their meat consumption.



I am one of them. Tofu and veg for my tea tonight.


----------



## 8ball (Jan 29, 2018)

UnderAnOpenSky said:


> I am one of them. Tofu and veg for my tea tonight.



Never really had tofu - is there a product suitable for a n00b with limited cooking skills?


----------



## UnderAnOpenSky (Jan 29, 2018)

8ball said:


> Never really had tofu - is there a product suitable for a n00b with limited cooking skills?



Yeah. Make sure you get the firm stuff. Lots of ways to cook it. I pressed out some of the water, cut it to cubes, marinaded in soy sauce and siracha and baked it. Basically it doesn't have that much taste, but is a great vessel for other flavours.

You can also fry it or if your feeling very indulgent batter and deep fry!


----------



## ddraig (Jan 29, 2018)

i press it then cut into cubes and fry for a couple of mins each side
marinade with tamari if doing stirfry but don't if doing pasta


----------



## 8ball (Jan 29, 2018)

Sounds low calorie, then! 

I’ve had it at a Korean place bit they really know what to do with it there.

Any way of being sure I’m getting the firm stuff - does it just say ‘firm’ on the packet?

Edit: Sainsbury’s seem to do one that says ‘firm’ on it - will add to the shopping list. 

It seems to be basically ‘soy cheese’.  Seems a little low in methionine and lysine but good aa profile otherwise.


----------



## UnderAnOpenSky (Jan 29, 2018)

8ball said:


> Sounds low calorie, then!
> 
> I’ve had it at a Korean place bit they really know what to do with it there.
> 
> ...



It's pretty healthy if baked. Nothing like cheese though!


----------



## 8ball (Jan 29, 2018)

UnderAnOpenSky said:


> It's pretty healthy if baked. Nothing like cheese though!



Yeah, the process of making it has some things in common with cheese is what I meant (coagulating soy milk and pressing the curds).

Marinading in something spicy and baking def sounds like a plan.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jan 30, 2018)

Just watched this: Food: Truth or Scare - Series 3: Episode 2
with Gloria Honeybun

They had a bit on vegans, which wasn't too bad, at least better and more balanced than their previous lame efforts.

Also featured a group of cheese nerds...

"The Colchester cheese appreciation society meet once a month to pay homage to the fromage" 

...and spoke about the alleged addictiveness of cheese.


----------



## 8ball (Jan 30, 2018)

Does the Colchester Cheese Popular Front have a vegan division?


----------



## mojo pixy (Jan 30, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> ... the alleged addictiveness of cheese.



Casomorphins. Apparently an evolutionary detail that makes babies want to feed more from their mothers, and better ensures survival. Life sure is clever.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jan 30, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> Casomorphins. Apparently an evolutionary detail that makes babies want to feed more from their mothers, and better ensures survival. Life sure is clever.


I've been aware of casomorphins ever since I posted Dr Neal Barnard's "How to magnetize a baby" vegsource lecture video on my own Joomla website 13 years ago. What isn't clear is whether cheese (or any other foods) are genuinely addictive, and the doctor on that BBC show who apparently specialises in the science of addiction doesn't believe it to be.



Spoiler: BBC Show Cheese Transcript



Narrator: "I've come to meet Dr Tony Goldstone who's a specialist in the science of addiction. He's studied the brain scans of over 1,000 subjects."

Dr Goldstone: "The brains response to food alcohol and cigarettes involves the same areas of the brain. When you eat foods that you individually like, you tend to release more dopamine in the brain. Now that happens when you take many drugs as well."

Narr: "But even though food causes your brain to release the same chemicals as something that is addictive, that doesn't mean that food is."

Dr G: "The amount of dopamine that's released with these drugs is very much greater than it would be with the food. It is ten to a hundred times greater than it would be with the food."

Narr: Dr Goldstone stays that it's NOT addiction, but a different reason entirely that we often crave some foods.

Dr G:  "We've evolved to like some foods that are high in fat like cheese. Those foods give us energy that we need to maintain life and reproduce and be resistant against disease."

Narr: In your opinion, could there be any scientific evidence that there is something in cheese that could be addictive?"

Dr G: "I'm not aware of any studies in humans that have in any way directly proven that that is a true statement."



Dr Neal Barnard is still banging on about it now and even has a book out about it...


----------



## veganomics (Jan 30, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> I hear where you're coming from on this and agree in part. The problem comes in separating the ACT from the PERSON. In my opinion, the ACT of killing and eating animals when there's no good reason for doing so IS an inferior act in a number of aspects including moral, environment and health. In this regard the act of avoiding animal products is a SUPERIOR act in comparison.
> 
> Does that mean that a vegan is necessarily superior to a meat eater? Of course not, because nobody is without some kind of fault. However, I have no problem with veganism itself being promoted as a better lifestyle choice for those that believe it to be one.
> Folks who strongly disagree with that position can simply carry on with the normal day and ignore the vegans, unaffected by any potential moral conundrums.


I remember back when smoking was allowed on trains and in offices, it was fairly common for smokers to complain about non-smokers being self-righteous and holier than thou if they ever complained or objected to them smoking. Of course the non-smokers were right to object then and their complaints and lobbying helped to pave the way for a positive change of attitudes and legislation which has resulted in smoking gradually going out of fashion. Hopefully the path to an increased number of vegans can follow a similar trajectory to the number of non-smokers.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jan 30, 2018)

veganomics said:


> I remember back when smoking was allowed on trains and in offices, it was fairly common for smokers to complain about non-smokers being self-righteous and holier than thou if they ever complained or objected to them smoking. Of course the non-smokers were right to object then and their complaints and lobbying helped to pave the way for a positive change of attitudes and legislation which has resulted in smoking gradually going out of fashion. Hopefully the path to an increased number of vegans can follow a similar trajectory to the number of non-smokers.


Absolutely. I was one of those who couldn't stand smoking and had to put up with sitting in an office with smokers or occasionally getting in the wrong tube carriage (or as I called it, the cancer cabin) with it's yellow windows and when people could smoke upstairs on buses. Those days were grim (#FirsWorldProblems), but thankfully we have evolved and moved on from that and although there are still people who smoke they are on the decline.


----------



## 8ball (Jan 30, 2018)

It’s the vegan smokers I feel sorry for.


----------



## Opera Buffa (Jan 30, 2018)

veganomics said:


> I remember back when smoking was allowed on trains and in offices, it was fairly common for smokers to complain about non-smokers being self-righteous and holier than thou if they ever complained or objected to them smoking. Of course the non-smokers were right to object then and their complaints and lobbying helped to pave the way for a positive change of attitudes and legislation which has resulted in smoking gradually going out of fashion. Hopefully the path to an increased number of vegans can follow a similar trajectory to the number of non-smokers.




That's a really good, measured analogy and therefore does not belong on this thread


----------



## mojo pixy (Jan 30, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> I've been aware of casomorphins ever since I posted Dr Neal Barnard's "How to magnetize a baby" vegsource lecture video on my own Joomla website 13 years ago. What isn't clear is whether cheese (or any other foods) are genuinely addictive, and the doctor on that BBC show who apparently specialises in the science of addiction doesn't believe it to be.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Yeah, fwiw I myself don't think cheese 'is addictive' (say like alcohol, heroin or cocaine) but it does bring on nice feelings and they may be a little addictive to some. Perhaps like hot chilli with its endorphin rush, also arguably somewhat addictive but more to do with the body's response than the substance itself.


----------



## 8ball (Jan 30, 2018)

I def get the chilli thing.  I’m at that funny point where if I go out for, say, an Indian meal, if I’m in the mood for something a bit hot there are few places that can really believe how hot I like it. Most places don’t do anything that I wouldn’t call ‘mild’.  

Trying to avoid the capsaicin a bit so that I can enjoy more of the menu.

It doesn’t take that much over a period of time before you’re in a bit of a no man’s land between ‘normal people’ and the place where serious chilli heads live.  Those guys (and they’re mostly guys) are seriously into pain, which isn’t my bag.  I just like enough heat to bring out the flavours.


----------



## mojo pixy (Jan 30, 2018)

To be fair though, while they may be into the pain it's probably the case that they're more into the endorphin rush that comes with it. And that is a damn good high, for a non-drug buzz.


----------



## 8ball (Jan 30, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> To be fair though, while they may be into the pain it's probably the case that they're more into the endorphin rush that comes with it. And that is a damn good high, for a non-drug buzz.



I totally get that bit. But there is also an element of self-testing and social competition there.  It’s not really my thing (maybe sometimes an element of the self-testing but not in a social way for me).  And as well as the flavour thing it’s really nice to combine nice food with that endorphin buzz.

So far, I find that heat really compliments the flavours of meat (especially lamb and mutton) but I’d be really interested to see whether there are vegan flavours that it works with.

Edit: I think it’s the salt and fat and umami that makes the combination.  Umami is probably the key. Umami is a very ‘meat’ thing, but there are things like yeast extracts and black garlic that definitely have it going on.


----------



## mojo pixy (Jan 31, 2018)

Heavy chilli spice makes potatoes amazing


----------



## Opera Buffa (Jan 31, 2018)

I always used to think 'patatas bravas' meant 'brave potatoes' but unfortunately it doesn't.


----------



## Opera Buffa (Jan 31, 2018)

They're 'fierce' instead, which makes them sound like rugby players and frankly I'm out IFSWIM


----------



## Opera Buffa (Jan 31, 2018)

It used to be like the ending to Blackadder Goes Forth every time I cooked a meal...


----------



## 8ball (Jan 31, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> Heavy chilli spice makes potatoes amazing



Oh yeah, most of the time when I have a baked spud there’s a good whack of chilli.

Something close to a good lamb vindaloo or seriously hot goat curry would be amazing, though.


----------



## JimW (Jan 31, 2018)

8ball said:


> It’s the vegan smokers I feel sorry for.


I resemble this remark!


----------



## OzT (Jan 31, 2018)

The one time I tried to fry tofu, and last time, I heated the pan up, sliced a large chunk of tofu into it and the flames did reach the ceiling, abait, or is it abate?, a low ceiling.

Now I have brought pre cooked cubes from the Korean shop for just £2 so going to try that tonight in my fish/seafood/odd left over bits soup and noodles.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jan 31, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> Yeah, fwiw I myself don't think cheese 'is addictive' (say like alcohol, heroin or cocaine) but it does bring on nice feelings and they may be a little addictive to some. Perhaps like hot chilli with its endorphin rush, also arguably somewhat addictive but more to do with the body's response than the substance itself.


tbh, I can't say that I properly understand the nature of addiction or know what it really is. Addiction appears to be quite a complicated machine with psychological and physical components. It is possible that cheese and other foods are addictive, it is also possible that they are not. According to this it is possible to be addicted to ANYTHING.  (so that would include cheese).  

I eventually found the first Dr Barnard video that I saw back in the day before youtube existed, where he talks about this at length.


----------



## UnderAnOpenSky (Jan 31, 2018)

8ball said:


> I def get the chilli thing.  I’m at that funny point where if I go out for, say, an Indian meal, if I’m in the mood for something a bit hot there are few places that can really believe how hot I like it. Most places don’t do anything that I wouldn’t call ‘mild’.
> 
> Trying to avoid the capsaicin a bit so that I can enjoy more of the menu.
> 
> It doesn’t take that much over a period of time before you’re in a bit of a no man’s land between ‘normal people’ and the place where serious chilli heads live.  Those guys (and they’re mostly guys) are seriously into pain, which isn’t my bag.  I just like enough heat to bring out the flavours.



I think I'm in that no man's land. I recently made a fermented chilli and garlic sauce that most people I've given to think is fearsome. I just think it's packed with flavour and have almost finished it...


----------



## mojo pixy (Jan 31, 2018)

_


PaoloSanchez said:





Click to expand...



Addiction _though is quite a specific thing and craving something really badly sometimes or even often isn't necessarily the same as _being addicted to it_. We paraphrase addiction with other expressions like _hooked on_, which are vaguer than _addicted_.

EtA, btw sucrose is both vegan and extremely addictive. Also, bacon and eggs for breakfast will keep a person feeling full for hours and hours too, it's not all about fibre.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jan 31, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> _Addiction _though is quite a specific thing and craving something really badly sometimes or even often isn't necessarily the same as _being addicted to it_. We paraphrase addiction with other expressions like _hooked on_, which are vaguer than _addicted_.


tbh, that hasn't really resolved exactly what this "specific thing" is and how it works, and there appears to be many schools of thought and umpteen million phd research papers on the subject.



mojo pixy said:


> EtA, btw sucrose is both vegan and extremely addictive.


Well, Dr Barnard introduced his talk with sugar, in fact that was the very substance he used to "magnetise a baby".


----------



## mojo pixy (Jan 31, 2018)

I began watching the vid, that's why I mentioned sucrose. It's more genuinely addictive than just about any other foodstuff.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jan 31, 2018)

Opera Buffa said:


> That's a really good, measured analogy and therefore does not belong on this thread


I beg to differ, this thread is exactly where decent quality posts should congregate. Why should the numpties have it all their own way.


----------



## AnnaKarpik (Jan 31, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Funnily enough, this has been my experience too. If there is any hectoring to be had it usually comes from the very people accusing vegans of hectoring. One thing you won't see is vegans camped in burger threads dicking around and making a nuisance of themselves.



If you're implying this is a vegan thread for vegans you haven't read the title; this is explicitly a vegan thread for non-vegans, or not-yet vegans.
I think you do vegans an injustice on the dicking around front too, the ones I know are very good at it.


----------



## 8ball (Jan 31, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Well, Dr Barnard introduced his talk with sugar, in fact that was the very substance he used to "magnetise a baby".



Magnetise a baby...


----------



## 8ball (Jan 31, 2018)

AnnaKarpik said:


> If you're implying this is a vegan thread for vegans you haven't read the title; this is explicitly a vegan thread for non-vegans, or not-yet vegans.
> I think you do vegans an injustice on the dicking around front too, the ones I know are very good at it.



#NotAllVegans


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jan 31, 2018)

AnnaKarpik said:


> If you're implying this is a vegan thread for vegans you haven't read the title; this is explicitly a vegan thread for non-vegans, or not-yet vegans.


Well according to our leader this started off as a troll thread. I'm not sure if that was the intention of the OP but it very quickly became a "lets have a dig at vegans for no good reason" thread. This appears to be something that happens wherever the word "vegan" appears in any thread on any forum. I'm simply presenting what I consider to be reasonable counter arguments to the usual stereotyped rubbish that is frequently posted. So yeah, the thread has long since drifted away and morphed from the title.



AnnaKarpik said:


> I think you do vegans an injustice on the dicking around front too, the ones I know are very good at it.


Funnily enough they haven't really demonstrated it in this forum anywhere, have they? Perhaps we need a full audit to clear this shit up.


----------



## paolo (Jan 31, 2018)

For some reason I keep seeing the thread title as disconnected.

Angry Vegan:

“I’ve been really impressed with the new range in M&S...  but ffs if anyone nicks my stapler again...”


----------



## 8ball (Jan 31, 2018)

OzT said:


> The one time I tried to fry tofu, and last time, I heated the pan up, sliced a large chunk of tofu into it and the flames did reach the ceiling, abait, or is it abate?, a low ceiling.



Albeit.

I’ll try to remember to get the non-flammable stuff.


----------



## OzT (Feb 1, 2018)

Thanks for that 8ball, albiet a bit late . . . lol!!  

Yes best check out the label for flammability!

Had the prefried tofu from the Korean shop last night, was good. Still not going to fry my own though, that was a large as well as high flames from the frying pan!


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Feb 1, 2018)

I just happened to be listening to an interview of rock legend Brian May by the former Sex Pistols guitarist Steve Jones on his radio show Jonesys jukebox, when I hear this from Dr May... 

"We should all be vegan, I wish I was one".





Spoiler



May: I think we have dominion over every creature on this planet, which by rights I don't think we should. To me, every creature on this planet has an equal right to have a good life. We shouldn't be abusing animals. I think we got it all wrong. We weren't put here to be users and abusers of any other creatures on this planet. We are here to do good stuff.

Jones: Are you a vegan.

May: I wish I was a vegan, no, I'm a vegetarian and I haven't managed to make the journey to being vegan. A lot of my friends are, and I eat a lot of vegan food, but I can't call myself a vegan.

Jones: You like a bit of goat cheese

May: I like cheese but I don't like the process by which it's obtained. Cheese is a hard one, because vegan cheese is really not desirable. I'm not a big soy fan.

Jones: I've been off the meat for a while, I'm trying to go that way. I do have a weakness for a bit of goat cheese.

May: Yeah, I have a weakness for cheese, it's hard to give up, but I spent a lot of time around dairy farmers in England because I'm involved in trying to save the badger from "legalised" persecution because it's blamed for bovine TB...
...I've seen a lot of dairy farms and there are some very good dairy farmers but I don't think we should be doing it, I really don't. We're not designed to drink the milk of a cow, why should we be, there's an awful lot of stuff in it that's not good for us.

Jones: Do you remember the commercials when you were a kid. "Milk's good for ya..."

May: Well it was based on no scientific evidence whatsoever, yeah, milks supposed to be great for you bones and it's essential...well this is propaganda you know, we all swallowed it but it's probably not the case so drinking almond milk is probably a whole lot better for you and in the end it's better for the environment too and it's better from the point of view of animal cruelty so yeah we should all be vegan, we damn well should be.


Top geezer, and not looking too bad for 70. Loved the interview.

Of course just because a celeb says something and gives an endorsement doesn't mean that everyone should blindly follow them, but hopefully people like him in influential positions plant the seeds that get people thinking.


----------



## mojo pixy (Feb 1, 2018)

Again, Bryan Adams


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Feb 1, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> Again, Bryan Adams


"Anything I do, I do it for you". Good on grizzly, the more the merrier.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 1, 2018)

Bryan Ferry is apparently still to be convinced.


----------



## gosub (Feb 1, 2018)

8ball said:


> Bryan Ferry is apparently still to be convinced.


Meatloaf would be a coup


----------



## 8ball (Feb 1, 2018)

gosub said:


> Meatloaf would be a coup



As would Kevin Bacon.


----------



## OzT (Feb 2, 2018)

Didn't this use to be in General forum?


----------



## Yossarian (Feb 2, 2018)

gosub said:


> Meatloaf would be a coup



He was vegetarian for a while, but didn't change his name to Nut Loaf.


> I was a vegetarian for 10 years. There’ve been vegetarians who wouldn’t speak to me because of my name. I was sitting with Jon Bon Jovi at one of those awards things, and I say, ”Oh, man, I love k.d. lang. I’d really like to meet her.” They went to find out if it was okay, and she goes, ”No. His name is Meat Loaf.” I stopped being a k.d. lang fan after that.



Why Meat Loaf borrowed money from Scary Spice


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 2, 2018)

8ball said:


> Bryan Ferry is apparently still to be convinced.


Certainly not by his son


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 2, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> _
> Addiction _though is quite a specific thing and craving something really badly sometimes or even often isn't necessarily the same as _being addicted to it_. We paraphrase addiction with other expressions like _hooked on_, which are vaguer than _addicted_.
> 
> EtA, btw sucrose is both vegan and extremely addictive. Also, bacon and eggs for breakfast will keep a person feeling full for hours and hours too, it's not all about fibre.


And healthier


----------



## 8ball (Feb 2, 2018)

Horus Snacks said:


> And healthier



Well, most things would be healthier than sucrose for breakfast.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Feb 2, 2018)




----------



## PaoloSanchez (Feb 2, 2018)

So the BBC marked the end of "Veganuary" this news item...



I thought it was a bit lightweight but at least it didn't have the negative dig that the BBC usually includes in their reports, presumably for "balance".


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 2, 2018)

I don't think you can get enough nutrition from veg alone, but if that's what people wish to eat that's fine.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 2, 2018)

Horus Snacks said:


> I don't think you can get enough nutrition from veg alone, but if that's what people wish to eat that's fine.



Depends what you mean by 'veg'.

Does that include pulses, nuts and seeds, all manner of relatively concentrated protein products (I'm including tofu here), fungus and associated extracts, various ferments etc. etc. ?


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 2, 2018)

Animal products seem the best source for nutrients.

There's stuff that is only found in such products.

I think you'd have to rely on a whole bunch of not easily/affordable sourced stuff to get the same nutrients. 

Asomeone who also eats low carb, vegan would be a nightmare. I'm also not convinced that the environmental argument holds either. Clearly there are issues with industrial farming of meat and how animals are treated, but ending capitalism would help with that.


----------



## UnderAnOpenSky (Feb 2, 2018)

Horus Snacks said:


> Animal products seem the best source for nutrients.
> 
> There's stuff that is only found in such products.
> 
> ...



Funny how vegans don't die of early then really isn't it? 

What stuff can't you find in plant based food?


----------



## 8ball (Feb 2, 2018)

UnderAnOpenSky said:


> Funny how vegans don't die of early then really isn't it?
> 
> What stuff can't you find in plant based food?



There are a couple of things you can only get from certain micro-organisms if you eschew animal products, but that's where vegans get them from (and I expect some fairly frequent micro-doses of animal-derived nutrients unless really careful eg. vitamin D3 is often synthesized from wool - there is a vegan (lichen) source but it's not cheap).


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 2, 2018)

UnderAnOpenSky said:


> Funny how vegans don't die of early then really isn't it?
> 
> What stuff can't you find in plant based food?


Do you have any sources for that claim? I've no idea what the mortality rate for vegans is compared to a healthy diet with animal products (ie no transfats or junk).

7 Nutrients That You Can't Get From Plant Foods

Not all of these are exclusive only to meat, but as I say you would likely struggle to find suitable animal sources without a lot of resources. Health food shops aren't known for their cheap prices IME.

IMO animal products are optimal.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Feb 2, 2018)

Horus Snacks said:


> Animal products seem the best source for nutrients.
> 
> There's stuff that is only found in such products.
> 
> ...


 Hmmm...can you let the ADA know what this "stuff" is so they can update their studies...

Position of the American Dietetic Association: vegetarian diets.  - PubMed - NCBI



> It is the position of the American Dietetic Association that appropriately planned vegetarian diets, including total vegetarian or vegan diets, are healthful, nutritionally adequate, and may provide health benefits in the prevention and treatment of certain diseases. Well-planned vegetarian diets are appropriate for individuals during all stages of the life cycle, including pregnancy, lactation, infancy, childhood, and adolescence, and for athletes. A vegetarian diet is defined as one that does not include meat (including fowl) or seafood, or products containing those foods. This article reviews the current data related to key nutrients for vegetarians including protein, n-3 fatty acids, iron, zinc, iodine, calcium, and vitamins D and B-12. A vegetarian diet can meet current recommendations for all of these nutrients.


----------



## UnderAnOpenSky (Feb 2, 2018)

Horus Snacks said:


> Do you have any sources for that claim? I've no idea what the mortality rate for vegans is compared to a healthy diet with animal products (ie no transfats or junk).
> 
> 7 Nutrients That You Can't Get From Plant Foods
> 
> ...



Well you can google for whatever result you want, but mine was vegan life span and none of the articles I got said it decreased it, with most claiming it increased it. Here's one.

Why a vegan diet can make you live longer

I'm not vegan or even vegetarian, so don't know how important it is actually is in practice to supplement with these things, but I do know that you can pay a fortune in health food shops or with a bit of shopping around find things for a fraction of the cost.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 2, 2018)

Horus Snacks said:


> Do you have any sources for that claim? I've no idea what the mortality rate for vegans is compared to a healthy diet with animal products (ie no transfats or junk).
> 
> 7 Nutrients That You Can't Get From Plant Foods
> 
> ...



Some of that is inaccurate, and many of those chemicals are not essential nutrients. 

There is a lichen source of cholecalciferol, creatine can be chemically synthesized for vegans, you can get a lot of ALA if you pick the right foods (which your body can convert to DHA, though I'd agree DHA or EPA are better).  And the guy who coined the term 'vegan' lived to 95.

I think there is an issue of absolutism here - 'regular' vegan diets can be very healthy but I'd agree it takes a little engineering for certain 'performance' diets.


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 2, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Hmmm...can you let the ADA know what this "stuff" is so they can update their studies...
> 
> Position of the American Dietetic Association: vegetarian diets.  - PubMed - NCBI





PaoloSanchez said:


> Hmmm...can you let the ADA know what this "stuff" is so they can update their studies...
> 
> Position of the American Dietetic Association: vegetarian diets.  - PubMed - NCBI


"appropriately planned"

EDIT: and that study refers to vegetarian not vegan


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 2, 2018)

8ball said:


> Some of that is inaccurate, and many of those chemicals are not essential nutrients.
> 
> There is a lichen source of cholecalciferol, creatine can be chemically synthesized for vegans, you can get a lot of ALA if you pick the right foods (which your body can convert to DHA, though I'd agree DHA or EPA are better).  And the guy who coined the term 'vegan' lived to 95.
> 
> I think there is an issue of absolutism here - vegan diets are very healthy but I'd agree it takes a little engineering for certain 'performance' diets.



If this info is inaccurate, do you have a source for that?

Sure you can supplements, but to me that's just admitting the diet doesn't provide the nutrient in question which is the point. Personally I'd rather not have to supplement. 

Whether or not he lived to 95 is irrelevant.

For me the main issue is carbs. I have no problem with people choosing to eat vegan. I don't think they should be demonised for it, I just think there's nowt wrong eating meat and that it's a better source of nutrition.


----------



## UnderAnOpenSky (Feb 2, 2018)

Horus Snacks said:


> "appropriately planned"



As opposed to just stopping at McDonald's when ever you feel hungry. I think you need an element of diet planning if you are trying to stay healthy or even just budget?


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Feb 2, 2018)

Horus Snacks said:


> "appropriately planned"


Yeah...and?

Same applies to "omnivore" diets, and the health stats would suggest that "omnivores" have more health issues than veg*ns, so perhaps they need to do a lot more "appropriate planning".


----------



## SpookyFrank (Feb 2, 2018)

Horus Snacks said:


> Do you have any sources for that claim? I've no idea what the mortality rate for vegans is compared to a healthy diet with animal products (ie no transfats or junk).
> 
> 7 Nutrients That You Can't Get From Plant Foods
> 
> ...



Only one of those, B12, can't be produced by the body itself.


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 2, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> Only one of those, B12, can't be produced by the body itself.


The question would be how vegans acquire those other sources without fortifying food or supplementation - as opposed to from vegetables and plant food, and whether the body produces enough of it


----------



## 8ball (Feb 2, 2018)

Horus Snacks said:


> If this info is inaccurate, do you have a source for that?
> 
> Sure you can supplements, but to me that's just admitting the diet doesn't provide the nutrient in question which is the point. Personally I'd rather not have to supplement.
> 
> ...



I have sources for various bits of it, but let's just do a quick one from the websiteyou linked to:

"There are two types of vitamin D in the diet, ergocalciferol (D2) found in plants, and cholecalciferol (D3) found in animal foods.
Of the two types of vitamin D, cholecalciferol (from animals) is much more potent than ergocalciferol."

Here's a link to get the lichen-derived stuff from:

Lichen-based vegan vitamin D3 gains momentum as Nordic Naturals introduces new product


----------



## UnderAnOpenSky (Feb 2, 2018)

Horus Snacks said:


> If this info is inaccurate, do you have a source for that?
> 
> Sure you can supplements, but to me that's just admitting the diet doesn't provide the nutrient in question which is the point. Personally I'd rather not have to supplement.
> 
> ...



I'd say low carb and keto diets are the embodyment of capatalist food systems...


----------



## SpookyFrank (Feb 2, 2018)

Horus Snacks said:


> Animal products seem the best source for nutrients.



Such a broad statement as to be utterly meaningless. Which animal products? Which nutrients? Live on nothing but meat and you'll be dead of scurvy long before your vegan mates have had time to develop even mild symptoms of B12 deficiency.


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 2, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Yeah...and?
> 
> Same applies to "omnivore" diets, and the health stats would suggest that "omnivores" have more health issues than veg*ns, so perhaps they need to do a lot more "appropriate planning".


And appropriately planned could mean having to source foods that are expensive or very hard to come by rendering the diet utterly impractical.

It's also not a vegan study


----------



## SpookyFrank (Feb 2, 2018)

Horus Snacks said:


> For me the main issue is carbs. I have no problem with people choosing to eat vegan. I don't think they should be demonised for it, I just think there's nowt wrong eating meat and that it's a better source of nutrition.



The main issue is carbohydrates. The thing your entire physiology is set up to use as its primary fuel. 

In our age of technological and scientific enlightenment we do still have some fucking stupid ideas don't we?


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Feb 2, 2018)

Horus Snacks said:


> The question would be how vegans acquire those other sources without fortifying food or supplementation - as opposed to from vegetables and plant food


The real question why you would be so concerned about deficiencies amongst vegans when by nearly every metric known to man, vegans are healthier than their meat eating peers. As Ali-G might say, check YOURSELF before you wreck yourself. Omnis have a lot more to worry about than vegans it would appear.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Feb 2, 2018)

Horus Snacks said:


> And appropriately planned could mean having to source foods that are expensive or very hard to come by rendering the diet utterly impractical.
> 
> It's also not a vegan study



It's one pound fifty and a ten minute walk for me to go get a jar of ASDA own brand marmite and that lasts me maybe a month.

Tastes great on toast with peanut butter too.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 2, 2018)

Horus' chosen website does, however, end with:

_"If you plan to completely eliminate animal foods, then be extra prudent about your diet and make sure you are getting everything your body needs."
_
Which I think is perfectly reasonable.  It's just that some of the quoted things aren't things your body _really_ needs.


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 2, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> Such a broad statement as to be utterly meaningless. Which animal products? Which nutrients? Live on nothing but meat and you'll be dead of scurvy long before your vegan mates have had time to develop even mild symptoms of B12 deficiency.


There's many people and communities of people i've met online who eat nothing but animal product. Zero carb. There's also the Masai and the Inuit who's traditional diets are pretty much if not entirely veg free. Vitamin C is found in animal products, a phrase that includes meats, organ meats, offal, and things like butter, cheeses etc - animal products! 

Now they could be three days away from death for all I know, or just yanking my chain. Whatever.

It doesn't matter since I'm not arguing people should eat nothing but meat.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 2, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> It's one pound fifty and a ten minute walk for me to go get a jar of ASDA own brand marmite and that lasts me maybe a month.
> 
> Tastes great on toast with peanut butter too.



Own brand Marmite!!!


----------



## SpookyFrank (Feb 2, 2018)

8ball said:


> Which I think is perfectly reasonable.  It's just that some of the quoted things aren't things your body _really_ needs.



Indeed. I've certainly felt a lot better since I cut bullshit out of my diet.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Feb 2, 2018)

Horus Snacks said:


> And appropriately planned could mean having to source foods that are expensive or very hard to come by rendering the diet utterly impractical.
> 
> It's also not a vegan study


Except that there are many people (myself included 20+  years) doing it very successfully and they appear to be better off than their meat eating peers. lol @ "impractical".


----------



## SpookyFrank (Feb 2, 2018)

8ball said:


> Own brand Marmite!!!



My flatmate has the same reaction. He won't countenance any pretenders to marmite's throne.

Obviously we had to do a blind taste test. Which he obviously failed. And obviously he still buys the posh stuff


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 2, 2018)

8ball said:


> I have sources for various bits of it, but let's just do a quick one from the websiteyou linked to:
> 
> "There are two types of vitamin D in the diet, ergocalciferol (D2) found in plants, and cholecalciferol (D3) found in animal foods.
> Of the two types of vitamin D, cholecalciferol (from animals) is much more potent than ergocalciferol."
> ...


Sure, and how much do they charge for these products? You are also advocating supplements which aren't real food IMO.


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 2, 2018)

UnderAnOpenSky said:


> I'd say low carb and keto diets are the embodyment of capatalist food systems...


How so?


----------



## 8ball (Feb 2, 2018)

Horus Snacks said:


> There's many people and communities of people i've met online who eat nothing but animal product. Zero carb.



You have to be pretty strategic about which bits of which animals to eat if you are not to miss out on key nutrients, though.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 2, 2018)

Horus Snacks said:


> Sure, and how much do they charge for these products? You are also advocating supplements which aren't real food IMO.



Yeah, but what of it?  If you live in Northern Europe and work indoors it's a very good idea to get a "not real food" vitamin D supplement regardless of whether you eat loads of meat, loads of veg, or subsist on tofu nuggets.


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 2, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> It's one pound fifty and a ten minute walk for me to go get a jar of ASDA own brand marmite and that lasts me maybe a month.
> 
> Tastes great on toast with peanut butter too.


Sure, so what? It's fortified.


8ball said:


> Horus' chosen website does, however, end with:
> 
> _"If you plan to completely eliminate animal foods, then be extra prudent about your diet and make sure you are getting everything your body needs."
> _
> Which I think is perfectly reasonable.  It's just that some of the quoted things aren't things your body _really_ needs.


Ok, some, but some isn't all. 



PaoloSanchez said:


> Except that there are many people (myself included 20+  years) doing it very successfully and they appear to be better off than their meat eating peers. lol @ "impractical".



Great, but that's just anecdotal.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 2, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> My flatmate has the same reaction. He won't countenance any pretenders to marmite's throne.
> 
> Obviously we had to do a blind taste test. Which he obviously failed. And obviously he still buys the posh stuff



Yeah, if I found something significantly cheaper that passed a blind taste test, I'd use it - I get through more than one big jar a month, I reckon.  
The Tesco one doesn't even pass the 'making you gag' test, and I'm miles from the nearest ASDA...


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 2, 2018)

8ball said:


> You have to be pretty strategic about which bits of which animals to eat if you are not to miss out on key nutrients, though.


I'm not sure. They seem to manage. Meat's pretty nutrient dense tbf. However it's not a diet i advocate for


----------



## SpookyFrank (Feb 2, 2018)

Horus Snacks said:


> There's many people and communities of people i've met online who eat nothing but animal product. Zero carb. There's also the Masai and the Inuit who's traditional diets are pretty much if not entirely veg free. Vitamin C is found in animal products, a phrase that includes meats, organ meats, offal, and things like butter, cheeses etc - animal products!
> 
> Now they could be three days away from death for all I know, or just yanking my chain. Whatever.
> 
> It doesn't matter since I'm not arguing people should eat nothing but meat.



Inuit folk eat seal blubber, which is uncommonly rich in vitamins due to the lifestyle and physiology of seals. 

The peoples with animal-based diets that didn't provide enough essential nutrients have either migrated to somewhere with better food or died out, so obviously you're not going to find any extant examples of people who live on meat-only diets that don't provide for their needs. Except maybe Texans.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 2, 2018)

Horus Snacks said:


> I'm not sure. They seem to manage. Meat's pretty nutrient dense tbf. However it's not a diet i advocate for



Vitamin C is tricky - cod roe, animal liver, a few other bits...

It's most likely a cultural part of the diet - most cultures wind up with cuisines that get all the key nutrients in, with a wide variation in meat consumption and which nutrients come from which source.


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 2, 2018)

8ball said:


> Yeah, but what of it?  If you live in Northern Europe and work indoors it's a very good idea to get a "not real food" vitamin D supplement regardless of whether you eat loads of meat, loads of veg, or subsist on tofu nuggets.


You can get vitamin D from food - and if supplementation is absolutely necessary then that applies to all diets so while far from ideal it doesn't put a vegan diet in a better position since they need to supplement _more_


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 2, 2018)

8ball said:


> Vitamin C is tricky - cod roe, animal liver, a few other bits...
> 
> It's most likely a cultural part of the diet - most cultures wind up with cuisines that get all the key nutrients in, with a wide variation in meat consumption and which nutrients come from which source.


I don't have an answer for you. Vitamin C may or may not be credible.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Feb 2, 2018)

Horus Snacks said:


> Great, but that's just anecdotal.


...and you're posts have been chock fulla "facts", right?
lol


----------



## UnderAnOpenSky (Feb 2, 2018)

Horus Snacks said:


> How so?



Because the amount of animal products that are consumed means that it won't scale globally and unless your seriously wealthy the animal products and vast amounts of feed those animals need will have been intensively farmed.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 2, 2018)

Horus Snacks said:


> Ok, some, but some isn't all.



The only essential one there is B12, as I think Frank said.

B12 is bacterial in origin (whether you eat something fortified, eat an animal that has been absorbing and concentrating the chemical, or eat one of the few non-animal sources with enough to sustain humans).


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 2, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> ...and you're posts have been chock fulla "facts", right?
> lol


Sure, you can cite some sources to correct anything I've said or linked to. We're just having a discussion on an internet forum and I've already conceded that I have no problem with people eating vegan so cool your jets


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 2, 2018)

UnderAnOpenSky said:


> Because the amount of animal products that are consumed means that it won't scale globally and unless your seriously wealthy the animal products and vast amounts of feed those animals need will have been intensively farmed.


I don't see why meat can't be farmed without capitalism, it's just we live in a capitalist world.

I don't really follow your argument tbh


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 2, 2018)

8ball said:


> The only essential one there is B12, as I think Frank said.
> 
> B12 is bacterial in origin (whether you eat something fortified, eat an animal that has been absorbing and concentrating the chemical, or eat one of the few non-animal sources with enough to sustain humans).


But you won't be eating an animal if you're vegan.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 2, 2018)

Horus Snacks said:


> But you won't be eating an animal if you're vegan.



No, so you're left with fortification or another non-animal source.


----------



## UnderAnOpenSky (Feb 2, 2018)

Horus Snacks said:


> I don't see why meat can't be farmed without capitalism, it's just we live in a capitalist world.
> 
> I don't really follow your argument tbh



Of course it can. However for it to be sustainable we all need to eat less, not more.


----------



## editor (Feb 2, 2018)

OzT said:


> Didn't this use to be in General forum?


Yes, but seeing as the move to veganism is a current affairs issue, I moved it.


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 2, 2018)

8ball said:


> No, so you're left with fortification or another non-animal source.



If you're happy with that, then that's fine. I'm not, so I don't eat vegan. 



UnderAnOpenSky said:


> Of course it can. However for it to be sustainable we all need to eat less, not more.



You would have to qualify that statement, eat less of what? In general or just meat? People who eat low carb seem to tend to eat less often as they are hungrier less and fuller for longer.

If everyone ate just veg that too would need to be sustainable.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Feb 2, 2018)

Horus Snacks said:


> I don't see why meat can't be farmed without capitalism, it's just we live in a capitalist world.
> 
> I don't really follow your argument tbh



It's a question of scale. Pre-industrial farming techniques fed a much smaller global population, most of whom were eating far less meat than your typical westerner eats nowadays.

Meat production always requires more land and water, and produces more waste products, than producing an equivalent amount of vegetable foods.

If the whole world wanted to eat as much meat as the average American, well that would be impossible. There's not enough farmland or fresh water in the world. To say nothing of the ecosystems that would have to be destroyed to make room for all the cows. The entire Amazon basin would be a dust bowl.


----------



## editor (Feb 2, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> Also, bacon and eggs for breakfast will keep a person feeling full for hours and hours too, it's not all about fibre.


A comparable veggie/vegan breakfast will keep most people feeling full too.


----------



## editor (Feb 2, 2018)

Horus Snacks said:


> Animal products seem the best source for nutrients.
> 
> There's stuff that is only found in such products.
> 
> ...


You are talking utter tosh.


----------



## mojo pixy (Feb 2, 2018)

editor said:


> A comparable veggie/vegan breakfast will keep most people feeling full too.



That was my point; in terms of feeling full for hours, the same effect can be achieved with or without meat / eggs. A vegan diet has no advantage in that respect, though the speaker in the video seemed to be giving the impression it did.

It seems you often read and respond to posts without looking at what those posts were themselves a response to. I get you're busy, but still.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 2, 2018)

Horus Snacks said:


> If you're happy with that, then that's fine. I'm not, so I don't eat vegan.



I’m not vegan either, but at the moment I’d guess a good whack of my B12 comes from marmite.

The subject of ‘non-essential’ nutrients is an interesting one to bring up, though.  There are a lot of nutrients that are good for you, but that you can live without.

It might be controversial on this thread due to it being quite polarised, but I suspect many of those vegans who are most happy with their diets are feeling more healthy due to larger amounts and variety of vegetables, rather than due to the things they leave out.

Edit: and nuts, pulses etc.


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 2, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> It's a question of scale. Pre-industrial farming techniques fed a much smaller global population, most of whom were eating far less meat than your typical westerner eats nowadays.
> 
> Meat production always requires more land and water, and produces more waste products, than producing an equivalent amount of vegetable foods.
> 
> If the whole world wanted to eat as much meat as the average American, well that would be impossible. There's not enough farmland or fresh water in the world. To say nothing of the ecosystems that would have to be destroyed to make room for all the cows. The entire Amazon basin would be a dust bowl.


It's very possible that we are, to put it simplisticially, an overpopulated species. Unfortuantely we have to work with where we are.

I'd have to look into the facts of this to see for sure. There is a book called, I think, the Vegetarian Myth which has, as you might expect, a lot of mixed reviews, that makes a case for the environmental impact of vegetarian (which may or may not include veganism) lifestyles on the environment. I have no idea if it's credible.


----------



## editor (Feb 2, 2018)

Horus Snacks said:


> The question would be how vegans acquire those other sources without fortifying food or supplementation - as opposed to from vegetables and plant food, and whether the body produces enough of it


A bowl of cereal in the morning can give you all the B12 you need.


----------



## editor (Feb 2, 2018)

Horus Snacks said:


> And appropriately planned could mean having to source foods that are expensive or very hard to come by rendering the diet utterly impractical.
> 
> It's also not a vegan study


What are these expensive foods that you keep banging on about?


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 2, 2018)

editor said:


> A comparable veggie/vegan breakfast will keep most people feeling fill too.


not if its full of carbs


----------



## SpookyFrank (Feb 2, 2018)

Horus Snacks said:


> It's very possible that we are, to put it simplisticially, an overpopulated species. Unfortuantely we have to work with where we are.



Where we are is a place were we need to drastically cut back meat production ASAP. Either that or switch to industrial cannibalism.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Feb 2, 2018)

Horus Snacks said:


> not if its full of carbs



Carbs make you feel hungry now? Obviously you've been getting too much tripe from your butcher coz some of it is spilling out of your mouth.


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 2, 2018)

editor said:


> A bowl of cereal in the morning can give you all the B12 you need.


Cereal was one of the worst things I used to eat. Was ravenous an hour later, blood sugar through the floor. Even on something as simple as oats. Most cereal with b12 are agian fortified and likely full of sugar and all sorts of other crap


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 2, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> Carbs make you feel hungry now? Obviously you've been getting too much tripe from your butcher coz some of it is spilling out of your mouth.


Yes, carbs are just sugar.

That's why i went low carb. Experiencing hypoglycemic episodes isn't fun


----------



## editor (Feb 2, 2018)

Horus Snacks said:


> There's many people and communities of people i've met online who eat nothing but animal product. Zero carb. There's also the Masai and the Inuit who's traditional diets are pretty much if not entirely veg free.


Except: 





> More recently the Maasai have started to consume other foods with more regularity, including cabbage, potatoes, maize meal and rice, which makes their diet more well rounded and lowers the fat and cholesterol content of the overall diet.
> Maasai Tribe Diet


----------



## editor (Feb 2, 2018)

Horus Snacks said:


> not if its full of carbs


I'll look forward to the science behind this claim.


----------



## editor (Feb 2, 2018)

Horus Snacks said:


> Cereal was one of the worst things I used to eat. Was ravenous an hour later, blood sugar through the floor. Even on something as simple as oats. Most cereal with b12 are agian fortified and likely full of sugar and all sorts of other crap


That's your own personal experience. Zillions of people enjoy cereal every morning.


----------



## mojo pixy (Feb 2, 2018)

Horus Snacks said:


> Inuit



So, some people live in a place where growing fruit and veg is all-but impossible so they subsist almost entirely on meat, fat and blood, and over many centuries have evolved physically to take advantage of this very specific diet .. so therefore everybody should eat meat because it's what's best for everyone.

That seems to be the point of referencing the Inuit in this context. Care to show your working?


----------



## 8ball (Feb 2, 2018)

Horus Snacks said:


> Yes, carbs are just sugar.
> 
> That's why i went low carb. Experiencing hypoglycemic episodes isn't fun



I've largely cut out sugar and also seriously cut back on bread, pasta and rice due to the wobbly post-sugar crash and partly because I'm a bit of a carb monster and overdo them.
I haven't found the carbs in vegetables and most fruit to be an issue, though, and tend to eat some kind of protein at most meals, which eases the GI.


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 2, 2018)

editor said:


> Except:


 
You're just appealing to balance, it means nothing to say their diet is 'more rounded', just as it does to say 'lowers fat and cholesterol'. WHy are those tho things bad. It was never an issue for the masai before, which is the point.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Feb 2, 2018)

Horus Snacks said:


> Yes, carbs are just sugar.



In the same way that a pile of bricks is the same thing as a house.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 2, 2018)

editor said:


> That's your own personal experience. Zillions of people enjoy cereal every morning.



Lots (not all) of them *are* way too packed with sugar, though.


----------



## editor (Feb 2, 2018)

Horus Snacks said:


> You're just appealing to balance, it means nothing to say their diet is 'more rounded', just as it does to say 'lowers fat and cholesterol'. WHy are those tho things bad. It was never an issue for the masai before, which is the point.


There's obviously other issues at play, but here's something you should mull over:  Life expectancy in Tanzania is 42 for men and 44 for women.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Feb 2, 2018)

Horus Snacks said:


> Sure, you can cite some sources to correct anything I've said or linked to. We're just having a discussion on an internet forum and I've already conceded that I have no problem with people eating vegan so cool your jets


I have rockets, not jets, and they run hot.
It's not really any of my business who you do or don't "have problems with", however when you open with dodgy statements suggesting that it's hard to be healthy on a plant based diet when the available data appears to show otherwise then don't be surprised if you're called out.


----------



## editor (Feb 2, 2018)

8ball said:


> Lots (not all) of them *are* way too packed with sugar, though.


There's plenty of low sugar/sugar-free ones and some people go really wild and sprinkle on fresh/dried fruits too. Amazeballs etc.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Feb 2, 2018)

8ball said:


> Lots (not all) of them *are* way too packed with sugar, though.



I do genuinely think it's criminal what you're allowed to market to kids as a breakfast food.


----------



## editor (Feb 2, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> I do genuinely think it's criminal what you're allowed to market to kids as a breakfast food.


Not just breakfast. Some soft drinks, milkshakes, sweets and burgers etc are horrifically calorie-packed.


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 2, 2018)

editor said:


> I'll look forward to the science behind this claim.


What claim are you referring to?



editor said:


> That's your own personal experience. Zillions of people enjoy cereal every morning.



I enjoyed cereal, that's why i ate it. Didn't stop it from reacting badly inside me. Sure some people eat lots of carbs and seem fine, good luck to them. Some don't, I'm one of them. So I changed my diet. Lots of other people, for all sorts of reasons, eat a LCHF diet, and they seem to be doing fine from the messages I read. More importantly, since that's anecdotal, there seems to be a lot of good evidence behind it. Keto has been around for decades. Eating real food, not processed junk foods or transfats. That's impoortant to me. Obviously not everyone suffers badly reacting to sugar.



mojo pixy said:


> So, some people live in a place where growing fruit and veg is all-but impossible so they subsist almost entirely on meat, fat and blood, and over many centuries have evolved physically to take advantage of this very specific diet .. so therefore everybody should eat meat because it's what's best for everyone.
> 
> That seems to be the point of referencing the Inuit in this context. Care to show your working?


I don't think evolution explains it. Evolution requires much greater spans of time.



8ball said:


> I've largely cut out sugar and also seriously cut back on bread, pasta and rice due to the wobbly post-sugar crash and partly because I'm a bit of a carb monster and overdo them.
> I haven't found the carbs in vegetables and most fruit to be an issue, though, and tend to eat some kind of protein at most meals, which eases the GI.


I don't find the carbs in veg to be a problem either, maionly because there's so few of them


----------



## 8ball (Feb 2, 2018)

editor said:


> There's obviously other issues at play, but here's something you should mull over:  Life expectancy in Tanzania is 42 for men and 44 for women.



Which data is that?  I'm seeing Male 59.9, female 63.8 based on 2015 WHO data.  With AIDS/HIV as most common cause of death.


----------



## editor (Feb 2, 2018)

8ball said:


> Which data is that?  I'm seeing Male 59.9, female 63.8 based on 2015 WHO data.  With AIDS/HIV as most common cause of death.


BBC - Northamptonshire - Features - Living with the Maasai


----------



## editor (Feb 2, 2018)

Horus Snacks said:


> What claim are you referring to?


Me: A *comparable* veggie/vegan breakfast will keep most people feeling full too.
You: not if its full of carbs

And now the science bit, please.


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 2, 2018)

editor said:


> There's obviously other issues at play, but here's something you should mull over:  Life expectancy in Tanzania is 42 for men and 44 for women.


Research on the masai diet and the bodies of the masai themselves found no evidence of aetherosclorosis or helath problems to do with their diet. Fat and cholesterol weren't killing them.



editor said:


> There's plenty of low sugar/sugar-free ones and some people go really wild and sprinkle on fresh/dried fruits too. Amazeballs etc.


yes full of carbs, which is sugar, or fructose, which is sugar. Fruits contain nutrients of course, but are primarily just compact hits of sugar.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 2, 2018)

editor said:


> There's plenty of low sugar/sugar-free ones and some people go really wild and sprinkle on fresh/dried fruits too. Amazeballs etc.



I never found a sufficiently low sugar one that I liked more than just eating something else, but you know the mass-market stuff I'm talking about.
The food industry needs a good kicking over the stuff that is marketed at kids.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 2, 2018)

editor said:


> Me: A *comparable* veggie/vegan breakfast will keep most people feeling full too.
> You: not if its full of carbs
> 
> And now the science bit, please.



I don't really know what comparable means in that sentence, though.
Maybe that new vegan egg stuff and tofacon would keep you full as long - more research required...


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 2, 2018)

editor said:


> Me: A *comparable* veggie/vegan breakfast will keep most people feeling full too.
> You: not if its full of carbs
> 
> And now the science bit, please.


Do you know what hypoglycemia is?

EDIT: let me clarify, protein is more satiating than carbohydrate, because the latter turns to sugar, and also makes you fat because it binds with water. Healthy fats promote longer satiety as well as provide a more stable source of energy


----------



## 8ball (Feb 2, 2018)

Horus Snacks said:


> Fruits contain nutrients of course, but are primarily just compact hits of sugar.



I'd dispute this for a lot of fruits.  The fibre binds it up and it gets into your system more slowly.  
I've never had a similar spike and crash from a couple of apples compared to what I'd get from a can of Coke.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 2, 2018)

editor said:


> BBC - Northamptonshire - Features - Living with the Maasai



Ok, I'll take the WHO 2015 data over an unsourced statement in a BBC Northants piece from 2004.

Pretty good increase in life expectancy in just a decade if the BBC Northants data is accurate, though.


----------



## UnderAnOpenSky (Feb 2, 2018)

Or brown rice compared to say pasta. There's an element of portion size as well. I suspect most people just eat to many in a single sitting. I was shocked recently when I started weighing mine just how much I was over consuming. Doesn't mean I'm cutting them out, just making sure they are a much smaller part of the meal.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Feb 2, 2018)

editor said:


> I'll look forward to the science behind this claim.



As usual people are getting 'carbs' all backwards.

Carbohydrates include both simple sugars like glucose and fructose, complex molecules like starch and also cellulose which is undigestible to humans and is known as 'dietary fibre'. What you normally get is amateur nutritionists* talking about the separate groups 'carbs', 'sugar' and 'fibre' even though the latter two belong in the former category. When people say carbs, they usually mean starch.

And yes, starch is made of sugar molecules. But the body doesn't treat them like sugar molecules. Starch does not have the same near-instantaneous physiological effects as refined sugars and doesn't send the pancreas and liver into panic mode trying to keep up. Starch is the ideal long-term energy source and the one the body can most efficiently make use of.

Atkins-type diets are designed to trick the body into using metabolic back alleys to produce the glucose that your organs need to function, as a way to _deliberately_ use more energy than we would otherwise need. This is based on a fundamentally stupid conception of what food is for. The goal is not to eat as much as you can without getting fat, the goal is to provide your body with what it needs to function. This is what we mean when we say low-carb diets are a fundamentally capitalist idea because they're a solution to the non-problem of having too much food. They're designed to allow consumption to outstrip need and that is the fundamental basis of consumer capitalism, swindling people into buying shit they don't need and working triple shifts to pay for it.

*and this is the only kind of nutritionist, because 'nutritionist' is not a real thing.


----------



## UnderAnOpenSky (Feb 2, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> It's a question of scale. Pre-industrial farming techniques fed a much smaller global population, most of whom were eating far less meat than your typical westerner eats nowadays.
> 
> Meat production always requires more land and water, and produces more waste products, than producing an equivalent amount of vegetable foods.
> 
> If the whole world wanted to eat as much meat as the average American, well that would be impossible. There's not enough farmland or fresh water in the world. To say nothing of the ecosystems that would have to be destroyed to make room for all the cows. The entire Amazon basin would be a dust bowl.



Ive only recently learned about the impact it was having on the oceans as well. I thought this was one thing I wasn't impacting much as I hardly eat fish. Turns out that a lot of animal feed is fish based, so I don't even get a pass on that. 

Although there is promising work done of making it from maggots that are fed on waste.


----------



## mojo pixy (Feb 2, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> When people say carbs, they usually mean starch.
> 
> And yes, starch is made of sugar molecules. But the body doesn't treat them like sugar molecules. Starch does not have the same near-instantaneous physiological effects as refined sugars and doesn't send the pancreas and liver into panic mode trying to keep up. Starch is the ideal long-term energy source and the one the body can most efficiently make use of.



Aren't starches basically chemical mirror-images of sugars?


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 2, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> Atkins-type diets are designed to trick the body into using metabolic back alleys to produce the glucose that your organs need to function, as a way to _deliberately_ use more energy than we would otherwise need. This is based on a fundamentally stupid conception of what food is for. The goal is not to eat as much as you can without getting fat, the goal is to provide your body with what it needs to function. This is what we mean when we say low-carb diets are a fundamentally capitalist idea because they're a solution to the non-problem of having too much food. They're designed to allow consumption to outstrip need, and that is the fundamental basis of consumer capitalism, swindling people into buying shit they don't need and working triple shifts to pay for it.
> 
> *and this is the only kind of nutritionist, because 'nutritionist' is not a real thing.



'trick the body'? Evidence please.

No human has ever needed carbs. It's the one macro you do not need. 

Atkins is also not a keto diet. It reduces carbs initially and then reintroduces them to the point you start gaining weight to find your tolerance level. 

Keto diets have been studied and studied. Low carb isn't some weird 'hack' despite what some american guru types might like to think. 

I don't know why you think this is also about deliberately spending more energy, and how you've tied that to capitalism makes no sense to me at all.


----------



## editor (Feb 2, 2018)

8ball said:


> I don't really know what comparable means in that sentence, though.
> Maybe that new vegan egg stuff and tofacon would keep you full as long - more research required...


I seriously doubt that anyone having a full English-style veggie/vegan breakfast would end up any more/less hungry than someone who eat a meaty one of equivalent size.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 2, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> Starch is the ideal long-term energy source and the one the body can most efficiently make use of.



I like the bulk of your post, but I'm not sure about this bit.  Or about the word 'ideal', anyway.  The proportion of fat and sugars your body is using for energy at any one time can vary based on a few factors.	 

I'm not entirely convinced about the Atkins diet being quite down to the motives you state either, but I don't know enough to argue the point.  I agree about the 'metabolic back alleys' though.

edit: must admit i was thinking of the keto pathway there - i do remember people on the Atkins diet talking about it back in the day but if it's not necessarily part of it I might have just conflated them accidentally


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 2, 2018)

editor said:


> I seriously doubt that anyone having a full English-style veggie/vegan breakfast would end up any more/less hungry than someone who eat a meaty one of equivalent size.


depends what is in it and what it's made of, i'v eno idea what an english style veggie/vegan breakfast is, or how meat substitute products, if included, are made.


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 2, 2018)

8ball said:


> I like the bulk of your post, but I'm not sure about this bit.  Or about the word 'ideal', anyway.  The proportion of fat and sugars your body is using for energy at any one time can vary based on a few factors.
> 
> I'm not entirely convinced about the Atkins diet being quite down to the motives you state either, but I don't know enough to argue the point.  I agree about the 'metabolic back alleys' though.


Atkins has been around since at least the 70's. It's only infamous because the likes of the Mail decided that it was something to moan about when Jennifer Aniston stopped eating bread or something. 

what metabolic back alleys are you referring to and why is that, if true, a problem?


----------



## 8ball (Feb 2, 2018)

editor said:


> I seriously doubt that anyone having a full English-style veggie/vegan breakfast would end up any more/less hungry than someone who eat a meaty one of equivalent size.



I just looked one up and it does look pretty hearty.
I couldn't say with certainty which is more satiating but it does look like a decent breakfast that could well pass the hangover test.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Feb 2, 2018)

Recommended reading : https://www.amazon.co.uk/Proteinaholic-Obsession-Meat-Killing-About/dp/0062279300

Relevant excerpt...
-------------------
From Real Food to Macronutrients

I'm fascinated by the concept of unintended consequences. We try to accomplish something, and the blowback from our efforts ends up sabotaging our goals in ways we didn't foresee. In this case, the McGovern Committee had wanted to help us avoid heart disease. Instead, the major effect—a highly problematic one—was to change the way we talk about food. And that change in language has contributed to our galloping epidemic of heart disease and other killers.

Before the committee, nutritionists, doctors, and policy-makers spoke of whole foods: fruits, vegetables, grains, nuts, meats, fish, butter, eggs. After the committee publicized its guidelines, *we stopped talking about food and instead referred to the macronutrient components of food: fats, carbohydrates, and of course, protein.*

*"Carbs" in general weren’t the problem, of course.* The problem was that people were eating processed, refined carbs instead of fresh whole fruits and vegetables, beans, and whole grains. After all, green leafy vegetables are carbs, and so are broccoli, cucumbers, red peppers, and onions, and those are some of the healthiest foods on earth. But because of our focus on macronutrients, we aren’t really thinking about those specific foods. We say “carbs”—and think starch.

Even to think about starchy carbs as a separate category distorts the picture. There’s a world of difference between a bowl of steel-cut oatmeal and a sugar-sweetened cereal made from refined flour; between some boiled garbanzos or black beans and a fried corn chip or potato chip.

Moreover, some “carbs” are mainly fats. Muffins, for example, are anywhere from 40 to 50 percent fat by calories, yet they are unfairly lumped in as a carb. Ditto McDonald’s french fries—over 43 percent of their calories come from the oil in which they are fried.

Some diet gurus even began to demonize fruit, conflating the natural sugars that occur in fruit with dead, processed, white sugar. This despite the fact that fresh, whole fruit is one of the healthiest foods there is, full of fiber, vitamins, and phytochemicals. If there is one food that could be said to be created specifically for human consumption, it would be fruit.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Feb 2, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> Aren't starches basically chemical mirror-images of sugars?



No. Starch is basically a very long chain of sugar moecules.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 2, 2018)

Horus Snacks said:


> Atkins has been around since at least the 70's. It's only infamous because the likes of the Mail decided that it was something to moan about when Jennifer Aniston stopped eating bread or something.
> 
> what metabolic back alleys are you referring to and why is that, if true, a problem?



See edit above.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Feb 2, 2018)

Horus Snacks said:


> No human has ever needed carbs. It's the one macro you do not need.



Glucose is a 'carb' ie carbohydrate, and this is the only fuel that your brain is able to use.

So yeah, what you've said here is horseshit.

e2a: And saying 'macro' like that is another dead giveaway that you don't know what you're on about.


----------



## AnnaKarpik (Feb 2, 2018)

UnderAnOpenSky said:


> Funny how vegans don't die of early then really isn't it?
> 
> What stuff can't you find in plant based food?



I don't think I've read anything to suggest that vegans are particularly long-lived either; the idea that vegans (or vegetarians for that matter) are healthier because of what they avoid eating is an odd one. Off the top of my head I can think of three groups of people who tend to live longer and healthier lives than the norm (northern Italy, Okinawa, US seventh day adventists). The Italians eat meat, the Okinawans eat meat and fish and the longest lived adventists eat fish. Then there's the Graz study of vegetarians that found they suffer more ill-health than omnivores (nb - the study did not conclude that a vegetarian diet was responsible for this. It seems that scientists, unlike newspapers, know that if a study divides people into meat / non-meat eaters it doesn't necessarily mean that any effects discovered are down to the presence or absence of meat.)

There is evidence galore that eating whole grains, legumes and lots of vegetables and fruit has a beneficial effect on various disease markers as well as the subjective experience of good health, whether you take out the dead things or not.


----------



## editor (Feb 2, 2018)

Horus Snacks said:


> depends what is in it and what it's made of, i'v eno idea what an english style veggie/vegan breakfast is, or how meat substitute products, if included, are made.


 Here's a picture of one if you're finding it so hard to imagine. This would leave me extremely full, as in unable to eat any more. As in as full as if I'd just eaten a meat one.


----------



## mojo pixy (Feb 2, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> No. Starch is basically a very long chain of sugar moecules.



OK fair enough, last thing I read about starch and sugar was Asimov's great big _New Guide to Science_ book years ago, and in it he seemed to say starch and sugar were identical molecules but structured oppositely. I evidently misunderstood.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 2, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Recommended reading : https://www.amazon.co.uk/Proteinaholic-Obsession-Meat-Killing-About/dp/0062279300


https://www.amazon.co.uk/Proteinaholic-Obsession-Meat-Killing-About/dp/0062279300

Good excerpt there. 

Except maybe: 



PaoloSanchez said:


> If there is one food that could be said to be created specifically for human consumption, it would be fruit.



No, if there was only *one* food created specifically for human consumption it would be human breast milk.


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 2, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> *"Carbs" in general weren’t the problem, of course.* The problem was that people were eating processed, refined carbs instead of fresh whole fruits and vegetables, beans, and whole grains. After all, green leafy vegetables are carbs, and so are broccoli, cucumbers, red peppers, and onions, and those are some of the healthiest foods on earth. But because of our focus on macronutrients, we aren’t really thinking about those specific foods. We say “carbs”—and think starch.
> 
> Even to think about starchy carbs as a separate category distorts the picture. There’s a world of difference between a bowl of steel-cut oatmeal and a sugar-sweetened cereal made from refined flour; between some boiled garbanzos or black beans and a fried corn chip or potato chip.
> 
> ...



This is a terrible quote.

The point about carbs is that they aren't necessary for human health and are a problem for a lot of people, not simply because refined food. People who eat LCHF find that the lower intake does them good. Arguing that carbs are fine because...broccoli is nonsense, there's precious few carbs (not including fibre which isn't digested) in it.

No carbs are fats. That's just nonsense. They are completely different macronutrients and you need fats more than you need carbs.

I don't care what diet gurus 'demonise' this is hyperbole; the point is that fruit is essentially just sugar and that the nutrition that many contain can be found elsewhere. Cooked liver is a far better source than an apple for all round nutrition for example. Now if you enjoy apples, good luck toyou - fillyour boots. Some fruits are fine - avocados are great because they are very low carb so i eat them. But that's the only fruit i eat. You don't need fruit.

Created for human consumption? Sounds like Ray Comfort's "bananas prove god exists" argument to me (despite bananas being man made).


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 2, 2018)

editor said:


> Here's a picture of one if you're finding it so hard to imagine. This would leave me extremely full, as in unable to eat any more. As in as full as if I'd just eaten a meat one.
> 
> View attachment 126572



Great, but again -so what? A picture of a meal isn't very imformative is it.

The goal of being full is n't to stuff yourself so you can't eat anymore, it's to feel sated. That's not = i'm stuffed (it is wafer thin!)


----------



## 8ball (Feb 2, 2018)

Horus Snacks said:


> Created for human consumption? Sounds like Ray Comfort's "bananas prove god exists" argument to me (despite bananas being man made).



My Dad used to work at the banana factory.
He got laid off when the EU decided they had to be straight from now on.  One less step in the system 

That's why I voted Brexit.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 2, 2018)

Horus Snacks said:


> Great, but again -so what? A picture of a meal isn't very imformative is it.



It does look good, tbf.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Feb 2, 2018)

Horus Snacks said:


> The point about carbs is that they aren't necessary for human health



Again, this is not even slightly close to bearing the merest resemblance to anything remotely akin to something that has at any point even vaguely considered the prospect of being true.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 2, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> Again, this is not even slightly close to bearing the merest resemblance to anything remotely akin to something that has at any point even vaguely considered the prospect of being true.



I think you'd be quite poorly if the only carbs you had were the obligatory glucose required for your brain.
Gut biome buggered, blood lipids would be very wonky, I dread to think what would happen to your bowel movements...


----------



## editor (Feb 2, 2018)

Horus Snacks said:


> Great, but again -so what? A picture of a meal isn't very imformative is it.
> 
> The goal of being full is n't to stuff yourself so you can't eat anymore, it's to feel sated. That's not = i'm stuffed (it is wafer thin!)


This is the stupidest argument ever.


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 2, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> Glucose is a 'carb' ie carbohydrate, and this is the only fuel that your brain is able to use.
> 
> So yeah, what you've said here is horseshit.
> 
> e2a: And saying 'macro' like that is another dead giveaway that you don't know what you're on about.


yes our brains use glucose, so what? 

the amount of glucose in our bodies is absolutely tiny.

there is no science that demonstrates the necessity to consume carbs and to say glucose is a carb is not strictly being accurate


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Feb 2, 2018)

Horus Snacks said:


> This is a terrible quote.
> 
> The point about carbs is that they aren't necessary for human health and are a problem for a lot of people, not simply because refined food. People who eat LCHF find that the lower intake does them good. Arguing that carbs are fine because...broccoli is nonsense, there's precious few carbs (not including fibre which isn't digested) in it.
> 
> ...


lol, the fact that you are referring to macronutrients rather than whole foods kinda proves the point. 
"fruit is essentially just sugar", lol, yeah right. Vague nonsense. 
"cooked liver is a better source than an apple for all round nutrition" ??? 
wow, just wow. So who goes around eating exclusively one type of food? That is a useless comparison. The point is that folks on a VARIETY of whole plant foods, nuts and seeds can and do thrive and appear to be doing rather well for themselves when compared to your regular omnivore punter. If you have evidence to the contrary, bring it forth and share it with us rather than the vague statements you've come up with so far.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Feb 2, 2018)

8ball said:


> I think you'd be quite poorly if the only carbs you had were the obligatory glucose required for your brain.
> Gut biome buggered, blood lipids would be very wonky, I dread to think what would happen to your bowel movements...



Without carbohydrates you'd not live long enough to be worried about your bowels.


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 2, 2018)

editor said:


> This is the stupidest argument ever.


how so?

satiety =/= mr creosote


----------



## SpookyFrank (Feb 2, 2018)

Horus Snacks said:


> to say glucose is a carb is not strictly being accurate



Where did you study biochemistry again? The University of Shitforbrains?


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Feb 2, 2018)

I suspect Snacks is playing a game of "defend the indefensible".


----------



## SpookyFrank (Feb 2, 2018)

This is just that weird offal guy with a new username isn't it?

At least he's been able to restrain himself from one-handedly typing out lists of unpleasant animal parts this time.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 2, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> Where did you study biochemistry again? The University of Shitforbrains?



Unless this a *really* obscure biochem-geek ploy to argue it's a ketone. 
Whole 'nother can of worms there, though.


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 2, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> lol, the fact that you are referring to macronutrients rather than whole foods kinda proves the point.
> "fruit is essentially just sugar", lol, yeah right. Vague nonsense.
> "cooked liver is a better source than an apple for all round nutrition" ???
> wow, just wow. So who goes around eating exclusively one type of food? That is a useless comparison. The point is that folks on a VARIETY of whole plant foods, nuts and seeds can and do thrive and appear to be doing rather well for themselves when compared to your regular omnivore punter. If you have evidence to the contrary, bring it forth and share it with us rather than the vague statements you've come up with so far.


The whole point? What IS your point, i don't think you've made one yet; can you tell me?
Fruits comprise some good nutrition, which can be better sourced elswhere, and fructose/carbs. That's not a conspiracy my friend.
Organ meats are incredibly nutritious. 
I've no idea who goes around eating one type of food, I don't think that was my argument.
I haven't said people can't eat vegan food. I've said that for me, and plenty of others, LC diets are best and that meat is a good (i'd say optimal personally) source of nutrition. Not once have i spoken down to someone because they eat differently than I


----------



## SpookyFrank (Feb 2, 2018)

editor said:


> This is the stupidest argument ever.



I dunno, if you post a picture of meat on the internet people can eat that. It's only vegan pictures that contain no nutrients.


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 2, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> Without carbohydrates you'd not live long enough to be worried about your bowels.


show me again all those people that died becauise they didn't eat carbs


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 2, 2018)

Horus Snacks said:


> there is no science that demonstrates the necessity to consume carbs and to say glucose is a carb is not strictly being accurate


so you've not read _inter alia_ 'the dietary guidelines for healthy american adults' in journal of cardiopulmonary rehabilitation 17:1 (1997), p52, where they say 55-60% of calories should come from complex carbohydrates.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Feb 2, 2018)

8ball said:


> Unless this a *really* obscure biochem-geek ploy to argue it's a ketone.
> Whole 'nother can of worms there, though.



Glucose is not a ketone, it is an aldehyde. Both ketones and aldehydes being categories of *drumroll* carbohydrate.


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 2, 2018)

8ball said:


> I think you'd be quite poorly if the only carbs you had were the obligatory glucose required for your brain.
> Gut biome buggered, blood lipids would be very wonky, I dread to think what would happen to your bowel movements...


again i've met people who, if they are to be believed, are fine without fibre, I donb't think i'm one of them.

blood lipids are also fine, including for people eating high fat or zero carb.

this doesn't seem to be an issue


----------



## 8ball (Feb 2, 2018)

There is no company called "Horus Snacks" selling gourmet sweetbreads and associated products.

I'm a little disappointed.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Feb 2, 2018)

e2a: Fuck feeding this troll, I'm out.


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 2, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> Where did you study biochemistry again? The University of Shitforbrains?



Carbs break down into glucose, to say they glucose is a carb is to be disingenuous and responding with assholery doesn't change your silly appeal to authority


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 2, 2018)

8ball said:


> There is no company called "Horus Snacks" selling gourmet sweetbreads and associated products.
> 
> I'm a little disappointed.


Wankhers Crisps?

perhaps not


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Feb 2, 2018)

Horus Snacks said:


> again i've met people who, if they are to be believed, are fine without fibre, I donb't think i'm one of them.
> 
> blood lipids are also fine, including for people eating high fat or zero carb.
> 
> this doesn't seem to be an issue


So anecdotes are ok only if they're your ones?


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 2, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> So anecdotes are ok only if they're your ones?




Of course not, that's why I qualified what I said. 

I'm not asking you to treat them as anything other than anecdotes, but there doesn't seem to be evidence that even a relative extreme meat only/zero carb/no plant food at all diet has the consequences you might expect. Blood lipids don't seem to suffer on LC diets. 

Why don' tyou make a point of your own instead of trying to call me out? YOu haven't yet done so


----------



## 8ball (Feb 2, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> Glucose is not a ketone, it is an aldehyde. Both ketones and aldehydes being categories of *drumroll* carbohydrate.



It's not me you have to convince! 

(it has an aldehyde group but I don't think it's considered an aldehyde - been a looonngg time since I did any biochem, though)
(or, it's an aldehyde in the same way fructose is a ketone...)
(maybe)


----------



## 8ball (Feb 2, 2018)

Horus Snacks said:


> again i've met people who, if they are to be believed, are fine without fibre, I donb't think i'm one of them.
> 
> blood lipids are also fine, including for people eating high fat or zero carb.
> 
> this doesn't seem to be an issue



I get what high fat is, but zero carb?  As in *zero*.  

What might you eat over the course of a day to have zero carbs?


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 2, 2018)

They aren't. No more than a steering wheel is a car.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Feb 2, 2018)

Horus Snacks said:


> Carbs break down into glucose, to say they glucose is a carb is to be disingenuous and responding with assholery doesn't change your silly appeal to authority



What do you think 'carb' means?

Spoiler alert: you're wrong.


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 2, 2018)

8ball said:


> I get what high fat is, but zero carb?  As in *zero*.
> 
> What might you eat over the course of a day to have zero carbs?


Zero carb is something of a misnomer, the diet is specifically no plant food. It would likely be impossible to be completely zero carb. Just animal meats/produce


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 2, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> What do you think 'carb' means?
> 
> Spoiler alert: you're wrong.


I think it means carbohydrate, what do you think it means?


----------



## SpookyFrank (Feb 2, 2018)

Horus Snacks said:


> I think it means carbohydrate, what do you think it means?



I think it means carbohydrate. 

What do you think 'carbohydrate' means?

Spoiler alert: you're wrong.


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 2, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> I think it means carbohydrate.
> 
> What do you think 'carbohydrate' means?
> 
> Spoiler alert: you're wrong.


Great, why ask me then? Do you enjoy wasting your own time?


----------



## SpookyFrank (Feb 2, 2018)

Horus Snacks said:


> Great, why ask me then? Do you enjoy wasting your own time?



I'm trying to get you to stop talking shit.


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 2, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> I'm trying to get you to stop talking shit.


Gee thanks dad!

Now why don't you make a good argument and stop saying things that aren't true.

Or you can actually leave, like you said you were going to, and take your ball and play somewhere else. 

I really don't care which


----------



## 8ball (Feb 2, 2018)

Horus Snacks said:


> Great, why ask me then? Do you enjoy wasting your own time?



Frank is taking 'carbohydrate' to be synonymous with 'sacharride', which is biochemically correct but admittedly not how everyone uses the term.
But it does cover one glucose molecule, or one sucrose molecule (a glucose and fructose molecule bonded together), right up to the loooonnng-chain and complex stuff.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Feb 2, 2018)

Horus Snacks said:


> The whole point? What IS your point, i don't think you've made one yet; can you tell me?
> Fruits comprise some good nutrition...


lol @ the grudging acceptance that there's "some" good nutrition in fruit, how very gracious of you to acknowledge the bleedin' obvious.



Horus Snacks said:


> Organ meats are incredibly nutritious.


Maybe so. Funny how veg*ns appear to be top of the wellness metrics while consuming all those nasty "carbs". Looks like they can also get good nutrition while avoiding the negatives of awful offal. How the fuck do they do that?



Horus Snacks said:


> I've no idea who goes around eating one type of food, I don't think that was my argument.


Well it makes your comparison of liver and apples useless, because nobody goes around eating just live or just apples. A healthy person eats a variety of whole foods and doesn't get their nutrients from just one food.



Horus Snacks said:


> I haven't said people can't eat vegan food.


Well you kinda have...


Horus Snacks said:


> I don't think you can get enough nutrition from veg alone, but if that's what people wish to eat that's fine.





Horus Snacks said:


> Not once have i spoken down to someone because they eat differently than I


I'm not sure why you've brought that up, I don't think that has been suggested.


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 2, 2018)

So what is the actual point being made here?


----------



## SpookyFrank (Feb 2, 2018)

8ball said:


> Frank is taking 'carbohydrate' to be synonymous with 'sacharride'



I'm taking it to be synonymous with 'carbohydrate', on which point our colleague appears to agree with me.

It's this business of glucose not being a carbohydrate that's complete rubbish.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Feb 2, 2018)

Horus Snacks said:


> So what is the actual point being made here?



You're an ignorant cunt who shoudn't be telling other people what's good for them.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 2, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> I'm taking it to be synonymous with 'carbohydrate', on which point our colleague appears to agree with me.
> 
> It's this business of glucose not being a carbohydrate that's complete rubbish.



You're taking 'carbohydrate' to be synonymous with 'carbohydrate'?
I'd consider this a fairly minimal expectation.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Feb 2, 2018)

8ball said:


> You're taking 'carbohydrate' to be synonymous with 'carbohydrate'?
> I'd consider this a fairly minimal expectation.



Apparently even that is setting the bar too low


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 2, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> lol @ the grudging acceptance that there's "some" good nutrition in fruit, how very gracious of you to acknowledge the bleedin' obvious.
> 
> 
> Maybe so. Funny how veg*ns appear to be top of the wellness metrics while consuming all those nasty "carbs". Looks like they can also get good nutrition while avoiding the negatives of awful offal. How the fuck do they do that?
> ...


Grudging? You're spoiling for a fight where none exists. I've repeatedly said I have no problem with people eating vegan at all. ON the other hand you seem incapable of extending the same courtesy.

Youre making the claim about vegans, but you aren't backing it up. No one said carbs were nasty either. I said they were not essential and that for some they aren't healthy. As I ALSO said plenty of people eat them just fine. 

The  nutritional content of liver stands by itself. You can easily look it up. The point of comparison was to show you that you don't need to eat fruit to get a helathy diet.


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 2, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> You're an ignorant cunt who shoudn't be telling other people what's good for them.


Poor baby.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Feb 2, 2018)

Horus Snacks said:


> Youre making the claim about vegans, but you aren't backing it up. No one said carbs were nasty either. I said they were not essential and that for some they aren't healthy. As I ALSO said plenty of people eat them just fine.



You also said numerous things which demonstrate that you don't know what a carb is.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Feb 2, 2018)

Horus Snacks said:


> Grudging? You're spoiling for a fight where none exists. I've repeatedly said I have no problem with people eating vegan at all. ON the other hand you seem incapable of extending the same courtesy.


Well, I'm not where you've see a "fight", I think you've just made that up. I don't think anybody said that you had e problem with people eating vegan, another thing you've just made up. What you have said is that people can't get enough nutrition from plants.



Horus Snacks said:


> Youre making the claim about vegans, but you aren't backing it up.


Where have you backed up your rubbish opening statement that decent nutrition can't be had from plant based sources?


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 2, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> You also said numerous things which demonstrate that you don't know what a carb is.


that's your claim, but you haven't established that


----------



## UnderAnOpenSky (Feb 2, 2018)

AnnaKarpik said:


> I don't think I've read anything to suggest that vegans are particularly long-lived either; the idea that vegans (or vegetarians for that matter) are healthier because of what they avoid eating is an odd one. Off the top of my head I can think of three groups of people who tend to live longer and healthier lives than the norm (northern Italy, Okinawa, US seventh day adventists). The Italians eat meat, the Okinawans eat meat and fish and the longest lived adventists eat fish. Then there's the Graz study of vegetarians that found they suffer more ill-health than omnivores (nb - the study did not conclude that a vegetarian diet was responsible for this. It seems that scientists, unlike newspapers, know that if a study divides people into meat / non-meat eaters it doesn't necessarily mean that any effects discovered are down to the presence or absence of meat.)
> 
> There is evidence galore that eating whole grains, legumes and lots of vegetables and fruit has a beneficial effect on various disease markers as well as the subjective experience of good health, whether you take out the dead things or not.




I wasn't trying to suggest they live longer, but suggest if they were missing all these nutrients as claimed, they wouldnt live such long lives.

Your totally right about that it's about what you add, rather then not eating dead things.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 2, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> You also said numerous things which demonstrate that you don't know what a carb is.



Colloquial language vs. technically accurate.  But yeah, technically accurate is best if discussing in this area.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Feb 2, 2018)

Horus Snacks said:


> that's your claim, but you haven't established that



carbohydrate
kɑːbəˈhʌɪdreɪt/
_noun_

any of a large group of organic compounds occurring in foods and living tissues and including sugars, starch, and cellulose. They contain hydrogen and oxygen in the same ratio as water (2:1) and typically can be broken down to release energy in the animal body.


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 2, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Well, I'm not where you've see a "fight", I think you've just made that up. I don't think anybody said that you had e problem with people eating vegan, another thing you've just made up. What you have said is that people can't get enough nutrition from plants.
> 
> 
> Where have you backed up your rubbish opening statement that decent nutrition can't be had from plant based sources?


My claim was that you don't get everything you need from plants, eg Vitamin b12 (at least, i'm happy to concede the rest of what i listed since i'm not interested in going through it all).


----------



## 8ball (Feb 2, 2018)

Horus Snacks said:


> that's your claim, but you haven't established that



Let’s just proceed on the basis that glucose is a carb until you can get to a Biochem textbook from somewhere in the last 80 years or so.


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 2, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> carbohydrate
> kɑːbəˈhʌɪdreɪt/
> _noun_
> 
> any of a large group of organic compounds occurring in foods and living tissues and including sugars, starch, and cellulose. They contain hydrogen and oxygen in the same ratio as water (2:1) and typically can be broken down to release energy in the animal body.


Why are you posting this and how do you think this answers my question?


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Feb 2, 2018)

8ball said:


> No, if there was only *one* food created specifically for human consumption it would be human breast milk.


lol, ok well, the production of human breast milk, as with all mammalian milks is a temporary arrangement, and that breast milk is created from whatever the mother has eaten, and in any case, for those who have a fetish for this sort of thing, the macronutrient ratio for human breast milk is similar to that of fruit. (quite a bit different to liver)


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 2, 2018)

8ball said:


> Let’s just proceed on the basis that glucose is a carb until you can get to a Biochem textbook from somewhere in the last 80 years or so.


I'm trying to establish what we're proceeding with. I'm not interested in semantics and pedantry


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 2, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> lol, ok well, the production of human breast milk, as with all mammalian milks is a temporary arrangement, and that breast milk is created from whatever the mother has eaten, and in any case, for those who have a fetish for this sort of thing, the macronutrient ratio for human breast milk is similar to that of fruit. (quite a bit different to liver)


I'm no expert on it but i would think breastmilk is the same regardless of waht the mother eats, at least fundamentally. It's not going to turn into cider if the mother starts eating lots of apples


----------



## mojo pixy (Feb 2, 2018)

Horus Snacks said:


> I'm trying to establish what we're proceeding with. I'm not interested in semantics and pedantry *and scienific definitions*



FIFY


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 2, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> FIFY


no one was arguing the scientific defintion of a carbohydrate. You've misunderstood the conversation.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 2, 2018)

Horus Snacks said:


> My claim was that you don't get everything you need from plants, eg Vitamin b12 (at least, i'm happy to concede the rest of what i listed since i'm not interested in going through it all).



You can get it from a few plants in small amounts.  It all ultimately comes from bacteria, though.  I was more interested in the ‘non-essential nutrients’ angle, really.


----------



## mojo pixy (Feb 2, 2018)

Horus Snacks said:


> no one was arguing the scientific defintion of a carbohydrate. You've misunderstood the conversation.



I don't think I have. 'Carbohydrate' is a thing. A specific thing. It includes Glucose, as stated and restated many times by now. I think _you've _misunderstood the conversation.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Feb 2, 2018)

Horus Snacks said:


> My claim was that you don't get everything you need from plants, eg Vitamin b12


If what you're claiming is true then veg*ns would be struggling compared to omnivores, and yet you haven't provided any evidence to back that up. Am I supposed to just accept that as a fact just because you say it is?


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 2, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> If what you're claiming is true then veg*ns would be struggling compared to omnivores, and yet you haven't provided any evidence to back that up. Am I supposed to just accept that as a fact just because you say it is?


You're straw manning me; I didn't make a claim that vegans were struggling. I said that meat is a better source of nutrition. Clearly vegans can supplement their diet and eat fortiied food products. I also said that wasn't something I endorsed or felt was part of a healthy diet. One shouldn't have to rely on supplements. If you want to, then be my guest.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 2, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> lol, ok well, the production of human breast milk, as with all mammalian milks is a temporary arrangement, and that breast milk is created from whatever the mother has eaten, and in any case, for those who have a fetish for this sort of thing, the macronutrient ratio for human breast milk is similar to that of fruit. (quite a bit different to liver)



Yeah, I was being flippant.
And yeah, lots of sugar in breast milk.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Feb 2, 2018)

Horus Snacks said:


> You're straw manning me; I didn't make a claim that vegans were struggling. I said that meat is a better source of nutrition.


Again, vague nonsense with nothing to back it up with. The evidence would be in the outcomes, which would mean that those vegans would be missing out on "essential" nutrients only available in meat, and yet they appear on nearly every reliable measure to be doing better. You have yet to provide evidence to back up what you've said.  That's not strawmanning at all. As Mr Cruise was forced to say "show me the money".



Horus Snacks said:


> Clearly vegans can supplement their diet and eat fortiied food products. I also said that wasn't something I endorsed or felt was part of a healthy diet. One shouldn't have to rely on supplements. If you want to, then be my guest.


Well I have been vegetarian for 30 years and vegan for 20 years with no supplementation apart from an occasional B12 spray.  My blood work is all within the normal range and compared to my peers, some of whom were very scathing of my dietry choice (I'm not suggesting that you are) I'm doing fine thanks. In fact two of my fiercest critics have already died from cancer.


----------



## mojo pixy (Feb 2, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> the production of human breast milk, as with all mammalian milks is a temporary arrangement



It is, but unlike other mammals, humanity has evolved in a way that most people continue producing lactase into adulthood, which means we uniquely can keep drinking milk of all kinds for as long as we like.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Feb 2, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> It is, but unlike other mammals, humanity has evolved in a way that most people continue producing lactase into adulthood, which means we uniquely can keep drinking milk of all kinds for as long as we like.


...and according to wiki lactase persistence is a fairly recent adaptation to the consumption of nonhuman milk, so it might be a bit of a stretch saying "we can drink it for as long as we like". Some of us can with no obvious symptoms, however "the majority of people around the world remain lactase nonpersistent".

Lactase persistence - Wikipedia


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 2, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Again, vague nonsense with nothing to back it up with. The evidence would be in the outcomes, which would mean that those vegans would be missing out on "essential" nutrients only available in meat, and yet they appear on nearly every reliable measure to be doing better. You have yet to provide evidence to back up what you've said.  That's not strawmanning at all. As Mr Cruise was forced to say "show me the money".
> 
> 
> Well I have been vegetarian for 30 years and vegan for 20 years with no supplementation apart from an occasional B12 spray.  My blood work is all within the normal range and compared to my peers, some of whom were very scathing of my dietry choice (I'm not suggesting that you are) I'm doing fine thanks. In fact two of my fiercest critics have already died from cancer.


There was nothing vague therein at all. 

Your other comment is just irrrelevant.


----------



## mojo pixy (Feb 2, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> ...and according to wiki lactase persistence is a fairly recent adaptation to the consumption of nonhuman milk, so it might be a bit of a stretch saying "we can drink it for as long as we like". Some of us can with no obvious symptoms, however "the majority of people around the world remain lactase nonpersistent"



I know that, which is why i used the word ''humanity'' rather than humans, or people. Not every single actual person is lactase-persistent and yet it's true to say that humanity in general has evolved that trait. Similarly, I can't touch my thumb and little finger together without using my other hand to push them together, that doesn't mean humanity hasn't evolved opposable digits.


----------



## NoXion (Feb 2, 2018)

No doubt lactase persistence is once of those traits that will be considered an aberrant mutation in the brave new vegan world, and presumably we'll be purged from the gene pool like the affronts to nature that we all are.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Feb 2, 2018)

Horus Snacks said:


> There was nothing vague therein at all.


It so is. You claim that meat has better nutrition, but you have produced no evidence to back up your claim. Just repeating your claim doesn't magic it into truth.



Horus Snacks said:


> Your other comment is just irrrelevant.


Again, I'm not just going to accept that on your say so given that most of what you've written so far has been fairly low quality. 
The relevance is that you're implying that vegans need supplementation moreso than their meat eating peers. Well here stands a non-meat eating person in defiance of your claims. Maybe it's divine intervention or something.

Anyway, I think I've been overly generous donating my time to you, so I'm calling time.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Feb 2, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> I know that, which is why i used the word ''humanity'' rather than humans, or people. Not every single actual person is lactase-persistent and yet it's true to say that humanity in general has evolved that trait. Similarly, I can't touch my thumb and little finger together without using my other hand to push them together, that doesn't mean humanity hasn't evolved opposable digits.


Your opposable digits comparison would work if the majority of "humanity" didn't have them, but all of us do have them even though some may be a bit less dexterous. The majority of humanity is not lactase-persistent.


----------



## mojo pixy (Feb 2, 2018)

The majority of humanity has black hair and brown skin. Therefore humanity hasn't evolved other levels of pigmentation.


----------



## ddraig (Feb 2, 2018)

an angry vegan!!
This is what happened when an angry vegan spotted Jeremy Vine’s ham sandwich


----------



## ddraig (Feb 2, 2018)

and perfect for this thread!!
Vegans hurt their case by being too extreme


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 2, 2018)

Joey 'Carbstrong'?

ridiculous man


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 2, 2018)

Interesting study linked off of the J-Vine story: Turns out vegan diets aren't so good for the environment


----------



## ddraig (Feb 2, 2018)

you clearly are bothered by vegans and their choices, why is that? what difference does it make to you?


----------



## ddraig (Feb 2, 2018)

Horus Snacks said:


> Interesting study linked off of the J-Vine story: Turns out vegan diets aren't so good for the environment


oooh a study!! must be true eh

what you say about this graphic in the link you provided?


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 2, 2018)

ddraig said:


> you clearly are bothered by vegans and their choices, why is that? what difference does it make to you?


you're not helping it Leon, why is that?


----------



## ddraig (Feb 2, 2018)

Horus Snacks said:


> you're not helping it Leon, why is that?


----------



## editor (Feb 2, 2018)

Horus Snacks said:


> you're not helping it Leon, why is that?


Who is Leon?


----------



## 8ball (Feb 2, 2018)

ddraig said:


>



He’s about to ask you about your mother.


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 2, 2018)

ddraig said:


> oooh a study!! must be true eh
> 
> what you say about this graphic in the link you provided?


Do you have a better study? I'd be happy to take a look. I'm not entirely sure what your attitde is in service to but your instincts are off kilter.


----------



## editor (Feb 2, 2018)

Horus Snacks said:


> Interesting study linked off of the J-Vine story: Turns out vegan diets aren't so good for the environment


And the conclusion: 


> The findings of this study support the idea that dietary change towards plant-based diets has significant potential to reduce the agricultural land requirements of U.S. consumers and increase the carrying capacity of U.S. agricultural resources. Future work is needed to determine the best way to share this productive bounty with the rest of the world, but potential for dietary change to influence land requirements and carrying capacity is clear. Diet composition matters.



Quality self-pwnage there.


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 2, 2018)

ddraig said:


>


Why don't you tell me all the good things...about your mother


----------



## ddraig (Feb 2, 2018)

I'm not the one making assertions
if you're going to make them, back them up


----------



## 8ball (Feb 2, 2018)

ddraig said:


> oooh a study!! must be true eh



Not actually a ‘study’, really.
Would be interested to see the input parameters.

Never heard of that journal, mind.


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 2, 2018)

editor said:


> And the conclusion:
> 
> 
> Quality self-pwnage there.


Is there a reason why you think I shouldn't post a study that doesn't explicitly advocate the diet I chose?


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 2, 2018)

ddraig said:


> I'm not the one making assertions
> if you're going to make them, back them up


So you're just another dickhead then?


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 2, 2018)

8ball said:


> Not actually a ‘study’, really.
> Would be interested to see the input parameters.
> 
> Never heard of that journal, mind.


I just thought it was worth mentioning, but apparently that's not a credible reason to post something on aninternet forum with angry vegans aboard


----------



## ddraig (Feb 2, 2018)

Horus Snacks said:


> So you're just another dickhead then?


pardon??  how am i?
you've been making all kinds of claims and not backing them up, that just means it's your opinion not fact


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 2, 2018)

ddraig said:


> I'm not the one making assertions
> if you're going to make them, back them up


How's this for starters, 





ddraig said:


> you clearly are bothered by vegans and their choices, why is that? what difference does it make to you?



Feel free to back that up


----------



## ddraig (Feb 2, 2018)

Horus Snacks said:


> How's this for starters,
> 
> Feel free to back that up


your entry and majority of posts on this thread claiming the vegan diet isn't sufficient


----------



## editor (Feb 2, 2018)

Horus Snacks said:


> Do you have a better study? I'd be happy to take a look. I'm not entirely sure what your attitde is in service to but your instincts are off kilter.


Who is Leon?


----------



## 8ball (Feb 2, 2018)

Horus Snacks said:


> I just thought it was worth mentioning, but apparently that's not a credible reason to post something on aninternet forum with angry vegans aboard



It’s interesting and a difficult thing to attempt to quantify.  I’ve worked in a similar area and with something like this the initial assumptions will have a major impact on the result.

If it supports anything, it’s that reducing meat consumption will have substantial environmental benefits.


----------



## editor (Feb 2, 2018)

8ball said:


> It’s interesting and a difficult thing to attempt to quantify.  I’ve worked in a similar area and with something like this the initial assumptions will have a major impact on the result.
> 
> If it supports anything, it’s that reducing meat consumption will have substantial environmental benefits.


Indeed. But that's pretty much universally recognised anyway.


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 2, 2018)

ddraig said:


> your entry and majority of posts on this thread claiming the vegan diet isn't sufficient



Nope you asserted that I was bothered by the choices of vegans. Hadyou bothered to read the thread you'd notice that on multiple occasions I said the complete opposite. Saying the vegan diet isn't sufficient is also not the claim I made. The claim I made was that you don't get enough nutrition from plant food alone. Clearly vegans supplement their diet so it can be sufficient, however that is not my preference or desire. Feel free not to jump to shitty conclusions about someone the first time you talk to them, it makes you look a dickhead.


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 2, 2018)

editor said:


> Who is Leon?


I suggest your direct your inquiry to Dr Elden Tyrell


----------



## ddraig (Feb 2, 2018)

Horus Snacks said:


> Nope you asserted that I was bothered by the choices of vegans. Hadyou bothered to read the thread you'd notice that on multiple occasions I said the complete opposite. Saying the vegan diet isn't sufficient is also not the claim I made. The claim I made was that you don't get enough nutrition from plant food alone. Clearly vegans supplement their diet so it can be sufficient, however that is not my preference or desire. Feel free not to jump to shitty conclusions about someone the first time you talk to them, it makes you look a dickhead.


and it's been explained to you that you are wrong
any need for the abuse btw?


----------



## 8ball (Feb 2, 2018)

editor said:


> Indeed. But that's pretty much universally recognised anyway.



Yeah, I suppose on this thread it could be surprising to some that vegan diets don’t come out on top, though.

It does start from an assumption that patterns of land use etc. remain as they are, which is a weakness of the model.  Then again, there are certain areas of land that are poor for growing crops but work for livestock grazing land.

It’s very complicated, but as you say, it supports what is “pretty much universally recognised”.

Although I think taken in the round it really isn’t pretty much universally recognised.  Yet.


----------



## editor (Feb 2, 2018)

Horus Snacks said:


> I suggest your direct your inquiry to Dr Elden Tyrell


I've still no idea what you're on about but you can have a warning for breaking Rule #1 of these forums.


----------



## mojo pixy (Feb 2, 2018)

ddraig said:


> oooh a study!! must be true eh
> 
> what you say about this graphic in the link you provided?





Horus Snacks said:


> Do you have a better study? I'd be happy to take a look. I'm not entirely sure what your attitde is in service to but your instincts are off kilter.



What that basically says is that if loads of people gave up meat everyone would have more to eat. This isn't a controversial opinion even, because livestock eat grain and veg crops humans could be eating instead, and the return on that fodder investment in terms of meat, weight for weight, is very small.

The interesting stat there is that a fully vegan diet is less sustainable than a dairy-vegetarian diet. If it were true, I'd be interested to know why that was. It might be that surrogate milks use even more water to produce than animal milk does, but I can't be arsed to look up figures. Someone who cares more can do that.


----------



## editor (Feb 2, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> What that basically says is that if loads of people gave up meat everyone would have more to eat. This isn't a controversial opinion even, because livestock eat grain and veg crops humans could be eating instead, and the return on that fodder investment in terms of meat, weight for weight, is very small.
> 
> The interesting stat there is that a fully vegan diet is less sustainable than a dairy-vegetarian diet. If it were true, I'd be interested to know why that was. It might be argued that surrogate milks use even more water to produce than animal milk does, but I can't be arsed to look up figures. Someone who cares more can do that.


I'm guessing it assumes that the dairy production employs the same high yield, intensive, extra-cruel methods currently employed which some may argue isn't truly 'sustainable'. But I can't be arsed to look it up either.


----------



## mojo pixy (Feb 2, 2018)

I don't think cruelty figures in the stats, but that is a bit of different issue than sustainability.


----------



## editor (Feb 2, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> I don't think cruelty figures in the stats, but that is a bit of different issue than sustainability.


Of course not, but I was idly mulling whether such cruelty is sustainable in a world where animal welfare issues are becoming moot.


Moot. Now there's a word I haven't used for a while.


----------



## mojo pixy (Feb 2, 2018)

Again, I'll not be looking it up but instinct (that infallible pundit) tells me that free-range organic stock farming is almost certainly more sustainable than intensive/battery farming, as well as self-evidently being less cruel.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 2, 2018)

editor said:


> I'm guessing it assumes that the dairy production employs the same high yield, intensive, extra-cruel methods currently employed which some may argue isn't truly 'sustainable'. But I can't be arsed to look it up either.



It will be using generally conservative assumptions in that regard, so I think you’d be right about current dairy methods being part of the assumptions.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 2, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> Again, I'll not be looking it up but instinct (that infallible pundit) tells me that free-range organic stock farming is almost certainly more sustainable than intensive/battery farming, as well as self-evidently being less cruel.



Reality is sometimes surprising once you start carefully working things out. But this is not talking about ‘sustainability’ in a very broad sense so much as how much land you need to feed a given number of people with a given set of conditions.

I’d be doubtful about complex variables like soil erosion being fed into the simulation.


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 2, 2018)

ddraig said:


> and it's been explained to you that you are wrong
> any need for the abuse btw?


Yes, when you talk down to me I bite back. Don't do it.

And you haven't explained anything, you were just rude and so you got bit for it.


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 2, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> What that basically says is that if loads of people gave up meat everyone would have more to eat. This isn't a controversial opinion even, because livestock eat grain and veg crops humans could be eating instead, and the return on that fodder investment in terms of meat, weight for weight, is very small.
> 
> The interesting stat there is that a fully vegan diet is less sustainable than a dairy-vegetarian diet. If it were true, I'd be interested to know why that was. It might be that surrogate milks use even more water to produce than animal milk does, but I can't be arsed to look up figures. Someone who cares more can do that.


It depends entirely on the nature of the meat-based diet. The only one mentioned in that study is the 'standard american diet' which is awful.


----------



## ddraig (Feb 2, 2018)

Horus Snacks said:


> Yes, when you talk down to me I bite back. Don't do it.
> 
> And you haven't explained anything, you were just rude and so you got bit for it.


I didn't explain as it had already been done by others
how have i talked down to you? and where was i rude? you're the one dishing out "dickhead" etc


----------



## mojo pixy (Feb 2, 2018)

8ball said:


> Reality is sometimes surprising once you start carefully working things out. But this is not talking about ‘sustainability’ in a very broad sense so much as how much land you need to feed a given number of people with a given set of conditions.
> 
> I’d be doubtful about complex variables like soil erosion being fed into the simulation.



Electricity (/oil/gas) and water use have to be factored in too, and they're bound to be far higher on ''indoor'' farms. Drug and antibiotic use, long-term stock health and waste disposal are also sustainability  issues, and will be different on indoor farms than free range ones. Space must be an issue, but it's far from the only one or I'd argue even the main one.


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 2, 2018)

ddraig said:


> I didn't explain as it had already been done by others
> how have i talked down to you? and where was i rude? you're the one dishing out "dickhead" etc


You're trolling at this point. You made a shitty assumption that one cursory read of any post I'd made in this thread would have disabused you of, and your response to my good faith posting of that survey was incredibly rude "ooh a study, it must be true!" Go away. I'm sick of having to deal with people like you, fuck off.


----------



## ddraig (Feb 2, 2018)

is this one awesome wells??


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 2, 2018)

What is wrong with you? You were incredibly rude to me and now you're so butthurt about it you're accusing me of being a sock? Get over yourself ffs


----------



## andysays (Feb 2, 2018)

editor said:


> Who is Leon?





editor said:


> Who is Leon?




The real question is, 'who is Horus Snacks?' or perhaps 'who did they use to be?'


----------



## editor (Feb 2, 2018)

ddraig said:


> is this one awesome wells??


It has the dull, stinky whiff, that's for sure.


----------



## editor (Feb 2, 2018)

Horus Snacks said:


> It depends entirely on the nature of the meat-based diet. The only one mentioned in that study is the 'standard american diet' which is awful.


What makes you think the British one is much better? We have a fucking appalling diet. Well I say 'we,' but I have a good veggie diet, but as a nation, we're the worst in Europe. 

This is the most overweight nation in Western Europe


----------



## ddraig (Feb 2, 2018)




----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 2, 2018)

editor said:


> What makes you think the British one is much better? We have a fucking appalling diet. Well I say 'we,' but I have a good veggie diet, but as a nation, we're the worst in Europe.
> 
> This is the most overweight nation in Western Europe


Where did I say that?


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 2, 2018)

editor said:


> It has the dull, stinky whiff, that's for sure.


learn to think critically then and stop behaving like a dick then


----------



## ddraig (Feb 2, 2018)

bye then!


----------



## editor (Feb 3, 2018)

Well well well

UK supermarkets report surge in sales of vegan food


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 3, 2018)

I guess 'supermarkets sell more fruit and veg' is a relatively pedestrian headline.

I'm all for people choosing to eat vegan if that's their jam. Good for them. As long as they eat real food and don't preach at me and call me a murderer or some daft shit. I fully respect that choice. 

Not every meat eater hates vegans and wants to rub their faces in bacon fat while punching them to death with a brisket, the narcissistic self absorbed pasty faced skeletor whiny cunts. Who the fuck do these people think they are anyway? GTFO!


----------



## Yossarian (Feb 3, 2018)

So edgy.


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 3, 2018)

SMH


----------



## coley (Feb 4, 2018)

Horus Snacks said:


> SMH



You still here? 
What if anything, is your point? 
Now I'm a 99.9 % vegetarian, anybody claiming to be a 100% vegetarian or Vegan is misleading themselves, but most, who try to live a meat free lifestyle do so honestly, but unless we investigate/ google,  every, cup of tea/coffee, alcoholic drink, meal, put before us, we are largely knackered.
So,we do our reasonable best.
Fuck you, and the rest of those, who think that increased GOP is the saviour of humankind.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Feb 4, 2018)

editor said:


> Well well well
> 
> UK supermarkets report surge in sales of vegan food


tbh, I have mixed feelings about using the word "vegan" at all and although I use it somewhat reluctantly I understand that is is a temporary way of distinguishing those that are ok with animal abuse and exploitation from those that aren't. 

I look forward to the day when it's no longer newsworthy and becomes the new normal and the word is removed from our vocabulary and from the headlines. "UK supermarkets report surge in sales of food". 

There is no word (well not one that I could find) for people who refuse to eat human flesh. We don't really need one. I suppose you could call them noncannibalistic, but even then it's not a word you'd have to use that often. Hopefully there will come a time when we no longer have to use the word "vegan" to describe people who refuse to eat animal flesh or consume their products (or call them noncarnist). A point brilliantly made in Amstell's Carnage (which I watched again yesterday), in this clip...



_That moment when UK citizens stopped labelling vegans "Vegan". As veganism became the dominant cultural norm, THEY instead became "Carnists"._


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 4, 2018)

coley said:


> You still here?
> What if anything, is your point?
> Now I'm a 99.9 % vegetarian, anybody claiming to be a 100% vegetarian or Vegan is misleading themselves, but most, who try to live a meat free lifestyle do so honestly, but unless we investigate/ google,  every, cup of tea/coffee, alcoholic drink, meal, put before us, we are largely knackered.
> So,we do our reasonable best.
> Fuck you, and the rest of those, who think that increased GOP is the saviour of humankind.


Yes, obviously.
My point? In relation to what, veganism? I thought I'd been pretty clear: I think animal produce is a better source of nutrition.
The rest of your point is a hideous straw man. Perhaps actually read what people say before misrepresenting them. I have no criticised anyone for doing their best, being a veggie/vegan at all. Nor have I said anything about GOP - what does taht even mean? The only GOP I'm aware is the Republican party in the US.


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 4, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> tbh, I have mixed feelings about using the word "vegan" at all and although I use it somewhat reluctantly I understand that is is a temporary way of distinguishing those that are ok with animal abuse and exploitation from those that aren't.
> 
> I look forward to the day when it's no longer newsworthy and becomes the new normal and the word is removed from our vocabulary and from the headlines. "UK supermarkets report surge in sales of food".
> 
> ...



What? Human flesh? Who eats that?

I think it'll be a long time coming before veganism becomes the dominant cultural norm I'm afraid.


----------



## mojo pixy (Feb 4, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> _ "Carnists"_



Have we managed to clarify yet why you aren't using the perfectly clear expression "meat eaters", apart from that you like to feel the power of winding up meat eaters by calling them "carnists"? What other purpose does this neologism serve?


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 4, 2018)

No one will ever use the word 'carnist' seriously


----------



## mojo pixy (Feb 4, 2018)

@PabloSanchez does - or he uses it as if he takes it seriously, dozens of times on this thread alone - hence my query.


----------



## NoXion (Feb 4, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> Have we managed to clarify yet why you aren't using the perfectly clear expression "meat eaters", apart from that you like to feel the power of winding up meat eaters by calling them "carnists"? What other purpose does this neologism serve?



The fact that vegans have come out with such neologisms, in addition to their central mystery of why it's OK to kill other animals for living space but not for food, is why I consider veganism (as opposed to simply refraining from consuming animal products) to be a kind of religion. That and the evangelism.


----------



## DotCommunist (Feb 4, 2018)

carnist sounds a bit like someone who is prejudiced against carnival people


----------



## ddraig (Feb 4, 2018)

NoXion said:


> The fact that vegans have come out with such neologisms, in addition to their central mystery of *why it's OK to kill other animals for living space but not for food*, is why I consider veganism (as opposed to simply refraining from consuming animal products) to be a kind of religion. That and the evangelism.


 what do you mean by the bit i've bolded?
are you hypocrisy hunting?


----------



## NoXion (Feb 4, 2018)

ddraig said:


> what do you mean by the bit i've bolded?
> are you hypocrisy hunting?



Well I don't see what difference it makes to the other animals the reason why they're killed. They're not going to care if it's for meat or for something we consider "essential", any more than any human would care why they're being murdered.


----------



## ddraig (Feb 4, 2018)

NoXion said:


> Well I don't see what difference it makes to the other animals the reason why they're killed. They're not going to care if it's for meat or for something we consider "essential", any more than any human would care why they're being murdered.


what "essential" things are they killed for and what about the living space assertion? can you elaborate or back up?


----------



## ddraig (Feb 4, 2018)

are you arguing if you can't do something 100% watertight there's no point in trying or those trying are pathetic losers and they might as well add more cruelty and eat meat?


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 4, 2018)

ddraig said:


> are you arguing if you can't do something 100% watertight there's no point in trying or those trying are pathetic losers and they might as well add more cruelty and eat meat?


Why is it cruel to eat meat?


----------



## NoXion (Feb 4, 2018)

ddraig said:


> what "essential" things are they killed for and what about the living space assertion? can you elaborate or back up?



I hardly think it's controversial to state that when humans occupy or make us of land for whatever reason, they displace other animals, indeed entire ecosystems, in the process. They may try to move into these areas once they are established, but may well be considered disruptive or noxious to the human inhabitants and could be subject to pest control measures. Since there is limited surface area on this planet, this means that when humans (re-)make use of land, animals will die for want of living space. This happens whatever the diet of the human population concerned. 

When humans do that kind of thing to each other, we tend to call it things like ethnic cleansing and genocide. Viewed in that light, eating meat and wearing leather are merely the gore-cherries on a planet-sized scabcake covered in blood icing. It's not all bad for non-humans I guess though; despite endless attempts at elimination by humans, rats have enjoyed an unprecedented success in breeding and surviving, hitching rides on human transportation to inhabit the entire world, or close enough.

But for the vast majority of non-human animals on this planet, the mere presence of humans is usually bad news.  What is more fundamental than the right to life? How can animals be liberated under the shadow of human domination?



ddraig said:


> are you arguing if you can't do something 100% watertight there's no point in trying or those trying are pathetic losers and they might as well add more cruelty and eat meat?



The problem as I see it is that being vegan is not even close to "100% watertight", if one takes the view that killing animals is inherently wrong. Would you accept a war criminal's excuse that at least he and none of his underlings ended up eating the bodies of their victims?


----------



## ddraig (Feb 4, 2018)

Horus Snacks said:


> Why is it cruel to eat meat?


because something has to die for you to eat it, ad you don't need it so choose for something to be put to death for your plate
and that's without the horrendous way animals are bred and raised before being slaughtered

why is it not?


----------



## ddraig (Feb 4, 2018)

NoXion said:


> I hardly think it's controversial to state that when humans occupy or make us of land for whatever reason, they displace other animals, indeed entire ecosystems, in the process. They may try to move into these areas once they are established, but may well be considered disruptive or noxious to the human inhabitants and could be subject to pest control measures. Since there is limited surface area on this planet, this means that when humans (re-)make use of land, animals will die for want of living space. This happens whatever the diet of the human population concerned.
> 
> When humans do that kind of thing to each other, we tend to call it things like ethnic cleansing and genocide. Viewed in that light, eating meat and wearing leather are merely the gore-cherries on a planet-sized scabcake covered in blood icing. It's not all bad for non-humans I guess though; despite endless attempts at elimination by humans, rats have enjoyed an unprecedented success in breeding and surviving, hitching rides on human transportation to inhabit the entire world, or close enough.
> 
> ...


oh my days, you actually typed that out!!  
did you copy and paste it or honestly believe it??
killing less things is better, do you agree?


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 4, 2018)

ddraig said:


> because something has to die for you to eat it, ad you don't need it so choose for something to be put to death for your plate
> and that's without the horrendous way animals are bred and raised before being slaughtered
> 
> why is it not?


Then why is it ok to kill vegetables? Are they not alive?

I don't think animals killing animals is cruel. I think it can be done cruelly and I think cruelty can, and does, exist in the process, which we ought to minimise and stamp out. But that is ancillary to the point.


----------



## NoXion (Feb 4, 2018)

ddraig said:


> oh my days, you actually typed that out!!
> did you copy and paste it or honestly believe it??
> killing less things is better, do you agree?



Depends on what "things" we are talking about. I think we should be killing more pests, and we should be killing fewer endangered species, but those are for entirely selfish reasons.


----------



## ddraig (Feb 4, 2018)

Horus Snacks said:


> Then why is it ok to kill vegetables? Are they not alive?
> 
> I don't think animals killing animals is cruel. I think it can be done cruelly and I think cruelty can, and does, exist in the process, which we ought to minimise and stamp out. But that is ancillary to the point.



how do you propose existing without eating vegetables and plants?
so we ought to minimise cruelty which exists in the process but you don't think killing animals is cruel? is that your actual argument??


----------



## ddraig (Feb 4, 2018)

NoXion said:


> Depends on what "things" we are talking about. I think we should be killing more pests, and we should be killing fewer endangered species, but those are for entirely selfish reasons.



eating meat is selfish too if not necessary where you are and all the caveats about food deserts etc etc before everyone jumps in


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 4, 2018)

ddraig said:


> how do you propose existing without eating vegetables and plants?
> so we ought to minimise cruelty which exists in the process but you don't think killing animals is cruel? is that your actual argument??


I'm not proposing anything, I'm responding to what you said. I personally find the cruelty argument ridiculous because it seems arbitrary. 

I don't think killing animals for food is cruel, i didn't say killing animals per se is cruel. It depends on the reason. I think that's the natural cycle of existence on planet earth. Killing animals for lipstick is cruel, killing animals for food is not. It also depends on th emethod of depsatch. If the process involves brutality then that would seem to me to be cruel.


----------



## NoXion (Feb 4, 2018)

ddraig said:


> eating meat is selfish too if not necessary where you are and all the caveats about food deserts etc etc before everyone jumps in



Loads of things aren't necessary. You don't need to drink anything other than tap water, yet would you call selfish anyone who drinks more than that?


----------



## klang (Feb 4, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> carnist sounds a bit like someone who is prejudiced against carnival people


----------



## Voley (Feb 4, 2018)

littleseb said:


>


I approve.


----------



## ddraig (Feb 4, 2018)

Horus Snacks said:


> I'm not proposing anything, I'm responding to what you said. I personally find the cruelty argument ridiculous because it seems arbitrary.
> 
> I don't think killing animals for food is cruel, i didn't say killing animals per se is cruel. It depends on the reason. I think that's the natural cycle of existence on planet earth. Killing animals for lipstick is cruel, killing animals for food is not. It also depends on th emethod of depsatch. If the process involves brutality then that would seem to me to be cruel.


how does death not involve brutality?


NoXion said:


> Loads of things aren't necessary. You don't need to drink anything other than tap water, yet would you call selfish anyone who drinks more than that?


are you both in the same class at school?


----------



## NoXion (Feb 4, 2018)

ddraig said:


> are you both in the same class at school?



Doing unnecessary things isn't selfish.


----------



## ddraig (Feb 4, 2018)

NoXion said:


> Doing unnecessary things isn't selfish.


killing am animal purely for your pleasure is selfish


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 4, 2018)

ddraig said:


> how does death not involve brutality?



I use the word to outline the situation where the animal was made to suffer. If we put a sick dog to sleep does it suffer? WOuld the vet be called brutal? I dont think so. Brutality would mean abuse, torture, unecessary pain inflicted. I don't think that is inherently the case with humanely and respectfully despatching animals for food.

I believe animal food is the optimal source of nutrition therefore i would argue that it's necessary in the sense we want to be at peak performance diet-wise.


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 4, 2018)

ddraig said:


> killing am animal purely for your pleasure is selfish


no one has made the argument animals should be killed for pleasure.


----------



## NoXion (Feb 4, 2018)

ddraig said:


> killing am animal purely for your pleasure is selfish



Well that's not the case with meat. It's generally eaten as food. Oh, it's purely for pleasure because you can choose to become vegan? Well you can choose to drink nothing but tap water.


----------



## ddraig (Feb 4, 2018)

Horus Snacks said:


> no one has made the argument animals should be killed for pleasure.


eating meat is for your pleasure isn't it? 
you don't do debate very well do you!
why are many sports people choosing a vegan diet then if it didn't enable them to do a peak performance? do you think you'd beat them


----------



## ddraig (Feb 4, 2018)

NoXion said:


> Well that's not the case with meat. It's generally eaten as food. Oh, it's purely for pleasure because you can choose to become vegan? Well you can choose to drink nothing but tap water.


so you don't enjoy eating meat? people don't eat it for their pleasure??


----------



## NoXion (Feb 4, 2018)

ddraig said:


> so you don't enjoy eating meat? people don't eat it for their pleasure??



Well if it wasn't pleasurable I wouldn't eat it. That's how eating food works, at least for me. I suppose there exist those self-flagellating types who only force down their throat exactly what they think they need in nutritional terms, no matter how awful it tastes, but I suspect that such folks are in the minority.


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 4, 2018)

ddraig said:


> eating meat is for your pleasure isn't it?
> you don't do debate very well do you!
> why are many sports people choosing a vegan diet then if it didn't enable them to do a peak performance? do you think you'd beat them


i eat food because it's healthy. That's what informs my diet. I also enjoy it because that's a biological necessity. There are foods I cannot stomach that are healthy so yes 'pleasure' in a practical sense is required. But it is not the focus or the goal. I think you're using the word incorrectly.


----------



## gosub (Feb 4, 2018)

NoXion said:


> Well if it wasn't pleasurable I wouldn't eat it. That's how eating food works, at least for me. I suppose there exist those self-flagellating types who only force down their throat exactly what they think they need in nutritional terms, no matter how awful it tastes, but I suspect that such folks are in the minority.


Huel nutters


----------



## NoXion (Feb 4, 2018)

gosub said:


> Huel nutters



Huel?


----------



## gosub (Feb 4, 2018)

NoXion said:


> Huel?


Complete Food


----------



## NoXion (Feb 4, 2018)

gosub said:


> Complete Food



Bloody hell!


----------



## keybored (Feb 4, 2018)

NoXion said:


> Huel?


It's surely no coincidence that the product name sounds a lot like the noise I make when I throw up.


----------



## editor (Feb 4, 2018)

Horus Snacks said:


> Then why is it ok to kill vegetables? Are they not alive?


Oh for fuck's sake.


----------



## editor (Feb 4, 2018)

Horus Snacks said:


> I also enjoy it because that's a biological necessity.


You've just described all food if your aim is to stay alive. In the west, no one _needs_ to eat meat to live though. It's a choice. People can live perfectly healthy lives with zero meat and impact a whole lot less on the environment.


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 4, 2018)

editor said:


> Oh for fuck's sake.


And yet you provide no counter argument


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 4, 2018)

editor said:


> You've just described all food if your aim is to stay alive. In the west, no one _needs_ to eat meat to live though. It's a choice. People can live perfectly healthy lives with zero meat and impact a whole lot less on the environment.


Yes, people can enjoy eating all sorts of food because we are programmed to receive a pleasurable sensation from foods we enjoy.

You missed the point: i believe animal produce to be the optimal source of nutrition. My goal is not merely to live, but to thrive, so logically that would entail eating optimally no?

You can keep facepalming all you like, i'd rather have a sensible respectful discussion not some tedious enounter with another preachy wanker. So far you've not given me a good reason to not eat meat. The environmental impact for my diet has yet to be established and I don't believe that, once divested of capitalism, this problem will be quite the same


----------



## ddraig (Feb 4, 2018)

Horus Snacks said:


> i eat food because it's healthy. That's what informs my diet. I also enjoy it because that's a biological necessity. There are foods I cannot stomach that are healthy so yes 'pleasure' in a practical sense is required. But it is not the focus or the goal. I think you're using the word incorrectly.


It is not a biological necessity
there are plenty of people as living proof
will you concede that?


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 4, 2018)

ddraig said:


> It is not a biological necessity
> there are plenty of people as living proof
> will you concede that?


You're not listening.
I said enjoying food is a biological necessity; that's how we are built. We have evolved to enjoy the foods we eat and seek them out in the future.


----------



## editor (Feb 4, 2018)

Horus Snacks said:


> You missed the point: i believe animal produce to be the optimal source of nutrition.


Ah, with no facts to back you up, it's now all down to 'belief' like a belief in God, pixies and UFOs.

A meat heavy diet is not the optimum anything. A balanced diet is, and that can be achieved without meat. 



> 'Studies have linked higher intakes of red meat consumption to higher risk of heart disease’, says Victoria Taylor, chief dietitian with the British Heart Foundation (BHF).





> A number of large scale studies have linked non-meat eaters to longer lives and the Blue Zones project, which studies the diets of the world’s longest lived people such as the Japanese in Okinawa and Sardinians in Italy shows they thrive on plant-based, low or no-meat diets.





> Last month the World Cancer Research Fund (WCRF) concluded red meat consumption was strongly linked to the development of colorectal cancer – the fourth most common cancer in the UK - and that by eating no more than 500 grams a week of cooked beef, lamb or pork we could considerably lower our risk.





> One study from Tufts University in Massachussetts published in last April analysed studies 120,000 people’s diets over 16 years and found large intakes of red meat were associated with weight gain while replacing red meat with yoghurt, seafood and nuts led to weight loss.


The truth about meat, according to scientists


----------



## editor (Feb 4, 2018)

Horus Snacks said:


> You're not listening.
> I said enjoying food is a biological necessity


No you didn't. Stop wriggling.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Feb 4, 2018)

Member since Tuesday. #15 on a thread that was started last july. CrabbedOne has a contender. I suggest feeding him less snacks. No more snacks for this radge basturt!


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Feb 4, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> Member since Tuesday. #15 on a thread that was started last july. CrabbedOne has a contender. I suggest feeding him less snacks. No more snacks for this radge basturt!
> 
> View attachment 126753


I stopped feeding scooby ages ago. Clearly a fraud.


----------



## editor (Feb 5, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> I stopped feeding scooby ages ago. Clearly a fraud.


T'is fun to kick the buffoon around from time to time though. I think he ight even believe the drivel he posts up because a proper troll wouldn't have to make anywhere near as  much effort.


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 5, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> Member since Tuesday. #15 on a thread that was started last july. CrabbedOne has a contender. I suggest feeding him less snacks. No more snacks for this radge basturt!
> 
> View attachment 126753


Is that aimed at me? You seriously posted this? Aren't there some kids playing ball outside you could be phoning the council about? Creepy mohtherfucker!



editor said:


> Ah, with no facts to back you up, it's now all down to 'belief' like a belief in God, pixies and UFOs.
> 
> A meat heavy diet is not the optimum anything. A balanced diet is, and that can be achieved without meat.
> 
> ...


I can't find a link to the study you're referring to in that article, published by a tabloid. Please cite a source diretly.

Saying that because I have provided no source my belief is the equivalent to the supernatural is just stupid. But you haven't debunked anything. All that article does is reiterate your own belief, and link to another article which mentions, but seems to provide no source, for a study about protein. I haven't advocated any particular protein, though mine is on the high side for Keto (which isn't a high protein diet).

Arguing for a balanced diet, which you don't eat as a vegan anyway, is just a fallacy.



editor said:


> No you didn't. Stop wriggling.


That is exactly what I said, and subsequently clarified as you know since you are responding to me doing so, which just makes you dishonest. 

You're just a liar, and not a very good one


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 5, 2018)

editor said:


> T'is fun to kick the buffoon around from time to time though. I think he ight even believe the drivel he posts up because a proper troll wouldn't have to make anywhere near as  much effort.


You mean like the effort to link to a tabloid article and not the direct source for the claim you're making?


----------



## xenon (Feb 5, 2018)

This is beyond tedious. 

Horus, if you don't care what other people eat, why are you posting so much bilge on this thread. 

Yeah, yeah you think eating meat is optimum. Fine. So what. Why bore everyone else about it.

This thread was partially interesting, if not entertaining, for a while.


----------



## xenon (Feb 5, 2018)

"Arguing for a balanced diet, which you don't eat as a vegan anyway, is just a fallacy."

Evidence your claim.



But seriously, how do you know Editor doesn't eat a balanced diet? You've admitted it's possible to get a range, a balance of nutriants with out eating meat. You love chucking around pseudo debate club rules and complaints, whilst repeatidly breaking them yourself. It's fucking boring anyway.

Balanced diet is not what this thread's about anyway. Many meat eaters don't eat a balanced diet, so far as the term is understood.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Feb 5, 2018)

editor said:


> T'is fun to kick the buffoon around from time to time though. I think he ight even believe the drivel he posts up because a proper troll wouldn't have to make anywhere near as  much effort.


tbh, I don't really know what motivates a proper troll and what lengths they go to. As soon as it was clear that scooby was a piss take just here to pick a fight and talk bare shite, I switched off.


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 5, 2018)

xenon said:


> "Arguing for a balanced diet, which you don't eat as a vegan anyway, is just a fallacy."
> 
> Evidence your claim.
> 
> ...


Because by definition a vegan diet requires supplementation. I wasn't arguing for a balanced diet, was that not clear. I'm sure you could find a thread more to your liking elsewhere. I'm nit here to give you an eco chamber


----------



## editor (Feb 5, 2018)

Horus Snacks said:


> I can't find a link to the study you're referring to in that article, published by a tabloid. Please cite a source diretly.


The article links directly to several sources you stupid, stupid, boy.


----------



## lazythursday (Feb 5, 2018)

Ah the old supplementation is bad argument, conveniently ignoring the fact that a number of staple foodstuffs are fortified with vitmains / minerals and farmed animals receive supplementation which ends up in the meat.


----------



## mwgdrwg (Feb 5, 2018)

Is there a general thread on Urban where one can find information and maybe get support about eating less or no meat? This thread's a fucking joke now


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Feb 5, 2018)

mwgdrwg said:


> Is there a general thread on Urban where one can find information and maybe get support about eating less or no meat? This thread's a fucking joke now


If you're genuinely interested there's loads on places on the interwebs where you can find support.

Although I'm not a big fan of single issue forums I am a member on this one ---> Vegetarian and Vegan Forums @ Veggie Views (haven't posted anything yet)

Unfortunately, the sort of thing that has happened in this thread is typical. Flesh eaters get shook and go out of their way to trash the topic. It's very predictable. Similarly with youtube comments.


----------



## ddraig (Feb 5, 2018)

mwgdrwg said:


> Is there a general thread on Urban where one can find information and maybe get support about eating less or no meat? This thread's a fucking joke now


was thinking of starting one in suburban for that very reason and that it wouldn't be dicked about so much on but worried the usual suspects would still wreck it


----------



## xenon (Feb 5, 2018)

ddraig said:


> was thinking of starting one in suburban for that very reason and that it wouldn't be dicked about so much on but worried the usual suspects would still wreck it



Go on start one I reckon.

This one's for argument stuff. A straight up informational thread shouldn't get trashed. I eat meat but do like other stuff too. Not like I eat meat every day.

Anyone being a nob on those type of threads could be banned off them.


----------



## xenon (Feb 5, 2018)

Horus Snacks said:


> Because by definition a vegan diet requires supplementation. I wasn't arguing for a balanced diet, was that not clear. I'm sure you could find a thread more to your liking elsewhere. I'm nit here to give you an eco chamber


Why do you care so much anyway? You've offered nothing except saying you think meat is more convenient source of certain nutrients for you. Vegans aren't making their case based on convenience.

Besides, supplementation is hardly the preserve of vegans. As pointed out. Bread is fortified etc. As for all the problems with meat production disappearing along with Capitlism. The scifi recommendations thread is elsewhere.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 5, 2018)

mwgdrwg said:


> Is there a general thread on Urban where one can find information and maybe get support about eating less or no meat? This thread's a fucking joke now



Maybe separate "ideology" and "recipes" ones.


----------



## ddraig (Feb 5, 2018)

xenon said:


> Go on start one I reckon.
> 
> This one's for argument stuff. A straight up informational thread shouldn't get trashed. I eat meat but do like other stuff too. Not like I eat meat every day.
> 
> Anyone being a nob on those type of threads could be banned off them.


done
Veganism, new and old Vegans, info, support and recipes


----------



## editor (Feb 5, 2018)

ddraig said:


> was thinking of starting one in suburban for that very reason and that it wouldn't be dicked about so much on but worried the usual suspects would still wreck it


I'll keep a close eye on it.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Feb 5, 2018)

_"First this morning. British farmers tell this program they can't sleep at night and feel under attack by some vegan activitsts who describe them as rapists and issue death threats."
_
That is a typical BBC "opening move" whenever they are reporting vegans in the news, however in spite of the not very flattering association between vegans and unpleasant numpties, I thought Earthling Ed conducted himself very well on the Victoria Derbyshire show last week...


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 5, 2018)

editor said:


> The article links directly to several sources you stupid, stupid, boy.


Great, so instead of your constant passive aggressive sneering bullshit which has been the hallmark of every one of your responses to me, you'll be able to link to one of those claims, which you also could have done here but again chose to piss all over the convo.
The only study actually referenced in that article is in relation to heart attacks and that the mediterranean diet is healthier. Not sure than what as I couldn't find a reference waht for. The Med diet is not a vegan diet.
Other than that it mentions, as I said, a study regarding animal protein which, if eaten in large enough quantities is apparently linked to cancer. Since no study is cited this is a meantingless assertion. It also doesn't address the proposition that all meat is inherently unhealthy since eating some meat would offend you.
Finally there is mention of the World Cancer Research Fund study claiming red meat is linked o colorectal cancer, but again no study is cited, just a link to the organisation itself. The article alleges this "could" related to sat fats. Meaningless, there is no evidence saturated fats are unhealthy anway, that dietary myth has been debunked. Besides it seems to refer to processed meats. Not fresh meat.

So, no, you stupid, stupid boy, there aren't studies linked. There are references to studies, which are not cited directly. Just mere assertion.


----------



## mojo pixy (Feb 5, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Unfortunately, the sort of thing that has happened in this thread is typical. *Flesh eaters *get shook and go out of their way to trash the topic. It's very predictable. Similarly with youtube comments.



Not to mention the regular little digs like this crude and unnecessary attempt to equate meat eating humans with some kind of bacteria or parasite. It's ridiculous. Why can't you just use the term _meat eaters_, like some kind of normal person? Does it really bother you so much to refer to meat eaters neutrally, without having a snide attack?


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 5, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> _"First this morning. British farmers tell this program they can't sleep at night and feel under attack by some vegan activitsts who describe them as rapists and issue death threats."
> _
> That is a typical BBC "opening move" whenever they are reporting vegans in the news, however in spite of the not very flattering association between vegans and unpleasant numpties, I thought Earthling Ed conducted himself very well on the Victoria Derbyshire show last week...



Would like to have heard more from the former vegan lady. 

Not sure harassing farmworkers really helps


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 5, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> If you're genuinely interested there's loads on places on the interwebs where you can find support.
> 
> Although I'm not a big fan of single issue forums I am a member on this one ---> Vegetarian and Vegan Forums @ Veggie Views (haven't posted anything yet)
> 
> Unfortunately, the sort of thing that has happened in this thread is typical. Flesh eaters get shook and go out of their way to trash the topic. It's very predictable. Similarly with youtube comments.


What you mean like when I posted to put my preference forward and gave you vegans every courtesy and got shit flung at me for my trouble?


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 5, 2018)

xenon said:


> Why do you care so much anyway? You've offered nothing except saying you think meat is more convenient source of certain nutrients for you. Vegans aren't making their case based on convenience.
> 
> Besides, supplementation is hardly the preserve of vegans. As pointed out. Bread is fortified etc. As for all the problems with meat production disappearing along with Capitlism. The scifi recommendations thread is elsewhere.


Do you have anything worth listening to or just wah wah the thread isn't to my liking? You come across like a spoilt child


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 5, 2018)

mwgdrwg said:


> Is there a general thread on Urban where one can find information and maybe get support about eating less or no meat? This thread's a fucking joke now


How about somewhere where someone can explain how to eat a LCHF vegan diet.


----------



## ddraig (Feb 5, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> Not to mention the regular little digs like this crude and unnecessary attempt to equate meat eating humans with some kind of bacteria or parasite. It's ridiculous. Why can't you just use the term _meat eaters_, like some kind of normal person? Does it really bother you so much to refer to meat eaters neutrally, without having a snide attack?


meat is flesh though so why do you see it as a dig? it's just the reality, nothing to do with bacteria or being a parasite. Many/most meat/flesh eaters know and are not bothered that they're eating animal flesh, why does it bother you so much?


----------



## xenon (Feb 5, 2018)

Horus Snacks said:


> Do you have anything worth listening to or just wah wah the thread isn't to my liking? You come across like a spoilt child



I've been reading it on and off for months. You've turned up and shat all over it. Bore off.


----------



## NoXion (Feb 5, 2018)

Not sure why we're even discussing the health aspects of a vegan diet in the first place. One's health is one's own business, and it's perfectly possible to eat a balanced diet that includes meat.

The great crusade isn't about health, otherwise vegan activists would be showing people pictures of tumours being surgically removed or whatever, like on fag packets.

Instead they show pictures of animals because they reckon more people give a shit about cyoot fuzzy-wuzzy animals than their own health.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 5, 2018)

Horus Snacks said:


> How about somewhere where someone can explain how to eat a LCHF vegan diet.



I found a few recipes on a quick Google -  haven’t compared macros with omni LCHF or anything but there seems to be stuff out there.


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 5, 2018)

xenon said:


> I've been reading it on and off for months. You've turned up and shat all over it. Bore off.


Cry more you fucking child


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Feb 5, 2018)

ddraig said:


> meat is flesh though so why do you see it as a dig? it's just the reality, nothing to do with bacteria or being a parasite. Many/most meat/flesh eaters know and are not bothered that they're eating animal flesh, why does it bother you so much?


mp is another waste of space I've stopped bothering too much with. Seems to have hang ups on terminology and cunjurs up grievances out of thin air. Can't be arsed with that. Appears to me more interested in me than I am in him a bit like that nutcase lbj, as long as I don't respond to the crap, it will eventually fade away. (stereo mc's again...birds of a feather bees of a sting...)


----------



## 8ball (Feb 5, 2018)

NoXion said:


> Instead they show pictures of animals because they reckon more people give a shit about cyoot fuzzy-wuzzy animals than their own health.



There's been a bit more of a climate change angle recently.


----------



## NoXion (Feb 5, 2018)

8ball said:


> There's been a bit more of a climate change angle recently.



I don't own or drive a car, so I think my sin-to-salvation ratio is good enough on that one.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 5, 2018)

NoXion said:


> I don't own or drive a car, so I think my sin-to-salvation ratio is good enough on that one.



I think there might be a bit more to it than that.

edit:  Not that I'd personally couch it in religious terms, though it's certainly appropriate for the thread.


----------



## NoXion (Feb 5, 2018)

8ball said:


> I think there might be a bit more to it than that.



That's my point, it's just the standard attempt at guilt-tripping bullshit, given a fashionable new veneer. Climate change is not going to be solved by individuals giving up meat. It's a systemic problem requiring a systemic response.


----------



## xenon (Feb 5, 2018)

Horus Snacks said:


> Cry more you fucking child



Why the abuce?


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Feb 5, 2018)

xenon said:


> Why the abuce?


It betrays his true colours and he justifies it with made up bs about being abused himself, lol. 
Allow the wasteman.


----------



## mojo pixy (Feb 5, 2018)

ddraig said:


> meat is flesh though so why do you see it as a dig? it's just the reality, nothing to do with bacteria or being a parasite. Many/most meat/flesh eaters know and are not bothered that they're eating animal flesh, why does it bother you so much?



And _Muslims aren't a race so I aint racist_ blah, yeah. Words are just words and don't have uses, meanings and contexts.

What bothers me is the snideyness.

Tell y'what, find some examples of "flesh-eating ___" used in real life, post 'em up and then we can discuss terminology and connotation, ok?



PaoloSanchez said:


> *mp is another waste of space I've stopped bothering too much with*. Seems to have hang ups on terminology and cunjurs up grievances out of thin air. Can't be arsed with that. Appears to me more interested in me than I am in him a bit like that nutcase lbj, as long as I don't respond to the crap, it will eventually fade away. (stereo mc's again...birds of a feather bees of a sting...)



Except for when you choose to reply to my posts.

_Respond to the crap?_ Most of the responses are to your own crap you fake dimwit


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 5, 2018)

Horus Snacks said:


> Is that aimed at me? You seriously posted this? Aren't there some kids playing ball outside you could be phoning the council about? Creepy mohtherfucker!



Funny you should mention that mr wells.




			
				Horus snacks said:
			
		

> Is it ok in your opinion because "it's football". That was the excuse jsut given to me by the guy who walked in, without asking, to collcet the ball. As if to say "more fool you for having a home near a pitch".
> 
> I have raised the issue with our local councillor but it seems to have gone no further, or fallen on deaf ears somewhere along the line. THe local council think it's a matter for the district council who think it's a polic issue - as if i'm going to call the cops in ffs!


----------



## ddraig (Feb 5, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> And _Muslims aren't a race so I aint racist_ blah, yeah. Words are just words and don't have uses, meanings and contexts.
> 
> What bothers me is the snideyness.
> 
> ...


wtf?!?! are YOU SERIOUS?? comparing someone saying flesh eater to racism????


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 5, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> It betrays his true colours and he justifies it with made up bs about being abused himself, lol.
> Allow the wasteman.


You've not made a single point worth a drop of piss boyo. Time to go away


----------



## mojo pixy (Feb 5, 2018)

ddraig said:


> wtf?!?! are YOU SERIOUS?? comparing someone saying flesh eater to racism????



You fucking idiot no. I'm calling out disingenuousness. Do you even know what that word means? I doubt it. Like a fish doesn't know what water is.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Feb 5, 2018)

ddraig said:


> wtf?!?! are YOU SERIOUS?? comparing someone saying flesh eater to racism????


Starve them of the oxygen they thrive on. mp has complained about the use of the word "carnist" and other perfectly reasonable and benign words/phrases as if they were grave insults, and all this while completely ignoring the genuine abuse coming in the other direction right off the bat from the likes of noxious and honeymonster. It would be hard to find anyone more disingenuous than him in this thread. The dude is a waste of space and can jump in the bin with his wasteman colleague scooby.


----------



## ddraig (Feb 5, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> You fucking idiot no. I'm calling out disingenuousness. Do you even know what that word means? I doubt it. Like a fish doesn't know what water is.


calling something out by using racism as a comparison
why so dishonest and fragile?
and abusive?


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Feb 5, 2018)




----------



## NoXion (Feb 5, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Starve them of the oxygen they thrive on. mp has complained about the use of the word "carnist" and other perfectly reasonable and benign words/phrases as if they were grave insults, and all this while completely ignoring the genuine abuse coming in the other direction right off the bat from the likes of noxious and honeymonster. It would be hard to find anyone more disingenuous than him in this thread. The dude is a waste of space and can jump in the bin with his wasteman colleague scooby.



Reasonable and benign? No, "carnist" is loaded language and you know it. If you don't, then you're a whole lot less intelligent than I thought you were. If it's not loaded, why invent a new term? What's wrong with "meat eater"?


----------



## 8ball (Feb 5, 2018)

NoXion said:


> What's wrong with "meat eater"?



It's common parlance for people outside the group _used by_ people outside the group.
Lots of groups do this.


----------



## lazythursday (Feb 5, 2018)

I'm not sure I'm a fan of the word 'carnism' but it doesn't just mean 'meat eater'. It's a way of describing a whole group of attitudes / cultural practices tied up with meat eating and the assumption that meat eating is the norm / 'natural' etc.


----------



## NoXion (Feb 5, 2018)

8ball said:


> It's common parlance for people outside the group _used by_ people outside the group.
> Lots of groups do this.



Yes of course, many groups cement solidarity through the construction of an Other. That explains, but does not justify.

If vegans want to call them "carnists" amongst themselves, that doesn't bother me. But in a thread ostensibly addressed to non-vegans, repeated use of such terms isn't helpful in my opinion.

Nor is this habit of saying "ooh, you're 'hypocrisy hunting', therefore I can dismiss your argument _a priori_". Despite the fact that when I last had that canard thrown at me, I wasn't talking about hypocrisy at all, but about the fact that to other animals the human species could be considered a monstrous blight, no matter what the vast majority of humans eat.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 5, 2018)

NoXion said:


> If vegans want to call them "carnists" amongst themselves, that doesn't bother me. But in a thread ostensibly addressed to non-vegans, repeated use of such terms isn't helpful in my opinion.



I think one of your premises is mistaken.


----------



## NoXion (Feb 5, 2018)

8ball said:


> I think one of your premises is mistaken.



It would be helpful if you pointed out which one.


----------



## ddraig (Feb 5, 2018)

NoXion said:


> Yes of course, many groups cement solidarity through the construction of an Other. That explains, but does not justify.
> 
> If vegans want to call them "carnists" amongst themselves, that doesn't bother me. But in a thread ostensibly addressed to non-vegans, repeated use of such terms isn't helpful in my opinion.
> 
> Nor is this habit of saying "ooh, you're 'hypocrisy hunting', therefore I can dismiss your argument _a priori_". Despite the fact that when I last had that canard thrown at me, I wasn't talking about hypocrisy at all, but about the fact that to other animals the human species could be considered a monstrous blight, no matter what the vast majority of humans eat.


yes humans as a species are a monstrous blight, all humans
why use that as an argument against veganism if it's not hypocrisy hunting when other humans that aren't vegan are a blight too??

e2a - why should people be helpful to you in this thread?  why do you think you can try and demand that? why does it bother you so much?


----------



## 8ball (Feb 5, 2018)

NoXion said:


> It would be helpful if you pointed out which one.



I think ddraig just did.


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 5, 2018)

"gas chamber" nice, evoke certain imagery without presenting an argument as to why gassing pigs is inhumane.


----------



## NoXion (Feb 5, 2018)

ddraig said:


> yes humans as a species are a monstrous blight, all humans
> why use that as an argument against veganism if it's not hypocrisy hunting when other humans that aren't vegan are a blight too??
> 
> e2a - why should people be helpful to you in this thread?  why do you think you can try and demand that? why does it bother you so much?



Well that's the thing, I *don't* think humans are a monstrous blight. We're actually pretty damn successful and I wish the best for all of us.

But if you - unlike me - take the view that it's inherently wrong to kill animals for human benefit, then monstrous is what we are, and eating meat is far from the worst of it. Like I said before, but which you ignored in favour of just scoffing, war criminals don't get brownie points for refraining from eating their victims.

I'm not demanding anything. Just stating my opinion on the unhelpfulness of using snarl words. I would prefer that you did not, but since I have no power over you, it can only ever be a request.


----------



## ddraig (Feb 5, 2018)

Horus Snacks said:


> "gas chamber" nice, evoke certain imagery without presenting an argument as to why gassing pigs is inhumane.


That's what happens, it's another fact of the meat industry
You think gassing is humane??


----------



## ddraig (Feb 5, 2018)

NoXion said:


> Well that's the thing, I *don't* think humans are a monstrous blight. We're actually pretty damn successful and I wish the best for all of us.
> 
> But if you - unlike me - take the view that it's inherently wrong to kill animals for human benefit, then monstrous is what we are, and eating meat is far from the worst of it. Like I said before, but which you ignored in favour of just scoffing, war criminals don't get brownie points for refraining from eating their victims.
> 
> I'm not demanding anything. Just stating my opinion on the unhelpfulness of using snarl words. I would prefer that you did not, but since I have no power over you, it can only ever be a request.


Ace logic!! Do carry on


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 5, 2018)

ddraig said:


> That's what happens, it's another fact of the meat industry
> You think gassing is humane??


You don't seem capable of paying attention.

I didn't dispute that gassing happens. However no argument was provided that it was inhumane, instead the reader is left to draw a fairly clumsy and obvious comparison to the holocaust. That's fallacious and pretty repellant. Pigs aren't people.

Now if you have an argument as to why this method is problematic, let's hear it. If it knocks the animal out quickly and painlessly then I don't have a problem with it.


----------



## NoXion (Feb 5, 2018)

ddraig said:


> Ace logic!! Do carry on



That's your response? It doesn't even address anything I said.


----------



## ElizabethofYork (Feb 5, 2018)

Horus Snacks said:


> You don't seem capable of paying attention.
> 
> I didn't dispute that gassing happens. However no argument was provided that it was inhumane, instead the reader is left to draw a fairly clumsy and obvious comparison to the holocaust. That's fallacious and pretty repellant. Pigs aren't people.
> 
> Now if you have an argument as to why this method is problematic, let's hear it. If it knocks the animal out quickly and painlessly then I don't have a problem with it.



You might find this interesting.  
The truth behind the pork we eat


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 5, 2018)

ElizabethofYork said:


> You might find this interesting.
> The truth behind the pork we eat


Ok, if true that's pretty gross.

I'm not convinced the answer is abandon eating meat altogether. I think removing the economic system that underpins this and other evils in the world, including human exploitation, is better.

Meat doesn't have to be made this way


----------



## ddraig (Feb 5, 2018)

Horus Snacks said:


> You don't seem capable of paying attention.
> 
> I didn't dispute that gassing happens. However no argument was provided that it was inhumane, instead the reader is left to draw a fairly clumsy and obvious comparison to the holocaust. That's fallacious and pretty repellant. Pigs aren't people.
> 
> Now if you have an argument as to why this method is problematic, let's hear it. If it knocks the animal out quickly and painlessly then I don't have a problem with it.


Do you consider the practice of gassing to be humane or not?


Horus Snacks said:


> Ok, if true that's pretty gross.
> I'm not convinced the answer is abandon eating meat altogether. I think removing the economic system that underpins this and other evils in the world, including human exploitation, is better.
> 
> Meat doesn't have to be made this way


why wouldn't it be true? it is and yes it is gross as is the grinding of millions of male chicks
the only/most effective way to remove the economic system that underpins it is not to buy it


----------



## ddraig (Feb 5, 2018)

NoXion said:


> That's your response? It doesn't even address anything I said.



your previous argument was that humans kill animals by taking up space and you brought up the monstrous blight




			
				you said:
			
		

> I wasn't talking about hypocrisy at all, but about the fact that to other animals the human species could be considered a monstrous blight, no matter what the vast majority of humans eat.


your continuous whattaboutery and twisting logic is tedious and been seen before so didn't warrant a proper reply


----------



## NoXion (Feb 5, 2018)

ddraig said:


> your previous argument was that humans kill animals by taking up space and you brought up the monstrous blight
> 
> 
> your continuous whattaboutery and twisting logic is tedious and been seen before so didn't warrant a proper reply



It was seen before and as I have pointed out, it was ignored before with dismissals that don't even attempt to address the points made. I was hoping you might actually get around to doing that.

Funny how you keep saying I have crap arguments, yet you haven't actually demonstrated how.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Feb 5, 2018)

ElizabethofYork said:


> You might find this interesting.
> The truth behind the pork we eat





> “I want to eat pork from pigs that have been reared outdoors, free to enjoy the rooting, snuffling and social interaction that are so essential to them.
> 
> "In fact, that’s the only pork I’m prepared to eat,” says Hugh Fearnley-Whittingstall.



Sick bastard wants to go out of his way to ensure that happy pigs are killed for his breakfast instead of the miserable pigs who probably want to die 

I bet he eats his bacon sandwich with one hand too, while wanking furiously at the thought of all that piggy happiness and contentment snuffed out in a heartbeat. I bet he spunks his load thinking about that look of betrayal and existential anguish on the pig's face as the bolt is raised to its head.


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 5, 2018)

ddraig said:


> Do you consider the practice of gassing to be humane or not?
> 
> why wouldn't it be true? it is and yes it is gross as is the grinding of millions of male chicks
> the only/most effective way to remove the economic system that underpins it is not to buy it


Bizarre question.

It may or may not be true. It's a report from a newspaper.

I'm not interested in not buying it. I dont want to eat a vegan diet. I doubt I could afford a vegan diet (which isn't simply food either). I want to eat meat, but the responsibility for how farmers conduct their business is down to them. 

Get rid of the profit motive and things change. Me not buying meat won't make a shit of differencce


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Feb 5, 2018)

NoXion said:


> Reasonable and benign? No, "carnist" is loaded language and you know it. If you don't, then you're a whole lot less intelligent than I thought you were. If it's not loaded, why invent a new term? What's wrong with "meat eater"?


lol @ loaded. Loaded with what? What a ridiculous objection, especially coming from someone regularly using genuinely negative and abusive language throughout this thread. Sorry I can't take your complaint seriously at all. There's nothing at all wrong with the word "carnist". I didn't invent the word, and the person that did invent it gives a perfectly good reason for it. If you don't like it then too bad.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Feb 5, 2018)

Horus Snacks said:


> I want to eat meat, but the responsibility for how farmers conduct their business is down to them.



That's convenient for you.


----------



## lazythursday (Feb 5, 2018)

Horus Snacks said:


> I doubt I could afford a vegan diet



I do find this strange (though it's a comment I've seen plenty of times) as whenever I glance at the meat in the supermarket it seems ludicrously expensive and I always wonder how people afford to be meat eaters.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Feb 5, 2018)

> Carnism (like other oppressive systems) maintains itself by both strengthening itself and weakening the system that challenges it: veganism. Carnistic defenses serve both these purposes: they _validate_ carnism (they make eating animals seem legitimate, the “right thing to do”), and they _invalidate_ veganism (they make not eating animals seem not legitimate, the “wrong thing to do”).
> 
> Secondary carnistic defenses are the special defenses that exist to invalidate veganism. They do so by invalidating vegans, vegan ideology (beliefs and practices), and the vegan movement as a whole. Secondary defenses hide or distort the truth about veganism so that we remain unaware of important facts, and we don’t trust the facts we are aware of.
> 
> For example, most of us are unaware of the tremendous health benefits of a vegan diet, and we still believe the myths that eating animals is necessary and nutritious. And popular (carnistic) culture often portrays vegans as biased (ignoring the fact that carnistic bias is deeply ingrained) so that we tend to distrust the information that vegans share. Vegans are also often portrayed as overly emotional (and therefore irrational), moralistic, and radical – all stereotypes that serve to discredit the vegan message. By shooting the messenger, carnism makes it less likely that the message – which directly challenges the validity of carnism – will be heard.


This might explain the reason behind the poor conduct of the carnists in this thread.


----------



## NoXion (Feb 5, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> lol @ loaded. Loaded with what? What a ridiculous objection, especially coming from someone regularly using genuinely negative and abusive language throughout this thread. Sorry I can't take your complaint seriously at all. There's nothing at all wrong with the word "carnist". I didn't invent the word, and the person that did invent it gives a perfectly good reason for it. If you don't like it then too bad.



So what is the necessity of the term?


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Feb 5, 2018)

lazythursday said:


> I do find this strange (though it's a comment I've seen plenty of times) as whenever I glance at the meat in the supermarket it seems ludicrously expensive and I always wonder how people afford to be meat eaters.


It's a rather lame excuse based on the "middle class privilege" myth.


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 5, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> Sick bastard wants to go out of his way to ensure that happy pigs killed for his breakfast instead of the miserable pigs who probably want to die
> 
> I bet he eats his bacon sandwich with one hand too, while wanking furiously at the thought of all that piggy happiness and contentment snuffed out in a heartbeat. I bet he spunks his load thinking about that look of betrayal and existential anguish on the pig's face as the bolt is raised to its head.


Do you find sharing these weird fantasies helps you cope?


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 5, 2018)

lazythursday said:


> I do find this strange (though it's a comment I've seen plenty of times) as whenever I glance at the meat in the supermarket it seems ludicrously expensive and I always wonder how people afford to be meat eaters.


Things like nuts are very expensive


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 5, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> That's convenient for you.


Isn't it!

It's almost as if the only actions I'm responsible for are my own.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Feb 5, 2018)

Horus Snacks said:


> Do you find sharing these weird fantasies helps you cope?



Talking of which, would you care to share another scintillating offal-related anecdote with us?


----------



## SpookyFrank (Feb 5, 2018)

Horus Snacks said:


> Isn't it!
> 
> It's almost as if the only actions I'm responsible for are my own.



And not those you pay people to carry out on your behalf?


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Feb 5, 2018)

NoXion said:


> So what is the necessity of the term?


Just think of it as an enrichment of the English vocabulary. If selfie can be added to the dictionary, then so can carnist. 

What exactly is your "beef" with it, especially with you yourself have been fairly strident in your anti-vegan language.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Feb 5, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Just think of it as an enrichment of the English vocabulary.



It's not in the English vocabulary if nobody actually says it. You can't just make shit up and then claim it's part of the language.


----------



## lazythursday (Feb 5, 2018)

Horus Snacks said:


> Things like nuts are very expensive


Some nuts are more expensive than others, but their price per gram doesn't seem hugely different from meat. And other sources of vegan protein eg pulses are often extremely cheap in comparison.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Feb 5, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> It's not in the English vocabulary if nobody actually says it. You can't just make shit up and then claim it's part of the language.


See that's the thing, "lika somebooodeee" actually does say it, and I didn't just "make shit up". Besides, the wikipedia entry has 36 references so somebody must be saying it somewhere. Granted given that vegans are only a small percentage of the population it might take a bit longer than it did for "selfie" to get into the dictionary. Collins has it pending investigation. The same person managed to get Jammies, WLAN, Emoji and Endamame published so you never know. 

I still don't get what the big deal is and why carnists got beef of this new fangled word. What's up with that?


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 5, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> Talking of which, would you care to share another scintillating offal-related anecdote with us?


I don't think i've shared any offal related anecdotes at all, perhaps you were too busy confusing what i actually said with some celebrity chef wank fantasy


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 5, 2018)

lazythursday said:


> Some nuts are more expensive than others, but their price per gram doesn't seem hugely different from meat. And other sources of vegan protein eg pulses are often extremely cheap in comparison.


too much carb for me


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 5, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> And not those you pay people to carry out on your behalf?


i don't care to be the scapegoat, thanks for playing


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 5, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Just think of it as an enrichment of the English vocabulary. If selfie can be added to the dictionary, then so can carnist.
> 
> What exactly is your "beef" with it, especially with you yourself have been fairly strident in your anti-vegan language.


except carnist isn't going to be added to the dictionary because no one on earth will be using it


----------



## xenon (Feb 5, 2018)

Horus Snacks said:


> Bizarre question.
> 
> It may or may not be true. It's a report from a newspaper.
> 
> ...




What are you doing to end the profit motive then?


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 5, 2018)

xenon said:


> What are you doing to end the profit motive then?


i campaign for and advocate anti capitalist/socialist policies that I hope will at some point between now and the heat death of spacetime end capitalism. 

But i have very little power. 

I also dont want to destroy the meat industry, i want to see it improved. Vegans simply want it destroyed so oour goals do not align


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 5, 2018)

Horus Snacks said:


> I also dont want to destroy the meat industry, i want to see it improved. Vegans simply want it destroyed so oour goals do not align


right. so the meat industry, which only exists on the back of animals being forced into unnatural lives and helps fucks the planet through the distorted use of resources, should stay. i hope there is reincarnation and in your next life you come back as a battery chicken, the one after as a male chick, and the one after that as a cow. if you ever make it back to being human you might have a better appreciation of the meat industry.


----------



## mojo pixy (Feb 5, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Starve them of the oxygen they thrive on. mp has complained about the use of the word "carnist" and other perfectly reasonable and benign words/phrases as if they were grave insults, and all this while completely ignoring the genuine abuse coming in the other direction right off the bat from the likes of noxious and honeymonster. It would be hard to find anyone more disingenuous than him in this thread. The dude is a waste of space and can jump in the bin with his wasteman colleague scooby.



Again, this third-person referring to other posters is the kind of immature posing that's turned this thread into an intellectual and ethical toilet.



ddraig said:


> calling something out by using racism as a comparison
> why so dishonest and fragile?
> and abusive?



Prick, I'm using an example of disingenuousness to call out another example of disingenuousness. You thrive on the shit so no wonder you're confused.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Feb 5, 2018)

Horus Snacks said:


> i don't care to be the scapegoat, thanks for playing



A scapegoat by definition is someone who is _not _responsible for something. Are you therefore suggesting that you're, somehow, not responsible for the actions of a meat industry whose products you consume and whose activities you fund? If so, explain how and why you consider this to be the case.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Feb 5, 2018)

Horus Snacks said:


> too much carb for me



But we've already established you don't know what 'carb' means. It has been shown to you that your understanding of what 'carb' means is false. You have also demonstrated beyond doubt that you do not comprehend the role of carbohydrates in human metabolism and health, so you have no basis on which to state that anything has 'too much' of them.


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 5, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> But we've already established you don't know what 'carb' means. It has been shown to you that your understanding of what 'carb' means is false. You have also demonstrated beyond doubt that you do not comprehend the role of carbohydrates in human metabolism and health, so you have no basis on which to state that anything has 'too much' of them.


We haven't established that at all, nor have you provided any evidence as to why, if that were the case, I would need to know what carbs are in order for the LCHF to be a valid way of eating that has demonstrable benefits. You can try if you like.

All you have done is mumble something to the effect of "glucose is a carb" which is a stupid clumsy statement for the reasons I explained before you took your ball and stomped out the playground.

Still if you can point to valid science that debunks the low carb theory, be my guest. I'll happily present it to the communities I'm part of they eat shit like that for low carb breakfast. Off you go...


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 5, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> right. so the meat industry, which only exists on the back of animals being forced into unnatural lives and helps fucks the planet through the distorted use of resources, should stay. i hope there is reincarnation and in your next life you come back as a battery chicken, the one after as a male chick, and the one after that as a cow. if you ever make it back to being human you might have a better appreciation of the meat industry.


good luck with that


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 5, 2018)

Horus Snacks said:


> good luck with that


Yeh. You struggled before producing that pisspoor attempt at cutting repartee.


----------



## lazythursday (Feb 5, 2018)

It seems pointless arguing about health benefits of diets, seeing as it's pretty easy to trawl the internet and find different studies pointing to positive and negative effects of all diets whether high carb, low carb, paleo or vegan or whatever. The only thing that seems clear is that a standard junk food / processed food heavy diet is bad for you whereas one made up of lots of whole foods is good. 

Most people who are vegans, or mainly plant based, don't choose the diet for solely health reasons in any case.


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 5, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Yeh. You struggled before producing that pisspoor attempt at cutting repartee.


and yet you're responding. Dance monkey dance


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 5, 2018)

lazythursday said:


> It seems pointless arguing about health benefits of diets, seeing as it's pretty easy to trawl the internet and find different studies pointing to positive and negative effects of all diets whether high carb, low carb, paleo or vegan or whatever. The only thing that seems clear is that a standard junk food / processed food heavy diet is bad for you whereas one made up of lots of whole foods is good.
> 
> Most people who are vegans, or mainly plant based, don't choose the diet for solely health reasons in any case.


Of course.

However it's not really pointless, since we can examine peer review and look at actual evidence. Maybe not easy or fun to do, but to argue that because there are lots of apparently conflicting claims, interests or biases, doesn't mean it's not possible. Whether you want to is a matter for you


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 5, 2018)

Horus Snacks said:


> and yet you're responding. Dance monkey dance


Is this what passes for the cut and thrust of debate round yours?


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 5, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Is this what passes for the cut and thrust of debate round yours?


I wasn't debating you. I was mocking you. Do you see the difference?


----------



## SpookyFrank (Feb 5, 2018)

Horus Snacks said:


> All you have done is mumble something to the effect of "glucose is a carb" which is a stupid clumsy statement for the reasons I explained before you took your ball and stomped out the playground.



Whatever your reasons were they were bullshit because gluose is a carbohydrate.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 5, 2018)

Horus Snacks said:


> I wasn't debating you. I was mocking you. Do you see the difference?


I see you're desperate. Of course you weren't debating me, never thought you were. And your mocking leaves much to be desired, it's really shit.


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 5, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> Whatever your reasons were they were bullshit because gluose is a carbohydrate.


You daft cunt, you've just admitted not knowing what i've said - so you can't comment on it then can you, fuckwit!


----------



## Spymaster (Feb 5, 2018)

Looks like this thread's finally showing a bit of promise!


----------



## editor (Feb 5, 2018)

Horus Snacks said:


> You daft cunt, you've just admitted not knowing what i've said - so you can't comment on it then can you, fuckwit!


Wind in the bad language please.


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 5, 2018)

editor said:


> Wind in the bad language please.


no thanks. what's good for the goose and all that. I don't need lectures from hypocrits


----------



## editor (Feb 5, 2018)

Horus Snacks said:


> no thanks. what's good for the goose and all that. I don't need lectures from hypocrits


And have a warning. Please look at the rules before continuing, Mr Wells.


----------



## mojo pixy (Feb 5, 2018)

NoXion said:


> So what is the necessity of the term?



Let's see then .. ''Carnist'' .. a term laden with assumptions, then like ''Flesh-eater'', used with a scornful, derisive tone. Not self-adopted labels but imposed from outside. The necessity is that someone needs a little word magick to give them power, it's one of the main reasons words get invented and then ring-fenced.

It's transparent and pathetic. But annoying nonetheless.


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 5, 2018)

editor said:


> And have a warning. Please look at the rules before continuing, Mr Wells.


Great warn me, do what you like. You're the mod. Doesn't mean I'm going to respect you while you ignore other people swearing in exactly the same fashion. 

No idea who Mr Wells is. But if you want to assume everyone who disagrees with you that you can't cope with intellectually is a sock, be my guest.


----------



## NoXion (Feb 5, 2018)

Horus Snacks said:


> Great warn me, do what you like. You're the mod. Doesn't mean I'm going to respect you while you ignore other people swearing in exactly the same fashion.
> 
> No idea who Mr Wells is. But if you want to assume everyone who disagrees with you that you can't cope with intellectually is a sock, be my guest.



If you're not Wells, I'll go vegan for a week!


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 5, 2018)

do what the fuck you like mate, this place is a joke


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 5, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> I see you're desperate. Of course you weren't debating me, never thought you were. And your mocking leaves much to be desired, it's really shit.


feel free to tell your cunt of a mate, butchers, that the community in Bristol don't want nothing to do with him, they know who he is and they don't want bullies in their community.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 5, 2018)

Horus Snacks said:


> Things like nuts are very expensive



Not at Lidl they're not.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 5, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> It's not in the English vocabulary if nobody actually says it. You can't just make shit up and then claim it's part of the language.



Well, people do that all the time.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 5, 2018)

editor said:


> Wind in the bad language please.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 5, 2018)

Horus Snacks said:


> feel free to tell your cunt of a mate, butchers, that the community in Bristol don't want nothing to do with him, they know who he is and they don't want bullies in their community.


you snivelling coward mr 'bo' wells


----------



## editor (Feb 5, 2018)

Horus Snacks said:


> do what the fuck you like mate, this place is a joke


Is that why you keep coming back?


----------



## ddraig (Feb 5, 2018)

I get bags of mixed nuts from home bargains for £1.60 something that are a decent size and have cashew, hazlenuts, almond, pecan and other stuff


----------



## 8ball (Feb 5, 2018)

You tend to eat nuts in pretty small amounts anyway (well, I do).
Then again, that was the way with meat for a very long time, except for the extremely rich.


----------



## editor (Feb 5, 2018)

ddraig said:


> I get bags of mixed nuts from home bargains for £1.60 something that are a decent size and have cashew, hazlenuts, almond, pecan and other stuff


Poundland do quite large bags of nuts for a massive quid.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Feb 5, 2018)

I wonder where this idea that fruits, vegetables, nuts and seeds are only available for the wealthy? 
Who makes this shit up?


----------



## 8ball (Feb 5, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> I wonder where this idea that fruits, vegetables, nuts and seeds are only available for the wealthy?
> Who makes this shit up?



Fresh fruit and veg can be quite difficult for some people in some locations, depending on budget.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Feb 5, 2018)

8ball said:


> Fresh fruit and veg can be quite difficult for some people in some locations, depending on budget.


...and fresh meat isn't?


----------



## 8ball (Feb 5, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> ...and fresh meat isn't?



I barely ever buy it.  Rarely buy fresh fish.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Feb 5, 2018)

8ball said:


> I barely ever buy it.  Rarely buy fresh fish.


Well regardless of whether you buy it or not, I don't believe that even if you were buying fresh fruit and veg that it would be more expensive than a shopping basket that included fresh meat/fish. Which is what that scooby clown is implying.


----------



## sealion (Feb 5, 2018)

ddraig said:


> I get bags of mixed nuts from home bargains for £1.60 something that are a decent size and have cashew, hazlenuts, almond, pecan and other stuff


These people  Nuts – Buy Almonds, Walnut, Cashews, Pinenut & Mixed Nuts have a store near me and are much cheaper than the big stores.


----------



## editor (Feb 5, 2018)

8ball said:


> Fresh fruit and veg can be quite difficult for some people in some locations, depending on budget.


Like meat then. Except that's generally a lot more expensive than fruit and veg.

Where is so hard to find, by the way? Even corner shops usually come with cheap fruit and veg?


----------



## 8ball (Feb 5, 2018)

editor said:


> Like meat then. Except that's generally a lot more expensive than fruit and veg.
> 
> Where is so hard to find, by the way? Even corner shops usually come with cheap fruit and veg?



Five a day? It's none a day in Britain's urban food deserts


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Feb 5, 2018)

8ball said:


> Five a day? It's none a day in Britain's urban food deserts


Oh gawd, not the "food deserts" again. 
Access to fresh meat and fish is would be equally problematic in a "food desert".


----------



## 8ball (Feb 5, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Oh gawd, not the "food deserts" again.
> Access to fresh meat and fish is would be equally problematic in a "food desert".



150 Urban points awarded.

#NotAllVegans


----------



## Favelado (Feb 5, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> I wonder where this idea that fruits, vegetables, nuts and seeds are only available for the wealthy?
> Who makes this shit up?



Fruit and veg and pulses are cheap. The myth that always gets me is that fast food is cheap. Think people on benefits can afford a Macdonald's for the whole family? 4  meal deals would work at out at 20 odd quid for one dinner. Very expensive. I'm not veggie by the way, just chiming in on that point. If you are skint, it's pasta, rice, and veg you have access to. It's stuff like that (and admittedly Super Noodles) that provide calories for the truly poor. Lentils if you know how to cook them too, although they aren't the top sellers in the UK that they are here in Spain.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Feb 5, 2018)

Favelado said:


> Fruit and veg and pulses are cheap. The myth that always gets me is that fast food is cheap. Thing people on benefits can afford a Macdonald's for the whole family? 4  meal deals would work at out at 20 odd quid for one dinner. Very expensive. I'm not veggie by the way, just chiming in on that point. If you are skint, it's pasta, rice, and veg you have access to. It's stuff like that (and admittedly Super Noodles) that provide calories for the truly poor. Lentils if you know how to cook them too, although they aren't the top sellers in the UK that they are here in Spain.


Exactly. It's a bit of nonsense really the whole "middle class privilege" myth. It would appear that some people are desperate to find anything, no matter how ridiculous, to try and make out that it's really hard to be vegan. The hardest thing is putting up with the dickheads talking rubbish.


----------



## Humberto (Feb 5, 2018)

Yeah well comfort food and marketing.


----------



## Favelado (Feb 5, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Exactly. It's a bit of nonsense really the whole "middle class privilege" myth. It would appear that some people are desperate to find anything, no matter how ridiculous, to try and make out that it's really hard to be vegan. The hardest thing is putting up with the dickheads talking rubbish.



I'd find it hard because of being older now, set in my ways, cravings for shite and so on. I think it would make a massive difference if you were half-decent at cooking too in terms of variety. I'm not saying I'm right though. Those caveats might be easily-dispelled clichés that I've fallen for.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 5, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Exactly. It's a bit of nonsense really the whole "middle class privilege" myth. It would appear that some people are desperate to find anything, no matter how ridiculous, to try and make out that it's really hard to be vegan. The hardest thing is putting up with the dickheads talking rubbish.



This would be your answer to "_Fresh fruit and veg can be quite difficult for some people in some locations, depending on budget._"

Really.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Feb 5, 2018)

Favelado said:


> I'd find it hard because of being older now, set in my ways, cravings for shite and so on. I think it would make a massive difference if you were half-decent at cooking too in terms of variety. I'm not saying I'm right though. Those caveats might be easily-dispelled clichés that I've fallen for.


Yes it can be a bit of a challenge changing well established habits. I don't have any easy answers for that. Anybody that is motivated enough will find a way to change whatever they want to change, and those that are happy doing whatever they are doing now and don't want to change will stick with that they're doing now.

I think that's Flemings right hand rule or something...


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Feb 5, 2018)

8ball said:


> This would be your answer to "_Fresh fruit and veg can be quite difficult for some people in some locations, depending on budget._"
> 
> Really.


No that's your conjured up strawman. 

Fresh fruit and vegetables are no more expensive than fresh meat/fish. So being vegan is no more expensive than being a meat eater.
Anybody finding it hard to find fresh fruit and veg would also find it hard to fresh meat products.
You can eat relatively well on a budget even without fresh produce.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 5, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> No that's your conjured up strawman.
> 
> Fresh fruit and vegetables are no more expensive than fresh meat/fish. So being vegan is no more expensive than being a meat eater.
> Anybody finding it hard to find fresh fruit and veg would also find it hard to fresh meat products.
> You can eat relatively well on a budget even without fresh produce.



On another note entirely, would you say the attitudes of vegans on this thread generally are broadly representative of vegans generally?

You can find examples of all manner of things being expressed if you Google for them, but it's difficult to get an overall feel for the general thrust of things.


----------



## editor (Feb 6, 2018)

Horus Snacks said:


> feel free to tell your cunt of a mate, butchers, that the community in Bristol don't want nothing to do with him, they know who he is and they don't want bullies in their community.


It seems that the warning I've just given you for this personal attack has just triggered an automatic temporary ban. _What_ a shame.


----------



## editor (Feb 6, 2018)

8ball said:


> Five a day? It's none a day in Britain's urban food deserts


Oh, hang on:



> Recently however, he has taken advantage of the service offered by grocery company Fresh Range that launched in Bristol just last year. It sources fruit, veg, meat and fish from local producers and farmers, cutting out the middleman to offer lower prices: in order to make its food as accessible as possible to people on limited incomes, founder Rich Osborn has chosen to take the uncommercial step of charging a pound to make a doorstep drop on a minimum £20 spend. This means Isaacson can now buy fresher produce than much of what’s on offer elsewhere.



But come on: the vast majority of people in the UK have no particular problem finding places that sell fruit and veg. Whether they choose to buy that or prefer to gorge on some shitty meaty fast food is up to them of course.


----------



## mojo pixy (Feb 6, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> It's a bit of nonsense really the whole "middle class privilege" myth.



Class privilege is very much_* not *_a myth. How it relates diet and dietary choice is arguable, but that particular privilege (set of privileges) is very real and does have its effects in countless visible and invisible ways. Denying it makes you look silly at best. Stick to the youtube veggie polemics, and leave off the class analysis, you have no idea what you're on about.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Feb 6, 2018)

8ball said:


> On another note entirely, would you say the attitudes of vegans on this thread generally are broadly representative of vegans generally?
> 
> You can find examples of all manner of things being expressed if you Google for them, but it's difficult to get an overall feel for the general thrust of things.


wow, bit of a segway there...

To find out what vegans are like, you'll have meet them irl. What you'll probably discover is that they are just like any other group of people, good, bad, happy, sad, funny, serious, excitable, placid, big dicks, small dicks, good drivers, bad drivers, labour, cuntservatives...a veritable banquet of bassets all sorts. 

Of course there are some people who are triggered by the very idea of veganism hence the many knee-jerk reactions in this thread, and the persistent and increasingly desperate attempts to try and rubbish vegans, which quickly gets a bit boring. This thread isn't really representative of anything important, but it does give an insight into the sort of flak and nonsense that vegans have to put up with. I have no problem having discussions with valid criticisms and observations, but when it descends into petty quibbling over terminology and semantics, cba with that shit for too long.


----------



## lazythursday (Feb 6, 2018)

editor said:


> But come on: the vast majority of people in the UK have no particular problem finding places that sell fruit and veg. Whether they choose to buy that or prefer to gorge on some shitty meaty fast food is up to them of course.


Of course there are all sorts of reasons why poorer people may choose to buy junk food - being time poor, plus it's often a high amount of calories for the money. It seems pretty obvious that a wholefood vegan diet is cheaper than a wholefood diet including daily meat, but I suspect that a vegan diet based around processed foods would be significantly more costly than a meat-based one. I know that when I get home tired and stressed I struggle to have the creativity to make a tasty vegan meal from scratch - it's much easier to bang some burgers in the oven.


----------



## xenon (Feb 6, 2018)

8ball said:


> Five a day? It's none a day in Britain's urban food deserts



Ha, that's just round the corner from me. Luckily we do have a green grocer and a couple of butchers near by, as well as a big Asda. Of course, that's not much good to your fella if disability means he can't get to those shops and carry the stuff back and doesn't have the money to shop online.

Must admit, I don't use those local shops as much as I should, partly due to disability myself. I can afford online shopping though.


----------



## xenon (Feb 6, 2018)

On the why not eat an apple instead of X. Well, as has been said way back there <----- if you've only got  a couple of quid and it's a cold day, a sausage roll / steak bake is far more appealing than an apple and bag of nuts. Now, if there were more readily available vegan fast foods, they could steal some of that market. Highly processed meat slop, the stuff in stake bakes, is cheap from the manufacturers point of view.


----------



## mojo pixy (Feb 6, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> This thread isn't really representative of anything important...



...because you like to post up all kinds of judgemental, provocative and even racist crap but won't amend it or back down even when every other poster points it out. The arrogance and stupidity is astounding...



PaoloSanchez said:


> I have no problem having discussions with valid criticisms and observations, but when it descends into petty quibbling over terminology and semantics, cba with that shit for too long.



You treat no criticism as valid, you put every opposing post down to trolling, and when you yourself run out of valid counter arguments then you start with the name calling. You're a terrible poster and ought really to be banned from this thread. Luckily for you, as a "live" vegan you have a mod (editor ) on your side so you can shitpost, insult other posters (ddraig too) even mangle other posters' names, and nothing will happen.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Feb 6, 2018)

editor said:


> But come on: the vast majority of people in the UK have no particular problem finding places that sell fruit and veg. Whether they choose to buy that or prefer to gorge on some shitty meaty fast food is up to them of course.


I don't believe that anyone is denying that there are people who genuinely struggle to feed themselves at all. As a society, we have to figure out a way to make sure that everybody is properly fed clothed and has shelter. That is one of the failings of our current economic system. 

The "well not everyone can become vegan" argument is a rather weak one imo and doesn't stand up to close scrutiny. If you are unable to feed yourself properly as a vegan, it will be difficult to do so as a meat eater. Rice, beans, pasta, potatoes are relatively cheap and widely available even in the "shithole" areas. 



lazythursday said:


> Of course there are all sorts of reasons why poorer people may choose to buy junk food - being time poor, plus it's often a high amount of calories for the money. It seems pretty obvious that a wholefood vegan diet is cheaper than a wholefood diet including daily meat, but I suspect that a vegan diet based around processed foods would be significantly more costly than a meat-based one. I know that when I get home tired and stressed I struggle to have the creativity to make a tasty vegan meal from scratch - it's much easier to bang some burgers in the oven.


I haven't bought meat burgers for a while, however I don't think the veggie burgers nowadays are prohibitively expensive in comparison. It can be a bit of a challenge to change from well established habits, but it really isn't hard at all and quite often people will look for excuses. If you're rubbish/not creative in the kitchen there's a billion quick easy and cheap recipies to choose from online.


----------



## Favelado (Feb 6, 2018)

lazythursday said:


> Of course there are all sorts of reasons why poorer people may choose to buy junk food - being time poor, plus it's often a high amount of calories for the money.



No it isn't. If you are skint, you can't afford junk food. This is the myth I see pushed so often. When my mum was skint when I was a kid, there was no way we could order a pizza or got to Macdonald's. That was a treat for when we had money.


----------



## lazythursday (Feb 6, 2018)

Favelado said:


> No it isn't. If you are skint, you can't afford junk food. This is the myth I see pushed so often. When my mum was skint when I was a kid, there was no way we could order a pizza or got to Macdonald's. That was a treat for when we had money.


I'm not talking about takeaways. I'm talking about the kind of dirt cheap stuff you get in the freezers at Iceland or wherever - cheap bags of oven chips, burgers etc.


----------



## Favelado (Feb 6, 2018)

lazythursday said:


> I'm not talking about takeaways. I'm talking about the kind of dirt cheap stuff you get in the freezers at Iceland or wherever - cheap bags of oven chips, burgers etc.



It's British national culture that's driving that. Spaniards generally live on significantly lower incomes than British people, poverty is rife, yet people don't eat anything like the same amount of junk food. Pasta is cheaper than oven chips, boiling up chickpeas or lentils and throwing in veg is cheaper than the Iceland freezer department. British people eat ridiculous amounts of ready-made food, compared to almost every other European country, and there are other cheap options.


----------



## lazythursday (Feb 6, 2018)

Favelado said:


> It's British national culture that's driving that. Spaniards generally live on significantly lower incomes than British people, poverty is rife, yet people don't eat anything like the same amount of junk food. Pasta is cheaper than oven chips, boiling up chickpeas or lentils and throwing in veg is cheaper than the Iceland freezer department. British people eat ridiculous amounts of ready-made food, compared to almost every other European country, and there are other cheap options.


When you can get ten chicken burgers for £2, which are piss easy to cook, highly flavoured etc, I can see how for many that seems a simpler cheaper option than the pasta / chickpeas / veg. One of those burgers and two slices of bread likely does come out cheaper than even the most basic healthy pasta. I agree that eating vegan, or mainly plant based, is not expensive, but it doesn't likely save much money either when you are eating at the bottom level of the junk food market. And the reasons that people do that are definitely cultural in part but I also think there's something about the comfort of highly flavoured (arguably addictive) processed foods when you have few luxuries in your life.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Feb 6, 2018)

...sigh...the persistent monkey puzzle is desperate for attention. 



mojo pixy said:


> ...because you like to post up all kinds of judgemental, provocative and even racist crap but won't amend it or back down even when every other poster points it out. The arrogance and stupidity is astounding...


Wowser...this dude is like fkin Drefus...





As usual, you cannot back up any of your crap accusations, so I can't take you at all seriously, like that dog barking across the street...



mojo pixy said:


> You treat no criticism as valid, you put every opposing post down to trolling, and when you yourself run out of valid counter arguments then you start with the name calling.


More nonsense I'm afraid. I don't recall you posting anything worthy apart from petty nit-picking and crying of the use of words like the dreaded "carnist". lol. Bare jokes. You conveniently ignore the torrent of abuse starting well before I even joined this thread from some of your "obnoxious" buddies. Bias much? This is why I mostly ignore your posts whenever possible...

...except for the fact that (similar to lbj) you follow me around like a fkin bloodsucking leech, even when I make it clear that I'm not interested. How many "fuck off's" is it going to take before you gets through your thick skull?



mojo pixy said:


> You're a terrible poster and ought really to be banned from this thread.


I'm quite happy with my content (but then I would say that wouldn't I  ), I wonder on what trumped up and bogus grounds this clown would have me banned from this thread. "walking on the cracks on the pavement" ...BAN HIM!



mojo pixy said:


> Luckily for you, as a "live" vegan you have a mod (editor ) on your side so you can shitpost, insult other posters (ddraig too) even mangle other posters' names, and nothing will happen.


Funny how you completely ignore the genuine "shitposts" that started way before I even joined this thread and complain bitterly about trivial matters like the pronunciation of words. Perhaps you need to go and have a lie down, lol.


----------



## Artaxerxes (Feb 6, 2018)

lazythursday said:


> Of course there are all sorts of reasons why poorer people may choose to buy junk food - being time poor, plus it's often a high amount of calories for the money. It seems pretty obvious that a wholefood vegan diet is cheaper than a wholefood diet including daily meat, but I suspect that a vegan diet based around processed foods would be significantly more costly than a meat-based one. I know that when I get home tired and stressed I struggle to have the creativity to make a tasty vegan meal from scratch - it's much easier to bang some burgers in the oven.



Despite veggie's costing literally pence veggie meals are usually still costed out at meat equivalent prices or treated as a luxury product.


----------



## ddraig (Feb 6, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> ...because you like to post up all kinds of judgemental, provocative and even racist crap but won't amend it or back down even when every other poster points it out. The arrogance and stupidity is astounding...
> 
> 
> 
> You treat no criticism as valid, you put every opposing post down to trolling, and when you yourself run out of valid counter arguments then you start with the name calling. You're a terrible poster and ought really to be banned from this thread. Luckily for you, as a "live" vegan you have a mod (editor ) on your side so you can shitpost, insult other posters (ddraig too) even mangle other posters' names, and nothing will happen.


"boohoooo waaaa waaaaa booohooo"

fragility strong in this one!

don't compare me to ps please
what usernames have i mangled?? and poor you if you're insulted by people arguing back
if you're going to dish it out then try taking some too


----------



## 8ball (Feb 6, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> wow, bit of a segway there...
> 
> To find out what vegans are like, you'll have meet them irl. What you'll probably discover is that they are just like any other group of people, good, bad, happy, sad, funny, serious, excitable, placid, big dicks, small dicks, good drivers, bad drivers, labour, cuntservatives...a veritable banquet of bassets all sorts.
> 
> Of course there are some people who are triggered by the very idea of veganism hence the many knee-jerk reactions in this thread, and the persistent and increasingly desperate attempts to try and rubbish vegans, which quickly gets a bit boring. This thread isn't really representative of anything important, but it does give an insight into the sort of flak and nonsense that vegans have to put up with. I have no problem having discussions with valid criticisms and observations, but when it descends into petty quibbling over terminology and semantics, cba with that shit for too long.



I think that covers things, thanks.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Feb 6, 2018)

lazythursday said:


> When you can get ten chicken burgers for £2, which are piss easy to cook, highly flavoured etc, I can see how for many that seems a simpler cheaper option than the pasta / chickpeas / veg. One of those burgers and two slices of bread likely does come out cheaper than even the most basic healthy pasta. I agree that eating vegan, or mainly plant based, is not expensive, but it doesn't likely save much money either when you are eating at the bottom level of the junk food market. And the reasons that people do that are definitely cultural in part but I also think there's something about the comfort of highly flavoured (arguably addictive) processed foods when you have few luxuries in your life.


I think the bottom line is, for those that are interested and motivated enough, they will find a way to make it work, without excuses. It really is is much easier than it was 20/30 years ago.
Anyone that can afford to have a smartphone and can afford to get on the internet, can afford to buy fags and booze, can afford to feed themselves properly even in the fabled "food deserts". They may choose not to, and many do, but it is still a choice, and all choices have consequences, some good some bad.

Those that are genuinely going hungry and can't afford to feed themselves need to be supported by the rest of us and taken care of. A good society should take care of it's citizens.

#voteJeremyCorbyn


----------



## lazythursday (Feb 6, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> I think the bottom line is, for those that are interested and motivated enough, they will find a way to make it work, without excuses. It really is is much easier than it was 20/30 years ago.
> Anyone that can afford to have a smartphone and can afford to get on the internet, can afford to buy fags and booze, can afford to feed themselves properly even in the fabled "food deserts". They may choose not to, and many do, but it is still a choice, and all choices have consequences, some good some bad.
> 
> Those that are genuinely going hungry and can't afford to feed themselves need to be supported by the rest of us and taken care of. A good society should take care of it's citizens.
> ...


I really don't think that it's as simple as being a 'choice'. Nor is buying fags and booze. If you are in poverty and your life is shit you simply don't have the same personal capacity to be healthy. I think all of us, vegans, meat eaters and somewhere in between - should recognise that and not blame poor people for their choices.

The stock line from some meat eaters that veganism is expensive and for the middle class, however, completely misses the point and is wrong.


----------



## xenon (Feb 6, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> I think the bottom line is, for those that are interested and motivated enough, they will find a way to make it work, without excuses. It really is is much easier than it was 20/30 years ago.
> Anyone that can afford to have a smartphone and can afford to get on the internet, can afford to buy fags and booze, can afford to feed themselves properly even in the fabled "food deserts". They may choose not to, and many do, but it is still a choice, and all choices have consequences, some good some bad.
> 
> Those that are genuinely going hungry and can't afford to feed themselves need to be supported by the rest of us and taken care of. A good society should take care of it's citizens.
> ...



It's not that simple though is it. Leaving aside the specifics about vegan food. The reasons why as a nation, we're becoming obese, eating  processed calorific food instead of home cooking fresh produce are actually quite complicated.

Not just about the economics. Atomisation, food as fuel, rather than a shared experience, highly commercialised supply chains and retail. Straight up ignorance, time poor, bad housing, sedentary lifestyle, laziness, etc, etc.


----------



## editor (Feb 6, 2018)

lazythursday said:


> I'm not talking about takeaways. I'm talking about the kind of dirt cheap stuff you get in the freezers at Iceland or wherever - cheap bags of oven chips, burgers etc.


Nothing wrong with oven chips or Iceland, for that matter.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Feb 6, 2018)

lazythursday said:


> I really don't think that it's as simple as being a 'choice'. Nor is buying fags and booze. If you are in poverty and your life is shit you simply don't have the same personal capacity to be healthy. I think all of us, vegans, meat eaters and somewhere in between - should recognise that and not blame poor people for their choices.


I agree, people living in genuine poverty don't really have a choice, which is why it is up to society as a whole to do their best to help those that need it the most. A proper welfare system that takes care of the well being of ALL it's citizens.

There are people who can afford to eat reasonably well but choose not to, for whatever reason. Sometimes it's habit, convenience or whatever. It really doesn't take that much effort to get the knowledge and at least try to establish "good habits". The thing is that it is a lot easier to "go with the flow" and do what everybody around you does, and many take the "path of least resistance" by default often without having to think about it.



lazythursday said:


> The stock line from some meat eaters that veganism is expensive and for the middle class, however, completely misses the point and is wrong.


On this we can at least agree. It isn't necessarily more expensive even though that is the claim that seems to be repeated often.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Feb 6, 2018)

xenon said:


> It's not that simple though is it. Leaving aside the specifics about vegan food. The reasons why as a nation, we're becoming obese, eating  processed calorific food instead of home cooking fresh produce are actually quite complicated.
> 
> Not just about the economics. Atomisation, food as fuel, rather than a shared experience, highly commercialised supply chains and retail. Straight up ignorance, time poor, bad housing, sedentary lifestyle, laziness, etc, etc.


Absolutely, I agree. The point that was being made though is that veganism is some kind of middle class privilege, when I don't believe that it is.


----------



## mojo pixy (Feb 6, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> How many "fuck off's" is it going to take before you gets through your thick skull?



More than you can manage anyway sunshine.



PaoloSanchez said:


> I'm quite happy with my content (but then I would say that wouldn't I  ).



Indeed. Do you have an actual response or is a dummy spitting tantrum all you can manage? Not holding my breath btw.



ddraig said:


> what usernames have i mangled?? and poor you if you're insulted by people arguing back
> if you're going to dish it out then try taking some too



Taking some _what?_ Is this an admission that your posts in this thread have basically been one crude insult after another? I think it is. "Arguing back" .. like _when?_

Still, the example set by the main mod here hasn't exactly been inspirational. So what are you gonna do "well they started it!" like a hard-done-to five year old? No wait, @PabloSanchez he's already done that, and you wouldn't want to be like him would you 

Incidentally, I'm not insulted by a single thing on this thread. Nobody's even tried, as far as I can tell. Maybe my threshold for _being insulted_ is a little higher than some half-arsed cunting off from strangers online can reach. 



ddraig said:


> "boohoooo waaaa waaaaa booohooo"
> fragility strong in this one!
> don't compare me to ps please



I don't know about _fragility_, you're the one (you and that other poster you're clearly nothing like obvs) been using that word. "Please don't compare me to..." aww what fragility is that then?

We should all have a massive food fight. Vegan food of course


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Feb 6, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> As usual, you cannot back up any of your crap accusations, so I can't take you at all seriously, like that dog barking across the street...


----------



## Spymaster (Feb 6, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> I'm quite happy with my content (but then I would say that wouldn't I  ), I wonder on what trumped up and bogus grounds this clown would have me banned from this thread.


Refusal to amend racially inappropriate language, for starters. You fucking slug.


----------



## mojo pixy (Feb 6, 2018)

Not to mention the achingly funny pretend digs about PTSD


----------



## AnnaKarpik (Feb 6, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Exactly. It's a bit of nonsense really the whole "middle class privilege" myth. It would appear that some people are desperate to find anything, no matter how ridiculous, to try and make out that it's really hard to be vegan. The hardest thing is putting up with the dickheads talking rubbish.



Middle class privilege is not a myth, it's not a matter of faith, it is a real measurable thing.


----------



## lazythursday (Feb 6, 2018)

AnnaKarpik said:


> Middle class privilege is not a myth, it's not a matter of faith, it is a real measurable thing.


To be fair to Paolo I think he meant that specifically in the context of veganism. Not that middle class privilege doesn't exist, but that you can only be vegan if you are middle class.


----------



## ddraig (Feb 6, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> More than you can manage anyway sunshine.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


grow up tiresome troll


----------



## mojo pixy (Feb 6, 2018)

ddraig said:


> grow up tiresome troll


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Feb 6, 2018)

lazythursday said:


> To be fair to Paolo I think he meant that specifically in the context of veganism. Not that middle class privilege doesn't exist, but that you can only be vegan if you are middle class.


Precisely, thank you for putting it so succinctly. 

Of course it goes without saying that people who are financially comfortable are able to afford to feed themselves adequately (although even rich people can, and often do, have poor nutrition). 

It appears to be a fairly persistent and stubborn myth that "not everybody can afford to be vegan", and that you need to be well off, when it's not something that applies uniquely to vegans. It isn't any more expensive to be vegan than to be a meat eater, and if you can use your loaf, it should in theory be cheaper imo.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Feb 6, 2018)

_"After another record-breaking Veganuary, it’s no surprise therefore that the UK dairy industry has hit back with Februdairy - a campaign of its own."_



Why I Don't Think Februdairy Will Work

_"I’d even go so far as to argue that Februdairy may hasten the decline of dairy consumption in the UK. The one thing that the dairy industry has on its side is that for most Britons, the consumption of dairy is an ingrained habit. Whether it’s milk in coffee, butter on toast, or cheese with biscuits, many wouldn’t even consider an alternative. Habits only tend to change if people are jarred out of their normal ways of thinking which only happens when they are provided with new challenges and information. Veganuary has brilliantly shone a light on the dairy industry, and got us to really think about where our milk, butter and cheese have come from. Februdairy, in my opinion, is giving Veganuary an extra month for free. It is forcing us to decide whether we should drink the milk of another animal that has been treated inhumanely, or whether we should get it from a health-promoting plant that has not had to suffer at all. The debating it is creating is changing habits by the day. For me, the decision, was a no-brainer and I am certain that for others it will be the same."
_


----------



## 8ball (Feb 6, 2018)

That’s bizarre.

Awaiting the announcement of Meaty March...


----------



## ddraig (Feb 6, 2018)

they're scared and think that's the right response, they've had crisis meetings about it
never mind the number of vegans is "minuscule" "insignificant" and it's all a fad


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Feb 6, 2018)

8ball said:


> That’s bizarre.
> 
> Awaiting the announcement of Meaty March...


...and possibly extending veganuary publicity for yet another month for free? lol

I think the activists would be ok with that.

I agree with the Huff post article that Februdairy actually is more helpful to those wanting to spread the vegan message than it is to the dairy folk.  Time will tell.


----------



## AnnaKarpik (Feb 6, 2018)

lazythursday said:


> To be fair to Paolo I think he meant that specifically in the context of veganism. Not that middle class privilege doesn't exist, but that you can only be vegan if you are middle class.





PaoloSanchez said:


> Precisely, thank you for putting it so succinctly.
> 
> Of course it goes without saying that people who are financially comfortable are able to afford to feed themselves adequately (although even rich people can, and often do, have poor nutrition).
> 
> It appears to be a fairly persistent and stubborn myth that "not everybody can afford to be vegan", and that you need to be well off, when it's not something that applies uniquely to vegans. It isn't any more expensive to be vegan than to be a meat eater, and if you can use your loaf, it should in theory be cheaper imo.



There's another equally persistent and stubborn myth that the poor could feed them selves perfectly well on their pittance if they only buckled down and made a fucking effort. Cheap ingredients are only a small part of keeping yourself fed; you can't rustle up a lovely dahl if you're living in a b&b or the leccy's been cut off or the pantry's full of cockroaches.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Feb 6, 2018)

AnnaKarpik said:


> There's another equally persistent and stubborn myth that the poor could feed them selves perfectly well on their pittance if they only buckled down and made a fucking effort. Cheap ingredients are only a small part of keeping yourself fed; you can't rustle up a lovely dahl if you're living in a b&b or the leccy's been cut off or the pantry's full of cockroaches.


All of that might well be true but nobody has said that in this thread and it has bugger all to do with being vegan. 
The point being made was that being vegan is a middle class privilege when it isn't.


----------



## AnnaKarpik (Feb 6, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> All of that might well be true but nobody has said that in this thread and it has bugger all to do with being vegan.
> The point being made was that being vegan is a middle class privilege when it isn't.



Hang on, am I some kind of untermensch that isn't allowed to mention anything that hasn't been said before? Something that is commonplace in the real world outside of this thread?

You talk about myths around food choices, that's ok, I talk about myths around food choices and that's irrelevant.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Feb 6, 2018)

AnnaKarpik said:


> There's another equally persistent and stubborn myth that the poor could feed them selves perfectly well on their pittance if they only buckled down and made a fucking effort. Cheap ingredients are only a small part of keeping yourself fed; you can't rustle up a lovely dahl if you're living in a b&b or the leccy's been cut off or the pantry's full of cockroaches.



 Also if you are on a low income, then you are constantly on the look out for supermarket reductions and/or picking up cheap/free food from community food schemes and (shudder) food banks (i.e. the community centre where i work doles out greggs leftovers twice a week) then you cant really afford to exclude two thirds of the food that's on offer.


----------



## editor (Feb 6, 2018)

Oh look, more new vegan restaurants.



> Last year saw a boom in vegan restaurants across Greater Manchester, and with accolades pouring in for plant-based food, 2018 looks set to be even bigger.
> 
> Last week, Stockport's vegan restaurant The Allotment was awarded 'best restaurant' at the CityLife Awards. It was a huge achievement for owner Matthew Nutter, who was also awarded best chef at the MFDF17 awards.
> 
> ...


Veganism booming in Greater Manchester as THREE more restaurants open


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Feb 6, 2018)

AnnaKarpik said:


> Hang on, am I some kind of untermensch that isn't allowed to mention anything that hasn't been said before? Something that is commonplace in the real world outside of this thread?
> 
> You talk about myths around food choices, that's ok, I talk about myths around food choices and that's irrelevant.


You can mention whatever you feel like, but it's unrelated to what was being discussed when you quoted me.


----------



## AnnaKarpik (Feb 7, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> You can mention whatever you feel like, but it's unrelated to what was being discussed when you quoted me.



You (and others) were arguing that that veganism is not the domain of the privileged middle class because staple vegan foods are cheap. 
The counter argument that the price of the ingredients is not the deciding factor in what people eat is entirely relevant to the discussion.


----------



## UnderAnOpenSky (Feb 7, 2018)

AnnaKarpik said:


> You (and others) were arguing that that veganism is not the domain of the privileged middle class because staple vegan foods are cheap.
> The counter argument that the price of the ingredients is not the deciding factor in what people eat is entirely relevant to the discussion.



Surely there is a huge gap in between privileged middle class and those relying on food banks though?


----------



## mojo pixy (Feb 7, 2018)

The point (if I understand it) is that "being vegan" is all-or-nothing. You can't eat a cheap ham and cheese pizza one day if it's reduced to 15p and still "be vegan". So yes, while it may be a good idea to make efforts to reduce consumption of animal products, and while (if one knows how to cook from scratch, which is itself a privileged situation) it may end up cheaper to cook only with pulses and fresh or frozen veg than cooking with meat or eggs (though the cheapest eggs are extremely cheap) .. many vegan ingredients are quite expensive, or at least difficult to get cheaply, and if one week someone buys what happens to be on offer, and it's not vegan, then one can no longer be in the vegan gang (so to speak)


----------



## AnnaKarpik (Feb 7, 2018)

UnderAnOpenSky said:


> Surely there is a huge gap in between privileged middle class and those relying on food banks though?



Do go on, I can't see what point you're making.
I don't think that someone who loses their well-paying job, then their privately rented flat, then their credit rating will find the gap nearly huge enough,btw.


----------



## UnderAnOpenSky (Feb 7, 2018)

AnnaKarpik said:


> Do go on, I can't see what point you're making.



That it's not the preserve of the privallaged middle class.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Feb 7, 2018)

AnnaKarpik said:


> You (and others) were arguing that that veganism is not the domain of the privileged middle class because staple vegan foods are cheap.
> The counter argument that the price of the ingredients is not the deciding factor in what people eat is entirely relevant to the discussion.


Except that the price of the ingredients is what is cited to be the reason for it being on the "domain of the privileged" and why "not everyone can afford to be vegan", which is false. 

Now you may wish to expand on all the other socio-ecomomic factors that shape what people eat, that's up to you, however cost is not any  more of an impediment to being vegan that it is to being a meat eater, and that remains my point.


----------



## lazythursday (Feb 7, 2018)

I think it's true to say that if you are on a truly poverty income it's likely harder to be a vegan for a whole host of factors. But there's a big group of people between there and 'the privileged middle class'. If you are on average household income it's likely cheaper to be vegan.


----------



## mojo pixy (Feb 7, 2018)

I believe there's some confusion here over what "being vegan" actually means. Eating some vegan food sometimes is cheap and easy enough, but keeping 100% vegan day in day out is not so cheap, unless you bolster your diet with cheap multivitamins. Which is somewhat revealing of the shortfalls of a cheap vegan diet IMO.


----------



## lazythursday (Feb 7, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> I believe there's some confusion here over what "being vegan" actually means. Eating some vegan food sometimes is cheap and easy enough, but keeping 100% vegan day in day out is not so cheap, unless you bolster your diet with cheap multivitamins. Which is somewhat revealing of the shortfalls of a cheap vegan diet IMO.


I don't think this is at all true. The main 'difficult' nutrient (B12) can be obtained from something like nutritional yeast which is about £3 for a big tub. What are these expensive vegan ingredients everyone should have? The trickiest part of eating vegan is keeping a good stock of herbs / spices / flavourings, but not all of these are especially expensive.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Feb 7, 2018)

lazythursday said:


> I think it's true to say that if you are on a truly poverty income it's likely harder to be a vegan for a whole host of factors. But there's a big group of people between there and 'the privileged middle class'. If you are on average household income it's likely cheaper to be vegan.


My original point remains that the vegan "middle class privilege" argument is bit of a nonsense. It seems to be a bit of a last ditch argument  used when the usual "protein tho" and "canines tho" arguments have been thoroughly debunked. I guess anyone posting on this forum would also be amongst the "privileged middle class" that has access to the internet, has mobile phones, has time to post on forums, sitting here rubbing it in the faces of the poor.


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Feb 7, 2018)

lazythursday said:


> I don't think this is at all true. The main 'difficult' nutrient (B12) can be obtained from something like nutritional yeast which is about £3 for a big tub.



Or from a standard multivitamin tablet which contains 100% RDA of b12 - you can buy a two month supply from sainsbury's for £1.


----------



## AnnaKarpik (Feb 7, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Except that the price of the ingredients is what is cited to be the reason for it being on the "domain of the privileged" and why "not everyone can afford to be vegan", which is false.


I haven't noticed anyone saying the price of vegan ingredients is expensive, this is demonstrably false, but saying veganism* is a pastime beloved of the resource-rich is self-evident. Dicking around with your food isn't high on your list of priorities when work, housing, benefits, health, shoes for the kids are things you are struggling with.



> Now you may wish to expand on all the other socio-ecomomic factors that shape what people eat, that's up to you, however cost is not any  more of an impediment to being vegan that it is to being a meat eater, and that remains my point.



Do you understand that your attitude here is typical of middle-class moralizing? You know what people can afford to do better than they do.

*veganism - getting to choose what you eat and wear on grounds other than price or availability, pretty near the top of whos'names hierarchy of needs.


----------



## UnderAnOpenSky (Feb 7, 2018)

AnnaKarpik said:


> I haven't noticed anyone saying the price of vegan ingredients is expensive, this is demonstrably false, but saying veganism* is a pastime beloved of the resource-rich is self-evident. Dicking around with your food isn't high on your list of priorities when work, housing, benefits, health, shoes for the kids are things you are struggling with.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Is there an assumption going that everyone on this thread is middle class and doesn't have to make choices every month or struggle a bit?


----------



## lazythursday (Feb 7, 2018)

I hate this assumption that you are either queuing up at the food bank or you are privileged middle class. Most working people are somewhere between the two.


----------



## AnnaKarpik (Feb 7, 2018)

UnderAnOpenSky said:


> Is there an assumption going that everyone on this thread is middle class and doesn't have to make choices every month or struggle a bit?



An assumption by me? Paolo Sanchez thinks everyone on the thread is middle class because they have access to the internet.
I tend to think of people as middle class based on a combination of resources and attitudes. If you are short of money at the end of the month because you like to eat out or go to the cinema or educate the kids privately that's a different thing to being short of money for food, shelter, heat and clothing. People with resouces have genuine choices, people without do not.


----------



## ddraig (Feb 7, 2018)

I'm signing on atm and manage
Lazy vegan in kitchen too


----------



## ddraig (Feb 7, 2018)

Anyway we had all this part of the tedious hypocrisy hunting at least once on this very thread


----------



## mojo pixy (Feb 7, 2018)

It's not hypocrisy hunting, it's simply trying to explain that keeping 100% vegan 100% of the time (anything less and you ain't vegan after all) is a) more expensive and b) more challenging in practise than eating some vegan food, some dairy and occasional meat and fish. Mainly because food containing dairy, meat and/or fish is often on some reduced to clear shelf or on offer. Eating it is cheaper but no matter how much vegan food you eat the rest of the time you don't get to be vegan if you eat that cheap ham and cheese pizza (15p). Go and buy the vegan pizza for £2.75 (specialist item, no reduction) instead if you want to stay in team vegan.

It's not a difficult or obscure point, in fact it's self-evident. So the misunderstandings being presented here are clearly deliberate.


----------



## ddraig (Feb 7, 2018)

More weird justifications
How often does your hypothetical 15p Vs £2.75 pizza conundrum actually happen???


----------



## Ralph Llama (Feb 7, 2018)

AnnaKarpik said:


> I haven't noticed anyone saying the price of vegan ingredients is expensive, this is demonstrably false, but saying veganism* is a pastime beloved of the resource-rich is self-evident. Dicking around with your food isn't high on your list of priorities when work, housing, benefits, health, shoes for the kids are things you are struggling with.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



The vegans I have known tended to live off homus and bread they got out the tesco`s skip and were itinerants TBH


----------



## NoXion (Feb 7, 2018)

ddraig said:


> More weird justifications
> How often does your hypothetical 15p Vs £2.75 pizza conundrum actually happen???



Plenty often if you're able to elbow your way through to the discounted section. I used to pick up cold cuts and cured meats for cheap that way.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Feb 7, 2018)

ddraig said:


> More weird justifications
> How often does your hypothetical 15p Vs £2.75 pizza conundrum actually happen???


Weird indeed and rather desperate. It's as if they're searching for the holy grail of "outs". I wonder how many more far fetched and ridiculous excuses and Heath Robinson like convoluted scenarios these clowns are going to come up with next. "Reasons not to be vegan, Part 3" - (round or skinny bottoms)


----------



## editor (Feb 7, 2018)

Ralph Llama said:


> The vegans I have known tended to live off homus and bread they got out the tesco`s skip and were itinerants TBH


Ah it's troll time!


----------



## editor (Feb 7, 2018)

Ooh look. Some pesky, stereotype crushing facts 



> More than a quarter of all evening meals in the UK are vegan or vegetarian, research shows.
> 
> In the 12 weeks to the end of January, 29% of them contained no meat or fish, according to Kantar Worldpanel.
> 
> ...



'One in four' UK dinners is vegetarian


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Feb 7, 2018)

I thought Joey did well...



I thought the discussion about the alleged offensive use of the words murder, rape and slavery was interesting, and I agree with Joey that they're playing word games rather than directly addressing the issue. 



Spoiler: Full version










Spoiler: This Morning's own edited version



This Morning's edited version with the wonderfully balanced title... "Hardcore Vegan on His Militant Views Against Dairy Farmers"







Spoiler: Ask Yourself Reaction video and Analysis


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Feb 7, 2018)

But...It's Expensive To Be Vegan, Isn't It? - Vegan Coach

"There are a LOT of excuses people use for not being 100% plant-based. Though none of them are valid (unless you are a lion or tiger, or you really DO live on some barren desert island where no plants grow!), I understand where lots of them come from and can feel compassion for people who, for example, truly believe they need milk for strong bones. We are fed so much erroneous information by so many seemingly authoritative parties; it can be difficult to find the truth.

As far as veganism being expensive goes? This belief I find harder to understand. You only have to be a frequent supermarket shopper (and quite frankly, who isn't?) to see that this is not the case. *In fact, it can be exactly the opposite.*"

"Trust me – while I absolutely feel abundant, my resources are currently limited (did you see how I tried to make my point with a positive spin there? Haha).  What I'm saying is, if being vegan wasn't an economical way to eat, I definitely couldn't sustain it.

The truth is, unless you are buying coconut milk ice cream and kale chips every day, *you will more likely than not SAVE money as a vegan.*"


----------



## Blackbean (Feb 8, 2018)

Just as we now judge much of the behaviour of our ancestors to be racist or unfair in many other ways, no doubt in future our current society will be looked upon as barbaric due to our horrific treatment of animals both in the way they are slaughtered and in the cruel way that we farm them.


----------



## Calamity1971 (Feb 8, 2018)

AnnaKarpik said:


> Dicking around with your food


Can you elaborate on this please.


----------



## Ralph Llama (Feb 8, 2018)

editor said:


> Ah it's troll time!



Nope. Unfortunately not. It`s true I tells you !


----------



## AnnaKarpik (Feb 8, 2018)

editor said:


> Ooh look. Some pesky, stereotype crushing facts
> 
> 
> 
> 'One in four' UK dinners is vegetarian



Which stereotypes are being crushed here? I don't think it's news that even meat eaters eat vegetarian meals sometimes?

Anyway, a couple of quotes from the research people, the first one to tease the vegans, the second one from the link you gave.




			
				 kantar worldpanel said:
			
		

> Data from Kantar Worldpanel also finds that those most likely to be shopping [dairy free alternatives] are younger and more affluent than the average Dairy shopper, with a high proportion of spend on the market coming from those in the capital (1). There is also a female bias, with women accounting for 61% of consumption (2). Whilst the more premium prices may be attracting this demographic of shopper, it could also be argued that growth is merely the result of a fashionable trend amongst this group. This suggests it is something that could become more and more mainstream.
> 
> *More vegans?*
> 
> A survey conducted this week by Lightspeed suggests that just 1% of people identify as ‘vegan’, but 24% selected ‘other’ despite options including ‘non-vegetarian’ and ‘lacto-ovo-vegetarian’ (which was a more popular choice than veganism, at 2%).






			
				 kantar worldpanel said:
			
		

> But as ever, when looking across the whole population, no one story fits all, and the rise of vegan and vegetarian diets does not necessarily mean consumers are moving away from meat overall.
> 
> In fact, fresh meat and poultry had a strong year in 2017, with the volume sold growing faster than can be explained by population growth (1.8% vs c1%).
> 
> Nathan Ward, business unit director for meat, fish and poultry, argues therefore that talk of us abandoning meat altogether is premature: “One dynamic we’re seeing is that shoppers are trying to find ways to cope with rising prices and falling promotions. A jacket potato and beans might be an easy (and vegetarian) midweek dinner, but consumers may also be motivated by other factors such as saving money.”


----------



## AnnaKarpik (Feb 8, 2018)

Calamity1971 said:


> Can you elaborate on this please.



Why don't you use your internet to look up, I dunno, try "healthiest diet", "super-foods", "which foods should I avoid".
You'll find a thousand and one ways to dick around with your diet.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 8, 2018)

Not sure if it's Veganuary-related but there were some massive discounts on Quorn products at the supermarket last night.

It occurred to me that maybe a lot of veggies have been eschewing the Quorn for a month, leading to a bit of a glut.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 8, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> "The truth is, unless you are buying coconut milk ice cream and kale chips every day, *you will more likely than not SAVE money as a vegan.*"



I guess a lot of people really like those kale chips (link to article written by a vegan). 

It costs an extra £2,000 a year to have a vegan diet, apparently | Metro News


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Feb 8, 2018)

Calamity1971 said:


> Can you elaborate on this please.


The term "dicking around"  means making a food choice that is cruelty free and healthier for the planet and it's people. Some misguided folk appear to believe that this "pastime" is only for the well to do.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 8, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> The term "dicking around"  means making a food choice that is cruelty free and healthier for the planet and it's people. Some misguided folk appear to believe that this "pastime" is only for the well to do.



You can eat vegan on a tight budget obv, but I don't think they (you?) are the people whose coin is driving the recent Big Food and media interest.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Feb 8, 2018)

8ball said:


> I guess a lot of people really like those kale chips (link to article written by a vegan).
> 
> 
> It costs an extra £2,000 a year to have a vegan diet, apparently | Metro News


lol, not a great article tbh. The devil is in the detail, and there was a distinct lack of it.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 8, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> lol, not a great article tbh. The devil is in the detail, and there was a distinct lack of it.



Yeah, not the best detail.  But the general rule that you're likely to end up spending more seems to be accepted on vegan forums, and on one Veganuary-related link one of the advice points was to be prepared to end up spending more (for various reasons).


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Feb 8, 2018)

8ball said:


> Yeah, not the best detail.  But the general rule that you're likely to end up spending more seems to be accepted on vegan forums, and on one Veganuary-related link one of the advice points was to be prepared to end up spending more (for various reasons).


Noobs starting out trying to make straight substitutions for their meat and dairy favourites are more likely be be buying more expensive processed/ready made meals, so yes, that sort of food will cost more. 

As with all important areas in life, it pays to get clued up and do at least a bit of due diligence in order to get the best value for money and not get conned. Once people find their feet and have a bit more experience and knowledge, they will EASILY be able to spend the same or less than they would have been when they were consuming dead animals.


----------



## dylanredefined (Feb 8, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> I thought Joey did well...
> 
> 
> 
> ...



 What an over emotional loon. Probably cares more about animals than people. Those words don't apply to animals.


----------



## ddraig (Feb 8, 2018)

8ball said:


> Yeah, not the best detail.  But the general rule that you're likely to end up spending more seems to be accepted on vegan forums, and on one Veganuary-related link one of the advice points was to be prepared to end up spending more (for various reasons).


why is meat and the lives of animals so cheap?


----------



## 8ball (Feb 8, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Noobs starting out trying to make straight substitutions for their meat and dairy favourites are more likely be be buying more expensive processed/ready made meals, so yes, that sort of food will cost more.



Yeah, that will happen during that switching over phase.  Some of the extra cost was also attributed on some blog posts I saw to people becoming more aware of farming practises etc. and being more likely to choose organic etc.  Plus finding enthusiasms for some of the rarer ingredients. 

Comparing like with like seems difficult in this area.


----------



## dylanredefined (Feb 8, 2018)

ddraig said:


> why is meat and the lives of animals so cheap?


 Demand and modern farming technology.


----------



## ddraig (Feb 8, 2018)

dylanredefined said:


> Demand and modern farming technology.


do you mean slaughter and poor conditions on an industrial scale?


----------



## 8ball (Feb 8, 2018)

dylanredefined said:


> Demand and modern farming technology.



That answers the 'meat' part. 
The "lives of animals" obviously having no monetary value.

Edit: actually technically a negative monetary value in that you have to pay a slaughterer to convert the live animal into a dead one.  Making the dead one a higher-value item.  Conflating moral with economic value is seldom a good idea.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 8, 2018)

ddraig said:


> do you mean slaughter and poor conditions on an industrial scale?



Difficult to get the meat without the slaughter bit.
Pretty bloody impossible to cook it...


----------



## Spymaster (Feb 8, 2018)

8ball said:


> That answers the 'meat' part.
> The "lives of animals" obviously having no monetary value.


Quite, so the question is meaningless. 

If he meant why are we so prepared to kill and eat animals, it’s because most normal people consider them to be far less important than humans and are therefore willing to exploit them to varying degrees.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 8, 2018)

Spymaster said:


> Quite, so the question is meaningless.
> 
> If he meant why are we so prepared to kill and eat animals, it’s because most normal people consider them to be far less important than humans and are therefore willing to exploit them to varying degrees.



I don’t think the sentence was meant to mean anything in a conventional semantic sense; I’m sure ddraig knows the answer that you’ve just given.


----------



## editor (Feb 8, 2018)

8ball said:


> I guess a lot of people really like those kale chips (link to article written by a vegan).
> 
> It costs an extra £2,000 a year to have a vegan diet, apparently | Metro News


Not the most methodical study, I'd suggest. 



> New research from VoucherCodesPro has found that vegans typically spend £2,000 a year more than non-vegans.
> Read more: It costs an extra £2,000 a year to have a vegan diet, apparently | Metro News


----------



## 8ball (Feb 8, 2018)

editor said:


> Not the most methodical study, I'd suggest.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Feb 8, 2018)

dylanredefined said:


> What an over emotional loon. Probably cares more about animals than people. Those words don't apply to animals.


Actually he's a pretty sound passionate dude, and given the "tabloid telly" situation, I thought he acquitted himself well and got his points across a lot better than the farmer couple who were rather poor imo. Dairy farmers were also portrayed as the victims due to abusive online comments attributed to "militant vegans", which is currently how the media in, particular the BBC, love to frame vegans. Unfortunately dodgy comments on the internet is the sort of thing that happens when things go viral, you get dickheads making inappropriate comments, it's not a vegan thing, it's a dickhead thing. Joey could easily have also played the victim given that he has long since been on the receiving end hateful and threatening comments but doesn't make such a big deal out of it.

Examples of the sort of things that psycho hater loons post...


I doubt if the BBC would attribute those sorts of nasty comments to "militant meat eaters".


----------



## Calamity1971 (Feb 8, 2018)

AnnaKarpik said:


> Why don't you use your internet to look up, I dunno, try "healthiest diet", "super-foods", "which foods should I avoid".
> You'll find a thousand and one ways to dick around with your diet.


So when i chose at the age of ten to not eat flesh i guess i was just 'dicking around'.
Internet didnt exist back then. Thanks for your advice though it was enlightening.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 8, 2018)

dylanredefined said:


> What an over emotional loon. Probably cares more about animals than people. Those words don't apply to animals.



I dunno.  Maybe he just doesn't like people.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Feb 8, 2018)

8ball said:


> I dunno.  Maybe he just doesn't like people.


:sigh: Misanthropy tho. 

I would make a nice change to see some decent quality counter arguments rather than the same old crappy recycled ones.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 8, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> :sigh: Misanthropy tho.
> 
> I would make a nice change to see some decent quality counter arguments rather than the same old crappy recycled ones.



I can see where he’s coming from tbf

Your confusion between comments and “counter-arguments” is quite interesting.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Feb 8, 2018)

8ball said:


> I can see where he’s coming from tbf


It's a bit of a simplistic crappy non argument. Just because he is passionate in his efforts to stop the exploitation of animals doesn't means he hates humans.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 8, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> It's a bit of a simplistic crappy non argument. Just because he is passionate in his efforts to stop the exploitation of animals doesn't means he hates humans.



No, of course it doesn’t literally *mean* that.  It was in the context of the post I was replying to.


----------



## mojo pixy (Feb 8, 2018)

There's definitely a heavy undertone of misanthropy in animal rights activism though.

*<insert defensive denial here>*

Defensive denial is irrelevant. I've seen the misanthropy, experienced it, argued for it and also against it. Eventually it drove me away from animal rights activism.

*<that guy is just a troll>*


----------



## 8ball (Feb 8, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> There's definitely a heavy undertone of misanthropy in animal rights activism though.
> 
> *<insert defensive denial here>*



Animal rights activism isn’t the same as veganism, though.

And veganism isn’t the same as not eating animals or their secretions.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Feb 8, 2018)

8ball said:


> Your confusion between comments and “counter-arguments” is quite interesting.


Oh there's no confusion, there's a distinct lack of decent quality comments too, mostly carping and baseless accusations.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 8, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Oh there's no confusion, there's a distinct lack of decent quality comments too, mostly carping and baseless accusations.



What have the nasty big boys been saying now, dear?


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Feb 8, 2018)

8ball said:


> What have the nasty big boys been saying now, dear?


More like big girls blouses.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 8, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> More like big girls blouses.



Yeah, you tell 'em that.  That'll show 'em!


----------



## mojo pixy (Feb 8, 2018)

8ball said:


> Animal rights activism isn’t the same as veganism, though.



Veganism is _a form of_ animal rights activism. We covered that pages ago 



8ball said:


> And veganism isn’t the same as not eating animals or their secretions.



And that's why.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 8, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> Veganism is _a form of_ animal rights activism. We covered that pages ago



Hmmm.  I'm not sure even of that, necessarily. 
But give me a page number and I can check back, I might be convinced...

edit: Or maybe it is and just happens to have a lot of corollary elements that are obscuring things...  <ponders...>


----------



## mojo pixy (Feb 8, 2018)

IIRC, I was having my first barney with old @PabloSanchez, perhaps misguidedly saying that changing diet isn't enough to be an animal rights activist. Jeff Robinson posted something that made me think again and reminded me that yeah, actually, it is a kind of activism because it involves taking active steps to reduce ones contribution to animal suffering. I'd happily go with that now, I think my levels were a bit skewiff because of the years I spent doing rather naughty things in the name of animal rights and it's easy to see ''just'' changing diet as a bit of a cop out. But it's not, not really.

On the other hand, I may have remembered the exchange completely wrong. After 138 pages it's more than conceivable.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 8, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> IIRC, I was having my first barney with old @PabloSanchez, perhaps misguidedly saying that changing diet isn't enough to be an animal rights activist. Jeff Robinson posted something that made me think again and reminded me that yeah, actually, it is a kind of activism because it involves taking active steps to reduce ones contribution to animal suffering. I'd happily go with that now, I think my levels were a bit skewiff because of the years I spent doing rather naughty things in the name of animal rights and it's easy to see just changing diet as a bit of a cop out. But it's not, not really.
> 
> On the other hand, I may have remembered the exchange completely wrong. After 138 pages it's more than conceivable.



Yeah, I get that thrust.  I think wanting to reduce animal suffering doesn't necessarily presume rights, though, and a person could theoretically end up with a default vegan lifestyle without necessarily considering animals. 
Purely for circumstantial or cultural reasons.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 8, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Examples of the sort of things that psycho hater loons post...



Haters gonna hate.


----------



## mojo pixy (Feb 8, 2018)

8ball said:


> Yeah, I get that thrust.  I think wanting to reduce animal suffering doesn't necessarily presume rights, though, and a person could theoretically end up with a default vegan lifestyle without necessarily considering animals.
> Purely for circumstantial or cultural reasons.



Yeah OK, but tbf the ''right'' in ''animal right(s)'' is basically the right to live without the needless suffering inflicted by humans. If there are other rights then they come after that one. The aim of vegan_ism_ is essentially that.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Feb 8, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> Yeah OK, but tbf the ''right'' in ''animal right(s)'' is basically the right to live without the needless suffering inflicted by humans. If there are other rights then they come after that one. The aim of vegan_ism_ is essentially that.


Even that has to be given a condition, though - 'needless' - acknowledging that, even in a world that was 100% vegan, we'd still have to kill some animals and take away the habitats of others. That's not really much of a right - 'you have the right to live except where we need to kill you' - and is really nothing like a human right as we normally think of it, which doesn't have those conditions attached to it.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Feb 8, 2018)

_The trainee farmer who told the BBC that she had received death threats from vegans because of her work, now admits that she hasn’t received any death threats.

Alison Waugh, 20, featured in a BBC News video and article on January 29th headlined “Vegans call me murderer and rapist”. Ms Waugh appears in the video (embedded here) stating at the very beginning of the piece that “you do get death threats” with the accompanying article confirming that she “has received death threats due to her work”._


_Ms Waugh’s claims were repeated in several other publications as fact, and kickstarted a whole series of sensationalist stories about farmers receiving death threats from vegans. Even The Vegan Society ran with the story and used Waugh’s claims as the basis for an article condemning vegans who make death threats, before bowing to pressure from disgusted vegans and amending the article to make it clear that the claims were allegations and that vegans are frequently on the receiving end of verbal and physical abuse.

The young farmer has now backtracked on her claims of receiving death threats, telling The Express that she has “*not had people making specific death threats towards me*“. Waugh evidently lied to the BBC, with her lies playing a fundamental role in launching the wave of stories which made very serious allegations about vegan activists without providing a single piece of evidence.

I wonder whether the BBC and other publications will amend their stories to make it clear that Waugh now admits she has not received any death threats? Somehow I doubt it.

We need to remain vigilant and treat such claims with extreme scepticism. Those with a vested interest in exploiting animals are feeling very threatened by the growing vegan movement. They will resort to smear campaigns and other underhand tactics to try and make vegans look bad, in order to protect their own dirty business and profits._
--------------------
Liar Liar?
Animal farmer Alison Waugh lied about receiving death threats from vegans


----------



## 8ball (Feb 8, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> Yeah OK, but tbf the ''right'' in ''animal right(s)'' is basically the right to live without the needless suffering inflicted by humans. If there are other rights then they come after that one. The aim of vegan_ism_ is essentially that.



Yeah, I'm aware of that, and of the origins and Peter Singer's arguments, which are compelling (most of them).
I think there were vegan Buddhists many years back who wanted not to be part of the chain of animal suffering who wouldn't have framed anything in terms of "rights", though, iyswim.

I think originally what we now call vegans were just called "vegetarians" very early on, then there was some sliding on the eggs and dairy front, which led Donald Watson to take his stand, but take a new name for a more orthodox vegetarianism.  I've read a couple of conflicting things on the history of it, though.

Vegetarianism then goes back way further, and there are religious and health as well as moral strands, with a major moral strand being the animal welfare case.

That's my current understanding of things, anyway.


----------



## mojo pixy (Feb 8, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Even that has to be given a condition, though - 'needless' - acknowledging that, even in a world that was 100% vegan, we'd still have to kill some animals and take away the habitats of others. That's not really much of a right - 'you have the right to live except where we need to kill you' - and is really nothing like a human right as we normally think of it, which doesn't have those conditions attached to it.



Fair enough, what I was doing there was just_ talking the language_. My own views are a bit more complex, and while I remain vegetarian I'm not entirely sure I agree wholesale with the idea of ''animal rights'' any more, mainly because there can be no ''animal responsibilities'' which rights are usually tied to. That might be fallacious but I've never heard any really convincing argument against it. Life is suffering, after all. And as you say, ''needless'' is a pretty subjective idea. And then, there's pets .. guide dogs .. beach donkeys .. racehorses and racing dogs .. ''animal rights'' gets complicated quickly when you dig into it.


----------



## AnnaKarpik (Feb 8, 2018)

Calamity1971 said:


> So when i chose at the age of ten to not eat flesh i guess i was just 'dicking around'.
> Internet didnt exist back then. Thanks for your advice though it was enlightening.



You're very welcome.


----------



## xenon (Feb 8, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Even that has to be given a condition, though - 'needless' - acknowledging that, even in a world that was 100% vegan, we'd still have to kill some animals and take away the habitats of others. That's not really much of a right - 'you have the right to live except where we need to kill you' - and is really nothing like a human right as we normally think of it, which doesn't have those conditions attached to it.



Human rights do implicitly follow the same logic though. Not to come over all hippy, but hence  "legal wasr."

Rights ultimately rest on the ability to defend them.


----------



## xenon (Feb 8, 2018)

Wars even.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 8, 2018)

xenon said:


> Rights ultimately rest on the ability to defend them.



Hmm.  No, not really.


----------



## xenon (Feb 8, 2018)

8ball said:


> Hmm.  No, not really.



You think not? Rights can be taken away, ignored, subverted as soon as is politically expedient. The court in Hague isn't as busy as it should be is it.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 8, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> _The trainee farmer who told the BBC that she had received death threats from vegans because of her work, now admits that she hasn’t received any death threats._



Assuming she lied about death threats, that's really bad, but if we're going to be precise here, did she specifically say _she_ had received death threats?  Because "You do get death threats.." when stripped of context could be relating to general cases or friends/family with a far lower special-pleading threshold than has been employed repeatedly in this thread.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Feb 8, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> Fair enough, what I was doing there was just_ talking the language_. My own views are a bit more complex, and while I remain vegetarian I'm not entirely sure I agree wholesale with the idea of ''animal rights'' any more, mainly because there can be no ''animal responsibilities'' which rights are usually tied to. That might be fallacious but I've never heard any really convincing argument against it. Life is suffering, after all. And as you say, ''needless'' is a pretty subjective idea. And then, there's pets .. guide dogs .. beach donkeys .. racehorses and racing dogs .. ''animal rights'' gets complicated quickly when you dig into it.


I can't see how animal rights can work, personally. 

I'm also not really bothered by the idea that we exploit other animals to our own ends. We certainly have non-animal alternatives to most things now, but we didn't - and it is a denial of our history to think that we could have got where we are now without exploiting other animals. That's not an argument that we cannot change our ways, but imo it is definitely an argument against using words like rape, murder and slavery to describe the exploitation of animals when these practices are so deeply embedded in human cultures - embedded down to the genetic level in the case of consuming dairy. 

The pity of it from my point of view has come up a few times and came up again in that This Morning video: once you start talking the language of rights (which includes using terms such as rape, murder and slavery), there is no common ground, there is no room for compromise. Those concerned with animal welfare who don't necessarily want to end animal exploitation but would like to see it massively reformed are pretty much lumped in with everyone else as 'over there' in the argument.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 8, 2018)

xenon said:


> You think not? Rights can be taken away, ignored, subverted as soon as is politically expedient. The court in Hague isn't as busy as it should be is it.



I mean this in the sense that a right can be ignored or violated or subverted (obviously), but it remains a right in the moral sense.
If I punch you in the face in the street I have not taken away your right to not be assaulted - I have violated it.

It's a moral as opposed to "what is" thing.


----------



## NoXion (Feb 8, 2018)

People don't have to receive death threats to be concerned.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Feb 8, 2018)

8ball said:


> I mean this in the sense that a right can be ignored or violated or subverted (obviously), but it remains a right in the moral sense.
> If I punch you in the face in the street I have not taken away your right to not be assaulted - I have violated it.
> 
> It's a moral as opposed to "what is" thing.


And if you go around punching other people in the face, you lose some of your rights not to be punched in the face back. 

As mojo said, that's the other bit of the rights equation that cannot be there when you try to extend the concept to other animals.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 8, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I can't see how animal rights can work, personally...



Are you familiar with Peter Singer's original thoughts on this (just trying to gauge where you're at with the idea)?



littlebabyjesus said:


> The pity of it from my point of view has come up a few times and came up again in that This Morning video: once you start talking the language of rights (which includes using terms such as rape, murder and slavery), there is no common ground, there is no room for compromise. Those concerned with animal welfare who don't necessarily want to end animal exploitation but would like to see it massively reformed are pretty much lumped in with everyone else as 'over there' in the argument.



I don't think those terms are the "language of rights" as such.  They are just attention seeking.
What PETA might call "unsophisticated marketing", now that they have adjusted their brand strategy.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Feb 8, 2018)

8ball said:


> Are you familiar with Peter Singer's original thoughts on this (just trying to gauge where you're at with the idea)?



Have read some stuff by him, but a long time ago. So not particularly.




8ball said:


> I don't think those terms are the "language of rights" as such.  They are just attention seeking.
> What PETA might call "unsophisticated marketing", now that they have adjusted their brand strategy.


I think they are. Each of those terms implies a violation of a right - a thing that it is unacceptable to do to any human.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 8, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> And if you go around punching other people in the face, you lose some of your rights not to be punched in the face back.



Well, not legally, but there is that general understanding.



littlebabyjesus said:


> As mojo said, that's the other bit of the rights equation that cannot be there when you try to extend the concept to other animals.



Yes, that is a part of _*a* _rights equation that differs.
Some rights will relate to an entities' ability to suffer, some to its ability to act and some to its ability to reason morally.

We do this stuff all the time with humans.  Whether or not you think the language of rights is the best way to frame things, these particular issues aren't hard to resolve.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Feb 8, 2018)

8ball said:


> Some rights will relate to an entities' ability to suffer, some to its ability to act and some to its ability to reason morally.
> .


And animal rights can only rest on the first of these. But they still don't work, imo. A rat has plenty ability to suffer, but rats spread diseases and I'm going to find a way to kill them if they're infesting my home. If I can't do it in a way that doesn't cause suffering, I'll do it in a way that does.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 8, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I think they are. Each of those terms implies a violation of a right - a thing that it is unacceptable to do to any human.



Yeah, but these are cases of using words that are specific to humans in an attempt to get an emotional reaction (and also as a form of catharsis imo).  This kind of thing is not an implicit consequence of the idea that animals have rights.

You can believe that an animal has a right not be made to suffer by humans without using the word "murder", for example.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 8, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> And animal rights can only rest on the first of these. But they still don't work, imo. A rat has plenty ability to suffer, but rats spread diseases and I'm going to find a way to kill them if they're infesting my home. If I can't do it in a way that doesn't cause suffering, I'll do it in a way that does.



But your knowledge of the rats' potential suffering has caused you to behave in a manner that is not indifferent to it. This can be couched in the language of rights (and balancing them), or in another way.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Feb 8, 2018)

8ball said:


> Yeah, but these are cases of using words that are specific to humans in an attempt to get an emotional reaction (and also as a form of catharsis imo).  This kind of thing is not an implicit consequence of the idea that animals have rights.


We may have to agree to disagree on that one. I think the idea that other animals have rights is implicit to the use of these terms. 

As for their use in arguments against animal farming, I'm not sure they're the best tactic. There is a danger that you end up only appealing to people who already agree with you, while actively turning off others.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Feb 8, 2018)

8ball said:


> Assuming she lied about death threats, that's really bad, but if we're going to be precise here, did she specifically say _she_ had received death threats?  Because "You do get death threats.." when stripped of context could be relating to general cases or friends/family with a far lower special-pleading threshold than has been employed repeatedly in this thread.


tbh, the whole reporting was a bit sensationalist which is to be expected from dumbed down telly. You'll have to listen to her and decide for yourself if she was fibbing, I'd say at minimum it was slightly deceptive. It was also not balanced because prominent vegan activists have also been receiving online abuse and threats of violence and death which never got mentioned.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Feb 8, 2018)

8ball said:


> Y
> 
> You can believe that an animal has a right not be made to suffer by humans without using the word "murder", for example.


Ah, but I didn't say that _not using_ those terms implies not thinking in terms of animal rights.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Feb 8, 2018)

8ball said:


> But your knowledge of the rats' potential suffering has caused you to behave in a manner that is not indifferent to it. This can be couched in the language of rights (and balancing them), or in another way.


But they don't have a right not to have suffering inflicted on them by humans, because ultimately human interests come first.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 8, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> We may have to agree to disagree on that one. I think the idea that other animals have rights is implicit to the use of these terms.



I think it goes a lot further and involves a moral status exactly equivalent to humans.

Also, terms like “murder” have been around much, much longer than the language of ‘rights’.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 8, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> tbh, the whole reporting was a bit sensationalist which is to be expected from dumbed down telly. You'll have to listen to her and decide for yourself if she was fibbing, I'd say at minimum it was a slightly deceptive. It was also not balanced because prominent vegan activists have also been receiving online abuse and threats of violence and death which never got mentioned.



I’d have to take a closer look to be fair.  In the second part of your post I think you are taking a very BBC-like approach as to what constitutes balance.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 8, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Ah, but I didn't say that _not using_ those terms implies not thinking in terms of animal rights.



No, I didn’t, but your point is escaping me here.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Feb 8, 2018)

8ball said:


> I think it goes a lot further and involves a moral status exactly equivalent to humans.


Hopefully I'm not misrepresenting him, but I think that is more or less Jeff Robinson's position: sentient beings all have rights due to being sentient beings, and this has a universal nature to it.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Feb 8, 2018)

8ball said:


> In the second part of your post I think you are taking a very BBC-like approach as to what constitutes balance.


I haven't a clue what you're on about with "BBC approach" tbh, and you do tend to go off on some weird and puzzling tangents. 
imo the BBC reports were not balanced, portraying farmers as poor innocent victims "unable to sleep at night" and vegans as the aggressors. No real evidence was presented to back up the serious allegations. In spite of all of that and in the limited time on both the This Morning and Victoria Derbyshire shows, I thought Ed and Joey acquitted themselves very well in the circumstances.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 8, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> I haven't a clue what you're on about with "BBC approach" tbh, and you do tend to go off on some weird and puzzling tangents.
> imo the BBC reports were not balanced, portraying farmers as poor innocent victims "unable to sleep at night" and vegans as the aggressors.



Let me try to make it less puzzling for you.

If party A is wronged by party B, then it is not critical to balance that party B may have been wronged by party C.

Or less abstractly, if that farmer girl had been being threatening and abusive to certain specific vegan groups or individual(s) and it was not reported, then *that* would have been grievously unbalanced.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 8, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Hopefully I'm not misrepresenting him, but I think that is more or less Jeff Robinson's position: sentient beings all have rights due to being sentient beings, and this has a universal nature to it.



That sounds very different to me to having a moral status exactly equivalent to humans.

Sentience/non-sentience does not seem to be a simple yes/no condition either. Not is it such in the Singer model of animal rights.

Of course, I can’t speak for Jeff either...

I’m not claiming the idea of animal rights is completely unproblematic either, just that some initial objections can be dealt with fairly quickly.

... a bit like some of the initial objections to veganism, I guess.


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Feb 8, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Hopefully I'm not misrepresenting him, but I think that is more or less Jeff Robinson's position: sentient beings all have rights due to being sentient beings, and this has a universal nature to it.



Yes, that is an accurate representation of my position.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Feb 8, 2018)

8ball said:


> Let me try to make it less puzzling for you.
> 
> If party A is wronged by party B, then it is not critical to balance that party B may have been wronged by party C.
> 
> Or less abstractly, if that farmer girl had been being threatening and abusive to certain specific vegan groups or individual(s) and it was not reported, then *that* would have been grievously unbalanced.


Holeeee fuck...and that was supposed to be the "less puzzling" version, right? Party C? wtf?
The media have been pitching this as a "militant vegan activists" vs "poor innocent farmers". That's two parties, not sure where the third comes in. The farmers (Party A if you will) are claiming that they are being threatened and the implication is that these threats are from "militant vegans" (Party B in your language). It is a bit of a sensationalist spin and due to the tabloid nature of these shows where there's not really enough time to go into much detail, there was no evidence presented to back up the serious allegations. To attribute that to "militant vegans" when there's no real supporting evidence is blatant spin and lazy journalism. So I'm not really surprised that the farmer lady was not able to back up her claims of abuse and had to retract them. As I posted earlier, in the online world unfortunately there's nasty abuse that gets hurled in every direction. If the vegans that have been on the receiving end of that abuse used the same sort of lazy accusations insinuating that the abusers were "militant farmers" without supporting evidence, then that would also be wrong.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 8, 2018)

Jeff Robinson said:


> Yes, that is an accurate representation of my position.



Was the corollary point that I followed with also part of your position?


----------



## 8ball (Feb 8, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Holeeee fuck...and that was supposed to be the "less puzzling" version, right? Party C? wtf?



In which case you may want to take a look at the paragraph immediately following that.


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Feb 8, 2018)

8ball said:


> Was the corollary point that I followed with also part of your position?



About equal moral status? I do also think that all sentient beings have equal moral status as well, though I am not 100% on that claim. No time to discuss tonight but maybe tomorrow.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 8, 2018)

Jeff Robinson said:


> About equal moral status? I do also think that all sentient beings have equal moral status as well, though I am not 100% on that claim. No time to discuss tonight but maybe tomorrow.



Cheers.  Think you can probably guess which kind of follow-up questions might be coming. Laters.


----------



## ddraig (Feb 8, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> But they don't have a right not to have suffering inflicted on them by humans, because ultimately human interests come first.


do you have a pet? anyone close to you have one?
ok if i come and kick it to death or slice it open?


----------



## 8ball (Feb 8, 2018)

ddraig said:


> do you have a pet? anyone close to you have one?
> ok if i come and kick it to death or slice it open?



Do you smoke a lot of dope?


----------



## 8ball (Feb 8, 2018)

It’s just that you come across at times like what I’d expect to happen if someone connected up a limbic system, an amygdala, a cerebellum and a rudimentary language centre.

And then bathed it in tartrazine and adrenaline.

What I’m saying is that if the answer is no, maybe find a nice mellow Thai and smoke *more*.

Peace, blud.


----------



## ddraig (Feb 8, 2018)

8ball said:


> Do you smoke a lot of dope?





8ball said:


> It’s just that you come across at times like what I’d expect to happen if someone connected up a limbic system, an amygdala, a cerebellum and a rudimentary language centre.
> 
> And then bathed it in tartrazine and adrenaline.
> 
> ...


wtf?!

my interests as a human come before those animals, I trump them, why are you questioning this fact?


----------



## 8ball (Feb 8, 2018)

ddraig said:


> wtf?!
> 
> my interests as a human come before those animals, I trump them, why are you questioning this fact?



Ok, so what we have is a fairly nuanced discussion over whether the language of rights with all its attendant issues is appropriate to apply to animals in a blanket manner.

Then Mr Empathetic Vegan comes along with “how about I come round and cut up your cat”.

I’m not fully conversant in all of the intricacies of vegan philosophy so I may be missing something, but I have to say that on a first reading it looks like you’re leaving a good few of the usual “peace lovin’ hippy” boxes unticked here.


----------



## ddraig (Feb 8, 2018)

no, lbj said our interests trump animals
are they wrong?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Feb 8, 2018)

ddraig said:


> no, lbj said our interests trump animals
> are they wrong?


You need to start reading other people's posts more carefully. I gave a specific example of rats, and the infestation of human dwellings with rats that carry disease. In this situation I will find a way to kill the rats. If I can't kill them painlessly, I'll kill them in a painful way, because they need to be killed, their interests coming second in this instance to those of the humans living in the house and protecting them from rat-borne diseases. 

You coming around and bashing my cat's head in, or whatever, doesn't really seem that relevant to this example.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 8, 2018)

ddraig said:


> no, lbj said our interests trump animals
> are they wrong?



If you kill someone’s pet, you’re in the world of balancing your bloodlust against another human’s rights, so it doesn’t really work as an example of the problem with lbj’s position.


----------



## ddraig (Feb 8, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> You need to start reading other people's posts more carefully. I gave a specific example of rats, and the infestation of human dwellings with rats that carry disease. In this situation I will find a way to kill the rats. If I can't kill them painlessly, I'll kill them in a painful way, because they need to be killed, their interests coming second in this instance to those of the humans living in the house and protecting them from rat-borne diseases.
> 
> You coming around and bashing my cat's head in, or whatever, doesn't really seem that relevant to this example.



this says nothing about rats



littlebabyjesus said:


> But they don't have a right not to have suffering inflicted on them by humans, because ultimately human interests come first.


you need to stop giving it the supposed expert and take responsibility for what you post


----------



## ddraig (Feb 8, 2018)

8ball said:


> If you kill someone’s pet, you’re in the world of balancing your bloodlust against another human’s rights, so it doesn’t really work as an example of the problem with lbj’s position.


is it because it's a pet then? that's it isn't it, that's when it's bloodlust but not when it's an animal designated as fair game for your plate


----------



## 8ball (Feb 8, 2018)

ddraig said:


> you need to stop giving it the supposed expert and take responsibility for what you post



This, after the “how about I come round and cut up your cat” schtick!


----------



## 8ball (Feb 8, 2018)

ddraig said:


> is it because it's a pet then? that's it isn't it



That was the game you were playing wasn’t it?  But you failed to grasp the context of the discussion and rather fucked it up.

What is your position on pets by the way?

Some might think it a form of slavery.


----------



## ddraig (Feb 8, 2018)

round of applause for 8ball

the question(s) remains
do the interests of humans trump animals?
always in every way?


----------



## 8ball (Feb 8, 2018)

ddraig said:


> round of applause for 8ball
> 
> the question(s) remains
> do the interests of humans trump animals?
> always in every way?



Not always in every way in my opinion.  That didn’t seem to be what lbj was saying either but we’d need his input to be sure.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 8, 2018)

Thanks for the applause by the way.

I’m here all week.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Feb 8, 2018)

I gave that example because imo not to act to get rid of the rats, killing them if necessary, and in a way that causes pain if that's the only way to hand, would be irresponsible.

There are lots of other examples where extermination of sentient animals might be necessary - the infestation of a grain supply with rats might require a mass extermination.

This isn't about lording it over rats or feeling superior so we can do what we want. It's about solving a problem of everyday human living.

And the fact that we need to do this kind of thing makes the concept of animal rights highly problematic, imo.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 8, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> ... the fact that we need to do this kind of thing makes the concept of animal rights highly problematic, imo.



I don’t agree that it does, but it depends on what else you are bringing to the discussion aside from the ‘rights’ concept, which is really just a way of framing things.

Not that I think the formulation is entirely unproblematic..


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Feb 8, 2018)

8ball said:


> I don’t agree that it does, but it depends on what else you are bringing to the discussion aside from the ‘rights’ concept, which is really just a way of framing things.
> 
> Not that I think the formulation is entirely unproblematic..


If I'm reading you right, you're saying that other animals may have a right to consideration due to their capacity for suffering, even if that consideration doesn't always win out.

That seems a rather weak thing to have the word 'right' attached to it, but maybe we view the idea of rights a little differently.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 8, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> If I'm reading you right, you're saying that other animals may have a right to consideration due to their capacity for suffering, even if that consideration doesn't always win out.
> 
> That seems a rather weak thing to have the word 'right' attached to it, but maybe we view the idea of rights a little differently.



I think you’re reading me right.

There are lots of situations where rights need to be weighed against others where no non-human animals are involved, including non-humans isn’t the big deal on that score.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Feb 9, 2018)

On the TalkRadio James Whale a couple of days ago Joey put in a good show debating with another farmer
The farmer did not really have decent answers tbf "vegans talk a load of rubbish and should be banned", lol 

James Whale used to have a smallholding and used to kill his own chickens and apparently his wife is vegetarian. 
Interested little post debate "chat" at the end between James and Ash...





Spoiler: Chat at the end



But I have a real problem with eating meat...
...I looked in the supermarket and all the meat, the dead flesh, is made to look as un animal like as possible...
...I find that appalling...I remember I did a show once on a radio station and the whole program was taken up with complaints, people had been complaining about a butchers shop and the butchers shop had whole animals hanging in the window like they used to, and they complained that it was on route for a lot of children to go to school and they saw these dead animals hanging in the window and I thought...this is excellent...this is what the kids need if you're going to eat meat you need to know that an animal gave its life.



'If I cut up my dog and ate it, I'd be arrested': Vegan campaigner goes head to head with dairy farmer


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Feb 9, 2018)

ddraig said:


> this says nothing about rats
> 
> 
> you need to stop giving it the supposed expert and take responsibility for what you post


Read the discussion Einstein.  Work out what the "they ' refers to.

You need to stop jumping in to insult me on threads where you don't comprehend what is being said. You make yourself look like a tool.

Anyway you're on ignore. I'm fed up with being patronised by rude idiots.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Feb 9, 2018)

8ball said:


> I think you’re reading me right.
> 
> There are lots of situations where rights need to be weighed against others where no non-human animals are involved, including non-humans isn’t the big deal on that score.


You're right of course that conflicting interests need to be balanced, and the concept of human rights isn't straightforward.

Without wishing to sink too deeply into this (the language of rights isn't normally my preferred way to think about these issues), certain 'basic' human rights such as the right not to be killed or the right not to be tortured can be considered universal and pretty much without exceptions, as long as that person hasn't acted in a way that means they are no longer entirely innocent. The subject of war then comes up, but the targetting of civilians is considered a war crime by many, for this very reason, and plenty of people consider things like the bombing of Hiroshima or Dresden to be war crimes.

But within a scheme where the interests of other animals can be trumped by the interests of humans, I can't see how any kind of universal system of the sort Jeff R espouses can work. At best, you would need a two-level system: human rights, and a set of weaker non-human rights. And this then looks very much like an animal welfare system recast (shoehorned?) into the language of rights.


----------



## ddraig (Feb 9, 2018)

you slink in and out of threads dishing your "expert" view about then disappear when called on your crap or shown up yet again, then don't hold your hands up when made mistakes and turn on the person pointing it out, pathetic weasel with some kind of weird know it all superiority complex


----------



## 8ball (Feb 9, 2018)

ddraig said:


> you slink in and out of threads dishing your "expert" view about then disappear when called on your crap or shown up yet again, then don't hold your hands up when made mistakes and turn on the person pointing it out, pathetic weasel with some kind of weird know it all superiority complex



Is there a point you think you’ve made somewhere that has gone unaddressed?


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Feb 9, 2018)




----------



## 8ball (Feb 9, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


>



... and where you stand on the subject of pets, obviously.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Feb 9, 2018)

In his book Sapiens, Yuval Noah Harari gives the best comparison between modern farming practices and slavery that I've read. I have big problems with lots of what he writes in that book, but this was a good insight, I think.

Harari makes the point that the financing of slavery and the enjoyment of its fruits came largely not out of hatred or some ideological drive but through the combination of indifference and greed. It made money for people who would never themselves set eyes on a slave, and the system was allowed to develop because those people didn't care where their returns came from: treated like another commodity, slaves simply slotted into the established financial order.

He compares this to the development of industrial farming practices, where again most of those who enjoy its results don't care about the system sufficiently to challenge it, and the system is allowed to develop because it maximises returns.

It's possible to recognise this common feature without making moral equivalences between humans and livestock.


----------



## NoXion (Feb 9, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


>



Yep, because slaves never fought and died in the cause of their own freedom, cannot learn to read and write, and therefore need more enlightened, superior beings to lead them out of bondage.  

You fucking idiot.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 9, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Harari makes the point that the financing of slavery and the enjoyment of its fruits came largely not out of hatred or some ideological drive but through the combination of indifference and greed. It made money for people who would never themselves set eyes on a slave, and the system was allowed to develop because those people didn't care where their returns came from: treated like another commodity, slaves simply slotted into the established financial order.



Maybe in that case a better indicator of where people would have stood on the slavery front could be how people arrange their finances.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Feb 9, 2018)

8ball said:


> Maybe in that case a better indicator of where people would have stood on the slavery front could be how people arrange their finances.


To link to another hot topic on here at the moment, there appear to be a fair few people who don't care where their returns come from wrt bitcoin. Of course there are differences, but a similar combination of indifference and greed leads to the flourishing of a destructive practice.


----------



## ddraig (Feb 9, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> To link to another hot topic on here at the moment, there appear to be a fair few people who don't care where their returns come from wrt bitcoin. Of course there are differences, but a similar combination of indifference and greed leads to the flourishing of a destructive practice.


like the meat industry!


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Feb 9, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> You're right of course that conflicting interests need to be balanced, and the concept of human rights isn't straightforward.
> 
> Without wishing to sink too deeply into this (the language of rights isn't normally my preferred way to think about these issues), certain 'basic' human rights such as the right not to be killed or the right not to be tortured can be considered universal and pretty much without exceptions, as long as that person hasn't acted in a way that means they are no longer entirely innocent. The subject of war then comes up, but the targetting of civilians is considered a war crime by many, for this very reason, and plenty of people consider things like the bombing of Hiroshima or Dresden to be war crimes.
> 
> But within a scheme where the interests of other animals can be trumped by the interests of humans, I can't see how any kind of universal system of the sort Jeff R espouses can work. At best, you would need a two-level system: human rights, and a set of weaker non-human rights. And this then looks very much like an animal welfare system recast (shoehorned?) into the language of rights.



I basically agree with what you say about human rights, but would add a few qualifiers. First, it is true that most regard the *targeting* of civilians as a war crime but opinion is much more divided about whether the 'collateral' killing of civilians can be justified. And in other circumstances people seem willing to accept the killing of innocent individuals as a side effect of producing a greater good. For example, in the famous 'trolley problem' thought experiment, the vast majority of people are prepared to divert a train onto a side track that will kill an innocent person in order to save the lives of 5 others on the main line. In other words, there seems to be fairly widespread acceptance that in some circumstances it is permissible, and indeed justified, to kill innocent humans. 

I also think the concept of 'innocence' needs unpacking. The idea of being innocent as it is used today usually means somebody who is not morally responsible or culpable of wrongdoing, but when one looks at the term's etymology it refers to something different: somebody who is not causing harm (from the Latin in- ‘not’ + nocere ‘to hurt’). You can have individuals who pose threats of harm who are not morally culpable in anyway: people labouring under serious mental delusions, people acting under extreme duress, sleep-walking people, toddlers who have come by their parent's gun etc. Many people think that if these individuals are posing lethal threats or other types of serious harm to others and the only means of averting such threats is to kill them, then killing them can be permissible on the grounds of self-defence, notwithstanding the fact that the attackers are not morally culpable in any way.

So, in my understanding of human rights, there are some instances where it is permissible to kill innocent humans as a side effect and some instances when it would be permissible to kill a non-culpable attacker. There are also circumstances where I think it is permissible to kill innocent animals as a side effect and to kill animals who non-culpably pose threats to us. I accept that farming practices will involve the killing of wild animals (both deliberate and accidental) - and that doesn't contradict my belief in animal rights, any more than my acceptance of the permissibility of killing innocent or non-culpable humans in some instances contradicts my belief in human rights.

Of course, both side-effect killings and self-defence killings are subject to necessity and proportionality considerations: if there are reasonable alternatives to killing they should be used and the killing can only be justified if the harm averted is proportionate to the harm inflicted (and significantly greater with side-effect killings). I take it that many crop-farming practices do not satisfy these criteria and so I would want them to be reformed in ways that do, but I do think that feeding of humans and preventing the spread of diseases like weil's are sufficiently weighty to justify some killing if necessary. 

But this is miles away from animal agriculture - which involves the breeding, mutilation, exploitation and killing of animals who pose *no* threat to us and whom we are using not out of any necessity but rather for trivial and selfish reasons related to desire, tradition and convenience.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 9, 2018)

Nicely considered post.


----------



## dylanredefined (Feb 9, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


>


t
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




  Stuff like this just makes me laugh at vegans.


----------



## Spymaster (Feb 9, 2018)

ddraig said:


> you slink in and out of threads dishing your "expert" view about then disappear when called on your crap or shown up yet again, then don't hold your hands up when made mistakes and turn on the person pointing it out, pathetic weasel with some kind of weird know it all superiority complex


Why do you do this to yourself? Every time you take LBJ on you end up with egg on your face. I’d have thought you’d have learnt your lesson years ago!!!


----------



## 8ball (Feb 9, 2018)

dylanredefined said:


> t
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I’d agree that Jeff’s manner of arguing is much more compelling than this sort of stuff.



Spymaster said:


> Why do you do this to yourself? Every time you take LBJ on you end up with egg on your face. I’d have thought you’d have learnt your lesson years ago!!!



Tbf, vegans aren’t going to like egg on their face.


----------



## ddraig (Feb 9, 2018)

any chance of not posting horrific images please? or at least putting spoiler tags on them



Spymaster said:


> Why do you do this to yourself? Every time you take LBJ on you end up with egg on your face. I’d have thought you’d have learnt your lesson years ago!!!


if you say so tag team, more like them getting shown up


----------



## Spymaster (Feb 9, 2018)

ddraig said:


> if you say so tag team, more like them getting shown up


Your lack of self awareness really is astonishing fella!

That ‘kill your cat’ thing was fucking brilliant though


----------



## 8ball (Feb 9, 2018)

If this wasn’t such a niche thread it could well have ended up with ‘boat happy’ in the annals of Urban history.


----------



## Spymaster (Feb 9, 2018)

Indeed. There’s also a certain irony in _ddraig_ inadvertently posting one of the funniest things I’ve seen on the boards for ages!


----------



## Spymaster (Feb 9, 2018)

ddraig said:


> do you have a pet? anyone close to you have one?
> ok if i come and kick it to death or slice it open?


 

Priceless!


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 9, 2018)

ddraig said:


> round of applause for 8ball
> 
> the question(s) remains
> do the interests of humans trump animals?
> always in every way?


Yes.


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 9, 2018)

editor said:


> Ooh look. Some pesky, stereotype crushing facts
> 
> 
> 
> 'One in four' UK dinners is vegetarian


None of this is a good argument. It tells us nothing other than some people ate meat free meals sometimes.


----------



## ddraig (Feb 9, 2018)

Horus Snacks said:


> Yes.


so can I come round and kick/slice open/kill your cat/dog/hamster?


Horus Snacks said:


> None of this is a good argument. It tells us nothing other than some people ate meat free meals sometimes.


it tells us that less animals are dying for food, which is a very good thing


----------



## 8ball (Feb 9, 2018)

ddraig said:


> it tells us that less animals are dying for food, which is a very good thing



Well, not directly.  It just suggests more meals don’t have meat or fish in than a year ago.

It’s not an _argument for_ anything either, just some market research results.

Though it is certainly crushing stereotypes; next time I hear a Dutch person say: “the thing about those British is that a minimum of 75% of their meals have meat or fish in them”, I’ll have this article ready-loaded on my phone and shove it right in their face.

That’ll show ‘em - the “three-quarters-of-meals-minumum-including-animal-content-not-including-eggs-or-dairy” assuming bastards! 

I should go round their country and kill their pets - teach them some fucking empathy!


----------



## 8ball (Feb 9, 2018)

Horus Snacks said:


> Yes.



Actually marginally more extreme than ddraig, there.

Though ddraig is funnier.


----------



## AnnaKarpik (Feb 10, 2018)

ddraig said:


> <snip)
> it tells us that less animals are dying for food, which is a very good thing



It tells us no such thing, I went to the trouble of quoting part of that survey which makes exactly that point.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Feb 10, 2018)

Jeff Robinson said:


> I basically agree with what you say about human rights, but would add a few qualifiers. First, it is true that most regard the *targeting* of civilians as a war crime but opinion is much more divided about whether the 'collateral' killing of civilians can be justified. And in other circumstances people seem willing to accept the killing of innocent individuals as a side effect of producing a greater good. For example, in the famous 'trolley problem' thought experiment, the vast majority of people are prepared to divert a train onto a side track that will kill an innocent person in order to save the lives of 5 others on the main line. In other words, there seems to be fairly widespread acceptance that in some circumstances it is permissible, and indeed justified, to kill innocent humans.
> 
> I also think the concept of 'innocence' needs unpacking. The idea of being innocent as it is used today usually means somebody who is not morally responsible or culpable of wrongdoing, but when one looks at the term's etymology it refers to something different: somebody who is not causing harm (from the Latin in- ‘not’ + nocere ‘to hurt’). You can have individuals who pose threats of harm who are not morally culpable in anyway: people labouring under serious mental delusions, people acting under extreme duress, sleep-walking people, toddlers who have come by their parent's gun etc. Many people think that if these individuals are posing lethal threats or other types of serious harm to others and the only means of averting such threats is to kill them, then killing them can be permissible on the grounds of self-defence, notwithstanding the fact that the attackers are not morally culpable in any way.
> 
> ...



Regarding the train example, you're not given the option 'kill nobody', so I would suggest that this belongs to a separate argument. Killing in self-defence even where the person is innocent belongs to a similar category - again, 'kill nobody' isn't an option.

However, I do accept that these arguments can be extended to the killing of non-culpable animals. One difference would be, as in my rat example, that you'd be killing them precisely because they present a danger to humans. You might also kill animals that present a danger to crops or other animals, perhaps not even for the direct benefit of humans: you might kill animals as a result of a calculation that their presence will be devastating to an ecosystem and act on behalf of that ecosystem regardless of direct human benefit. But would you kill non-culpable humans to protect an ecosystem?

There is also the danger in this kind of thought experiment that we lose the sense of uncertainty about the future that is always there in the real world. So a man is in a sinking boat with two children. He t_hinks he is_ is the only one strong enough to steer the boat, and _he thinks_ that they will sink before they're rescued with all that weight. What does he do? Surely the human response is that he tries to save all three of them, even if that means that they probably all die. Or he throws himself off the boat to give the children a chance. The least human response, I would suggest, would be to throw one of the children into the water, even if he sincerely believes this to be the best chance of saving one of the children. Our calculations are not always utilitarian.


----------



## Spymaster (Feb 10, 2018)

ddraig said:


> so can I come round and kick/slice open/kill your cat/dog/hamster?


Oh my days, he’s at it again! I do like to wake up to a laugh though. 

ddraig , what point do you think you’re making by suggesting you get all Jack The Ripper on people’s pets?


----------



## Spymaster (Feb 10, 2018)

8ball said:


> Actually marginally more extreme than ddraig, there.
> 
> Though ddraig is funnier.


Why is it more extreme? I can’t think of any sulituation where can animal’s rights can be reasonably argued to equal or surpass those of a human in similar circumstances.


----------



## mojo pixy (Feb 10, 2018)

ddraig said:


> do you have a pet? anyone close to you have one?
> ok if i come and kick it to death or slice it open?





ddraig said:


> so can I come round and kick/slice open/kill your cat/dog/hamster?


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 10, 2018)

8ball said:


> Actually marginally more extreme than ddraig, there.
> 
> Though ddraig is funnier.


Why is it extreme to think my, as a human, interests are more important to me than those of an animal who cannot engage in the social contract and reason to the same degree?

Why do you assume my post was intended as humour?

All it says is that when there are conflicting interests I pick humans over animals. It doesn't even suggest we shouldn't find ways to achieve goals that don't cause undue suffering to animals, this would be my preference - but only where possible. 

So if killing a few rabbits in a lab meant we could cure cancer, I would probably pick curing cancer over the wellbeing of a brace of rabbits. Doesn't mean i find that funny or take pleasure in it.


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 10, 2018)

ddraig said:


> so can I come round and kick/slice open/kill your cat/dog/hamster?
> 
> it tells us that less animals are dying for food, which is a very good thing


Is owning pets ok? Interesting

I would love to answer your question but i've no idea how you've inferring the right to breach my personal property (which in this example would include my personal livestock/pets) from my answer. Your question implied there are good reasons to overrule animal rights from my perspective, can you give me a good reason why you should need to harm my cat/dog/hamster? I don't consider your personal bloodliust to be satisfactory, but you'd be welcome to try and bust into my home. If you did you'd be met with considerable force 

Animals die for food throughout nature, if less of them did so that would mean predator specices would be suffering. Most predator hunts fail anyway, so this is already not a good thing from their perspective


----------



## mojo pixy (Feb 10, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> There's definitely a heavy undertone of misanthropy in animal rights activism though.





dylanredefined said:


> t



Exactly what I mean. That kind of stuff does no favours for anyone, and certainly doesn't help the cause. Quite the opposite IMO.


----------



## Yossarian (Feb 10, 2018)

Going back to the question in the thread title - there have been all kinds of arguments put forth in this thread for and against being a vegan. Some of them are sensible, others have been ridiculous, offensive, weird, or just stupid.

Have any of them put me off thinking being vegan is a good thing that I should work toward? Not one little bit. I don't fully agree with uncompromising animal rights activists, but I respect their opinions and I've got no reason to tell them they should think differently.


----------



## Spymaster (Feb 10, 2018)

Yossarian said:


> I've got no reason to tell them they should think differently.


I haven’t seen a single meat eater telling a veg-head that they should change their minds on this thread. There’s been some piss-taking but the only genuine arrogance has come the other way with the plant botherers insisting that animals are being “murdered”, fuckwitted comparisons to slavery and nazism, daft pictures and wtf videos, and now bizarre  suggestions of kicking the shit out of people’s pets. Most meat eaters here seem not to give a toss what anyone else eats. The same just can’t be said of veggies.


----------



## AnnaKarpik (Feb 10, 2018)

Yossarian said:


> Going back to the question in the thread title - there have been all kinds of arguments put forth in this thread for and against being a vegan. Some of them are sensible, others have been ridiculous, offensive, weird, or just stupid.
> 
> Have any of them put me off thinking being vegan is a good thing that I should work toward? Not one little bit. I don't fully agree with uncompromising animal rights activists, but I respect their opinions and I've got no reason to tell them they should think differently.



But what did you think before reading the thread, I mean have you changed your mind in any way?

My perception of vegans has changed after reading the thread, not for the better, and tbf probably quite unjustly as regards the majority of them but there we are.
The rare forays into genuine discussion have been interesting but in the end, I can accept the fact that other animals are farmed and die for food. There are lots of things I dislike about the way it's done but that's a different argument.


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 10, 2018)

AnnaKarpik said:


> But what did you think before reading the thread, I mean have you changed your mind in any way?
> 
> My perception of vegans has changed after reading the thread, not for the better, and tbf probably quite unjustly as regards the majority of them but there we are.
> The rare forays into genuine discussion have been interesting but in the end, I can accept the fact that other animals are farmed and die for food. There are lots of things I dislike about the way it's done but that's a different argument.


I personally don't find veganism compelling or remotely sustainable personally. It seems a very sophisticated asceticism based on superficial notions of sustainability and morality. Grazing livestock can be beneficial to the environment while some non-meat products (palm oil, iirc) results in deforestation. Again, capitalism is th eenemy.

If your diet consists of eating fake meats so as to make your breakfast look like a 'normal' breakfast, imho, you're doing it wrong 

Doesn't offend me though, nor do i think you shouldn't have the right.


----------



## Yossarian (Feb 10, 2018)

AnnaKarpik said:


> But what did you think before reading the thread, I mean have you changed your mind in any way?
> 
> My perception of vegans has changed after reading the thread, not for the better, and tbf probably quite unjustly as regards the majority of them but there we are.
> The rare forays into genuine discussion have been interesting but in the end, I can accept the fact that other animals are farmed and die for food. There are lots of things I dislike about the way it's done but that's a different argument.



Not been much change for me, tbh - I knew there were people who believe animals have the same rights as humans, so there hasn't been much said that isn't a logical extension of that. And since there are millions of vegans out there and maybe four or five vegans posting on this thread, I'm not going to make the mistake of seeing everything said here as representative of how all vegans feel.


----------



## andysays (Feb 10, 2018)

Of all the things I never thought I'd see on Urban, ddraig channeling cat killer @franceslengel is pretty high up on the list


----------



## 8ball (Feb 10, 2018)

Spymaster said:


> Why is it more extreme? I can’t think of any sulituation where can animal’s rights can be reasonably argued to equal or surpass those of a human in similar circumstances.



I was responding to the comment that human interests trump animal interests _always, in every way_.  Not taking the case where the injury to rights might be equivalent.  So taking an example at the most extreme end, torturing a horse for shits and giggles would not be justified.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 10, 2018)

Horus Snacks said:


> Why is it extreme to think my, as a human, interests are more important to me than those of an animal who cannot engage in the social contract and reason to the same degree....all it says is that when there are conflicting interests I pick humans over animals. It doesn't even suggest we shouldn't find ways to achieve goals that don't cause undue suffering to animals, this would be my preference - but only where possible.



See my post above. 



Horus Snacks said:


> Why do you assume my post was intended as humour?



I wasn't, I don't think ddraig's posts are really _intended_ as humour either.  Though it's a pretty scathing form of satire if so, and has gone over the heads of most of us.



Horus Snacks said:


> So if killing a few rabbits in a lab meant we could cure cancer, I would probably pick curing cancer over the wellbeing of a brace of rabbits. Doesn't mean i find that funny or take pleasure in it.



Agree.  I would prefer minimising tests on whole animal models where possible.


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 10, 2018)

i take human interest to mean something substantive, like curing a disease or optimal nutrition.

Not personal preference - killing or torturing an animal for pleasure. I don't think that qualifies since that could be applied simply between our own species and is thus merely emotional preference.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 10, 2018)

AnnaKarpik said:


> It tells us no such thing, I went to the trouble of quoting part of that survey which makes exactly that point.



When you combine it with the increase in meat products sold over the festive period, part of it could be that the _context_ that people see meat in is changing.  Or maybe some of them were considering Veganuary and this was akin to an "extinction burst".

Also, the big reductions on Quorn products in the supermarket suggested to me (and it seems sensible anyway), that it is vegetarians rather than full-on carnivals that have been partaking of the last month's experiment.  I think that research might be indicative of a few things going on.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 10, 2018)

Horus Snacks said:


> I personally don't find veganism compelling or remotely sustainable personally. It seems a very sophisticated asceticism based on superficial notions of sustainability and morality. Grazing livestock can be beneficial to the environment while some non-meat products (palm oil, iirc) results in deforestation.



Vegetarianism is historically intimately tied up with religious ascetic traditions.  
It would be odd if that strand of its DNA had fallen away entirely.

Prediction: now that we have had Veganuary, let's see if talk of Lent has any resurgence this year.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 10, 2018)

Horus Snacks said:


> i take human interest to mean something substantive, like curing a disease or optimal nutrition.
> 
> Not personal preference - killing or torturing an animal for pleasure. I don't think that qualifies since that could be applied simply between our own species and is thus merely emotional preference.



Yeah, that became clear later.  Though I think most people who eat meat are aware of alternatives and 'optimal nutrition' isn't usually the primary goal.  However 'optimal' is defined...


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 10, 2018)

Not sure how else one could define optimal other than in terms of nutrition and health. That's why i say animal food, for example organ meats, are optimal, because they are loaded with nutrition and lacking in a lot of stuff that isn't healthy.


----------



## keybored (Feb 10, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Spoiler: Chat at the end
> 
> 
> 
> ...



And why don't funeral parlours have human corpses displayed in their windows? _Why are they trying to hide what their industry is really about, eh?_


----------



## ddraig (Feb 10, 2018)

Spymaster said:


> Oh my days, he’s at it again! I do like to wake up to a laugh though.
> 
> ddraig , what point do you think you’re making by suggesting you get all Jack The Ripper on people’s pets?


that my interests as a human trump the interests of an animal to live


Horus Snacks said:


> Is owning pets ok? Interesting
> 
> I would love to answer your question but i've no idea how you've inferring the right to breach my personal property (which in this example would include my personal livestock/pets) from my answer. Your question implied there are good reasons to overrule animal rights from my perspective, can you give me a good reason why you should need to harm my cat/dog/hamster? I don't consider your personal bloodliust to be satisfactory, but you'd be welcome to try and bust into my home. If you did you'd be met with considerable force
> 
> Animals die for food throughout nature, if less of them did so that would mean predator specices would be suffering. Most predator hunts fail anyway, so this is already not a good thing from their perspective


I don't consider yours to be either


andysays said:


> Of all the things I never thought I'd see on Urban, ddraig channeling cat killer @franceslengel is pretty high up on the list


that thieving skanky twisted cunt actually did it though and revelled in it


Horus Snacks said:


> i take human interest to mean something substantive, like curing a disease or optimal nutrition.
> 
> Not personal preference - killing or torturing an animal for pleasure. I don't think that qualifies since that could be applied simply between our own species and is thus merely emotional preference.


what do you think meat eating is?


----------



## ddraig (Feb 10, 2018)

Horus Snacks said:


> Not sure how else one could define optimal other than in terms of nutrition and health. That's why i say animal food, for example organ meats, are optimal, because they are loaded with nutrition and lacking in a lot of stuff that isn't healthy.


do you drink or smoke? exercise regularly and properly? never cross the road unless the green man is on? do you always go for the most organic meats from animals that smiled all their lives? do you live in an unpolluted area or breathe from oxygen tanks?
if not why not? doing these would surely be optimal


----------



## NoXion (Feb 10, 2018)

keybored said:


> And why don't funeral parlours have human corpses displayed in their windows? _Why are they trying to hide what their industry is really about, eh?_



It's also blatantly untrue. Now we don't have a traditional farmer's market here in my own, but my local Tesco's, as well as the various independent supermarkets catering for this town's various different ethnic communities, all have sections where they sell freshly butchered meat and and fish. I don't know about the rest of you, but I find pretty easy to tell that the lumps of organic matter they are selling once came from living animals.

If people who eat meat are complaining about butchers hanging up animal carcasses, then those people should be found and taken on a day trip to the nearest abattoir, because they clearly need to be clued in about what the fuck their food is made of.


----------



## andysays (Feb 10, 2018)

ddraig said:


> do you drink or smoke? exercise regularly and properly? never cross the road unless the green man is on? do you always go for the most organic meats from animals that smiled all their lives? do you live in an unpolluted area or breathe from oxygen tanks?
> if not why not? doing these would surely be optimal



Not content with emulating your old chum FL, you're now doing your very own bit of hypocrisy hunting. Sounds legit...


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 10, 2018)

ddraig said:


> that my interests as a human trump the interests of an animal to live
> 
> I don't consider yours to be either
> 
> ...


 
Of course you don't, we wouldn't be having this conversation otherwise. The issue is whether you have a good argument and evidence for your positoin and i've not seen that from the vegan side. I have seen a lot of abuse however.

I think eating meat is the optimal diet for a human being and part of the natural process of life on earth, the only difference is that we're pretty good at it and have mechanised it


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 10, 2018)

ddraig said:


> do you drink or smoke? exercise regularly and properly? never cross the road unless the green man is on? do you always go for the most organic meats from animals that smiled all their lives? do you live in an unpolluted area or breathe from oxygen tanks?
> if not why not? doing these would surely be optimal


no, no, yes...define properly please.

I cross roads all the time, like the chickens i eat.

Not entirely sure what your argument is. Crossing roads is inherently risky but necessary. Breathing is an autonomic response i have no control over


----------



## ddraig (Feb 10, 2018)

andysays said:


> Not content with emulating your old chum FL, you're now doing your very own bit of hypocrisy hunting. Sounds legit...


you're such a creep bandwagon jumping shit poster still


----------



## ddraig (Feb 10, 2018)

Horus Snacks said:


> Of course you don't, we wouldn't be having this conversation otherwise. The issue is whether you have a good argument and evidence for your positoin and i've not seen that from the vegan side. I have seen a lot of abuse however.
> 
> I think eating meat is the optimal diet for a human being and part of the natural process of life on earth, the only difference is that we're pretty good at it and have mechanised it


what abuse? and if you're not going to address anything put to you and just dish out your view as gospel then it's pointless


----------



## NoXion (Feb 10, 2018)

Horus Snacks said:


> Of course you don't, we wouldn't be having this conversation otherwise. The issue is whether you have a good argument and evidence for your positoin and i've not seen that from the vegan side. I have seen a lot of abuse however.
> 
> I think eating meat is the optimal diet for a human being and part of the natural process of life on earth, the only difference is that we're pretty good at it and have mechanised it



I don't think there is such a thing as "the" optimal diet for a human being, since human beings vary in their habits and requirements.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 10, 2018)

NoXion said:


> It's also blatantly untrue. Now we don't have a traditional farmer's market here in my own, but my local Tesco's, as well as the various independent supermarkets catering for this town's various different ethnic communities, all have sections where they sell freshly butchered meat and and fish. I don't know about the rest of you, but I find pretty easy to tell that the lumps of organic matter they are selling once came from living animals.



There is a funny kind of selective squeamishness that I've noticed, though.
My nephew was tucking into his Sunday roast and wondered what an odd little structure was, so I explained that it was a tricuspid venous valve which led to the question what exactly was it for and before I could begin explaining (he loves science) the adults in the family were aghast and stopped me, clearly agreeing that I had overstepped some kind of mark.

I can be a bit iffy with social conventions but it struck me as interesting.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 10, 2018)

NoXion said:


> I don't think there is such a thing as "the" optimal diet for a human being, since human beings vary in their habits and requirements.



Should be pointed out that vegans (on this thread anyway), often dispute that variance in optimal requirements exists.


----------



## ddraig (Feb 10, 2018)

8ball said:


> There is a funny kind of selective squeamishness that I've noticed, though.
> My nephew was tucking into his Sunday roast and wondered what an odd little structure was, so I explained that it was a tricuspid venous valve which led to the question what exactly was it for and before I could begin explaining (he loves science) the adults in the family were aghast and stopped me, clearly agreeing that I had overstepped some kind of mark.
> 
> I can be a bit iffy with social conventions but it struck me as interesting.


what's wrong with the truth eh!


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 10, 2018)

ddraig said:


> what abuse? and if you're not going to address anything put to you and just dish out your view as gospel then it's pointless


I've addressed EVERYTHING that's been put to me. To a fault. If you think otherwise you are free to ask me anything. I don't shy away from questions.

But don't pretend there's been no abuse when I'm called a cunt for a position on eating carbs.


----------



## ddraig (Feb 10, 2018)

Horus Snacks said:


> I've addressed EVERYTHING that's been put to me. To a fault. If you think otherwise you are free to ask me anything. I don't shy away from questions.
> 
> But don't pretend there's been no abuse when I'm called a cunt for a position on eating carbs.


who called you a cunt? which post?


----------



## NoXion (Feb 10, 2018)

8ball said:


> There is a funny kind of selective squeamishness that I've noticed, though.
> My nephew was tucking into his Sunday roast and wondered what an odd little structure was, so I explained that it was a tricuspid venous valve which led to the question what exactly was it for and before I could begin explaining (he loves science) the adults in the family were aghast and stopped me, clearly agreeing that I had overstepped some kind of mark.
> 
> I can be a bit iffy with social conventions but it struck me as interesting.



That might explain some things. In my family that would be treated as a learning opportunity.


----------



## Spymaster (Feb 10, 2018)

ddraig said:


> that my interests as a human trump the interests of an animal to live


Do you really think this kind of reductio argument does you any favours? You’re coming across as a fucking banana. 

Keep it up though!


----------



## 8ball (Feb 10, 2018)

ddraig said:


> what abuse? and if you're not going to address anything put to you and just dish out your view as gospel then it's pointless



It's just an opinion that you disagree with.  Under certain conditions meat is going to be optimal depending on what is around, but I don't think we live under those conditions here and now, generally speaking.


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 10, 2018)

ddraig said:


> who called you a cunt? which post?


This is what you want to focus on now? Given up on the arguments against meat you want to try and catch me out. this just shows you to be a bad faith operator


----------



## 8ball (Feb 10, 2018)

ddraig said:


> who called you a cunt? which post?



Well, I got called a cunt for trying to bring up a point about the demographics and life cycle of food trends.
This isn't really a thread for the thin-skinned.


----------



## ddraig (Feb 10, 2018)

Horus Snacks said:


> This is what you want to focus on now? Given up on the arguments against meat you want to try and catch me out. this just shows you to be a bad faith operator


it's to show that you're lying bascially
don't lie or say shit you can't back up and you'll be fine
you're the bad faith operator here


----------



## andysays (Feb 10, 2018)

ddraig said:


> you're such a creep bandwagon jumping shit poster still



Whereas you are clearly winning support for veganism with every post you make.

Are you  actually sponsored by the BMPA by any chance?


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 10, 2018)

ddraig said:


> it's to show that you're lying bascially
> don't lie or say shit you can't back up and you'll be fine
> you're the bad faith operator here


Why don't you stick to your main act and talk about how I'm wrong about meat because it seems like you've just given up.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 10, 2018)

ddraig said:


> it's to show that you're lying bascially
> don't lie or say shit you can't back up and you'll be fine
> you're the bad faith operator here



Possible mis-remembering, I'd say.  The post that I think Horus is referring to seems at least partially related to a spat over the definition of 'carbohydrate'.

A brief search shows this to be a very 'cunty' thread.  On spec, it does seem more instances are aimed at vegans than the other way round.  Though with quite a few confusing instances and one outlier spraying the word liberally around without seeming preference as to the target's tribal affiliation.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Feb 10, 2018)

Things I reckon Jeff Robinson and I would agree on:

Lots of animals other than humans are sentient, have a point of view, a mind, emotions, emotional attachment, the capacity to feel pleasure and pain. How wide this sentience spreads is a tricky question: sheep, certainly; snakes, probably; frogs, possibly; nematode worms, probably not. Also, it is probably possible for a form of awareness to be present without a unified sense of self: this may well be the case with frogs. This isn't well understood, but the important point here would be that we both agree that the majority of farm animals are sentient beings capable of suffering.

We also agree that sometimes there is a need for us to kill other sentient beings, and I can add here that I don't approve of the idea of killing other animals without a good reason to do so (hence dealing with ddraig's pet-bashing objection). But this takes us to the sticking point: what constitutes a good reason? 

I'm conflicted over animal experimentation, which involves not merely killing animals but also intentionally inflicting suffering on them. Both of my siblings would be long dead without a treatment developed by testing on sentient animals. In some ways, I can see using animals for testing as more justifiable than using them for meat. 

Over meat and dairy, I'm less conflicted in the sense that I do see 'for food' as a decent reason for killing animals. Here we meet a point of sharp disagreement. I acknowledge the suffering that modern farming causes, and would like to see it reformed, but I don't in principle have a problem with keeping animals for food if the animals are kept well during their lives, something that I probably see as more possible to do than Jeff does. 

While I agree with Jeff over the horrific nature of many slaughter practices, I don't have a sticking point with the actual act of killing per se: in theory at least, a bolt to the brain should knock out consciousness before the brain has even had the time to experience any suffering. This particular animal is only alive in the first place because it is going to be killed. I can see how that may sound harsh. I'm not demanding that others agree. 

I don't expect to change opinions here, but we can reach a point where we understand each other's position at least, where we are not simply talking past one another.


----------



## ddraig (Feb 12, 2018)

BRAINWASHING on the streets of Cardiff


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Feb 12, 2018)

Just had some pretty awesome vegan mushroom tattie and neep pie! Who knew mashed tatties and neeps with olive oil could be so tasty? Mmmmm


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 13, 2018)

ddraig said:


> BRAINWASHING on the streets of Cardiff



Indeed. Cutesy balloon animals anthropomorphising them is hardly objective.

Did these people/you offer alternatives to the carnists you/they spoke to, or just accuse them of being murderers in front of their kids


----------



## ddraig (Feb 13, 2018)

Horus Snacks said:


> Indeed. Cutesy balloon animals anthropomorphising them is hardly objective.
> 
> Did these people/you offer alternatives to the carnists you/they spoke to, or just accuse them of being murderers in front of their kids


  
you don't think animals are cute irl then? awwww
objective, get to fuck, what met marketing is objective? how is not telling kids the truth objective?
why do you assume people were accused of being murderers?  doubt that would have gone down too well and what went on looks quite effective on it's own


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 13, 2018)

I think cute is a product of socialisation and irrelevant to the arguments for or against meat.

So how about the second question I asked. Did they give out practical information or just guilt trip kids?


----------



## ddraig (Feb 13, 2018)

how well do you think calling people and their kids murderers would have gone down in front of the other piggies in attendance?


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 13, 2018)

ddraig said:


> how well do you think calling people and their kids murderers would have gone down in front of the other piggies in attendance?


i didn't say they did. I asked you what they were doing. That was not a loaded question


----------



## ddraig (Feb 13, 2018)

why don't you ask them on their page? 
and start answering some questions put to you if you're going to demand answers from others


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 13, 2018)

I have no idea who 'they' are, if you are not involved.

So if you had nothing to do with it and can't tell us anymore about what they were doing or have to say, what was the point of posting it?


----------



## ddraig (Feb 13, 2018)

Horus Snacks said:


> I have no idea who 'they' are, if you are not involved.
> 
> So if you had nothing to do with it and can't tell us anymore about what they were doing or have to say, what was the point of posting it?


 follow the link to whoever posted the video
and    for the rest of your post


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 13, 2018)

ddraig said:


> follow the link to whoever posted the video
> and    for the rest of your post


the link is to a page of videos. a link YOU posted you dumb cunt.

I'm not doing your work for you so take your shitty attitude and shove it up your arse. Patronsing prick.


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 13, 2018)

Don't bother responding, you're blocked.


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 13, 2018)

Wells has put himself on ignore. Marvellous.


----------



## ddraig (Feb 13, 2018)

Horus Snacks said:


> the link is to a page of videos. a link YOU posted you dumb cunt.
> 
> I'm not doing your work for you so take your shitty attitude and shove it up your arse. Patronsing prick.


awww diddums throwing your toys about
no need for the abuse either, abuse then block, pathetic coward


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 13, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> Wells has put himself on ignore. Marvellous.



"If he comes in I will convey the message from the collective that until his bullying behaviour is amended for a protracted amount of time he will not be welcome"

Thanks Hydra Books, at least staff there give a shit that the person who (co) created the space now engages in online harassment.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Feb 14, 2018)

8ball said:


> ... and where you stand on the subject of pets, obviously.


Er...obviously? Not really. Pets are typically loved and well cared for by their companions and not usually abused, beaten, slaughtered or eaten, some or all of those things applying to farm animal and human slaves. 

#YetMoreTediousWhatAbouttery


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Feb 14, 2018)

8ball said:


> I’d agree that Jeff’s manner of arguing is much more compelling than this sort of stuff.


Well different things appeal to different people. There's no "one size fits all". It is normal for people to react negatively to information which challenges core sacred cow beliefs, and may prefer what would appear to them to be more safer and "non-threatening" points of discussion. "Just give me recipies and don't mention ethics or morals."

Well, sorry sir, but NO CAN DO. As far as I'm concerned ethics and morals are an integral part of the vegan universe and I'm not going to avoid the subject just because hearing "the truth" makes some people a bit uncomfortable. 

It's rather amusing that there are apparently so many folk who don't much care for veganism and claim to have no interest in it, and yet so many have invested time and effort in this thread and out in the real world (as I have experienced) to have a pop. I can understand vegans putting in a shift more out of necessity, with them being massively outnumbered, however the intensity of the backlash is another indication that the message is getting through and the animal eaters are worried.

Anyway, continuing on the morals track, here's a rather good synopsis of the ethics of killing animals for food, which some believe to be justifiable killing and have no problem with...


----------



## 8ball (Feb 14, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Er...obviously? Not really.



Nah, you’re right - not the best example of tailoring the post to the audience on my part.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Feb 15, 2018)

Do militant angry carnists turn you against going carnist? ...


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Feb 15, 2018)

keybored said:


> And why don't funeral parlours have human corpses displayed in their windows? _Why are they trying to hide what their industry is really about, eh?_


Well, not quite the same tbh. Given our supposed meat eating heritage, there really shouldn't be a reason to be squeamish about seeing dead animals with all their blood, guts and brains hanging out and for genuine meatheads should be a cause for salivation.

The fact that so many people really don't like seeing or smelling that shit, coupled with the many well documented negatives associated with eating meat is what makes such a strong case for veganism, imo.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 15, 2018)

How 'bout them Olympics, eh?


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Feb 16, 2018)

8ball said:


> How 'bout them Olympics, eh?


Even though that was another one of your useless comments in this thread...


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Feb 16, 2018)




----------



## 8ball (Feb 16, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Even though that was another one of your useless comments in this thread...



Well done, you spotted the 'dog' angle.
Would have been easy to say something relevant on that point.


----------



## veganomics (Feb 19, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> View attachment 127575


I saw her being interviewed on PCRM channel just before the olympics...


----------



## ddraig (Feb 19, 2018)

Offended by Koreans eating dog? I trust you’ve never had a bacon butty | Chas Newkey-Burden


----------



## mojo pixy (Feb 19, 2018)

...the point being, presumably, that _being offended_ about someone else eating a dead animal is pretty stupid.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Feb 19, 2018)

ddraig said:


> Offended by Koreans eating dog? I trust you’ve never had a bacon butty | Chas Newkey-Burden



"_Would you eat rabbit? Even those who regularly consume meat from chickens, sheep and pigs will often balk at the thought of eating a cuddly little bunny rabbit. But what’s the difference? Why do we see some animals as furry friends and others as fair game to chop up and eat? With the Winter Olympics turning attention towards South Korea, dog meat has been put on the media menu. The west has gone into shock mode. They eat dogs? They must be mad!

But they do. Some of the same breeds we consider man’s best friend in England – labradors, beagles, chihuahuas – are eaten in South Korea. More than 30 million dogs are slaughtered each year for the Asian market and served up in dishes like dog salad and dog stew. As a vegan, this appals me. But no more than I'm appalled by people eating chickens and cows. Is there really such a difference? I sense some hypocrisy in the outrage, and perhaps a little dollop of racism (or at least xenophobia) on the side."
_
Right on the money.


----------



## Opera Buffa (Feb 19, 2018)

I had rabbit in Malta. Tastes like chewy pork.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Feb 19, 2018)

Koreans eat dogs? Who knew? The shock. The outrage!


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Feb 19, 2018)

Also, people 'often balk' at eating rabbit? Really? What complete bollocks.


----------



## Yossarian (Feb 19, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Also, people 'often balk' at eating rabbit? Really? What complete bollocks.



How often do you see rabbit on a menu? Most people think of rabbits more as pets than meat and don't eat them.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Feb 19, 2018)

Yossarian said:


> How often do you see rabbit on a menu? Most people think of rabbits more as pets than meat and don't eat them.


You don't see it on the menu much, true. But loads of traditional British recipes involve rabbit. That strikes me as an evidence-free assertion.


----------



## andysays (Feb 19, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Koreans eat dogs? Who knew? The shock. The outrage!



I think that article would be better suited to the _Why the Guardian is shit_ thread, TBH.

The idea that "_The west has gone into shock mode" _is utter nonsense, and the final bit of PaoloSanchez's quote 


> I sense some hypocrisy in the outrage, and perhaps a little dollop of racism (or at least xenophobia) on the side.


is sanctimonious holier-than-thou shit equally typical of smug Guardianistas and many angry vegans


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Feb 19, 2018)

Yossarian said:


> How often do you see rabbit on a menu? Most people think of rabbits more as pets than meat and don't eat them.


Except if you wish to justify eating animals. Perhaps Korean expats should start a publicity campaign to make dog meat more popular.

...and the expat French open up an equine burger outlet. I'm sure both of those emerging meat markets can be popularised with a slick creative media campaign and a bit of lobbying.


----------



## ddraig (Feb 19, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> ...the point being, presumably, that _being offended_ about someone else eating a dead animal is pretty stupid.


no, the point is about the hypocrisy in being outraged at people eating dog when they eat pigs, cows, lambs, sheep, chicken and other animals


----------



## ddraig (Feb 19, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Koreans eat dogs? Who knew? The shock. The outrage!


it's not for know it alls like you obviously


----------



## andysays (Feb 19, 2018)

ddraig said:


> no, the point is about the hypocrisy in being outraged at people eating dog when they eat pigs, cows, lambs, sheep, chicken and other animals



Except there's no evidence provided in that article that significant numbers *are* outraged. And without evidence of that it's just a load of transparently manipulative nonsense.


----------



## ddraig (Feb 19, 2018)

andysays said:


> Except there's no evidence provided in that article that significant numbers *are* outraged. And without evidence of that it's just a load of transparently manipulative nonsense.


boo hooo! something you don't like 

people are outraged and it's bollocks, have some consistency ffs


----------



## andysays (Feb 19, 2018)

ddraig said:


> boo hooo! something you don't like
> 
> *people are outraged* and it's bollocks, have some consistency ffs



Are they? Who is outraged? How is this outrage manifesting itself? 

Can you point me to any evidence at all which supports the claim that "_the west has gone into shock mode"_ made by the author of this article and taken up by you as if it's gospel?


----------



## ddraig (Feb 19, 2018)

andysays said:


> Are they? Who is outraged? How is this outrage manifesting itself?
> 
> Can you point me to any evidence at all which supports the claim that "_the west has gone into shock mode"_ made by the author of this article and taken up by you as if it's gospel?


what you want? names and addresses of all those outraged? 
you don't actually care just more hunting of anything to attack so no i won't


----------



## 8ball (Feb 19, 2018)

ddraig said:


> Offended by Koreans eating dog? I trust you’ve never had a bacon butty | Chas Newkey-Burden



Got there in the end. Ish.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 19, 2018)

Opera Buffa said:


> I had rabbit in Malta. Tastes like chewy pork.



Not if it's done right.


----------



## mojo pixy (Feb 19, 2018)

Yossarian said:


> How often do you see rabbit on a menu?



Fair point, but this only really says people don't get a chance to balk at eating rabbit, as it's not on the menu in the first place.



ddraig said:


> no, the point is about the hypocrisy in being outraged at people eating dog when they eat pigs, cows, lambs, sheep, chicken and other animals



o rly


----------



## 8ball (Feb 19, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Perhaps Korean expats should start a publicity campaign to make dog meat more popular.



Showing quite a lot of ignorance about the issue there...


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Feb 19, 2018)

Crap comedians have been making shit racist jokes about Koreans eating dogs for decades. This is not news.


----------



## andysays (Feb 19, 2018)

ddraig said:


> what you want? names and addresses of all those outraged?
> you don't actually care just more hunting of anything to attack so no i won't



It's really quite sad that you have descended to such levels of bullshit. I can only assume that you're feeling a bit hangry today...


----------



## 8ball (Feb 19, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Crap comedians have been making shit racist jokes about Koreans eating dogs for decades. This is not news.



Might have been news to some that some Koreans still do, I guess.
But most of the talk I've heard about these Olympics has focused on the curling, the skeleton and those snowboard mentalists.

Though some people might have been talking about it. Can be hard to tell what's going on in the other echo chambers these days...


----------



## ddraig (Feb 19, 2018)

andysays said:


> It's really quite sad that you have descended to such levels of bullshit. I can only assume that you're feeling a bit hangry today...


fuck the fuck off you creep


----------



## andysays (Feb 19, 2018)

ddraig said:


> fuck the fuck off you creep



Do angry vegans turn me against going vegan? No, but they certainly don't do anything to persuade with posts like this


----------



## ddraig (Feb 19, 2018)

andysays said:


> Do angry vegans turn me against going vegan? No, but they certainly don't do anything to persuade with posts like this


for the 100th time, i don't give a fuck, why the fuck do you think i care what the fuck you eat you pompous fuckwit? 
i'm not out to convince or convert you, and you're only here to troll


----------



## 8ball (Feb 19, 2018)

ddraig said:


> for the 100th time, i don't give a fuck, why the fuck do you think i care what the fuck you eat you pompous fuckwit?
> i'm not out to convince or convert you, and you're only here to troll



Matthew 13:19?


----------



## Yossarian (Feb 19, 2018)

Wonder if an athlete from India or somewhere will follow Duhamel's lead and rescue some animals during an international sporting event held in the West.

"I saved this baby cow from a slaughterhouse - yes, they eat baby cows here, I shit you not..."


----------



## 8ball (Feb 19, 2018)

Yossarian said:


> Wonder if an athlete from India or somewhere will follow Duhamel's lead and rescue some animals during an international sporting event held in the West.
> 
> "I saved this baby cow from a slaughterhouse - yes, they eat baby cows here, I shit you not..."



Although eating dogs isn’t quite legal in Korea. The history of it is complicated and there’s a bit of racism in the simplistic way it is covered by the media at times.

The current situation as I understand it is an unfortunate grey area where dogs do not even have the same legal status as livestock due to past legal bungling and manoeuvring.


----------



## editor (Feb 19, 2018)

Eating dogs is fucking disgusting but if you're tucking into equally intelligent pigs and other smart creatures, I'm not sure why full on meat eaters should get on their high horse about it.


----------



## Spymaster (Feb 19, 2018)

ddraig said:


> boo hooo! something you don't like
> 
> people are outraged and it's bollocks, have some consistency ffs


Post an example of meat eaters expressing _outrage_ at consumption of dog meat.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 19, 2018)

editor said:


> Eating dogs is fucking disgusting but if you're tucking into equally intelligent pigs and other smart creatures, I'm not sure why full on meat eaters should get on their high horse about it.



...seems like a fair point if you see intelligence as some kind of important cut-off point.  Which I’d guess a lot of people do.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 19, 2018)

Spymaster said:


> Post an example of meat eaters expressing _outrage_ at consumption of dog meat.



On this thread, or elsewhere (I’d expect the latter should be easy).


----------



## editor (Feb 19, 2018)

8ball said:


> ...seems like a fair point if you see intelligence as some kind of important cut-off point.  Which I’d guess a lot of people do.


What other deciding factors might there be to this curious conundrum? Cuddliness? Domesticity?


----------



## andysays (Feb 19, 2018)

editor said:


> Eating dogs is fucking disgusting but if you're tucking into equally intelligent pigs and other smart creatures, I'm not sure why full on meat eaters should get on their high horse about it.



I still haven't seen any evidence that significant numbers of people, full on meat eaters or not, really are expressing particular concern about the supposed Korean habit of eating dog.

Is this just one of these times when if a few people repeat something often enough it becomes an accepted fact?


----------



## 8ball (Feb 19, 2018)

editor said:


> What other deciding factors are there? Cuddliness? Domesticity?



That’s two, yes.


----------



## editor (Feb 19, 2018)

andysays said:


> I still haven't seen any evidence that significant numbers of people, full on meat eaters or not, really are expressing particular concern about the supposed Korean habit of eating dog.
> 
> Is this just one of these times when if a few people repeat something often enough it becomes an accepted fact?


Oh come on. I don't think it's too much of a leap to assume that a fairly large percentage of people in a dog loving country like the UK are going to find the notion of eating dogs unpleasant.


----------



## ddraig (Feb 19, 2018)

yeah yeah but but evidence EVIDENCE or it didn't happen
you must provide EVIDENCE for the arbitrators of what's acceptable or else you're clearly lying!!! etc


----------



## editor (Feb 19, 2018)

Most South Koreans are against the disgusting practice too:

South Koreans are increasingly turning their backs on cruel dog meat trade


----------



## andysays (Feb 19, 2018)

editor said:


> Oh come on. I don't think it's too much of a leap to assume that a fairly large percentage of people in a dog loving country like the UK are going to find the notion of eating dogs unpleasant.



That may or may not be correct, but that's not what has been asserted in the Guardian article posted up thread.

For the record, I don't particularly like dogs, and I would find the idea of eating them not to my taste (for a variety of cultural reasons, I guess) but that doesn't mean I'm outraged by the fact that some people from another culture and in another country might find it perfectly acceptable.


----------



## Spymaster (Feb 19, 2018)

Yossarian said:


> How often do you see rabbit on a menu? Most people think of rabbits more as pets than meat and don't eat them.


You'll often see rabbit on menu's in restaurants specialising in game. The meat is excellent if cooked well and rabbit is in season all year round in the UK (except Scotland I think) so it's often great value. Jugged hare is an awesome Brit classic. You'll see prepped rabbit in clingfilmed trays in supermarkets but mainstream restaurants probably don't run with it because it's not easy to cook well. Same as game birds.


----------



## editor (Feb 19, 2018)

andysays said:


> That may or may not be correct, but that's not what has been asserted in the Guardian article posted up thread.
> 
> For the record, I don't particularly like dogs, and I would find the idea of eating them not to my taste (for a variety of cultural reasons, I guess) but that doesn't mean I'm outraged by the fact that some people from another culture and in another country might find it perfectly acceptable.


So you're cool with people rearing dogs in cruel conditions and then eating them. I could be wrong but I suspect you're in a minority.


----------



## Spymaster (Feb 19, 2018)

ddraig said:


> yeah yeah but but evidence EVIDENCE or it didn't happen
> you must provide EVIDENCE for the arbitrators of what's acceptable or else you're clearly lying!!! etc


Well just a couple of examples would do. Otherwise it's just noise. 

I'd avoid dog meat now but that's because I wouldn't trust the suppliers of it and the one time I've tried it I didn't much care for it.


----------



## andysays (Feb 19, 2018)

editor said:


> Most South Koreans are against the disgusting practice too:
> 
> South Koreans are increasingly turning their backs on cruel dog meat trade



Are you suggesting that the practice is disgusting because of the cruel conditions the dogs are kept in (which appears to be at least part of the argument of that Mirror story and the story linked to in the Guardian article claiming that "_The west has gone into shock mode"_), or would it be disgusting whatever conditions existed?


----------



## editor (Feb 19, 2018)

I think this backs up what I've been saying: 



> *Westerners' disgust*
> Our love of dogs isn't the only thing stopping us from eating them; it is claimed the feeling of "disgust" and fear of being judged by others influences our eating habits too.
> 
> In an article for The Guardian, science writer Dr Kathleen Taylor says: "To most Westerners, eating your dog is an abomination, end of story. That's the rule our culture happens to follow.
> ...


Why the UK doesn't eat dog meat, but people in China do


----------



## editor (Feb 19, 2018)

andysays said:


> Are you suggesting that the practice is disgusting because of the cruel conditions the dogs are kept in (which appears to be at least part of the argument of that Mirror story and the story linked to in the Guardian article claiming that "_The west has gone into shock mode"_), or would it be disgusting whatever conditions existed?


I think it's disgusting on both levels: the abject cruelty (which is very widely documented) and the eating of the dog itself. But you're OK with that, yes?


----------



## editor (Feb 19, 2018)

Oh, at no point have I been "outraged" by this practice. I just think it's cruel and disgusting.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 19, 2018)

editor said:


> I think it's disgusting on both levels: the abject cruelty (which is very widely documented) and the eating of the dog itself.



Clean and pure, up on the moral high ground, as the article says.


----------



## andysays (Feb 19, 2018)

editor said:


> I think it's disgusting on both levels: the abject cruelty (which is very widely documented) and the eating of the dog itself. But you're OK with that, yes?



Thanks for clarifying.

I haven't said anywhere that I'm OK with the cruelty associated with much of the meat industry, dog or otherwise.


----------



## editor (Feb 19, 2018)

andysays said:


> Thanks for clarifying.
> 
> I haven't said anywhere that I'm OK with the cruelty associated with much of the meat industry, dog or otherwise.


Sorry, this comment suggested you weren't bothered by it: "For the record, I don't particularly like dogs, and I would find the idea of eating them not to my taste (for a variety of cultural reasons, I guess) but that doesn't mean I'm outraged by the fact that some people from another culture and in another country might find it perfectly acceptable." If you're not outraged, how about 'disgusted'?

Closer to home, what are your feelings on the cruelty and general mucking-about involved in, say, the chicken industry?


----------



## 8ball (Feb 19, 2018)

I think it’s useful to pull apart the conflation of the ethics of eating meat as a concept and certain brutal farming practices.

Some of the louder voices against the latter have come from meat eaters, and I don’t think anyone on this thread has expressed approval of either factory farming processes or the far worse things which are accepted in cases of pseudo-legal rearing of minority meat products.

The ‘carnism’ point of what is accepted as a ‘food animal’ is tied up with it, but is another separate point. Fact is, it would be better for those dogs in Korea if their livestock status had never been revoked, because standards of livestock rearing have been on a path of convergence with the West.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Feb 19, 2018)

Cultures aren't fully logically consistent about what they consider food animals, for a variety of reasons. I totally reject the idea that people above the age of about 10 in the UK are put off eating rabbit cos they're cute. Bad example, and rabbit has a longstanding tradition in British cuisine. Horse would be a better example. There's no particular reason why people should reject eating horse over other animals, but many in the UK do do that. 

But I'm not quite sure what this proves except that we're not completely logical beings in our choices and preferences. Regarding the disgust reaction, that's something that comes from a complex number of factors, and many people have weird disgust reactions to non-meat foods like mushrooms.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 19, 2018)

Yeah, the mushroom thing is pretty common, and seems a little odd.  I don’t like beetroot but I don’t have that kind of reaction about it.

Maybe it’s related to the poisonous nature of so many related fungi.


----------



## ddraig (Feb 19, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Cultures aren't fully logically consistent about what they consider food animals, for a variety of reasons. I totally reject the idea that people above the age of about 10 in the UK are put off eating rabbit cos they're cute. Bad example, and rabbit has a longstanding tradition in British cuisine. Horse would be a better example. There's no particular reason why people should reject eating horse over other animals, but many in the UK do do that.
> 
> But I'm not quite sure what this proves except that we're not completely logical beings in our choices and preferences. Regarding the disgust reaction, that's something that comes from a complex number of factors, and many people have weird disgust reactions to non-meat foods like mushrooms.


evidence?!?! where's your EVIDENCE of people above the age of 10 not being put off eating bunnies because they're cute??
otherwise it's just noise, as usual


----------



## Spymaster (Feb 19, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> But I'm not quite sure what this proves except that we're not completely logical beings in our choices and preferences. Regarding the disgust reaction, that's something that comes from a complex number of factors, and many people have weird disgust reactions to non-meat foods like mushrooms.


It's just the vegheads jumping up and down and engaging in the hypocrisy hunting that so exercises ddraig when the tables are turned.


----------



## andysays (Feb 19, 2018)

editor said:


> Sorry, this comment suggested you weren't bothered by it: "For the record, I don't particularly like dogs, and I would find the idea of eating them not to my taste (for a variety of cultural reasons, I guess) but that doesn't mean I'm outraged by the fact that some people from another culture and in another country might find it perfectly acceptable." If you're not outraged, how about 'disgusted'?



I think a meaningful distinction can be made between the general fact of eating (dog) meat and the conditions which animals are kept in or the way they're treated before being killed. 

I don't have a problem with the general fact of eating meat, even if some of the animals (eg dogs) people choose to eat are ones which I wouldn't eat myself.

I agree that the conditions in which many animals are kept are unnecessarily cruel, including chickens eaten in the UK and dogs apparently eaten in Korea. To the extent it's possible, I attempt to avoid eating meat from animals which have been kept in conditions I would regard as unnecessarily cruel, though I accept I could probably do more than I currently do.

But I'm not going to declare myself either disgusted or outraged by the fact that some people in Korea apparently eat dog meat, particularly when the driver for that feeling of disgust and outrage is a disingenuous story in the Guardian, attempting to use the Winter Olympics in Korea to whip up a story claiming that "_The west has gone into shock mode"_.


----------



## ddraig (Feb 19, 2018)

Spymaster said:


> It's just the vegheads jumping up and down and engaging in the hypocrisy hunting that so exercises ddraig when the tables are turned.


 only works one way does it?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Feb 19, 2018)

8ball said:


> Yeah, the mushroom thing is pretty common, and seems a little odd.  I don’t like beetroot but I don’t have that kind of reaction about it.
> 
> Maybe it’s related to the poisonous nature of so many related fungi.


Could be. Disgust reactions tend to have their root in unpleasant associations, don't they? 

Could also be related to a particular reaction to a chemical that others don't sense in the same way. Or a combination of the two.


----------



## Spymaster (Feb 19, 2018)

ddraig said:


> only works one way does it?


Of course not. But the hypocrisy of your hypocrisy is amusing!


----------



## 8ball (Feb 19, 2018)

ddraig said:


> evidence?!?! where's your EVIDENCE of people above the age of 10 not being put off eating bunnies because they're cute??
> otherwise it's just noise, as usual



Evidence is tricky in this regard, since rabbit meat is something of a cottage industry in the UK.  You don’t get the kind of collated figures you get with large-scale factory farming.

There *was* that fuss over Jeanette Winterson killing, cooking and eating a rabbit about 5 or 6 years ago, but it’s unclear what proportion of the ‘great outraged’ were happily guzzling down chicken nuggets while hammering their keyboards.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 19, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Could be. Disgust reactions tend to have their root in unpleasant associations, don't they?
> 
> Could also be related to a particular reaction to a chemical that others don't sense in the same way. Or a combination of the two.



I was more thinking it might be some kind of ‘genetic memory’ (for want of a better word) similar to that speculated to be involved in an aversion of spiders and snakes (or cucumbers, if you’re a cat), but that’s an interesting idea.

A lot of mycophobes say it is the texture.  I guess those people don’t eat tofu either.  Most tofu eaters I know also eat mushrooms, but obviously I’m not going to draw anything from that.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Feb 19, 2018)

8ball said:


> I was more thinking it might be some kind of ‘genetic memory’ (for want of a better word) similar to that speculated to be involved in an aversion of spiders and snakes (or cucumbers, if you’re a cat), but that’s an interesting idea.
> 
> A lot of mycophobes say it is the texture.  I guess those people don’t eat tofu either.  Most tofu eaters I know also eat mushrooms, but obviously I’m not going to draw anything from that.


We're not always the best at explaining things like our disgust reactions, though. We confabulate some post facto story, but we're not reliable narrators.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 19, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> We're not always the best at explaining things like our disgust reactions, though. We confabulate some post facto story, but we're not reliable narrators.



That’s my feeling too.

Would be interesting to know how many anti-fungists eat aubergine.

Also, a lot of foods become slimy in texture when going off.


----------



## NoXion (Feb 19, 2018)

Don't like mushrooms or aubergines. Texture makes me boke.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 19, 2018)

NoXion said:


> Don't like mushrooms or aubergines. Texture makes me boke.



Science, bitches! 

(Ok, small sample size...)


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Feb 19, 2018)

Is rabbit really such an odd thing to eat? It’s delicious if cooked right and readily available here in the UK...


----------



## Spymaster (Feb 19, 2018)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> Is rabbit really such an odd thing to eat?


Not. At. All.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 19, 2018)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> Is rabbit really such an odd thing to eat? It’s delicious if cooked right and readily available here in the UK...


 
Certainly is (delicious, I mean, not odd).  Though I was very conflicted as a kid when my Dad brought a freshly-shot one home.

I remember a lot of people saying _Watership Down_ had a big effect on whether they would eat rabbit (of my generation, anyway).

Demand still outstrips what we produce here, though. According to (rough) estimates, it is mostly imported.

As of a few years ago, demand was increasing, but I can’t immediately find anything more current.


----------



## Spymaster (Feb 19, 2018)

Sainsbury's, Iceland, and probably all the others currently stock rabbit meat.


----------



## Spymaster (Feb 19, 2018)

Opera Buffa said:


> I had rabbit in Malta. Tastes like chewy pork.


Rabbit is a national dish in Malta.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 19, 2018)

Spymaster said:


> Sainsbury's, Iceland, and probably all the others currently stock rabbit meat.



Looks like Sainsbury’s stuff is a mixture of UK and EU - Iceland’s is from Hungary.

Tesco don’t seem to be doing rabbit right now.

Not making any kind of point, just found that interesting.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 19, 2018)

Spymaster said:


> Rabbit is a national dish in Malta.



You’d think they’d have cooked it better.


----------



## Spymaster (Feb 19, 2018)

8ball said:


> Looks like Sainsbury’s stuff is a mixture of UK and EU - Iceland’s is from Hungary.


Makes sense. A quick Google suggests that rabbit farming in the UK is still quite small scale and seems to be confined to smallholdings, in the main.


----------



## Spymaster (Feb 19, 2018)

8ball said:


> You’d think they’d have cooked it better.


They call it fenec and it's a popular take-away dish there. Most times that I've had it, it has been quite chewy, as OB says.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 19, 2018)

Spymaster said:


> Makes sense. A quick Google suggests that rabbit farming in the UK is still quite small scale and seems to be confined to smallholdings, in the main.



Also, I think the small-scale UK production is a mixture of people directly supplying the products of pest control to a close-knit number of consumers, and a mixture of that and farmed produce going to high-end restaurants.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 19, 2018)

Spymaster said:


> They call it fenec and it's a popular take-away dish there. Most times that I've had it, it has been quite chewy, as OB says.



Guess that’s how they like it.

For those who have ddraig on ignore, it’s pretty identical to a cat once you’ve skinned it.

(Just guessing he was about to point that out)


----------



## ddraig (Feb 19, 2018)

8ball said:


> Guess that’s how they like it.
> 
> For those who don’t have ddraig on ignore, it’s pretty identical to a cat once you’ve skinned it.
> 
> (Just guessing he was about to point that out)


what relevance does this post have to what i've posted and why then have you tagged me?
the carnists have taken over again and now happily discussing rabbit, why tag me?

e2a why would i be about to point that out and why the pathetic winky smiley


----------



## 8ball (Feb 19, 2018)

ddraig said:


> what relevance does this post have to what i've posted and why then have you tagged me?
> the carnists have taken over again and now happily discussing rabbit, why tag me?



Hey, bud, it wasn’t me that first brought up the subject of cutting up cats!


----------



## Spymaster (Feb 19, 2018)

I thought it was considered common courtesy to tag posters you mention.


----------



## Spymaster (Feb 19, 2018)

8ball said:


> Hey, bud, it wasn’t me that first brought up the subject of cutting up cats!


Or kicking them to death


----------



## 8ball (Feb 19, 2018)

Spymaster said:


> I thought it was considered common courtesy to tag posters you mention.



I dunno, I bring up his finest moment on this thread and this is what I get.


----------



## ddraig (Feb 19, 2018)

Spymaster said:


> I thought it was considered common courtesy to tag posters you mention.


when it's actually relevant and not baiting/point scoring


----------



## ddraig (Feb 19, 2018)

8ball said:


> I dunno, I bring up his finest moment on this thread and this is what I get.


get a new hobby ffs


----------



## 8ball (Feb 19, 2018)

ddraig said:


> get a new hobby ffs



Oh, come now.

You know it will come up again in the ‘best posts of the year’ thread.

You’ve carved your niche in Urban lore.  Revel in it!


----------



## Spymaster (Feb 19, 2018)

ddraig said:


> get a new hobby ffs


It _was_ one of the funniest things I've seen on the boards and definitely the most amusing post _you _have ever made!


----------



## 8ball (Feb 19, 2018)

Spymaster said:


> It _was_ one of the funniest things I've seen on the boards and definitely the most amusing post _you _have ever made!



Obviously we’ve collectively agreed that no conclusions about vegans in general can be made from this.


----------



## Yossarian (Feb 19, 2018)

8ball said:


> Certainly is (delicious, I mean, not odd).  Though I was very conflicted as a kid when my Dad brought a freshly-shot one home.
> 
> I remember a lot of people saying _Watership Down_ had a big effect on whether they would eat rabbit (of my generation, anyway).
> 
> ...



I know you might see rabbit in upscale or exotic restaurants and occasionally in supermarkets, but I don't get the impression that many people who don't shoot their own eat it on a regular basis - it's like pigeon, if you were making dinner for a lot of people, you probably wouldn't serve it because there'd probably be a large proportion of people saying "hell, no."

Apparently most of the rabbit sold in Britain comes from factory farms in France and Italy that are exceptionally grim even by the standards of factory farms so it's just as well people don't eat it that much, IMO.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 19, 2018)

I certainly wouldn’t try to feed a lot of people with a pigeon.  For a while I took two woodpigeons to school for lunch each day.  I was in a growing phase but you wouldn’t feed many without a lot of them.

Tbf there was a massive ‘yuk factor’ from the other pupils.  Even growing up in a rural area you get a lot of that.  Those pigeons had a way better life than the chickens and cows they were chowing down on, though.

Don’t think I ever had a rabbit that wasn’t shot by someone I know either.

Edit: Except from Skomer when I was really little, but that’s cos you didn’t even have to shoot them.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Feb 19, 2018)

8ball said:


> I certainly wouldn’t try to feed a lot of people with a pigeon.  For a while I took two woodpigeons to school for lunch each day.  I was in a growing phase but you wouldn’t feed many without a lot of them.
> 
> Tbf there was a massive ‘yuk factor’ from the other pupils.  Even growing up in a rural area you get a lot of that.  Those pigeons had a way better life than the chickens and cows they were chowing down on, though.
> 
> ...


People often have a yuk factor towards novel food items. And particularly children. That's not such a shock. And in the case of pigeons, I doubt it's because they thought they were too cute to eat.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 19, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> People often have a yuk factor towards novel food items. And particularly children. That's not such a shock. And in the case of pigeons, I doubt it's because they thought they were too cute to eat.



We never had the kind of feral pigeons you get in cities there, though.  They got especially weird about me digging shotgun pellets out of the things.

Some of them were also funny about fish, even the ones who lived right by the coast.  The alienation over where food comes from was well underway from the 70s.

Chips, beans and sausages was the order of the day.  If I brought a crab in you’d think I was eating someone’s hamster.

No idea what they thought sausages and burgers were made of...


----------



## 8ball (Feb 19, 2018)

But yeah, I get where you’re coming from with kids and new food items.  I was fussy as fuck for a while.  This was more of a social reinforcement thing than normal fussiness, though.

Got a load of stick in primary school because I wouldn’t eat chips or beans. That didn’t leave much..

Edit: think maybe there were mushy peas.  The E102 kind.  Didn’t like them either.


----------



## Opera Buffa (Feb 19, 2018)

Spymaster said:


> Rabbit is a national dish in Malta.



That's why I ate it!


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Feb 19, 2018)

Yossarian said:


> I know you might see rabbit in upscale or exotic restaurants and occasionally in supermarkets, but I don't get the impression that many people who don't shoot their own eat it on a regular basis - it's like pigeon, if you were making dinner for a lot of people, you probably wouldn't serve it because there'd probably be a large proportion of people saying "hell, no."
> 
> Apparently most of the rabbit sold in Britain comes from factory farms in France and Italy that are exceptionally grim even by the standards of factory farms so it's just as well people don't eat it that much, IMO.


Most (> 80%) of the meat sold in Britain, be it rabbit, chicken, pigs or cows are the products of the "farmageddon" factory farms, and yet so many meat eaters claim to be eating "happy meat". Most of them are fucking liars.



Apparently it is not the meat eaters themselves that are to blame for this rather sad state of affairs, it's the fault of angry Grauniad reading vegans.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 19, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Apparently it is not the meat eaters themselves that are to blame for this rather sad state of affairs, it's the fault of angry Grauniad reading vegans.



Oh, do go on.

Enlighten me as to why this is apparently the fault of Guardian-reading vegans.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Feb 20, 2018)

Well apparently, according to some of your triggered dead animal eating peers, if vegans weren't so nasty and objectionable then perhaps more meat eaters might be persuaded to reduce their demand for dead animal flesh. It's a bit like the defiant NRA "from my  cold dead hands" stance. If only vegans would agree that killing animals unnecessarily was ok, then everything would be fine. Bloody extremists.


----------



## DotCommunist (Feb 20, 2018)

'


littlebabyjesus said:


> You don't see it on the menu much, true



not an incredible flavour to it. Its good in a stew.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Feb 20, 2018)

BBC Radio 1 - Radio 1's Life Hacks, With Cel Spellman and Katie Thistleton, What is veganism and could it be for you?


----------



## Spymaster (Feb 20, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> not an incredible flavour to it. Its good in a stew.


Yep. Best prepared á la jugged hare. 

Originally the animals blood was added in to thicken it towards the end of cooking but obviously unless you shoot or trap your own, you'll not have the blood available so flour is the obvious alternative. 

Rules in Covent Garden usually have traditional rabbit dishes on the menu.


----------



## NoXion (Feb 20, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Well apparently, according to some of your triggered dead animal eating peers, if vegans weren't so nasty and objectionable then perhaps more meat eaters might be persuaded to reduce their demand for dead animal flesh. It's a bit like the defiant NRA "from my  cold dead hands" stance. If only vegans would agree that killing animals unnecessarily was ok, then everything would be fine. Bloody extremists.



As I stated way back near the beginning of this thread, the snotty attitudes of certain vegans has nothing to do with why I'm not vegan. Can't say I recall anyone else saying otherwise, although doubtless you'll be along to refresh our memories with a quote. Right?


----------



## cupid_stunt (Feb 20, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> People often have a yuk factor towards novel food items. And particularly children.



Yep, there's certainly a yuk factor when it comes to eating kids.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 20, 2018)

NoXion said:


> As I stated way back near the beginning of this thread, the snotty attitudes of certain vegans has nothing to do with why I'm not vegan. Can't say I recall anyone else saying otherwise, although doubtless you'll be along to refresh our memories with a quote. Right?



I try not to get things conflated, but it can be tricky at times. Tbf, it *is* kind of the subject of the thread.

I’m still struggling with the NRA analogy...


----------



## ddraig (Feb 20, 2018)

NoXion said:


> As I stated way back near the beginning of this thread, the snotty attitudes of certain vegans has nothing to do with why I'm not vegan. Can't say I recall anyone else saying otherwise, although doubtless you'll be along to refresh our memories with a quote. Right?


just a couple of pages ago


andysays said:


> Do angry vegans turn me against going vegan? No, but they certainly don't do anything to persuade with posts like this


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Feb 20, 2018)

NoXion said:


> As I stated way back near the beginning of this thread, the snotty attitudes of certain vegans has nothing to do with why I'm not vegan. Can't say I recall anyone else saying otherwise, although doubtless you'll be along to refresh our memories with a quote. Right?


Yeah, didn't see nuffink guvnor.

#confirmationBias
#selectiveVision


----------



## 8ball (Feb 20, 2018)

#NotAllVegans


----------



## NoXion (Feb 20, 2018)

ddraig said:


> just a couple of pages ago



You don't see a difference between "not being convinced" and "being turned against"? OK.


----------



## ddraig (Feb 20, 2018)

NoXion said:


> You don't see a difference between "not being convinced" and "being turned against"? OK.


knew that was coming 
pick pick pick
fucking schoolyard bullshit


----------



## NoXion (Feb 20, 2018)

ddraig said:


> knew that was coming
> pick pick pick
> fucking schoolyard bullshit



Maybe andysays can clarify exactly what he meant.


----------



## NoXion (Feb 20, 2018)

Even we were to accept that as an example, that's exactly one. Hardly "some".

Pretty rich to go on about schoolyard tactics while making a hasty generalisation oneself.


----------



## xenon (Feb 20, 2018)

I've eat rabbit, in a stew. They do sell it in supermarkets you know. Or did. I'd probably eat dog too.


----------



## xenon (Feb 20, 2018)

Lunch today is a bean burger though.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 20, 2018)

xenon said:


> I've eat rabbit, in a stew. They do sell it in supermarkets you know. Or did. I'd probably eat dog too.



I’ll pass on the dog.  The treatment of them, the lack of hygiene regs and the fact that predator animals tend to taste bad all kind of put me off.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 20, 2018)

Though you can keep the beanburger too.  Most veggie burgers I’ve tried have had too much in common with the bread texture wise.

I’ve had the odd decent one, but so many feel like a carb sandwich.

Love falafel though - that seems to work better in terms of textures.


----------



## xenon (Feb 20, 2018)

8ball said:


> I’ll pass on the dog.  The treatment of them, the lack of hygiene regs and the fact that predator animals tend to taste bad all kind of put me off.



Not sure about the latter clause. But yeah, I mean I'd eat dog, purely as know objection to it as a meat on fluffy wuffy grounds. Levels of cruelty and conditions should ideally inform all my meat choices. I won't eat fras guas (You know what I mean.) But of course I eat fried chicken, bacon all manner of mass produced stuff. I'm cutting down though. For health / variety reasons as much as anything.

Just trying to think if I've eaten any mammalian predators actually. Don't think I have.


----------



## NoXion (Feb 20, 2018)

I remember beanburgers from when my family (lead by my mum) went through a veggie phase. They're not absolutely terrible, but they're certainly no substitute for the real thing.


----------



## xenon (Feb 20, 2018)

Sainsburries spicy bean burger. Not bad. No bread required.


----------



## xenon (Feb 20, 2018)

They are a different thing, not a substitute for a beef burger in my usage.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 20, 2018)

NoXion said:


> I remember beanburgers from when my family (lead by my mum) went through a veggie phase. They're not absolutely terrible, but they're certainly no substitute for the real thing.



The thing with a burger is having the
bun and then the fatty, salty protein inside.  This is the bit that most of the veggie options I’ve tried seem to miss.

Falafel does things totally differently and works on its own level.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 20, 2018)

xenon said:


> Just trying to think if I've eaten any mammalian predators actually. Don't think I have.



Closest thing I can think of isn’t
a mammal - I had alligator once.

There’s a lot of discussion on the net about why/whether/which meat eating animals taste bad.


----------



## NoXion (Feb 20, 2018)

I had shark once. I remember it tasting a bit, well, pissy.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Feb 20, 2018)

NoXion said:


> I remember beanburgers from when my family (lead by my mum) went through a veggie phase. They're not absolutely terrible, but they're certainly no substitute for the real thing.


Wimpy spicy beanburgers were great. Best things in there aside from the liver and onions.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Feb 20, 2018)

xenon said:


> Sainsburries spicy bean burger. Not bad. No bread required.



The Lidl ones are great, they have a crispy coating with whole cumin seeds in it and you get four for a quid fifty.


----------



## andysays (Feb 20, 2018)

NoXion said:


> Maybe andysays can clarify exactly what he meant.








TBH, I think the meaning of this post is pretty clear to everyone except the WORLD'S ANGRIEST VEGAN


andysays said:


> Do angry vegans turn me against going vegan? No, but they certainly don't do anything to persuade with posts like this



I'm not "turned against going vegan" because it's not something I'm considering, but if it was, then the sort of self-righteous  screeching which ddraig is so keen on would be more likely to put me off than to convince me.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 20, 2018)

Yeah, well they don’t _want_ you in their club.


----------



## mojo pixy (Feb 20, 2018)

yeah, filthy carnist


----------



## bemused (Feb 20, 2018)

xenon said:


> I'd probably eat dog too.



Tastes like lamb - now you know.


----------



## NoXion (Feb 20, 2018)

bemused said:


> Tastes like lamb - now you know.



I thought it was a white meat?


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Feb 20, 2018)

Well done Lauren. Outstanding work.


Food Empowerment Project | Because your food choices can change the world


----------



## MrSpikey (Feb 21, 2018)

8ball said:


> But most of the talk I've heard about these Olympics has focused on the curling, the skeleton and those snowboard mentalists.



I have emailed the IOC to urge them to seek humane alternatives to this use of skeletons, and I ask you all to do the same.


----------



## OzT (Feb 21, 2018)

NoXion said:


> I thought it was a white meat?


 
Surely not if from a red setter?


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Feb 21, 2018)

Another numpty farmer making baseless accusations yesterday. 

The BBC do like to frame this as a battle between farmer and vegans, with the farmers being the victims. Once again I thought JC held his own quite well and the farmer was all over the place...


----------



## AnnaKarpik (Feb 21, 2018)

8ball said:


> Closest thing I can think of isn’t
> a mammal - I had alligator once.
> 
> There’s a lot of discussion on the net about why/whether/which meat eating animals taste bad.



Chickens will happily eat meaty things, given the opportunity. Mice, frogs, anything they can catch and swallow.
Not that many of them get the chance of course. I don't know if gangland corpses are still fed to pigs?

Anyway, just highlighting common food animals that eat unexpected things.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 21, 2018)

AnnaKarpik said:


> Chickens will happily eat meaty things, given the opportunity. Mice, frogs, anything they can catch and swallow.



Carnists everywhere!!


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Feb 21, 2018)

"You see de meat's not necessary..."


----------



## 8ball (Feb 21, 2018)

I don’t think it is either, but I’m not
100% sure that the people I know who have packed in veg*nism for health reasons are entirely down to dismissiveness from GPs.

Maybe a mix of the former, plus not eating quite right, personal constitution and circumstances, largely.  I’m mindful that they guy who invented the tern veganism lived to 95, though.

I guess these things are easy to dismiss if you feel really good on it.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Feb 21, 2018)

8ball said:


> I don’t think it is either, but I’m not
> 100% sure that the people I know who have packed in veg*nism for health reasons are entirely down to dismissiveness from GPs.
> 
> Maybe a mix of the former, plus not eating quite right, personal constitution and circumstances, largely.  I’m mindful that they guy who invented the tern veganism lived to 95, though.
> ...


Bloke who invented pot noodle and ate virtually nothing but lived to 97.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 21, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Bloke who invented pot noodle and ate virtually nothing but lived to 97.



Pot Noodle is vegan! 

(Except the beef & tomato one)


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Feb 21, 2018)

8ball said:


> Pot Noodle is vegan!
> 
> (Except the beef & tomato one)


Not even a tiny bit of fish sauce?


----------



## 8ball (Feb 21, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Not even a tiny bit of fish sauce?



I might be wrong, having speed-googled it.  Never seen fish sauce in one.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Feb 21, 2018)

8ball said:


> I might be wrong, having speed-googled it.  Never seen fish sauce in one.


You're probably right. I knew the meat bits weren't meat.


----------



## Mordi (Feb 21, 2018)

I still haven't come to terms with Super Noodles having milk in. 
Although the Sainsbury's own brand Chicken Flavour is a solid option.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 21, 2018)

Would be nice if they just put a couple of v’s on things - one for veggie, two for vegan.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Feb 21, 2018)

8ball said:


> I don’t think it is either, but I’m not
> 100% sure that the people I know who have packed in veg*nism for health reasons are entirely down to dismissiveness from GPs.
> 
> Maybe a mix of the former, plus not eating quite right, personal constitution and circumstances, largely.  I’m mindful that they guy who invented the tern veganism lived to 95, though.
> ...


tbh, one thing that nearly all animals know how to do better than us supposedly "clever" humans, they know how to eat. Modern folk appear to struggle with that quite a bit, and this might explain why there are so many "diet" failures. Vegans appear to be a bit more knowledgeable in this regard than most, however noobs transitioning over from a "normal" omni diet are more likely to fail if they don't use their noggin. (and a lot of people are quite lazy in this regard)

As far as nutrition advice from GP's goes, well my experience thus far has been that most of them don't really know what they are talking about wrt to nutrition, so I've learned not to automatically trust what they say on that subject without a spot of due diligence. Medical staff appear to be good at emergency and repair, but not so good at prevention.

wrt, longevity...you will always find somebody who drank and smoked all their life and lived to 100, not sure that means that it's a good idea to follow that example. Most of the stats appear to show that on the whole veg*ns have better overall health than other eating styles, however, even if for argument sake, it wasn't true and the health outcomes were exactly the same, veganism also has other advantages (notably environmental, ethical?) which imo makes it a good choice.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 21, 2018)

Ime dogs will eat whatever is put in front of them, and all manner of animals will eat very bad food if either out of their niche, overly hungry or exposed to human foodstuffs.  Otherwise, most animals have much narrower diets than humans and have generally evolved towards their particular niche, as well as having been around a lot longer than humans.

Agree with you about medics and nutritional advice, though.  There’s a tendency with GPs to recommend the simplest potential solution if presented with a veg*n experiencing vague malaise symptoms.

My argument with concluding too much about the health benefits of veganism, as I said before, was that while if you do it right you can get all your nutrients and are also likely to be dodging some toxins, it’s not easy to tease perceived health benefits apart from effects of strongly associated behaviour, much like how they found people eating breakfast to be healthier than people who skipped it (breakfast being the most important meal of the day was part of a cluster of health advice that people in this group were likely to be following).

Plus a larger variety of plant-based foods is likely to be good in itself.

Not arguing on environmental and ethical grounds that it is not better than the average diet, though.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Feb 22, 2018)

8ball said:


> Ime dogs will eat whatever is put in front of them, and all manner of animals will eat very bad food if either out of their niche, overly hungry or exposed to human foodstuffs.  Otherwise, most animals have much narrower diets than humans and have generally evolved towards their particular niche, as well as having been around a lot longer than humans.


Well I'm not including domesticated animals as they're exposed to/affected by some of our crap habits and activities. Subject to availability, "wild" animals know what and how to eat and don't need scientists and chemical formulas to work what their optimum macro and micro nutrient ratios ought to be. For a variety of reasons, they mostly know what they're doing and a significant number of us haven't really got a clue, hence the increasing and crippling healthcare costs, a big chunk of which is associated with preventable diseases.



8ball said:


> Agree with you about medics and nutritional advice, though.  There’s a tendency with GPs to recommend the simplest potential solution if presented with a veg*n experiencing vague malaise symptoms.


In the few interactions I have had with medics on this subject they have been mostly clueless.



8ball said:


> My argument with concluding too much about the health benefits of veganism, as I said before, was that while if you do it right you can get all your nutrients and are also likely to be dodging some toxins, it’s not easy to tease perceived health benefits apart from effects of strongly associated behaviour, much like how they found people eating breakfast to be healthier than people who skipped it (breakfast being the most important meal of the day was part of a cluster of health advice that people in this group were likely to be following).
> 
> Plus a larger variety of plant-based foods is likely to be good in itself.
> 
> Not arguing on environmental and ethical grounds that it is not better than the average diet, though.


I'm not sure one even needs to "tease the perceived health benefits apart". It's already common sense knowledge that an abundance of fresh fruit and veg is beneficial should make up a significant part of one's diet, that is a given. It is also widely known that saturated fat and cholesterol, predominantly from animal products, are play a significant role in the prevalence of mostly preventable diseases. So it should really be a no-brainer, especially when the other non-dietary benefits are factored in.

I realise that there is a lot of resistance to the ethical side of things and that a lot of people would rather not think about that side of things, however imo, it's an integral part and shouldn't really be separated. I do believe that it is wrong and immoral for us to kill animals for food when we have no need to do so.


----------



## Calamity1971 (Feb 22, 2018)

Pay extortionate prices for a yoghurt and they still can't get it right?

Vegan yoghurts recalled after milk found


----------



## Spymaster (Feb 22, 2018)

Calamity1971 said:


> Pay extortionate prices for a yoghurt and they still can't get it right?
> 
> Vegan yoghurts recalled after milk found


£3.50 for a pot of not-yoghurt


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Feb 22, 2018)

Calamity1971 said:


> Pay extortionate prices for a yoghurt and they still can't get it right?
> 
> Vegan yoghurts recalled after milk found


tbf, there are plenty of much more reasonably priced non-dairy yoghurts (and more expensive dairy ones). Contamination is always going to be a risk with mass produced processed foods, and is not something particularly unique to vegan foods. People with food allergies can also be affected by food contamination scares.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 22, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> I'm not sure one even needs to "tease the perceived health benefits apart".



Well, it would be if you wanted a specific appraisal of any health differences between a vegan diet and, say, a diet with equivalent nutrients which is not entirely vegan (as opposed to, to give an extreme example, a good vegan diet vs a bad omni diet, or a good omni diet vs a vegan who lives on Pot Noodles).  But then, comparing "like with like" in this case is going to be difficult.  As you say, the vegans that do well on it tend to be better clued up on nutrition anyway.



PaoloSanchez said:


> It's already common sense knowledge that an abundance of fresh fruit and veg is beneficial should make up a significant part of one's diet, that is a given.



Abundance _and_ variety.  But yes, it's supported by good evidence as well as "common sense" (the latter of which can vary depending on who you're talking to).



PaoloSanchez said:


> It is also widely known that saturated fat and cholesterol, predominantly from animal products, are play a significant role in the prevalence of mostly preventable diseases.



The effect of dietary cholesterol and how it relates to blood cholesterol has changed a lot in recent years (hence the changes in advice on how many eggs can be eaten in a week).  New research is shifting the consensus on the saturated fats front, too.  There are other downsides to animal products in the diet, though (carcinogens in processed meat being one of several examples), and the Western diet is certainly too "meat heavy" in a way that doesn't happen from being too "veg heavy".



PaoloSanchez said:


> I realise that there is a lot of resistance to the ethical side of things and that a lot of people would rather not think about that side of things, however imo, it's an integral part and shouldn't really be separated. I do believe that it is wrong and immoral for us to kill animals for food when we have no need to do so.



What I meant by saying that I wasn't arguing wasn't that I didn't want to talk about it - just that I had no points of disagreement from your preceding post.  I don't dispute environmental benefits generally speaking, and I have some sympathies with a lot of the ethical arguments.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 22, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> tbf, there are plenty of much more reasonably priced non-dairy yoghurts (and more expensive dairy ones). Contamination is always going to be a risk with mass produced processed foods, and is not something particularly unique to vegan foods. People with food allergies can also be affected by food contamination scares.



Most of the weird stuff going on with food at the moment seems to involve meat.  There's all that KFC business, plus other restaurants and chains having issues with supply due to recalls.
I think cracks in the regulatory systems are beginning to open up.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Feb 22, 2018)

8ball said:


> Well, it would be if you wanted a specific appraisal of any health differences between a vegan diet and, say, a diet with equivalent nutrients which is not entirely vegan (as opposed to, to give an extreme example, a good vegan diet vs a bad omni diet, or a good omni diet vs a vegan who lives on Pot Noodles).  But then, comparing "like with like" in this case is going to be difficult.  As you say, the vegans that do well on it tend to be better clued up on nutrition anyway.


I'm not sure there's much value to be had in trying to compare, at least not at an amateur level. Might be worthwhile for some sort of professional level research study. In my opinion, it's kind of moot anyway, when we already know that people can and do thrive on a vegan diet, and they can also do well on a non-vegan diet, comparing the worst vegan to the best non-vegan and vice versa wouldn't really yield much in the way of useful information. Regardless of what diet you are on, if you have any interest at all in your own health and well being and that of your loved ones, then imho, it would be wise to eat the highest quality of food that is practical for you and can meet your taste, health and moral/ethical requirements.

Those that claim to care about the wellbeing of animals should be able to meet their requirements with a vegan diet. Those that are happy to have animals killed and exploited will be able to meet their requirements with a non-vegan diet. I will maintain that I believe it to be wrong and unethical to kill animals for food when we don't need to.



8ball said:


> Abundance _and_ variety.  But yes, it's supported by good evidence as well as "common sense" (the latter of which can vary depending on who you're talking to).


If you're living in the UK and even if you are on a fairly modest income, the majority of folk will have access to both abundance AND variety. The limiting factor is more likely to be knowledge and the lack of awareness (or lack of interest) in what is readily available and what they can do with it. I would suggest that for most people who are not living in abject poverty, I don't believe there are any good excuses for not eating reasonably healthily, be it veg*n or non-veg*n.



8ball said:


> The effect of dietary cholesterol and how it relates to blood cholesterol has changed a lot in recent years (hence the changes in advice on how many eggs can be eaten in a week).  New research is shifting the consensus on the saturated fats front, too.  There are other downsides to animal products in the diet, though (carcinogens in processed meat being one of several examples), and the Western diet is certainly too "meat heavy" in a way that doesn't happen from being too "veg heavy".


I'm not a medical professional or nutrition scientist and don't claim any particular expertise in that area. There's always studies that say often conflicting things, however there is a general underlying pattern which shows fruit and veg to be largely beneficial and animal products to be more likely to be associated with health problems. At this moment in time (perhaps because of my current bias), I'm more inclined to believe PCRM medics (like Greger, Barnard, McDougall, Davis, Furhman, Novick, Popper) than the "low-carb" or "paleo" authorities (like Cordain, Taubes, Fallon, Minger). I like to think that I'm open minded and do listen to many sides of the argument for perspective. At this moment in time the vegan position makes the most sense to me.



8ball said:


> What I meant by saying that I wasn't arguing wasn't that I didn't want to talk about it - just that I had no points of disagreement from your preceding post.  I don't dispute environmental benefits generally speaking, and I have some sympathies with a lot of the ethical arguments.


I didn't mean to imply that it was you in particular that didn't want to discuss the ethics, however there does appear to be a fair amount of resistance from some of the more adamant meat eaters in this thread, which is perhaps a reaction to their belief that they are being made to feel guilty for being ok with animals being killed on their behalf.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 23, 2018)

I didn't mean anyone was likely to tease apart various health effects in a non-professional capacity, just that it's very hard to do (including in a professional capacity, as previous errors have shown).  I'm not a low-carb or paleo aficionado myself, I think there are a lot of flaws in the thinking behind it.  Though I do think reducing refined sugar is a good idea for a lot of people (it certainly helps me feel better).  I try to follow a high protein, medium fat, medium carb diet generally, with a focus on healthy fats and carbs (vegetables being as healthy as carbs get imo).

I get what you mean about a lack of interest by people in what they eat.  There also seems to be an extent to which many people use food to 'self-medicate' in unproductive ways too, which the food industry is all to happy to pander to.  Plus a lot of people are quite pushed for time, so making changes isn't going to be their highest priority.  I know I tend to go off track when busy with other stuff.

I'm not familiar with the PCRM lot, but their Wikipedia entry makes me a little sceptical about them.  Though lot of the info on them is quite old tbf.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Feb 24, 2018)

8ball said:


> I didn't mean anyone was likely to tease apart various health effects in a non-professional capacity, just that it's very hard to do (including in a professional capacity, as previous errors have shown).


Indeed, and the point I was trying to make is that even if it was relatively easy to do, there's not much value to such a comparison given that it has already been observed that people can do well on both veg and non-veg diets, and can also do poorly on either. There are just too many variables involved imo, although it might be worth making a not of what those that are the most successful do and learn from them, that might be a worthwhile research study.



8ball said:


> I'm not a low-carb or paleo aficionado myself, I think there are a lot of flaws in the thinking behind it. Though I do think reducing refined sugar is a good idea for a lot of people (it certainly helps me feel better).  I try to follow a high protein, medium fat, medium carb diet generally, with a focus on healthy fats and carbs (vegetables being as healthy as carbs get imo).


Following on from what I was saying about animals not needing a chemistry degree to work out what to eat, I think the whole categorising foods by their macronutrients is a bit of a nonsense tbh, although it's currently very fashionable. I've never paid any particular attention to them and as yet I've not seen a compelling reason why I should do and what all the fuss is about. I agree that refined sugar isn't a good idea, but then I don't consider refined sugar to be a proper food. Similarly, with refined fats (ie oils, butters, and cheese), imo they are not really proper foods and should only be had in moderation.

One of the benefits of eating predominantly whole foods is that they have more of an in built self regulation system, which makes it much harder to overeat whole foods. For example, most people can eat perhaps 3 or 4 apples in one sitting and then not be able to eat any more, however they will be able to down more than 4 apples worth of "refined and processed" apple juice quite easily, with it's more concentrated sugar and minus the balancing fibre. That principle applies to other foods resulting in us over consuming processed foods which our bodies cannot deal with properly, and causes of many of the dietary problems that a lot of folks have.



8ball said:


> I get what you mean about a lack of interest by people in what they eat.  There also seems to be an extent to which many people use food to 'self-medicate' in unproductive ways too, which the food industry is all to happy to pander to.  Plus a lot of people are quite pushed for time, so making changes isn't going to be their highest priority.  I know I tend to go off track when busy with other stuff.


Yeah, the time thing, it's just another poor excuse I'm afraid. Health is important enough to invest ones time in, and in the long run is a time saver if you invest wisely. Unfortunately there is a widespread ignorance lack of wisdom in this area and most people don't pay enough attention to health until they get sick. imo everyone should have a good understanding of diet and nutrition and that should be the foundation upon which they build their health. The problem is, when the people we regard as authorities and rely on for health advice (ie the medics) know so little themselves about diet and nutrition, it's not surprising that so many of us regular punters struggle and fail with our diets and get it wrong so often.



8ball said:


> I'm not familiar with the PCRM lot, but their Wikipedia entry makes me a little sceptical about them.  Though lot of the info on them is quite old tbf.


lol @ "their wikipedia entry". Well hopefully you'd do a bit more than quick glance at notoriously unreliable wikipedia entries before drawing conclusions. I've been familiar with them and their work for a nearly 20 years and I'm still learning new stuff regularly from them. I have a high regard for Dr Greger, Dr McDougall and Dr Barnard. In particular, Dr Gregers' Nutritionfacts.org is a great resource imo. I've also referred to Dr Garth Davis' book "Proteinaholic", a doctor who used to recommend high protein/low carb diets to his patients, but now no longer does so.

It does take time to properly research this sort of stuff, and most people cba and would rather go for quick easy to digest little soundbites.


----------



## Artaxerxes (Feb 24, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Well I'm not including domesticated animals as they're exposed to/affected by some of our crap habits and activities. Subject to availability, "wild" animals know what and how to eat and don't need scientists and chemical formulas to work what their optimum macro and micro nutrient ratios ought to be. For a variety of reasons, they mostly know what they're doing and a significant number of us haven't really got a clue, hence the increasing and crippling healthcare costs, a big chunk of which is associated with preventable diseases.
> 
> In the few interactions I have had with medics on this subject they have been mostly clueless.
> 
> ...



The main problem is not with us not knowing what to eat and animals being much wiser but in that the range of food on offer to people is vastly different to what it started off as. It's all highly processed to fuck.

The human brain craves sweet things as well,a legacy from our primate days, now we can get it whenever we want in the form of chocolate or sweets. We also want fats as that's where a lot of the energy is stored and about what we could get as we first started hunting or rather scavenging.

If foxes were sentient they'd make our fried chicken habits look amateur by comparison though.


----------



## DotCommunist (Feb 24, 2018)

and if wild animals are so wise in eating how come they are usually carrying one or more stomach parasite


----------



## Yossarian (Feb 24, 2018)

If stomach parasites are so clever at adapting, how come they're hiding themselves in piles of fox shit or whatever instead of Big Macs?


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Feb 24, 2018)

Artaxerxes said:


> The main problem is not with us not knowing what to eat and animals being much wiser but in that the range of food on offer to people is vastly different to what it started off as. It's all highly processed to fuck.


Indeed, a lot of processed crap, which passes for "food". My contention is that it isn't really food at all, and should be eaten once in a while at best or to tide us over in times of shortage. Unfortunately a lot of these "non-foods" have become staples, and we've replaced infectious diseases and stomach parasites with more exotic heart disease, cancer, stroke and diabetes. 



Artaxerxes said:


> The human brain craves sweet things as well,a legacy from our primate days, now we can get it whenever we want in the form of chocolate or sweets. We also want fats as that's where a lot of the energy is stored and about what we could get as we first started hunting or rather scavenging.


All of that may well be true, however tricking our bodies with refined and processed rubbish is a recipe for disaster.



Artaxerxes said:


> If foxes were sentient they'd make our fried chicken habits look amateur by comparison though.


Maybe you have a different understanding of what sentience is. Animals that live in close proximity to us humans will take any easy pickings available, and we give rodents, foxes, pigeons and seagulls plenty of opportunities. Let me know when a fox opens up a KFC and lights up the deep fat frier, coats the chicken breast in the Colonels secret recipe batter and fries it for 7.5 minutes, that might just go viral on youtube.


----------



## mojo pixy (Feb 24, 2018)

Yossarian said:


> If stomach parasites are so clever at adapting, how come they're hiding themselves in piles of fox shit or whatever instead of Big Macs?



I've heard mucky d's kitchens get cleaned regularly. Not saying it's a fact, just what I've heard.

As for animals eating what they've evolved to eat, well humans are animals too and we also eat what we've evolved to eat, that is everything (_*omni*_vorism) including fruits/vegetables, roots, seeds, leaves, fungi, milk, eggs, meat and fish. Humans are lucky to be able to eat so much, it's one of the main reasons for our evolutionary success.

Some individuals exclude certain foods and get by and that's no disadvantage in a culture where a varied and fresh food supply (or well preserved by freezing, canning, drying, sugaring, salting, pickling or fermentation) is well assured.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Feb 24, 2018)

Yossarian said:


> If stomach parasites are so clever at adapting, how come they're hiding themselves in piles of fox shit or whatever instead of Big Macs?



Because parasitism as a lifestyle tends to reduce motility over an evolutionary timescale? No point growing legs if you're planning to spend your whole life up a badger's arsehole getting him to do all the wandering-around-finding-food for you. Not much point growing a brain either, hence why it never occurs to an intestinal parasite to try its luck at a popular fast food outlet rather than simply laying a bunch of eggs which will then get shat out in the woods somewhere.

Also those intestinal parasites that do have the resources and wherewithal to get up and move to towns and cities tend to become letting agents rather than burger-flippers.


----------



## Favelado (Feb 24, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> Because parasitism as a lifestyle tends to reduce motility over an evolutionary timescale? No point growing legs if you're planning to spend your whole life up a badger's arsehole getting him to do all the wandering-around-finding-food for you. Not much point growing a brain either, hence why it never occurs to an intestinal parasite to try its luck at a popular fast food outlet rather than simply laying a bunch of eggs which will then get shat out in the woods somewhere.
> 
> Also those intestinal parasites that do have the resources and wherewithal to get up and move to towns and cities tend to become letting agents rather than burger-flippers.



Just the phrasing of this post made me LOL. Nicely written.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Feb 24, 2018)

Humans are omnivores – 29:31

"...well some people contest that, but even if it's true, it doesn't justify eating animals. We can get our nutrients from plants. If a carnivorous species reached our level of sentience it would also have the moral obligation to develop food which does not require murder. Again, nothing about the presumed "naturality" of eating animals justifies it morally to an intelligent modern species with alternatives available."


----------



## 8ball (Feb 25, 2018)

[QUOTE="PaoloSanchez, post: 15454181, member: 73461”]
lol @ "their wikipedia entry". Well hopefully you'd do a bit more than quick glance at notoriously unreliable wikipedia entries before drawing conclusions. I've been familiar with them and their work for a nearly 20 years and I'm still learning new stuff regularly from them. I have a high regard for Dr Greger, Dr McDougall and Dr Barnard. In particular, Dr Gregers' Nutritionfacts.org is a great resource imo. I've also referred to Dr Garth Davis' book "Proteinaholic", a doctor who used to recommend high protein/low carb diets to his patients, but now no longer does so.

It does take time to properly research this sort of stuff, and most people cba and would rather go for quick easy to digest little soundbites.”[/QUOTE]

I notice no particular objections to anything in that entry.

I was admittedly just looking up the first entry I found and looking for “scare terms” that tend to signal certain things, nothing more.  Of course, Wikipedia is far from infallible on many subjects.  You can get a sense of who has written who has written something and their agendas pretty quickly, though.

So, this Dr Barnard, who makes great claims about the use of his particular vegan diets in terms of their effect on diabetes.  What would his area of training be?  I expect he is a particularly eminent endocrinologist?

Obviously, it does take time to properly research this stuff. 

Edit: something wonky with the quoting there


----------



## mojo pixy (Feb 25, 2018)

[QUOTE="PaoloSanchez, post: 15455186, member: 73461"]If a carnivorous species reached our level of sentience it would also have the moral obligation to develop food which does not require murder. [/QUOTE]

_Why?_ What moral obligation is it exactly, that makes killing another animal for food so _essentially_ bad? What is _our_ _level of sentience?_ Do you mean once they've invented gods or something? Because gods aside, why does any species have a _moral obligation_ not to kill other animals for any reason they see fit?

I get that your opinions are strong and that's fair enough but universalizing like that is in _my_ opinion a sort of religious pomposity. BTW, FYI, it's that what gets people's backs up. Even people who agree with a lot of what you post.

EtA, that quote code is right, so I reckon our @PabloSanchez just isn't keen on being quoted any more. Or tagged. Oh well.


----------



## NoXion (Feb 25, 2018)

Weird, the quote tags work when I do it.



PaoloSanchez said:


> If a carnivorous species reached our level of sentience it would also have the moral obligation to develop food which does not require murder.



No, they wouldn't. You think that they should have that obligation. Unless you can demonstrate the existence of an objective morality that applies universally to intelligent beings. Can you?


----------



## Spymaster (Feb 25, 2018)

This is where Sanchez and the vegheads (that's the name of a band) stick their fingers in their ears. Perceived morality varies hugely from culture to culture and individually. There are some universal perceptions of morality but not killing animals is most definitely not one of them.

He’s just making stuff up.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Feb 25, 2018)

8ball said:


> I notice no particular objections to anything in that entry.
> 
> I was admittedly just looking up the first entry I found and looking for “scare terms” that tend to signal certain things, nothing more.  Of course, Wikipedia is far from infallible on many subjects.  You can get a sense of who has written who has written something and their agendas pretty quickly, though.


Well tbh, I don't know what the basis of your initial scepticism was because you didn't say, it was a bit vague and appeared to be based solely on a cursory glance. If you have anything a bit more substantial to base your scepticism on, it would be interesting to hear what it is.



8ball said:


> So, this Dr Barnard, who makes great claims about the use of his particular vegan diets in terms of their effect on diabetes.  What would his area of training be?  I expect he is a particularly eminent endocrinologist?


Again, if you're interested, you can do the legwork and check up on his credentials for yourself and not just take my word for it.



8ball said:


> Obviously, it does take time to properly research this stuff.


...yes indeed, it doesn't have to be a full blown Phd research study, but imo should be a bit more than a quick wiki glance and dismissal.



8ball said:


> Edit: something wonky with the quoting there


Well I've managed to do it ok so not sure what your problem was.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Feb 25, 2018)

So we're back to Meat is Murder? It's a death for no reason, and a death for no reason is murder. 

Thing is, it's not a death for no reason, is it? It's a death for food. 

And as covered before, focusing on the death bit obscures other parts of the process to do with creating and managing the lives of livestock. To go back to the cows released by a farmer mentioned further back in the thread, is it better that 10 cows should live out their full lifespans of 14 years in a field that can sustain 10 cows, or that 70 cows should live in that field over the course of those 14  years, but living for just 2 years each? I don't see an absolute moral imperative towards one or the other.


----------



## Spymaster (Feb 25, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> So we're back to Meat is Murder? It's a death for no reason, and a death for no reason is murder.


They all do it. Hyperbole is the cornerstone of vegheadism (see also rotting flesh, cow-juice, torture, etc). Obviously it's completely impossible to murder an animal.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Feb 25, 2018)

Spymaster said:


> They all do it. Hyperbole is the cornerstone of vegheadism (see also rotting flesh, cow-juice, torture, etc). Obviously it's completely impossible to murder an animal.


Depends how it's done, imo. For example, ddraig coming round my house and slitting my cat or dog's throat for no reason other than to piss me off, or perhaps just to please himself, would be something along the same kind of moral line as murder. Serial killers often start their careers with killing people's pets for fun. It's a transgression.


----------



## Spymaster (Feb 25, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Depends how it's done, imo. For example, ddraig coming round my house and slitting my cat or dog's throat for no reason other than to piss me off, or perhaps just to please himself, would be something along the same kind of moral line as murder. Serial killers often start their careers with killing people's pets for fun. It's a transgression.


Ddraig's psychotic fantasies aside, "murder" is a legal term. It requires a HUMAN to be killed by another HUMAN. I'd disagree there's even a moral equivalence.


----------



## editor (Feb 25, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> So we're back to Meat is Murder? It's a death for no reason, and a death for no reason is murder.
> 
> Thing is, it's not a death for no reason, is it? It's a death for food.


Well, sort of. For many people it's a decision to have a dead thing to eat over a non dead thing.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Feb 25, 2018)

editor said:


> Well, sort of. For many people it's a decision to have a dead thing to eat over a non dead thing.


Most people, perhaps with the exception of the cat-killer ddraig, think that killing animals to control the spread of disease is killing with a good reason. Killing for food where you have few other options is also considered a good reason by most people, I think. 

So the position is at the very least weakened by these considerations. Should you ever kill another human in anything other than self-defence? There is a strong argument that you shouldn't. Should you ever kill another animal in anything other than self-defence? Yes, we need to when those animals' interests conflict with human interests. Even in a 100% vegan world, this would still need to happen. Is the human interest of eating meat a 'good reason' here or not? Clearly opinions vary.


----------



## editor (Feb 25, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Most people, perhaps with the exception of the cat-killer ddraig, think that killing animals to control the spread of disease is killing with a good reason. Killing for food where you have few other options is also considered a good reason by most people, I think.


But we have plenty of options so, again, slaughtering millions of animals could well be seen as a death for no reason for people living in relative comfort with plenty of alternatives readily available.


----------



## andysays (Feb 25, 2018)

editor said:


> Well, sort of. For many people it's a decision to have a dead thing to eat over a non dead thing.


No it's not. It's a decision to have a combination of animal-and-vegetable-based dead things rather than just vegetable-based dead things.

All livings things consume once-living-but-now-dead things to some extent. Even plants get nutrients from organic matter which was once alive but has now been broken down/decomposed by other living things.

Everything vegans eat is dead and was once alive.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Feb 25, 2018)

editor said:


> But we have plenty of options so, again, slaughtering millions of animals could well be seen as a death for no reason for people living in relative comfort with plenty of alternatives readily available.


If you're focusing on the killing bit, yes. There are something like 20-50 billion chickens in the world - estimates seem to vary wildly, but they all agree that the chicken is the most numerous bird on the planet by some distance. Most of them, of course, lead short, miserable lives, but they wouldn't be alive in the first place if they weren't destined to be killed. So there is another way of looking at the same issue, which is to focus on the quality of the life, however short it may be.


----------



## editor (Feb 25, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> If you're focusing on the killing bit, yes. There are something like 20-50 billion chickens in the world - estimates seem to vary wildly, but they all agree that the chicken is the most numerous bird on the planet by some distance. Most of them, of course, lead short, miserable lives, but they wouldn't be alive in the first place if they weren't destined to be killed. So there is another way of looking at the same issue, which is to focus on the quality of the life, however short it may be.


With chicken wings priced at around four for £1.50 or whatever, any dreams of poor hormone-stuffed, daylight starved freakshow birds getting a huge improvement in the quality of their lives is up there with the fairies.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Feb 25, 2018)

editor said:


> With chicken wings priced at around four for £1.50 or whatever, any dreams of poor hormone-stuffed, daylight starved freakshow birds getting a huge improvement in the quality of their lives is up there with the fairies.


As I've posted before, there are groups that campaign for just that, such as CiWF. They have achieved some small things wrt factory farming, much of it working to make EU-wide changes. You may say nowhere near enough - I would say nowhere near enough, as would CiWF themselves - but it's not an entirely futile quest. For example, free range eggs have become almost the norm now - we're on our way in the EU at least towards eliminating caged-hen egg production. That's a significant change. 

I think you might overestimate the 'comfort' that many people who buy cheap, low-welfare meat live in - people for whom forking out a tenner or more on a free-range chicken for a family dinner is a pretty big decision when there's one the same size right next to it for four quid. Which is why, as I've posted before, I think focusing on the individual morality of consumers is nowhere near enough. We need decisions taken at the level of society.


----------



## Spymaster (Feb 25, 2018)

Any campaigning to improve the quality of life of food animals is nowhere near as futile as campaigns to get everyone to stop eating them completely.


----------



## ddraig (Feb 25, 2018)

lots of wriggling still
littlebabyjesus as posted previously, if you're going to have a dig tag me, coward
I am not a cat killer it was making a point and you know it, you just won't accept it so keep on hammering your point that killing animals for food is necessary, which it isn't (caveats to stop the pile on applied)


----------



## ddraig (Feb 25, 2018)

Spymaster said:


> Any campaigning to improve the quality of life of food animals is nowhere near as futile as campaigns to get everyone to stop eating them completely.


who is trying to get EVERYONE to stop eating them COMPLETELY?
and the vegans get accused of absolutism


----------



## ddraig (Feb 25, 2018)

andysays said:


> No it's not. It's a decision to have a combination of animal-and-vegetable-based dead things rather than just vegetable-based dead things.
> 
> All livings things consume once-living-but-now-dead things to some extent. Even plants get nutrients from organic matter which was once alive but has now been broken down/decomposed by other living things.
> 
> Everything vegans eat is dead and was once alive.


straight of the anti vegan bingo crap argument card and more twisting
the decision to have animal based dead things to eat is for your pleasure only, the animal didn't need to be reared and die prematurely if you didn't fancy it for tea


----------



## andysays (Feb 25, 2018)

ddraig said:


> straight of the anti vegan bingo crap argument card and more twisting
> the decision to have animal based dead things to eat is for your pleasure only, the animal didn't need to be reared and die prematurely if you didn't fancy it for tea


I'm not the one arguing that there is something wrong (although no one seems to be able to explain exactly what) about some living things dying so that other living things can continue to live. I recognise that this is not only natural but also an essential part of life.

How many animals do you think died directly as a result of the farming of the food you've eaten in the last week?

All the anger in the world can't hide the fact that you have no argument to offer, and are apparently as ignorant about the consequences of the farming of the food you eat as you accuse meat-eaters of being.


----------



## Spymaster (Feb 25, 2018)

ddraig said:


> who is trying to get EVERYONE to stop eating them COMPLETELY?
> and the vegans get accused of absolutism


This shows a misunderstanding of what's being said.


----------



## ddraig (Feb 25, 2018)

andysays said:


> I'm not the one arguing that there is something wrong (although no one seems to be able to explain exactly what) about some living things dying so that other living things can continue to live. I recognise that this is not only natural but also an essential part of life.
> 
> How many animals do you think died directly as a result of the farming of the food you've eaten in the last week?
> 
> All the anger in the world can't hide the fact that you have no argument to offer, and are apparently as ignorant about the consequences of the farming of the food you eat as you accuse meat-eaters of being.


right so we're going back to basics are we? not read the thread then?
If you can live without killing a pig for your plate why wouldn't you? because you choose not to. I and others believe it is unnecessary and cruel to kill a pig and other animals for your plate, you don't that's up to you but it is not needed for you to "continue to live" do you agree on that?
the argument of  "How many animals do you think died directly as a result of the farming of the food you've eaten in the last week?" is bollocks because how would i survive otherwise and those animals die for you too, so it's about less animals dying and not directly paying for animals to be slaughtered for my plate.
Why do you think you can say I have no argument to offer? 
It's really straightforward, where possible with all the caveats, there is no need to eat dead animals to survive and it is a personal choice, all the wriggling, high level philosophising and low level bacon comments will not change that

If your still confused by it all, look up the definitions, we're not talking about fruitarianism here, just veganism


----------



## SpookyFrank (Feb 25, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> So we're back to Meat is Murder? It's a death for no reason, and a death for no reason is murder.



Murder isn't death with no reason. Could be the victim slept with a spouse that did not belong to them, or talked too loud at the cinema, or blocked someone's driveway with their stupid fucking BMW.

Even in completely random murder sprees there's still a reason. Even if it's only, that guy's fucking crazy and it's too easy to get hold of guns around here.


----------



## NoXion (Feb 25, 2018)

ddraig said:


> It's really straightforward, where possible with all the caveats, there is no need to eat dead animals to survive and it is a personal choice, all the wriggling, high level philosophising and low level bacon comments will not change that



There's a lot of shit I don't need to have in order to live, but I enjoy them anyway. I don't need to drink tea, or eat crisps. Animals die as a result of the production of both items, as well as any number of things one doesn't need but are nice to have. Basing one's actions purely on necessity is fundamentally absurd. We're not Vulcans.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Feb 25, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> Murder isn't death with no reason. Could be the victim slept with a spouse that did not belong to them, or talked too loud at the cinema, or blocked someone's driveway with their stupid fucking BMW.
> 
> Even in completely random murder sprees there's still a reason. Even if it's only, that guy's fucking crazy and it's too easy to get hold of guns around here.


True enough, although at the risk of sounding like kabbes, that doesn't logically preclude the idea that a death for no reason is murder. 

The 'Morrissey Doctrine' has arisen on this thread more often than I thought it would. Maybe I shouldn't be so surprised - he was pretty influential on many people my age.


----------



## ddraig (Feb 25, 2018)

NoXion said:


> There's a lot of shit I don't need to have in order to live, but I enjoy them anyway. I don't need to drink tea, or eat crisps. Animals die as a result of the production of both items, as well as any number of things one doesn't need but are nice to have. Basing one's actions purely on necessity is fundamentally absurd. We're not Vulcans.


yes you enjoy them so carry on
why then do you have a problem with vegans who decide not to have these things even though they may have once enjoyed them?
and why if you can live with less/very little cruelty would you choose not to? because you enjoy the taste of meat, not because you need it

to lbj, of course meat is murder, meat comes from animals that have been killed for your plate
or would 'meat is a portion of killed animal reared and slaughtered for my needs' suit your sensitivities better?
an it's not the "morrissey doctrine" ffs, it was around before that as it's really fucking obvious
Morrissey is a cunt and your attempts to tie veganism to him saying that is disingenuous


----------



## Spymaster (Feb 25, 2018)

ddraig said:


> why then do you have a problem with vegans who decide not to have these things even though they may have once enjoyed them?


Nobody has a problem with vegans _per se_. It's judgemental cunts who insist on moralising and telling us that meat is murder (clearly massive bollocks) and that our lifestyle is wrong/immoral/incorrect/whatever. That just happens to be most vegans.


> to lbj, of course meat is murder, meat comes from animals that have been killed for your plate


 If that's your definition of murder you seriously need to do some more reading.


> ... would 'meat is a portion of killed animal reared and slaughtered for my needs' suit your sensitivities better?


It's nothing to do with sensitivities and everything to do with accuracy. The above is at least, accurate.


----------



## ddraig (Feb 25, 2018)

who here has told you your lifestyle is wrong/immoral/incorrect/whatever?
vegans may think that eating animals and their products is but if you don't why do you care?
meat is murder, animals that once alive were killed/murdered to make meat, that's how I and others see it, many don't of course but no picking over the words and official definitions will change that for me, you carry on thinking what you like, obviously


----------



## Gromit (Feb 25, 2018)

Are zoos animal prisons for creatures caught by the nature police for the crime of meat is murder?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Feb 25, 2018)

Oh god are we back to this 'sensitivities' nonsense? I reckon I could represent your position pretty well, ddraig. I don't think you would have a hope of representing mine - you very clearly don't understand it. I've killed chickens, then plucked, gutted, cooked and eaten them. I don't have the problem with this part of the meat-production process that you think I must have, and neither do many meat-eaters. We're not all the fragile creatures you seem to think we must be.


----------



## ddraig (Feb 25, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Oh god are we back to this 'sensitivities' nonsense? I reckon I could represent your position pretty well, ddraig. I don't think you would have a hope of representing mine - you very clearly don't understand it. I've killed chickens, then plucked, gutted, cooked and eaten them. I don't have the problem with this part of the meat-production process that you think I must have, and neither do many meat-eaters. We're not all the fragile creatures you seem to think we must be.


you reckon/think a lot yeah, you think you know the arguments and values of others and wax lyrical on here trying to find common ground to make you feel better 
I don't care about your squirming and your "position" or what you do or don't have a problem with until you start telling me i'm wrong
so carry on, stick to your position and keep finding long winded arguments you think back you up and justify the need to kill animals for your plate, we're never going to agree


----------



## Spymaster (Feb 25, 2018)

ddraig said:


> who here has told you your lifestyle is wrong/immoral/incorrect/whatever?


It's been intimated by just about everyone, you included. Anyone talking about morality from a vegan perspective is de facto taking the moral high ground over meat eaters. Obviously. 


> vegans may think that eating animals and their products is but if you don't why do you care?


We don't care about what you eat, ffs. It's the other way roound. Haven't you read this thread or the dozens of others on the subject?


> meat is murder, animals that once alive were killed/murdered to make meat, that's how I and others see it


Then you are fucking idiots. You are simply and demonstrably wrong about this. You don't even really believe it yourselves (unless you really are _total_ morons). It's just a wanky, clichéd catch phrase some hippy started using and you lot have picked up without thinking what you're saying.


----------



## ddraig (Feb 25, 2018)

Spymaster said:


> It's been intimated by just about everyone, you included. Anyone talking about morality from a vegan perspective is de facto taking the moral high ground over meat eaters. Obviously.
> 
> We don't care about what you eat, ffs. It's the other way roound. Haven't you read this thread or the dozens of others on the subject?
> 
> Then you are fucking idiots. You are simply and demonstrably wrong about this. You don't even really believe it yourselves (unless you really are _total_ morons). It's just a wanky, clichéd catch phrase some hippy started using and you lot have picked up without thinking what you're saying.


more projection and anger and abuse
"intimated" so no one has told you then, just intimated (in your opinion), glad that's cleared up
and they say the vegans are angry


----------



## Spymaster (Feb 25, 2018)

ddraig said:


> "intimated" so no one has told you then, just intimated, glad that's cleared up


It isn't. But let's clear it up straight away now then shall we?

Do you think that your being a vegan makes you morally superior to someone who eats meat?


----------



## Spymaster (Feb 25, 2018)

It's a simple enough question ddraig


----------



## ddraig (Feb 25, 2018)

Spymaster said:


> It's a simple enough question ddraig


i was just about to hit reply on my response before carrying on with real life stuff, why do you think you can demand answers on a bulletin board at your convenience and in 8 minutes? 
arrogance and bullishness


----------



## Spymaster (Feb 25, 2018)

ddraig said:


> i was just about to hit reply on my response before carrying on with real life stuff, why do you think you can demand answers on a bulletin board at your convenience and in 8 minutes?
> arrogance and bullishness


Because you are here for my entertainment, as you well know. 

Now answer the question.


----------



## Spymaster (Feb 25, 2018)

Silence is golden, golden


----------



## ddraig (Feb 25, 2018)

Spymaster said:


> Because you are here for my entertainment, as you well know.
> 
> Now answer the question.


arrogance and bullishness confirmed
fuck you I won't do as you tell me, grow up eh


----------



## twentythreedom (Feb 25, 2018)

This thread


----------



## Spymaster (Feb 25, 2018)

ddraig said:


> fuck you I won't do as you tell me ...


Of course you won't. You can't.

Did you stamp your little feet as you posted that?


----------



## mojo pixy (Feb 25, 2018)

The answer is _yes_, a huge number of vegetarians and especially vegans do think they're morally superior to meat eaters. A huge number of vegans believe they're morally superior to dairy and egg veggies.

All the denials in the world from defensive numpties doesn't change this opinion based on lived experience and masses of exchanges on this matter with different levels of veggies.**

((Yeah OK _*you're*_ different, the exception that proves the rule as it were. It's the others who act all superior, not _*you*_))

As for me, I think I'm morally superior to myself in the past, because I don't preach about vegetarianism any more 

** EtA, more often than not, as we see, a simple denial is not even forthcoming anyway.


----------



## Spymaster (Feb 25, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> The answer is _yes_, a huge number of vegetarians and especially vegans do think they're morally superior to meat eaters. A huge number if vegans believe they're morally superior to dairy and egg veggies.


Of course they fucking do. They've said as much on these boards.


----------



## ddraig (Feb 25, 2018)

who needs people to answer questions put to them when the answers are already set by those asking the questions!
"intimated", "said as much" 
the desparation


----------



## mojo pixy (Feb 25, 2018)

I can almost hear lurking vegans sighing in exasperation, _But we are morally superior to meat eaters, why can't you seeeeeeeee it??_


----------



## Spymaster (Feb 25, 2018)

ddraig said:


> who needs people to answer questions put to them when the answers are already set by those asking the questions!


 Fucking hell.


----------



## Spymaster (Feb 25, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> I can almost hear lurking vegans sighing in exasperation, _But we are morally superior to meat eaters, why can't you seeeeeeeee it??_


Whilst Thriago's had well over an hour to think something clever up, failed, so comes back with some bollocks!


----------



## mojo pixy (Feb 25, 2018)

We've had _moral obligation_ too; I wonder what intellectual gymnastics need to take place to maintain this _moral obligation_ exists but still claim those who don't meet it are not inherently less moral than those who do. I know @PabloSanchez doesn't speak for all vegans but he evidently wishes he did, and I certainly have heard that _moral obligation _type shtick many times.

Can't really have it both ways.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Feb 25, 2018)

paolo Sanchez has been very explicit - in his opinion, veganism is a sign of a more advanced state of civilisation. tbf he hasn't couched that in caveats - he clearly considers himself to be more advanced than those who are not vegan.

tbh if you genuinely believe in the Morrissey Doctrine, that's really the only consistent position to take. Of course you are morally superior to murderers. It's this kind of absolutism that leads Morrissey into some of his more unpleasant misanthropic and racist ramblings.

Problem comes when you're confronted with people who have the same access to information as you have, who agree with you about the nature of being of other animals, but who haven't adopted veganism as a result of that agreement. Either they are monsters or they're in denial. A fog of incomprehension descends at this point.


----------



## bogbrush (Feb 25, 2018)

I have eaten cat, but you can't call it 'murder' as it was dead when I found it.  It was a half grown kitten that had been killed by a prowling tom cat that got into the house and killed it. It was more like duck than rabbit.


----------



## Watermelon Man (Feb 25, 2018)

Jeez. Is this still going? 


Eat death and feel like death.
Eat or drink suffering, suffer.

Those animals don't want to die.
The mama cows don't want their babies snatched from them.
The baby cows don't want to be separated from their mamas..

Love the animals.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Feb 25, 2018)

Watermelon Man said:


> Eat death and feel like death.
> Eat or drink suffering, suffer..


Deep, man.

See here's the problem. I know full well that my steak has come from the body of a cow that has been killed so that I could eat it. 

And it makes me feel _just fine_. 

What a monster I must be.


----------



## Watermelon Man (Feb 25, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Deep, man.
> 
> See here's the problem. I know full well that my steak has come from the body of a cow that has been killed so that I could eat it.
> 
> ...



It's a problem for you?


----------



## mojo pixy (Feb 25, 2018)

Watermelon Man said:


> Love the animals.



Please define _love,_ it's such a dense word with so many possibilities about it...

FYI nothing and nobody _wants _to die.


Spoiler



Everything and everybody dies.


----------



## Spymaster (Feb 25, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Deep, man.
> 
> See here's the problem. I know full well that my steak has come from the body of a cow that has been killed so that I could eat it.
> 
> ...


Liar. You feel guilty about it. 

Your denial of it is a manifestation of your carnist fragility.


----------



## Watermelon Man (Feb 25, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> Please define _love,_ it's such a dense word with so many possibilities about it...
> 
> FYI nothing and nobody _wants _to die.
> 
> ...



Well you know, like love as in not murdering them, not enslaving them, not putting arms in their bot bot to make them preggers to make more $$$$ from the clueless brainwashed.

It's not that hard to do. Try it. You may like it.


----------



## Watermelon Man (Feb 25, 2018)

Spymaster said:


> Liar. You feel guilty about it.
> 
> Your denial of it is a manifestation of your carnist fragility.



They already said it was a problem.


----------



## mojo pixy (Feb 25, 2018)

Watermelon Man said:


> Well you know, like love as in not murdering them, not enslaving them, not putting arms in their bot bot.



Some people who love each other put arms in bot bot.
By the way are you 6?
Anyway, people do _love animals _... cooked in a variety of ways (boom boom)
But so what? You don't have to, I don't have to, but if people want to then literally, so what? It's up to them. Disapproval is pointless really.

EtA, except the warm glowy feels that justified disapproval gives, obvs


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Feb 25, 2018)

Watermelon Man said:


> Well you know, like love as in not murdering them, not enslaving them, not putting arms in their bot bot to make them preggers to make more $$$$ from *the clueless brainwashed*.


The misanthropy is never far from the surface, is it? 

That and the inherent sense of superiority.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Feb 25, 2018)

Watermelon Man said:


> It's a problem for you?


No, it's a problem for your little aphorism.


----------



## Watermelon Man (Feb 25, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> Some people who love each other put arms in bot bot.
> By the way are you 6?
> Anyway, people do _love animals _... cooked in a variety of ways (boom boom)
> But so what? You don't have to, I don't have to, but if people want to then literally, so what? It's up to them. Disapproval is pointless really.



It is up to them of course. You are happy to eat dead animals and consume dairy.  There is a victim (the animal) so your morals can be questioned.  

We get it, you are a cunt that cares not one jot. Well done. 

I don't know why you are so against people pointing out you are morally wrong?


----------



## mojo pixy (Feb 25, 2018)

Watermelon Man said:


> the clueless brainwashed.


----------



## Watermelon Man (Feb 25, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> The misanthropy is never far from the surface, is it?
> 
> That and the inherent sense of superiority.



Superiority?  

You eat dead animals and drink animal fluids you also cry arse when someone points out that your actions have a victim. 

I can undersand why that gives you an inferiority complex.

Can you work it out?


----------



## mojo pixy (Feb 25, 2018)

Watermelon Man said:


> I don't know why you are so against people pointing out you are morally wrong?



Nobody has done that, and if they did it would be no more than an opinion.

_Pointing out [others'] moral wrongness_ is an interesting way to put it though. Glad you enjoy that. That's why you do it by the way, not because you're necessarily right or because it needs to be done. You enjoy it. There are loads of pretexts for it, well done for finding one that suits your chosen lifestyle. What more can anyone say?

EtA, might as well edit this in.



Watermelon Man said:


> We get it, you are a cunt that cares not one jot. Well done.



W_hen you point a finger, three fingers point back at you_. Trisha says that so it must be true


----------



## Watermelon Man (Feb 25, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> Nobody has done that, and if they did it would be no more than an opinion.
> 
> _Pointing out [others'] moral wrongness_ is an interesting way to put it though. Glad you enjoy that. That's why you do it by the way, not because you're necessarily right or because it needs to be done. You enjoy it. There are loads of pretexts for it, well done for finding one that suits your chosen lifestyle. What more can anyone say?



You know taking a life is wrong don't you? 

You know putting your fist in a cow's rectum whilst they are tied up and impregnating them for financial gain is wrong don't you?

You know slavery is wrong don't you?

You know kidnapp is wrong?

I get why you are defensive. I get the anger.
I get that you feel like you have been conned by the big industries. 

It's natural response.


----------



## mojo pixy (Feb 25, 2018)

Watermelon Man said:


> I get why you are defensive. I get the anger.
> I get that you feel like you have been conned by the big industries.
> 
> It's natural response.



lol you think you're talking about me?
Good luck with that.


----------



## Watermelon Man (Feb 25, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> lol you think you're talking about me?
> Good luck with that.



I get the jovial denial too.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Feb 25, 2018)

.


----------



## mojo pixy (Feb 25, 2018)

Watermelon Man said:


> I get the jovial denial too.



You don't _get _anything, you're just lashing out randomly. It's making you look petty.


----------



## Watermelon Man (Feb 25, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> You don't _get _anything, you're just lashing out randomly. It's making you look petty.



Playing the victim now? 

There is a saying you are what you eat.

You eat victims...


----------



## mojo pixy (Feb 25, 2018)

That's the thing, I actually don't. Still you're obviously having fun so keep at it.


----------



## Spymaster (Feb 25, 2018)

Watermelon Man said:


> You know taking a life is wrong don't you?
> 
> You know putting your fist in a cow's rectum whilst they are tied up and impregnating them for financial gain is wrong don't you?
> 
> ...


----------



## Spymaster (Feb 25, 2018)

This one's great! 

They're a lot like conspiranoids.


----------



## Spymaster (Feb 25, 2018)

Watermelon Man said:


> You know taking a life is wrong don't you?


Why is it?


----------



## ddraig (Feb 25, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> paolo Sanchez has been very explicit - in his opinion, veganism is a sign of a more advanced state of civilisation. tbf he hasn't couched that in caveats - he clearly considers himself to be more advanced than those who are not vegan.
> 
> tbh if you genuinely believe in the Morrissey Doctrine, that's really the only consistent position to take. Of course you are morally superior to murderers. It's this kind of absolutism that leads Morrissey into some of his more unpleasant misanthropic and racist ramblings.
> 
> Problem comes when you're confronted with people who have the same access to information as you have, who agree with you about the nature of being of other animals, but who haven't adopted veganism as a result of that agreement. Either they are monsters or they're in denial. A fog of incomprehension descends at this point.


let's suggest veganism and racism are somehow linked/an extension of an attitude/outlook
classy and desperate


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Feb 25, 2018)

ddraig said:


> let's suggest veganism and racism are somehow linked/an extension of an attitude/outlook
> classy and desperate


In the specific case of Morrissey, I'm sure that it is linked - his racist outburst against the Chinese was specifically meat-eating-based. In very few other people, I would hope, but misanthropy of the kind Watermelon Man is currently exhibiting is perhaps more common a result of such absolutism.


----------



## ddraig (Feb 25, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> In the specific case of Morrissey, I'm sure that it is linked - his racist outburst against the Chinese was specifically meat-eating-based. In very few other people, I would hope, but misanthropy of the kind Watermelon Man is currently exhibiting is perhaps more common a result of such absolutism.


pathetic, really pathetic even for you


----------



## Spymaster (Feb 25, 2018)




----------



## littlebabyjesus (Feb 25, 2018)

I will apologise for giving the impression you took. I didn't intend it that way. But unpleasant misanthropy and adherence to the idea that meat is murder do often go together. It's not so hard to see why. They have set themselves against most other people. 

Do you actually adhere to 'meat is murder'? Surely not.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Feb 25, 2018)

Someone who takes a fish out of the sea and eats it is a murderer if they didn't have to do that to survive? (And, by extension, those that do it on behalf of others. Who are we attacking here? Oh yeah, everyone.)

Morrissey Doctrine, so 'fish you so fancifully fry' is in there under the murder count. Doing that thing that you fancy, you evil murderer, when you didn't _need to_.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Feb 25, 2018)

'Everyone grows out of their Morrissey phase except Morrissey' (Sean Hughes).

Morrissey would no doubt stand by his words if he were here.

As Watermelon Man shows (and Morrissey shows as well, of course), it isn't a grown-up position. It leads you to think that everyone else must be really, really stupid.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 26, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Well tbh, I don't know what the basis of your initial scepticism was because you didn't say, it was a bit vague and appeared to be based solely on a cursory glance. If you have anything a bit more substantial to base your scepticism on, it would be interesting to hear what it is.



Just that funny smell of activists pretending to be scientists, really.  The kind you get from having seen similar before.  I'm not saying its conclusive.

A look at their actual materials has a slicker, more corporate vibe than I'd expect, but goes a bit wrong by mixing the look of a private medical group's site with a woo-ey "SUPERCHARGE your gut bacteria with this ONE WEIRD TRICK!" style thing, among other tropes.

Then there are the links with PETA, which helps make sense of the above, to some degree.



PaoloSanchez said:


> Again, if you're interested, you can do the legwork and check up on his credentials for yourself and not just take my word for it.



I wasn't taking your word for anything - you never said.  For all I know he could be an undistinguished psychiatrist with a gift for self-promotion who is declaring himself an authority on diabetes.



PaoloSanchez said:


> Well I've managed to do it ok so not sure what your problem was.



mojo pixy seemed to have the same issue.  The common factor in both cases appears to be you. 
Though it's stopped happening now.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 26, 2018)

Spymaster said:


> Nobody has a problem with vegans _per se_. It's judgemental cunts who insist on moralising and telling us that meat is murder (clearly massive bollocks) and that our lifestyle is wrong/immoral/incorrect/whatever. That just happens to be most vegans.



I thought we'd agreed on not over-extrapolating from small samples.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 26, 2018)

Spymaster said:


> This one's great!
> 
> They're a lot like conspiranoids.



Fundamentalist groups all share certain habits.
The thread keeps returning to this theme.

#NotAllVegans


----------



## Mr. Jelly (Feb 26, 2018)

I suppose its a little too easy to be glib about eating that decontextualized slab of protein. You don't really have to do the deed, see it scared shitless before you take it down. All that stuff is hidden, such is the modern world.

I dont think its 'murder' btw, but it has a great propensity for cruelty.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 26, 2018)

Mr. Jelly said:


> I suppose its a little too easy to be glib about eating that decontextualized slab of protein. You don't really have to do the deed, see it scared shitless before you take it down. All that stuff is hidden, such is the modern world.



Hard to say how things would be by now if such things had never been hidden away.
There would certainly be a lot less meat about than there is currently, because it couldn't be produced on such a scale.

Then again, capitalism was the big driver for factory farming and the world would be hugely different without that...


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Feb 26, 2018)

8ball said:


> Hard to say how things would be by now if such things had never been hidden away.
> There would certainly be a lot less meat about than there is currently, because it couldn't be produced on such a scale.
> 
> Then again, capitalism was the big driver for factory farming and the world would be hugely different without that...


Before industrialised farming and in places that still don't have it, where people have direct everyday experience of the meat-producing process, there isn't a surge of revulsion towards killing for meat. Rather the reverse, I would suggest: hiding the process away has a dual effect - both protecting people from certain truths about killing and making people more easily upset by the idea of those truths about killing.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 26, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Before industrialised farming and in places that still don't have it, where people have direct everyday experience of the meat-producing process, there isn't a surge of revulsion towards killing for meat. Rather the reverse, I would suggest: hiding the process away has a dual effect - both protecting people from certain truths about killing and making people more easily upset by the idea of those truths about killing.



Well, yes, we can't really discuss the socialisation aspects of "carnism" meaningfully if we pretend the default _tabula rasa_ is an early life totally alienated from the means of food production, accompanied by a cast of singing _Disney_ animals.


----------



## Mr. Jelly (Feb 26, 2018)

8ball said:


> Hard to say how things would be by now if such things had never been hidden away.
> There would certainly be a lot less meat about than there is currently, because it couldn't be produced on such a scale.
> 
> Then again, capitalism was the big driver for factory farming and the world would be hugely different without that...



I think humans by their very nature over empathise , and have always find the killing of animals at some level problematic, otherwise we wouldn't have all the ritual we see around slaughter, or indeed the psychic toll on slaughterhouse workers. The modern consumer doesn't have to worry about this, the trauma is taken on elsewhere. I don't see the end of capitalism meaning the end of industrialised production of food, but given wages would disappear what would be the motive to spend all day killing animals?


----------



## 8ball (Feb 26, 2018)

Mr. Jelly said:


> I think humans by their very nature over empathise , and have always find the killing of animals at some level problematic, otherwise we wouldn't have all the ritual we see around slaughter, or indeed the psychic toll on slaughterhouse workers. The modern consumer doesn't have to worry about this, the trauma is taken on elsewhere. I don't see the end of capitalism meaning the end of industrialised production of food, but given wages would disappear what would be the motive to spend all day killing animals?



Humans have created rituals over various significant phases of life, death and birth.  Without particular details it doesn't seem very convincing.  The one in many cultures where a boy transitions to a man with his first kill of a dangerous animal doesn't fit very well, but I'll confess 'availability bias' there.  Re: slaughterhouse workers - yeah, combining the face to face with industrialisation in killing isn't good psychologically.  We've also managed to make indoor work in climate-controlled offices psychologically intolerable for many, though, so our gift for turning things to shit seems quite flexible.

I see what you mean about modern slaughterhouses not keeping going without the wages, but it raises the question of who is going to spend all day picking fruit for no money.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 26, 2018)

..I won't accept the Brexiter answer of "Bulgarians", by the way.


----------



## Spymaster (Feb 26, 2018)

8ball said:


> I thought we'd agreed on not over-extrapolating from small samples.


I did consider that and thought about qualifying it with "most U75 vegans", but given that even the previously sensible Jeff Robinson has started talking about animal murder I thought, fuck it.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 26, 2018)

Mr. Jelly said:


> I think humans by their very nature over empathise , and have always find the killing of animals at some level problematic, otherwise we wouldn't have all the ritual we see around slaughter, or indeed the psychic toll on slaughterhouse workers. The modern consumer doesn't have to worry about this, the trauma is taken on elsewhere. I don't see the end of capitalism meaning the end of industrialised production of food, but given wages would disappear what would be the motive to spend all day killing animals?


are you really that unimaginative?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Feb 26, 2018)

Mr. Jelly said:


> I think humans by their very nature over empathise , and have always find the killing of animals at some level problematic, otherwise we wouldn't have all the ritual we see around slaughter, or indeed the psychic toll on slaughterhouse workers. T


That's an interesting point about rituals. And it's a good thing not to take killing lightly, something that our present industrialised system certainly doesn't recognise.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 26, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Do you actually adhere to 'meat is murder'? Surely not.



i know I'd feel pretty bad about myself if millions of murders were happening right in front of me and all I did in defense of the innocent victims was tut about it and decline to partake.


----------



## Spymaster (Feb 26, 2018)

8ball said:


> i know I'd feel pretty bad about myself if millions of murders were happening right in front of me and all I did in defense of the innocent victims was tut about it and decline to partake.




Which is why it's bollocks and they know it.


----------



## Mr. Jelly (Feb 26, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> are you really that unimaginative?



Generally yes.


----------



## Mr. Jelly (Feb 26, 2018)

lack of B12


----------



## 8ball (Feb 26, 2018)

Spymaster said:


> Which is why it's bollocks and they know it.



I always figured it was a bit like "property is theft" or some Zen sayings in that it needs a little unpacking.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 26, 2018)

Mr. Jelly said:


> lack of B12



Marmite.


----------



## Spymaster (Feb 26, 2018)

8ball said:


> I always figured it was a bit like "property is theft" or some Zen sayings in that it needs a little unpacking.


As a silly slogan for shouting on demos you can see where it's come from but it's when they roll it into an actual argument that it becomes idiotic and obviously disingenuous, like this:


ddraig said:


> ...meat is murder, animals that once alive were killed/murdered to make meat ...


It's just an unconvincingly stupid attempt to redefine the word which nobody over the age of 5 could possibly buy.


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Feb 26, 2018)

Spymaster said:


> Jeff Robinson has started talking about animal murder



No I haven't. Not once.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 26, 2018)

Spymaster said:


> It's just an unconvincingly stupid attempt to redefine the term which nobody over the age of 5 could possibly buy.



It was a very quick Google, but the oldest thing I can find on it is a quote (paraphrased) that has been attributed to Benjamin Franklin.
It looks possibly apocryphal.  It's also possible it was more along the lines of "fishing is unprovoked murder".

But as Abraham Lincoln said, you can never be sure of the veracity of quotes on the internet.


----------



## Spymaster (Feb 26, 2018)

Jeff Robinson said:


> No I haven't. Not once.


Fair enough. I seemed to recall you doing so and me being quite shocked at it coming from you.

If I've done you a disservice, I apologise.


----------



## Watermelon Man (Feb 27, 2018)

8ball said:


> Marmite.



Eat your own poop or take a vit b12 tablet. 

Or nutritional yeast. 

Yay. B12 options.


----------



## Watermelon Man (Feb 27, 2018)

Spymaster said:


> Fair enough. I seemed to recall you doing so and me being quite shocked at it coming from you.
> 
> If I've done you a disservice, I apologise.



Judgemental non vegans playing judge and jury. Tsk tsk tsk


----------



## Spymaster (Feb 27, 2018)

Watermelon Man said:


> Judgemental non vegans playing judge and jury. Tsk tsk tsk


You seem to be replying to a different post to the one that you’re quoting. It looks to be a common problem on this  thread.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Feb 27, 2018)

If god had wanted us to be vegetarian , why did he make animals out of meat ?


----------



## Watermelon Man (Feb 27, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> If god had wanted us to be vegetarian , why did he make animals out of meat ?



That's what I don't understand about you pre vegans. Meat is meat right? Humans are meat. Dogs. Cats. Foxes. Rats. All meat... So why do you only eat certain animals?

Your nan and chicken taste the same.

Why do you eat certain dead animals and not others?


----------



## not-bono-ever (Feb 27, 2018)

I have been a vegi for longer than you have been alive I would warrant bludz


----------



## Watermelon Man (Feb 27, 2018)

Spymaster said:


> You seem to be replying to a different post to the one that you’re quoting. It looks to be a common problem on this  thread.



There you go again...judging.. smh.


----------



## Watermelon Man (Feb 27, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> I have been a vegi for longer than you have been alive I would warrant bludz



Vegetarian?


----------



## not-bono-ever (Feb 27, 2018)

yes, vegan didn't work because of the drinking issues for me. i.e. it was a ball ache to get leathered and stay true. and the various milk substitutes didn't work in coffee. the food was great though


----------



## mojo pixy (Feb 27, 2018)

Watermelon Man said:


> Your nan and chicken taste the same.



I bet they don't.


----------



## Spymaster (Feb 27, 2018)

Watermelon Man said:


> Why do you eat certain dead animals and not others?


Because some taste better than others. There's also the availability issue and some meat eaters feel greater sentimentality towards some animals than others. Personally I'd eat any meat that I liked, could afford, wasn't endangered or someone's pet (ddraig - take note), and was available.


----------



## Watermelon Man (Feb 27, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> yes, vegan didn't work because of the drinking issues for me. i.e. it was a ball ache to get leathered and stay true. and the various milk substitutes didn't work in coffee. the food was great though



Some booze isn't vegetarian. Not sure about what is/isn't. Think its fish guts in some drinks...sounds grim. Are you arsed to check or not?


----------



## Spymaster (Feb 27, 2018)

Watermelon Man said:


> Some booze isn't vegetarian. Not sure about what is/isn't.


Isinglass. It's collagen obtained from the swim bladders of fish. Used to give clarity to wine and beer.


----------



## Watermelon Man (Feb 27, 2018)

Spymaster said:


> Because some taste better than others. There's also the availability issue and some meat eaters feel greater sentimentality towards some animals than others. Personally I'd eat any meat that I liked, could afford, wasn't endangered or someone's pet (ddraig - take note), and was available.



There are ways  around the taste issue. Sausages etc.. take away the seasonng /spices/ flavouring etc and I bet it's quite a bad taste. 

I understand the sentimental argument but suggest it's more to do with a lifetime of programming.  

The availability thing is questionable. Not sure where you live but here in London there's loads of pigeons, rats, squirrels, and a fair few foxes. But dead animal eaters don't seem to want to take advantage. Free meat.


----------



## Watermelon Man (Feb 27, 2018)

Spymaster said:


> Isinglass. It's collagen obtained from the swim bladders of fish. Used to give clarity to wine and beer.



Sounds grim.


----------



## DotCommunist (Feb 27, 2018)

Nobody wants to eat anything thats lived in london. The meat probably glows in the dark and has weird tumors.


----------



## Spymaster (Feb 27, 2018)

Watermelon Man said:


> There are ways  around the taste issue. Sausages etc.. take away the seasonng /spices/ flavouring etc and I bet it's quite a bad taste.


Well then it becomes an issue of convenience. Why go to the bother of flavouring or processing unpalatable meat when there's plenty available that's delicious straight off the carcass?


> I understand the sentimental argument but suggest it's more to do with a lifetime of programming.


That's certainly the case for many.


> The availability thing is questionable. Not sure where you live but here in London there's loads of pigeons, rats, squirrels, and a fair few foxes. But dead animal eaters don't seem to want to take advantage. Free meat.


I'd try fox but I've heard it's vile and needs to be salted and soaked etc. Squirrels are delicious and should be eaten more. Pigeons the same although I'd have health concerns about eating the filthy things that fly around London. Same issue with rats.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Feb 27, 2018)

its all down to cost at the end of the day- there are increasingly acceptable alternatives to isinglass available now and the changes in the ranges of beers & tolerance for cloud and colour makes it much easier these days if you were vegan and a drinker. in the bad old days, the need for mediocrity and consistency from the market dominant huge brewers made the use of clarifying agensts common ( and nasty) - I lived in Germany and the wheat beers were vegan pretty much IIRC


----------



## not-bono-ever (Feb 27, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> Nobody wants to eat anything thats lived in london. The meat probably glows in the dark and has weird tumors.


 
you should see the shit that the foxes eat on my street. I would not want to nom on an animal that has spent its life going through bins and eating fake morleys and vomit


----------



## fishfinger (Feb 27, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> ...I would not want to nom on an animal that has spent its life going through bins and eating fake morleys and vomit


And shitty nappies


----------



## not-bono-ever (Feb 27, 2018)

I have been thinking a lot about this of late as it happens- I am as fat as a pig due to the carbs I load up on as a shit veggie. I am not getting any younger and have seriously considered a move to a selective protein heavy diet with meat for health reasons. fucking hell.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Feb 27, 2018)

Spymaster said:


> Well then it becomes an issue of convenience. Why go to the bother of flavouring or processing unpalatable meat when there's plenty available that's delicious straight off the carcass?


In order not to waste anything. I'm a big advocate of using everything when you eat an animal. There are very few parts of the animal that cannot be turned into something tasty. I'm not sold on tendon or cartilage, but most other things.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 27, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> I have been thinking a lot about this of late as it happens- I am as fat as a pig due to the carbs I load up on as a shit veggie. I am not getting any younger and have seriously considered a move to a selective protein heavy diet with meat for health reasons. fucking hell.



How about more protein in a veggie diet, and increase relative amount of healthy fats to aid satiety?


----------



## not-bono-ever (Feb 27, 2018)

I know, its another option - its easier to do with meat and I am probably the laziest person on this board. and its the carbs that I am addicted to, so need to tackle that primarily. politically, it would be a climb down for me with meat though. as if anyone cares


----------



## Watermelon Man (Feb 27, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> I have been thinking a lot about this of late as it happens- I am as fat as a pig due to the carbs I load up on as a shit veggie. I am not getting any younger and have seriously considered a move to a selective protein heavy diet with meat for health reasons. fucking hell.



Sorry my friend. I know I may have been having fun on here but I'm calling bullshit on this.  Don't take it personally.  You are "fat as a pig" due to the fat you load up on as a "shit veggie".  And protein? don't fall for that bullshit. Seriously. Just don't.


----------



## Watermelon Man (Feb 27, 2018)

fishfinger said:


> And shitty nappies



Yep. Fortunately, there is bacon from those animals that don't eat shit...


----------



## Watermelon Man (Feb 27, 2018)

8ball said:


> How about more protein in a veggie diet, and increase relative amount of healthy fats to aid satiety?



Seriously, this is bullshit.  Don't take it personally, but you don't need more protein. It's an absolute myth.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 27, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> I know, its another option - its easier to do with meat and I am probably the laziest person on this board. and its the carbs that I am addicted to, so need to tackle that primarily. politically, it would be a climb down for me with meat though. as if anyone cares



I got really heavy through a combo of comfort eating on carbs and lack of exercise a few years back.
I guess it might be easier to redress with meat for protein-per-calorie reasons (tuna and chicken are really good on that count, but obviously chickens ethics etc. <everyone can castigate me for not caring much about tuna later>) unless you supplement it.  Tofu is pretty good on the ppc score too, but not to everyone's taste. 

Rice and beans make a good protein combo but then that's carbs again and quite a few calories if you're prone to pigging out on them like I was.

Sure some of the saner vegans on the thread will have good tips.


----------



## fishfinger (Feb 27, 2018)

Watermelon Man said:


> Yep. Fortunately, there is bacon from those animals that don't eat shit...


That's OK. I'd never considered eating fox bacon.


----------



## Watermelon Man (Feb 27, 2018)

fishfinger said:


> That's OK. I'd never considered eating fox bacon.



fox in blankets?


----------



## fishfinger (Feb 27, 2018)

Watermelon Man said:


> fox in blankets?


They seem to go for most things in the bin but I haven't spotted them wearing blankets. Maybe it's not cold enough for that?


----------



## Watermelon Man (Feb 27, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> I know, its another option - its easier to do with meat and I am probably the laziest person on this board. and its the carbs that I am addicted to, so need to tackle that primarily. politically, it would be a climb down for me with meat though. as if anyone cares



Mate, sending you a virtual hug bro.  You seem a bit down on yourself.  I can give you a diet that has more carbs than you are currently eating and you'll be more energetic and feeling better about yourself than ever. Any time you need help my friend, give me a shout.


----------



## Spymaster (Feb 27, 2018)

Watermelon Man said:


> I can give you a diet that has more carbs than you are currently eating and you'll be more energetic and feeling better about yourself than ever.


I'll have some of that if you want to post it up. It'll be supplemented with the occasional steak but I'm interested to see what you've got.


----------



## Watermelon Man (Feb 27, 2018)

Spymaster said:


> I'll have some of that if you want to post it up. It'll be supplemented with the occasional steak but I'm interested to see what you've got.



Just out of interest, what is it about the steak that you like best? Is it the taste or the feeling strong after it? The downside for me was the feeling clogged up for two days after.


----------



## Spymaster (Feb 27, 2018)

Watermelon Man said:


> Just out of interest, what is it about the steak that you like best? Is it the taste or the feeling strong after it? The downside for me was the feeling clogged up for two days after.


The taste. I cant recall ever feeling clogged up.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 27, 2018)

Watermelon Man said:


> Seriously, this is bullshit.  Don't take it personally, but you don't need more protein. It's an absolute myth.



How do you know how much protein I’m getting or what my needs are?


----------



## 8ball (Feb 27, 2018)

Spymaster said:


> The taste. I cant recall ever feeling clogged up.



Most people need to overindulge a bit for that to happen.


----------



## AnnaKarpik (Feb 27, 2018)

Spymaster said:


> Isinglass. It's collagen obtained from the swim bladders of fish. Used to give clarity to wine and beer.



And then filtered out of the wine and beer.
I'm not sure of the vegetarian status of drinks that had bits of critter added then taken away. I'm pretty sure that flour would still be vegetarian if I sift out any meal moth eggs or weevils that might be in there.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 27, 2018)

AnnaKarpik said:


> And then filtered out of the wine and beer.
> I'm not sure of the vegetarian status of drinks that had bits of critter added then taken away. I'm pretty sure that flour would still be vegetarian if I sift out any meal moth eggs or weevils that might be in there.



Must be a right ballache finding water to drink.

Tbf I didn’t think it was completely filtered out.

For vegans it would be down to using the swim bladders for a human want for clear beer.  I think most veggies wouldn’t be too keen, either.


----------



## Watermelon Man (Feb 27, 2018)

Spymaster said:


> The taste. I cant recall ever feeling clogged up.



Do you like curries?


----------



## Spymaster (Feb 27, 2018)

Watermelon Man said:


> Do you like curries?


Of course.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 27, 2018)

Spymaster said:


> The taste. I cant recall ever feeling clogged up.


yeh but that's because of your emetick habit.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 27, 2018)

AnnaKarpik said:


> And then filtered out of the wine and beer.
> I'm not sure of the vegetarian status of drinks that had bits of critter added then taken away. I'm pretty sure that flour would still be vegetarian if I sift out any meal moth eggs or weevils that might be in there.


it's long been well known that guinness isn't vegetarian because of the use of fish parts in the brewing process.

although apparently it's soon to be vegan Soon to be made without any fish guts, Guinness is going vegan


----------



## not-bono-ever (Feb 27, 2018)

pretty sure I have been offered beer with lard in it. cannot recall where though


----------



## Watermelon Man (Feb 27, 2018)

Spymaster said:


> Of course.



OK. I'll give you a few options... Option 1 and you are pretty much hitting every single vitamin, mineral, fibre and amino acid requirement.  It's 250g of carbs but you can add to that if you want more sweet potatoes..


Sweet potatoes baked 550g
Lentils - one small cup
Brocolli
Kale
Carrot

Put sweet potatoes in oven after pricking them etc for an hour.

Take the cup of lentils, add three cups of water. put in saucepan. Add a half teaspoon of turmeric, extra hot chilli powder, garam masala etc.  Whatever works for you.  I find extra hot chilli and turmeric is the best but sometimes like a garam masala on it's own.  Bring to boil and leave to simmer for about 30 minutes.  

Steam the veg for about 15 minutes, except for the kale - do that in just a few minutes. 

Pour the curried lentils in the sweet potatoes.  

If you are arsed about these sort of things.... That hits B1. B2, B3, B5, B6, folate, vit a, vit c, half of vit e, vit k, calcium, copper, iron, magnesium, manganese, phosphorus, potassium, zinc, (amino acids - cystine, histidine, isoleucine, leucine, lysine, methionine, phenylalanine, threonine, tryptophan, tyrosine and valine).  It's only 6.2 grams of fat. The omega 3-6 ratio is 1 : 3 (which is great).  The fibre is 48g - way over the recommended...   

It's a hefty meal.  You can add, take away to suit your appetite. 

You could swap sweet potatoes with jacket spuds or rice to suit.  Not as healthy but still tastes good and still carb heavy.  You could also swap lentils with mung beans but they take a bit longer to cook.  I prefer these two as they give a mushy texture. Piss easy to make. Tastes good and you'll feel great afterwards.


----------



## Spymaster (Feb 27, 2018)

Watermelon Man said:


> Pour the curried lentils in the sweet potatoes.


You mean put the sweet potatos into the curried lentils?

I reckon I could do a bit better with the spices, and you're missing garlic, but I'll certainly give it a go. Cheers. 

I assume the steamed veg just goes on the side?


----------



## 8ball (Feb 27, 2018)

Watermelon Man said:


> If you are arsed about these sort of things.... That hits B1. B2, B3, B5, B6, folate, vit a, vit c, half of vit e, vit k, calcium, copper, iron, magnesium, manganese, phosphorus, potassium, zinc, (amino acids - cystine, histidine, isoleucine, leucine, lysine, *methionine*, phenylalanine, threonine, tryptophan, tyrosine and valine).  It's only 6.2 grams of fat. The omega 3-6 ratio is 1 : 3 (which is great).  The fibre is 48g - way over the recommended...



Agree with you about the chilli and turmeric, but we're talking a pretty basic veggie curry.  Though steaming the veg to preserve vitamin content is a nice touch.

I'm a little sceptical about whether it's "hitting" the methionine (it has more than zero, if that's what you mean).

Peanuts!  (could put some nuts in there, or seeds - it seems possibly a bit low in fat).

Not that you need to get *every* nutrient in every meal, obviously.


----------



## Watermelon Man (Feb 27, 2018)

Spymaster said:


> You mean put the sweet potatos into the curried lentils?
> 
> I reckon I could do a bit better with the spices, and you're missing garlic, but I'll certainly give it a go. Cheers.
> 
> I assume the steamed veg just goes on the side?



No. I just pour the lentils in baked sweet potatoes. 

Yeah basic as fuck.. but still tasty. No doubt you could make this a lot better.

Let me know of upgrades.


----------



## Watermelon Man (Feb 27, 2018)

8ball said:


> Agree with you about the chilli and turmeric, but we're talking a pretty basic veggie curry.  Though steaming the veg to preserve vitamin content is a nice touch.
> 
> I'm a little sceptical about whether it's "hitting" the methionine (it has more than zero, if that's what you mean).
> 
> Peanuts!  (could put some peanuts in there, or seeds - it seems possibly a bit low in fat)



I think it's just under 100%? Something like 95%... that's not bad with one meal.

It is low fat. I tend to get my fat from ground flaxseed, nuts, oats and avocados.

For sure...re your updated edit. 

This is the meal I have if my diet/lifestyle has been a bit shit and I'm feeling a bit meh.. It works well as a get health back on track type of thing..


----------



## 8ball (Feb 27, 2018)

Watermelon Man said:


> I think it's just under 100%? Something like 95%... that's not bad with one meal.
> 
> It is low fat. I tend to get my fat from ground flaxseed, nuts, oats and avocados.



You mean the methionine is 100%?  I'm sceptical, but you did seem to be a bit down on protein earlier so maybe the protein target is very low (plus some people restrict methionine for various reasons).

I used to do something slightly similar and freeze for when I came home pissed.  Losing some vitamins that your recipe preserves with the steaming, but still way healthier than a kebab.


----------



## Watermelon Man (Feb 27, 2018)

8ball said:


> You mean the methionine is 100%?  I'm sceptical, but you did seem to be a bit down on protein earlier so maybe the protein target is very low (plus some people restrict methionine for various reasons).
> 
> I used to do something slightly similar and freeze for when I came home pissed.  Losing some vitamins that your recipe preserves with the steaming, but still way healthier than a kebab.



Not down on protein but it's over played in my view. Mainly by the two industries I don't support. Fibre more important to me. Protein good but I think 7% of total calories is more than enough. 

I'm probably more down on fats. Oil is a no no. Nuts, seeds in moderation. Same with avocados.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 27, 2018)

Watermelon Man said:


> Not down on protein but it's over played in my view. Mainly by the two industries I don't support. Fibre more important to me. Protein good but I think 7% of total calories is more than enough.
> 
> I'm probably more down on fats. Oil is a no no. Nuts, seeds in moderation. Same with avocados.



That’s *really* low on the protein.  I’m not sure most people would function well on that amount.  It’s a shade over half of what is often quoted as a minimum if I have my maths right (I mean quoted by regular health organisations rather than the crazy amounts on things like bodybuilding websites).

Combine that with the low fat and I think I’d be very hungry a lot of the time.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Feb 27, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> _Why?_ What moral obligation is it exactly, that makes killing another animal for food so _essentially_ bad?


What makes it ok to kill another animal when we have no need to? Especially given all the negatives associated with doing so. If you're happy with that then good for you. I believe it to be very wrong and anyone that is speaking out against this sort of injustice gets my support.



mojo pixy said:


> What is _our_ _level of sentience?_ Do you mean once they've invented gods or something? Because gods aside, why does any species have a _moral obligation_ not to kill other animals for any reason they see fit?


The level of sentience that can watch another creature having it's throat cut and bled to death and is repulsed by that and feels empathy. There are psychopaths who revel in that sort of carnage, however I believe that there are plenty of normally kind and compassionate people around who would not condone that savagery.



mojo pixy said:


> I get that your opinions are strong and that's fair enough but universalizing like that is in _my_ opinion a sort of religious pomposity. BTW, FYI, it's that what gets people's backs up. Even people who agree with a lot of what you post.


More irrelevant nonsense, which appears to be your thing. It's funny how you idiots twist things around so that the death cultists who are ok with mass killing are somehow the innocent victims, and those who speak out against it are the militant villains. Totally arse about face. If my perfectly valid opinion that it is wrong to kill animals bothers you so much then feel free to either present your own "better" opinion in a civilised manner or to simply ignore me. I cba with all the whiny complaining about stupid side issues eg terminology. I'm also not overly concerned about people getting their "backs up", I'm not here trying to win a popularity contest.  I will continue to post anything that I believe is of interest or relevant whether you like it or not, and if you don't, other posters and threads are available.



mojo pixy said:


> EtA, that quote code is right, so I reckon our @PabloSanchez just isn't keen on being quoted any more. Or tagged. Oh well.


Well you missed the one common denominator, it was only numpty posters that had the problem, nobody else had an issue. Just saying.

If I am going to be tagged or quoted, I'd rather that it was something of decent quality and intelligence as opposed to the rubbish you usually reply with, that would make a nice change.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Feb 27, 2018)

8ball said:


> Just that funny smell of activists pretending to be scientists, really. The kind you get from having seen similar before. I'm not saying its conclusive.
> 
> A look at their actual materials has a slicker, more corporate vibe than I'd expect, but goes a bit wrong by mixing the look of a private medical group's site with a woo-ey "SUPERCHARGE your gut bacteria with this ONE WEIRD TRICK!" style thing, among other tropes.
> 
> Then there are the links with PETA, which helps make sense of the above, to some degree.


So...as I suspected...nothing of any real substance behind your idle speculation and casting of negative aspersions. A cursory confirmation bias glance followed by dismissal, lazy journalist style.



8ball said:


> I wasn't taking your word for anything - you never said. For all I know he could be an undistinguished psychiatrist with a gift for self-promotion who is declaring himself an authority on diabetes.


 ...and something a bit more in depth than perusing the wiki entry might help to establish how credible he is or isn't. (for those that can be bothered)



8ball said:


> mojo pixy seemed to have the same issue. The common factor in both cases appears to be you.
> Though it's stopped happening now.


Wow...some incredible detective work right thurr, put on a dirty raincoat and you could pass for a second rate Columbo.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Feb 27, 2018)

Confirmation bias doesn't mean quite what you think it does, ps. That's not really an example of it.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 27, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> So...as I suspected...nothing of any real substance behind your idle speculation and casting of negative aspersions. A cursory confirmation bias glance followed by dismissal, lazy journalist style.



If only you had the wit to grasp how funny and unintentionally educational that post was. 

Or is it some kind of trap? 

I’ll go for the first one.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 27, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Confirmation bias doesn't mean quite what you think it does, ps. That's not really an example of it.



Gently put, but isn’t it a bit late in the game to be expressing surprise at this sort of thing?


----------



## Watermelon Man (Feb 27, 2018)

8ball said:


> That’s *really* low on the protein.  I’m not sure most people would function well on that amount.  It’s a shade over half of what is often quoted as a minimum if I have my maths right (I mean quoted by regular health organisations rather than the crazy amounts on things like bodybuilding websites).
> 
> Combine that with the low fat and I think I’d be very hungry a lot of the time.



Ha ha. No. Not even close. I have anything up to 3000 calories and get ALL of my vitamins, minerals, etc. I believe that if you lack the vitamins/minerals then you get hungry and eat more.  Not that bothered what health organisations say - I go by how I feel and results I've had over 3 years.


----------



## NoXion (Feb 27, 2018)

Watermelon Man said:


> That's what I don't understand about you pre vegans. Meat is meat right? Humans are meat. Dogs. Cats. Foxes. Rats. All meat... So why do you only eat certain animals?
> 
> Your nan and chicken taste the same.
> 
> Why do you eat certain dead animals and not others?



I haven't tried it myself, but I hear that human flesh actually tastes like pork.


----------



## mojo pixy (Feb 27, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> What makes it ok to kill another animal when we have no need to? Especially given all the negatives associated with doing so. If you're happy with that then good for you. I believe it to be very wrong and anyone that is speaking out against this sort of injustice gets my support.



Fair enough, no need to be a dick about it though is there?



PaoloSanchez said:


> The level of sentience that can watch another creature having it's throat cut and bled to death and is repulsed by that and feels empathy. There are psychopaths who revel in that sort of carnage, however I believe that there are plenty of normally kind and compassionate people around who would not condone that savagery.



You forgot the many millions who can probably watch an animal be slaughtered for food and feel nothing much except for a vague sense that it's kind of gross. They must be psychos, in your view. On the other hand, my lover has a shit every day and sometimes I even smell that, and it's gross. But I still kiss and hug them anyway.

tl;dr, life and death is pretty gross, who knew? _Inter faeces et urinam nascimur._



PaoloSanchez said:


> More irrelevant nonsense, which appears to be your thing. It's funny how you idiots twist things around so that the death cultists who are ok with mass killing are somehow the innocent victims, and those who speak out against it are the militant villains. Totally arse about face. If my perfectly valid opinion that it is wrong to kill animals bothers you so much then feel free to either present your own "better" opinion in a civilised manner or to simply ignore me. I cba with all the whiny complaining about stupid side issues eg terminology. I'm also not overly concerned about people getting their "backs up", I'm not here trying to win a popularity contest.  I will continue to post anything that I believe is of interest or relevant whether you like it or not, and if you don't, other posters and threads are available.



Blah, nice to have different opinions isn't it? Disapproval is optional. Keep at it if it makes you happy. It doesn't make you a better human.



PaoloSanchez said:


> Well you missed the one common denominator, it was only numpty posters that had the problem, nobody else had an issue. Just saying.
> 
> If I am going to be tagged or quoted, I'd rather that it was something of decent quality and intelligence as opposed to the rubbish you usually reply with, that would make a nice change.



So you've blocked tags (and quotes?) from people who challenge your bullshit. You don't block the posters who can't be arsed to, or the ones you feel you can handle. Understood.
EtA, I managed to quote @PabloSanchez .. tags not working though.


----------



## Watermelon Man (Feb 27, 2018)

NoXion said:


> I haven't tried it myself, but I hear that human flesh actually tastes like pork.



There you go. Bacon. Sausages. Pigs in blankets. You could combine a funeral with a barbecue.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 27, 2018)

Watermelon Man said:


> Ha ha. No. Not even close. I have anything up to 3000 calories and get ALL of my vitamins, minerals, etc. I believe that if you lack the vitamins/minerals then you get hungry and eat more.  Not that bothered what health organisations say - I go by how I feel and results I've had over 3 years.



Fair enough, people differ on their requirements.  I’m not sure about lack of vitamins and minerals actually making you hungry, but that’s a quibble.

I found loads of carbs was making me fat, but they weren’t as healthy as the stuff you’re probably eating, and the fibre is bound to help.

And with 7% cals from protein you’re not that far below the normal recommendation of 3,000 cals a day. 

If it works for you, it works for you.


----------



## Watermelon Man (Feb 27, 2018)

8ball said:


> Fair enough, people differ on their requirements.  I’m not sure about lack of vitamins and minerals actually making you hungry.
> 
> I found loads of carbs was making me fat, but they weren’t as healthy as the stuff you’re probably eating, and the fibre is bound to help.
> 
> ...



What do you mean by "carbs".  Most people haven't a clue what they mean when referring to carbs.  Not pointing the finger at you, but highly educated people tell me pork pies are carbs or cakes are carbs or biscuits etc.  What are you referring to?  What specific carb food made you fat?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Feb 27, 2018)

NoXion said:


> I haven't tried it myself, but I hear that human flesh actually tastes like pork.


Not called long pig for nothing.


----------



## NoXion (Feb 27, 2018)

Watermelon Man said:


> There you go. Bacon. Sausages. Pigs in blankets. You could combine a funeral with a barbecue.



Ritual cannibalism *has* been a feature of human funerary rites in some cultures, but I think that lab-grown human tissue would provide a more reliable supply that's safer for the end consumer.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 27, 2018)

Watermelon Man said:


> What do you mean by "carbs".  Most people haven't a clue what they mean when referring to carbs.  Not pointing the finger at you, but highly educated people tell me pork pies are carbs or cakes are carbs or biscuits etc.  What are you referring to?  What specific carb food made you fat?



Bread, pasta and rice were my nemeses.  Comfort food.


----------



## Watermelon Man (Feb 27, 2018)

8ball said:


> Bread, pasta and rice were my nemeses.  Comfort food.



What did you put on the bread, pasta and rice?


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Feb 27, 2018)

Watermelon Man said:


> What did you put on the bread, pasta and rice?


that's carbs man


----------



## 8ball (Feb 27, 2018)

Watermelon Man said:


> What did you put on the bread, pasta and rice?



Oh, the usual stuff, really.  Though sometimes stuff that was a bit over-processed (eg. those pasta sauces that you buy in the smallish serving sizes) plus the rice with curries and chilli and bread with almost everything ).


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Feb 27, 2018)

Lots of them and no exercise make you fat.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 27, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> Lots of them and no exercise make you fat.



That was my experience, certainly.

And pizza, forgot pizza (variant of bread, I guess, but combining the carbs with plenty of fat too).


----------



## Watermelon Man (Feb 27, 2018)

8ball said:


> Oh, the usual stuff, really.  Though sometimes stuff that was a bit over-processed (eg. those pasta sauces that you buy in the smallish serving sizes) plus the rice with curries and chilli and bread with almost everything ).



That's the thing with bread. As much as it is convenient and tastes great, it's heavily processed shite.  Also, butter/marge/cheese/ham - fat heavy shit goes on bread.  

Oily curries on rice.

Pasta with cheese?? 

I don't know, you aren't telling me much but I suspect that a lot of fat was going on the carbs.  

Fat makes you fat. 

The fat you eat is the fat you wear. 

I love carbs and probably eat about double the amount than I used to in my pre vegan days. Mainly fruit and starchy stuff, not so much processed stuff mind.  I'm leaner than I ever have been before but exercise a fair amount.  I'm getting on now but I'm leaner than I have been in 20 years for sure. That's on a high carb low fat diet.


----------



## Watermelon Man (Feb 27, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> Lots of them and no exercise make you fat.



Yes of course. If you smash in 4000 calories of just rice and sit around and do fuck all, you'll get fat.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Feb 27, 2018)

I'm no scientist but watching all 202 episodes of X files on bread vs watching it on eggs, well I would choose eggs.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Feb 27, 2018)

8ball said:


> That was my experience, certainly.
> 
> And pizza, forgot pizza (variant of bread, I guess, but combining the carbs with plenty of fat too).


Yeah big pizza fan here, eating a whole co-op delicious one whilst pregnant puts you out of action for 24hrs. Facts.


----------



## Watermelon Man (Feb 27, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> I'm no scientist but watching all 202 episodes of X files on bread vs watching it on eggs, well I would choose eggs.



I'd take bread over eggs for sure.  Eggs = fast lane to heart disease. Bread = middle lane to serious stomach problems.  Both shite to be fair but supermarket eggs = murder.


----------



## Watermelon Man (Feb 27, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> Yeah big pizza fan here, eating a whole co-op delicious one whilst pregnant puts you out of action for 24hrs. Facts.



That ain't carbs tho...

Pizza - 52% fat.
33% carbs
15% protein.

Pizza is fat, not carbs...


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Feb 27, 2018)

Watermelon Man said:


> I'd take bread over eggs for sure.  Eggs = fast lane to heart disease. Bread = middle lane to serious stomach problems.  Both shite to be fair but supermarket eggs = murder.


Are you Morrisey? What's your take on  immigration?


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Feb 27, 2018)

Watermelon Man said:


> That ain't carbs tho...
> 
> Pizza - 52% fat.
> 33% carbs
> ...


Pretty sure it's fat and carbs, professor


----------



## NoXion (Feb 27, 2018)

Watermelon Man said:


> Fat makes you fat.
> 
> The fat you eat is the fat you wear.



Bollocks. I eat fat all the time, including saturated fats. I love cheese. I'm skinny as fuck.

Excess calories is what makes you fat, not the source of those calories. Saying "eating fat makes you fat" is as silly as saying "eating carbohydrates makes you carbohydrates".


----------



## 8ball (Feb 27, 2018)

Watermelon Man said:


> That's the thing with bread. As much as it is convenient and tastes great, it's heavily processed shite.  Also, butter/marge/cheese/ham - fat heavy shit goes on bread.
> 
> Oily curries on rice.
> 
> ...



Yep, carbs do tend to go with fat, but the major calorie overage was coming from the carbs.
Booze wasn't helping much either (cals on its own, then makes me crave the carbs - hence a curry similar to yours being one of my defenses ready in the fridge for coming home and getting the munchies).

Exercise was a problem at the time due to an illness which was getting me down and also nudging me toward the comfort food, and the booze, then more comfort food.

I'm not anti-carb but the fast-digesting kind in large amounts isn't a good fit for me.  I try to make more of them the kind you're eating.  I also disagree with people who have a problem with fruit because there is sugar in it.

I still probably eat too much bread.


----------



## Watermelon Man (Feb 27, 2018)

8ball said:


> Yep, carbs do tend to go with fat, but the major calorie overage was coming from the carbs.
> Booze wasn't helping much too (cals on its own, then makes me crave the carbs - hence a curry similar to yours being one of my defenses ready in the fridge for coming home and getting the munchies).
> 
> Exercise was a problem at the time due to an illness which was getting me down and also nudging me toward the comfort food, and the booze, then more comfort food.
> ...



I disagree with this.  Let's say you had two slices of bread with butter.  

That works out to be

55% fat
35% carbs
10% protein

That's not carbs. That's fat.


----------



## Watermelon Man (Feb 27, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> Pretty sure it's fat and carbs, professor



It's mostly fat..


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Feb 27, 2018)

This conversation is weeeeeird


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Feb 27, 2018)

The EVERYTHING IS FAT evangelism is a new one for me though, so I have learned something.


----------



## Watermelon Man (Feb 27, 2018)

8ball said:


> Yep, carbs do tend to go with fat, but the major calorie overage was coming from the carbs.
> Booze wasn't helping much either (cals on its own, then makes me crave the carbs - hence a curry similar to yours being one of my defenses ready in the fridge for coming home and getting the munchies).
> 
> Exercise was a problem at the time due to an illness which was getting me down and also nudging me toward the comfort food, and the booze, then more comfort food.
> ...



Fruit is the best. Low carbers are absolutely clueless, tired, easily fooled bellends that are damaging their health.  Seriously, I had a mate that went low carb, he lost shit loads of weight but you'd go down the pub and he'd be there with his gin or whatever, moaning about everything, going home before everyone else because he was so fucked from low energy. Who wants to be around someone like that, zero energy? Fuck knows what his insides looked like.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 27, 2018)

Watermelon Man said:


> I disagree with this.  Let's say you had two slices of bread with butter.
> 
> That works out to be
> 
> ...



I know, and I'm aware of a pro-carb stance as well as the valid point that a lot of carbs come with fat and the energy density difference often means the bulk of calories comes from the fat.  But I worked it all out at the time.  Fact is, there was too much fat too, but I was *really* heavy on the carbs, and where there was a choice of a lot of fat and almost no carb vs. the reverse, I'd consistently go for the reverse.


----------



## Watermelon Man (Feb 27, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> The EVERYTHING IS FAT evangelism is a new one for me though, so I have learners something.



No. Two slices of bread with butter is predominantly fat as in 55% of calories come from fat! I am not saying it's 100% fat, I'm saying it's predominantly fat.  Most people say ooooh bread made me fat, not realising that what they were consuming was predominantly fat as in over 50% of the calories..

it's pretty simple.  Maybe the fat has clogged up your arteries and blood supply to your brain....


----------



## NoXion (Feb 27, 2018)

It probably wouldn't kill low-carbers to have a slice of wholemeal bread once in a while, or have some porridge for breakfast.


----------



## Watermelon Man (Feb 27, 2018)

8ball said:


> I know, and I'm aware of a pro-carb stance as well as the valid point that a lot of carbs come with fat and the energy density difference often means the bulk of calories comes from the fat.  But I worked it all out at the time.  Fact is, there was too much fat too, but I was *really* heavy on the carbs, and where there was a choice of a lot of fat and almost no carb vs. the reverse, I'd consistently go for the reverse.



Maybe you need to write it all down, what you eat etc. I used to do that, but it's a bit of a pain in the arse to be fair. If you were ill though, it might help your health. I think you are right tho, processed carbs make me feel a bit shit too. Pasta makes me feel a bit sluggish.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 27, 2018)

Watermelon Man said:


> Fruit is the best. Low carbers are absolutely clueless, tired, easily fooled bellends that are damaging their health.  Seriously, I had a mate that went low carb, he lost shit loads of weight but you'd go down the pub and he'd be there with his gin or whatever, moaning about everything, going home before everyone else because he was so fucked from low energy. Who wants to be around someone like that, zero energy? Fuck knows what his insides looked like.



The carbs you're talking about have a very different effect compared to say, something like white bread, which metabolically isn't so far off just eating white sugar.  Feeling crap on that kind of stuff and then cutting fruit and veg to avoid carbs is very misguided.  Taking a very broad-brush approach on macro-nutrients can be a bit of a trap generally.  

Re: your mate, people who lose loads of weight also often have bugger all energy just due to their calories being too low.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 27, 2018)

Watermelon Man said:


> Maybe you need to write it all down, what you eat etc. I used to do that, but it's a bit of a pain in the arse to be fair. If you were ill though, it might help your health. I think you are right tho, processed carbs make me feel a bit shit too. Pasta makes me feel a bit sluggish.



I did for quite a while.  Got slightly obsessive for a bit.
You do need reasonable data to track things, because it's really easy to fool yourself if you rely on memory.


----------



## Watermelon Man (Feb 27, 2018)

NoXion said:


> It probably wouldn't kill low-carbers to have a slice of wholemeal bread once in a while, or have some porridge for breakfast.



Oats are fucking great. 70% carbs. 15% fat. 15% protein. Fair bit of selenium, iron and zinc in there too. 4 tablespoons of sugar on it and you are set for the morning.


----------



## editor (Feb 27, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> The EVERYTHING IS FAT evangelism is a new one for me though, so I have learned something.


Here's what it is: 



> A large slice of bread will offer a similar number of calories whether it’s made from refined white flour or whole grain flour, but the other nutrient components can be quite different. According to the USDA, a 38 g slice of white toast has 110 calories, 3.5 g protein, 1.5 g fat, 20.5 g carbohydrates, 1 g fiber and 1.8 g sugar. The same sized slice of whole wheat toast has 115 calories, 6 g protein, 1.5 g fat, 19.5 g carbohydrates, 3.5 g fiber and 2 g sugar. An equivalent slice of multigrain toast, which typically contains a variety of whole grains, has 110 calories, 5.5 g protein, 1.75 g fat, 18 g carbohydrates, 3 g fiber and 2.5 g sugar. A tablespoon of salted butter adds 100 calories and 11.5 g fat to a slice of toast.
> 
> Nutritional Value of Buttered Toast



I love bread, me. And toast. And sandwiches.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 27, 2018)

editor said:


> I love bread, me. And toast. And sandwiches.



Me too.
A bit too much (a lot too much).

I try to make sure it's the stuff with seeds and that in these days - at least get some better nutrition in with it.


----------



## NoXion (Feb 27, 2018)

Watermelon Man said:


> Oats are fucking great. 70% carbs. 15% fat. 15% protein. Fair bit of selenium, iron and zinc in there too. 4 tables spoons of sugar on it and you are set for the morning.


 I think that what makes oats great is not necessarily their carb content, but rather how quickly those carbs end up hitting the blood stream. I doubt that eating a bunch of white bread slices has the same effects.


----------



## Watermelon Man (Feb 27, 2018)

editor said:


> Here's what it is:
> 
> 
> 
> I love bread, me. And toast. And sandwiches.



Get on coconut oil on toast.  Tastes fucking great, but maybe not so good for the heart.


----------



## editor (Feb 27, 2018)

8ball said:


> Me too.
> A bit too much (a lot too much).
> 
> I try to make sure it's the stuff with seeds and that in these days - at least get some better nutrition in with it.


I chuffing all sorts of bread. I did a quick check to see how I'm doing: 

 



BMI healthy weight calculator - Health tools - NHS Choices


----------



## editor (Feb 27, 2018)

Watermelon Man said:


> Get on coconut oil on toast.  Tastes fucking great, but maybe not so good for the heart.


More than happy with butter/marg _taverymuch. _


----------



## Watermelon Man (Feb 27, 2018)

8ball said:


> I did for quite a while.  Got slightly obsessive for a bit.
> You do need reasonable data to track things, because it's really easy to fool yourself if you rely on memory.



Totally agree with you there.  I did it for a week and felt like I was developing some strange illness. It is good to kind of know where your deficiencies are. Mine seems to be vitamin E... think that's almonds, avocados? Avocado on toast works as well!


----------



## 8ball (Feb 27, 2018)

editor said:


> I chuffing all sorts of bread. I did a quick check to see how I'm doing:
> 
> View attachment 128639
> 
> ...



That's good going.

BMI 26.5 today for me. 
Was over 30 before I got cracking sorting it out.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 27, 2018)

Watermelon Man said:


> Totally agree with you there.  I did it for a week and felt like I was developing some strange illness. It is good to kind of know where your deficiencies are. Mine seems to be vitamin E... think that's almonds, avocados? Avocado on toast works as well!



Avocado on toast with marmite is my replacement comfort food.
The saltiness with the fat from the avocado... mmm.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Feb 27, 2018)

I tend to put stuff like tahini on my toast now but I love cheese. Think my medication is the main cause of my weight gain though. Boo


----------



## Watermelon Man (Feb 27, 2018)

8ball said:


> The carbs you're talking about have a very different effect compared to say, something like white bread, which metabolically isn't so far off just eating white sugar.  Feeling crap on that kind of stuff and then cutting fruit and veg to avoid carbs is very misguided.  Taking a very broad-brush approach on macro-nutrients can be a bit of a trap generally.
> 
> Re: your mate, people who lose loads of weight also often have bugger all energy just due to their calories being too low.



Mate, it's just Heart attack Atkins diet re packaged. Fast track to heart disease and all sorts of other shit. Most low carbers have to have about 5 coffees a day just to get by. Fuck that lifestyle. Eat loads of carbs, have loads of energy and get lean as fuck whilst doing it.


----------



## prunus (Feb 27, 2018)

Watermelon Man said:


> I'd take bread over eggs for sure.  Eggs = fast lane to heart disease. Bread = middle lane to serious stomach problems.  Both shite to be fair but supermarket eggs = murder.



I grow suspicious of your nutritionist qualifications.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 27, 2018)

Watermelon Man said:


> Mate, it's just Heart attack Atkins diet re packaged. Fast track to heart disease and all sorts of other shit. Most low carbers have to have about 5 coffees a day just to get by. Fuck that lifestyle. Eat loads of carbs, have loads of energy and get lean as fuck whilst doing it.



I haven't worked out proportions by exact calorie contributions, but I've found what works best so far seems to be medium-ish carb, medium-ish fat and high protein (keeping a decent amount of lean muscle bulk works best for a health condition I have, and I definitely feel fuller for longer with a decent amount of protein).  

By protein I don't mean "meat" (though I'm not veggie).

Cholesterol (LDL-C) is way lower than it was before, too.  Having changed a few things, it's hard to tell what's mostly contributing to that.


----------



## andysays (Feb 27, 2018)

NoXion said:


> Bollocks. I eat fat all the time, including saturated fats. I love cheese. I'm skinny as fuck.
> 
> Excess calories is what makes you fat, not the source of those calories. Saying "eating fat makes you fat" is as silly as saying "eating carbohydrates makes you carbohydrates".



Or eating "vegetables makes you a vegetable"...


----------



## Watermelon Man (Feb 27, 2018)

8ball said:


> I haven't worked out proportions by exact calorie contributions, but I've found what works best so far seems to be medium-ish carb, medium-ish fat and high protein (keeping a decent amount of lean muscle bulk works best for a health condition I have, and I definitely feel fuller for longer with a decent amount of protein).
> 
> Cholesterol (LDL-C) is way lower than it was before, too.  Having changed a few things, it's hard to tell what's mostly contributing to that.



Mate, it could be loads of things. Stress, sleep, exercise all sorts of stuff. Of course diet is important - junk food or heavy processed shite like bread is going to change your stress levels.


----------



## Watermelon Man (Feb 27, 2018)

prunus said:


> I grow suspicious of your nutritionist qualifications.



Eggs - high in cholesterol & saturated fat. Yeah there are good things about them. One egg hits over 10% of each amino acid, fair bit of selenium in there, b12 20%.

They are classed as "not healthy" by the American government... Do the research if you want. 

Fact is that supermarket eggs are murder.  If you buy eggs, you support murder of those little cute chicks! I'd sooner stick with bread.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 27, 2018)

In terms of blood cholesterol, the dietary cholesterol in eggs is largely off the hook these days, and the picture re: saturated fat and heart health is looking a bit more complex than it once did.

As far as I know, anyway.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Feb 27, 2018)

prunus said:


> ...nutritionist qualifications.



This is an oxymoron. In the UK a nutritionist is 'any cunt who calls himself a nutritionist' as there are no required qualifications and the title is not protected by the Health Professionals Council or any other legitimate professional association.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Feb 27, 2018)

Watermelon Man said:


> That ain't carbs tho...
> 
> Pizza - 52% fat.
> 33% carbs
> ...



This is pure hand-reared, artisan-baked, chef's special  in a red wine and tarragon reduction right here.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Feb 28, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> Fair enough, no need to be a dick about it though is there?


Pot, meet kettle. If anybody's being the dick here, it's most definitely you. 



mojo pixy said:


> You forgot the many millions who can probably watch an animal be slaughtered for food and feel nothing much except for a vague sense that it's kind of gross. They must be psychos, in your view.


Yeah, right...assuming that the "many millions" you've just invented actually exist and aren't yet another one of your bs "facts" that you frequently pull out of your arse.



mojo pixy said:


> On the other hand, my lover has a shit every day and sometimes I even smell that, and it's gross. But I still kiss and hug them anyway.
> 
> tl;dr, life and death is pretty gross, who knew? _Inter faeces et urinam nascimur. _



Hmm, so your partner taking a dump vs watching a pig get it's throat slit and dismembered. Yeah, exactly the same thing. I guess if it was 2 girls one cup style it might be a bit closer to some sort of "gross" parity.



mojo pixy said:


> Blah, nice to have different opinions isn't it? Disapproval is optional. Keep at it if it makes you happy. It doesn't make you a better human.


Once again you have an uncanny knack of making up complete strawman bullshit and then behaving as if it's the gospel truth.  Your repeated implication that I somehow "believe I'm a better human" because I express a valid opinion is yet another example of fantasy level fabrication. 



mojo pixy said:


> So you've blocked tags (and quotes?) from people who challenge your bullshit. You don't block the posters who can't be arsed to, or the ones you feel you can handle. Understood.
> EtA, I managed to quote @PabloSanchez .. tags not working though.


Again, more fantasy bollocks. No I haven't blocked anything or anybody. It's true that sometimes I won't respond when a persistent idiot troll quotes me with unfriendly nonsense and I cba to reply, but that's about it. Next time I would suggest that you get your facts straight before making stupid assumptions.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Feb 28, 2018)

On the subject of low carbs, just happened to be listening to this in the car on Sunday while on the way to Streatham Tesco's with my daughter...

BBC Radio 4 - The Food Programme, Eat to Run, Part 3

tl;dr Medical scientist Professor Tim Noakes apparently one of the influential people behind the idea of "carb loading" for endurance athletes completely changed his tune after 3 decades and now is firmly in the low carb camp. Although I don't think I agree with him, it was nonetheless quite an interesting listen.


----------



## mojo pixy (Feb 28, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Yeah, right...assuming that the "many millions" you've just invented actually exist and aren't yet another one of your bs "facts" that you frequently pull out of your arse.



Same as the masses of people you seem believe would give up meat_ if only they knew where it came from_ *rattle of pearls being clutched*


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Feb 28, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> Same as the masses of people you seem believe would give up meat_ if only they knew where it came from_ *rattle of pearls being clutched*


Yet another made up bullshit strawman. That's not a claim that I have made, however now that you mention it, I think it would be worth putting to the test. Lets see how many of your alleged "millions" would accept witnessing the gore of animal slaughter and then feel good about tucking into a juicy steak. 

No doubt there will be no empathy die hards who will be comfortable with that and even lick their lips, however my hunch is that there will be a significant number of compassionate folk who will be moved enough stop. 

How about we make things easier by setting up a corrective conditioning program seeing as us westerners have gone a bit soft and squeamish and moved a bit too far away from our more primitive ancestry... 


Spoiler








Set up some meat kindergartens where toddlers get used to ripping mice, rats, gerbils and hamsters to pieces. In infant schools they can then graduate to butchering bigger animals like guinea pigs, rabbits, ferrets. Secondary schools can slaughter cats, dogs, lambs and little ponies, so that by the time they're adult they'll be unfazed by blood and guts and fully carnage compliant. Sounds like a plan. If all of you meat sympathisers petition your local MP's perhaps we can get this through parliament in time for Brexit.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Feb 28, 2018)

'our more primitive ancestry'

This is the modern version of the colonialist mindset, isn't it? We know better. We will put an end to these savage practices.


----------



## mojo pixy (Feb 28, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Yet another made up bullshit strawman.



That's virtually a triple tautology, well done 

Sadly for some reason I'm unable to search your posts on this thread but I believe somewhere in that lot is the claim that meat is only as popular as it is because people don't really know how it's produced. I'm certain of it.

But, when I do this:



I get this:



...which is clearly false, so something is up. But no, I don't believe it is a straw man at all, in your case.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 28, 2018)

_Paulo_Sanchez, not Pablo.


----------



## klang (Feb 28, 2018)

8ball said:


> _Paulo_Sanchez, not Pablo.


Paolo.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 28, 2018)

littleseb said:


> Paolo.





 at self

Closer, though.


----------



## klang (Feb 28, 2018)

8ball said:


> at self
> 
> Closer, though.


slowly but steadily we're inching towards the truth on this thread.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Feb 28, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> ...which is clearly false, so something is up. But no, I don't believe it is a straw man at all, in your case.


Indeed,  something is definitely up. You appear to be a bit of a noob. Can't quote properly, can't search properly and can't substantiate any of your accusations. That's about the size of it. 

This book might be of use to you :-


----------



## Watermelon Man (Feb 28, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> On the subject of low carbs, just happened to be listening to this in the car on Sunday while on the way to Streatham Tesco's with my daughter...
> 
> BBC Radio 4 - The Food Programme, Eat to Run, Part 3
> 
> tl;dr Medical scientist Professor Tim Noakes apparently one of the influential people behind the idea of "carb loading" for endurance athletes completely changed his tune after 3 decades and now is firmly in the low carb camp. Although I don't think I agree with him, it was nonetheless quite an interesting listen.



Noakes knows his stuff about running.

Doesn't have a clue about nutrition.

I'm not sure why he's changed his mind? ££££££££££ Why would you promote a diet that causes heart disease and ends/ruins people's lives? £££££££££££ It's a mystery why Noakes has changed his mind. ££££££££££££££


----------



## Watermelon Man (Feb 28, 2018)

One general observation I've made on this thread.

Meat eaters = most angriest/stressed
Vegetarians = second most angriest/stressed
Vegans = most chilled out/intelligent

I suspect meatards and vegetarians have taken on the stress and suffering of the animal/animal juices that they consume.  That's why they are so uptight.  

It's clear the world needs more vegans.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Feb 28, 2018)

Watermelon Man said:


> Noakes knows his stuff about running.
> 
> Doesn't have a clue about nutrition.
> 
> I'm not sure why he's changed his mind? ££££££££££ Why would you promote a diet that causes heart disease and ends/ruins people's lives? £££££££££££ It's a mystery why Noakes has changed his mind. ££££££££££££££


You could be right maybe he did do it "fo the monays". He sounded sincere in the interview though, and I'll have to listen to it properly, but the gist I got was that he lost out quite a bit financially and professionally by changing his stance.


----------



## Watermelon Man (Feb 28, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> You could be right maybe he did do it "fo the monays". He sounded sincere in the interview though, and I'll have to listen to it properly, but the gist I got was that he lost out quite a bit financially and professionally by changing his stance.



Salesmen sound sincere. I like his work on running but he really hasn't a clue about nutrition. In his condition - diabetic - he really needs to go whole food plant based no oil.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Feb 28, 2018)

Watermelon Man said:


> It's clear the world needs more vegans.


We will get there....





_"I've seen the Promised Land. I may not get there with you. But I want you to know tonight, that we, as a people, will get to the Promised Land."_


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Feb 28, 2018)

Watermelon Man said:


> Salesmen sound sincere. I like his work on running but he really hasn't a clue about nutrition. In his condition - diabetic - he really needs to go whole food plant based no oil.


He could indeed be a conman, but I'm going to assume that he's being honest and legit. I don't know anything about him except what I heard in that interview. He appears to be well "credentialled" but I'll have to look into his work a bit more. I haven't taken the time to look into their claims properly however there does seem to be a fair amount of paleo "noise" about the place, and I like to think that I am open minded enough to at least listen to what they have to say and not dismiss it out of hand automatically. My initial feeling is that the whole low-carb thing just sounds wrong, but I'm not an expert and it could be that I'm the one that's wrong.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Feb 28, 2018)

Here was a recent "Talks At Google" debate between a leading low carb advocate and Kip Anderson (of What The Health fame) and a plant based doctor...


----------



## Watermelon Man (Feb 28, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> We will get there....
> 
> 
> 
> ...



There's kale for everyone in the Promised Land! Everyone. 

In fact, reducing world hunger was the reason that tipped me right onto the vegan path.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 28, 2018)

Watermelon Man said:


> Noakes knows his stuff about running.
> 
> Doesn't have a clue about nutrition.
> 
> I'm not sure why he's changed his mind? ££££££££££ Why would you promote a diet that causes heart disease and ends/ruins people's lives? £££££££££££ It's a mystery why Noakes has changed his mind. ££££££££££££££



This idea that anyone who disagrees with something you say or changes their mind from your point of view must have been paid off somehow doesn’t lend much credibility to your argument.

The idea of carb loading is falling out of fashion in various sporting circles based on research about how the body uses energy under various states of metabolic load.

Maybe still a good idea for some activities, but not for all of them.

On the subject of vegans being chilled out - once you’ve read more posts from the Dirty-Thraigo axis of over-caffeination I think you might re-assess things.

So far, to be fair, you’re the second vegan poster with a significant numbet of posts to buck the trend.


----------



## Watermelon Man (Feb 28, 2018)

8ball said:


> This idea that anyone who disagrees with something you say or changes their mind from your point of view must have been paid off somehow doesn’t lend much credibility to your argument.
> 
> The idea of carb loading is falling out of fashion in various sporting circles based on research about how the body uses energy under various states of metabolic load.
> 
> ...



Shit, am I after credibility to my argument? That's a game changer. I'm only on here to have fun and chat to people online.  I'm trying to think of any sport where energy isn't that important... darts maybe? It's difficult.


----------



## mojo pixy (Feb 28, 2018)

8ball said:


> _Paulo_Sanchez, not Pablo.





littleseb said:


> Paolo.



All 

Apologies, sorry about that.
I'll try a search later...


----------



## 8ball (Feb 28, 2018)

Watermelon Man said:


> Shit, am I after credibility to my argument? That's a game changer. I'm only on here to have fun and chat to people online.  I'm trying to think of any sport where energy isn't that important... darts maybe? It's difficult.



It’s not that energy isn’t important - just that for a lot of sports, especially involving endurance, the human body likes to rely on largely burning fat (there is almost always a mixture of fat and carbs being burned).


----------



## mojo pixy (Feb 28, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> This book might be of use to you :-



Maybe, maybe. But at least I can keep track of my arguments; here's your straw man back:



PaoloSanchez said:


> As I said earlier, I am well aware that there are some people (die hards?) who are not put off by death blood and guts, but there are also plenty that are...or at least would be if it wasn't hidden, so I don't believe I'm overestimating or underestimating anything tbh..


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Feb 28, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Yet another made up bullshit strawman. That's not a claim that I have made, however now that you mention it, I think it would be worth putting to the test. Lets see how many of your alleged "millions" would accept witnessing the gore of animal slaughter and then feel good about tucking into a juicy steak.



The 'gore' bit in the slaughter of cows generally comes after it's been rendered unconscious. If I were explaining that to kids, I'd say that it looks messy but that the animal was unconscious so it did not feel it.

The pig-gassing is less easily explained away, and I don't condone that. It's a practice whose banning I would fully support. I also do not support slaughter without pre-stunning.


----------



## xenon (Feb 28, 2018)

I have seen fish gutted. I have had my hand in the back of a prize winning cod’s head. I had to hold it up so my dad could take a picture. I eat fish.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Feb 28, 2018)

xenon said:


> I have seen fish gutted. I have had my hand in the back of a prize winning cod’s head. I had to hold it up so my dad could take a picture. I eat fish.


tbh I think ps's ideas on this are mostly projection. He himself is repulsed by the entire business so he assumes others would be too.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Feb 28, 2018)

xenon said:


> I have seen fish gutted. I have had my hand in the back of a prize winning cod’s head. I had to hold it up so my dad could take a picture. I eat fish.


Couldn't put the fucking worms on a hook though! I have eaten deid fishes eyes. Chewy!


----------



## Watermelon Man (Feb 28, 2018)

8ball said:


> It’s not that energy isn’t important - just that for a lot of sports, especially involving endurance, the human body likes to rely on largely burning fat (there is almost always a mixture of fat and carbs being burned).



ALL of my great (oh so great) sporting achievements have been after serious carb loading, even mad amounts of skittles. 

All my shit performances have been after high fat food. 

I'd go so far as to say... I could probably complete 5k quicker after 10 pints the night before than eating a high (above 50% from calories ) fat diet... like bread and butter which as we've learned is over 50% fat. Or deep fried chips.

I would run probably 2 minutes faster with the right carbs on board. 

Noakes is clueless.


----------



## xenon (Feb 28, 2018)

.


----------



## xenon (Feb 28, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> tbh I think ps's ideas on this are mostly projection. He himself is repulsed by the entire business so he assumes others would be too.





HoratioCuthbert said:


> Couldn't put the fucking worms on a hook though! I have eaten deid fishes eyes. Chewy!




Ha, yeah. I never done the baiting. Well or the actual fishing TBH. After my dad came home from a sea fishing trip. Things like 3 (dead) conger eel in the bath waiting to be gutted. Him holding bits up and saying this is the liver etc.

Like most meat eaters on this thread, Had I / we been raised on a farm, I think we'd would be relatively sanguine about being close to butchery. Assuming humain as possible conditions.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Feb 28, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> Maybe, maybe. But at least I can keep track of my arguments; here's your straw man back:


More crap I'm afraid. As you pride yourself on being a nitpicking bit of a dick, you should learn to pay a bit more attention to detail when you're desperately trying to pick holes in my posts.


----------



## xenon (Feb 28, 2018)

Hm I should change my tag line. I'ts nothing to do with food.


----------



## mojo pixy (Feb 28, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> More crap I'm afraid. As you pride yourself on being a nitpicking bit of a dick, you should learn to pay a bit more attention to detail when you're desperately trying to pick holes in my posts.



Not even wrong.


----------



## tompinch (Feb 28, 2018)

Watermelon Man said:


> ALL of my great (oh so great) sporting achievements have been after serious carb loading, even mad amounts of skittles.
> 
> All my shit performances have been after high fat food.
> 
> ...



A 5k run is not an endurance sport though, and therefore of course your stored glycogen will be used as the primary energy source.

Wasn’t it 8ball’s point that endurance sports ultimately burn stored body fat because once the carb stores get depleted, the body gets its fuel from its fat reserves?


----------



## VeganMight (Feb 28, 2018)

The problem is, vegans _are_ morally superior to carnists and no amount of pandering to their feeilings will change that - Anyone who knowingly participates in the carnist holocaust is a murderer - Morally if not legally.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 28, 2018)

Watermelon Man said:


> ALL of my great (oh so great) sporting achievements have been after serious carb loading, even mad amounts of skittles.
> 
> All my shit performances have been after high fat food.
> 
> ...



I can't dispute what works for you.  For me, (I’m not an athlete or sportsperson) I train best fasted.  Mixture of cardio and resistance usually.

Even small amounts of food in the few hours before a gym sesh adversely affect my performance.

Might just be how my body handles sugar, other members of my family are similar in this regard.  If I take in a load of carbs I get a crash about 90 mins later.  Tests show no diabetes-type issues.

It’s entirely tangential to the subject of veganism, obv.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 28, 2018)

VeganMight said:


> The problem is, vegans _are_ morally superior to carnists and no amount of pandering to their feeilings will change that - Anyone who knowingly participates in the carnist holocaust is a murderer - Morally if not legally.



The lurkers are kind of different to what I expected.  Then again, I suppose these are the least reticent.


----------



## VeganMight (Feb 28, 2018)

It doesn't matter about athletic performance or anything like that - Even if you have to sacrifice your own health in order to avoid participating in the carnist holocaust, that's a sacrifice worth making.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 28, 2018)

VeganMight said:


> It doesn't matter about athletic performance or anything like that - Even if you have to sacrifice your own health in order to avoid participating in the carnist holocaust, that's a sacrifice worth making.



That’s the spirit!


----------



## VeganMight (Feb 28, 2018)

8ball said:


> The lurkers are kind of different to what I expected.  Then again, I suppose these are the least reticent.



What are you trying to say?


----------



## VeganMight (Feb 28, 2018)

8ball said:


> That’s the spirit!



Thank you!


----------



## 8ball (Feb 28, 2018)

VeganMight said:


> What are you trying to say?



I’d assumed the axis of DirtyThraigo was something of an anomaly.  Possibly overly influenced by the vegans I know personally.

Sampling error abounds.


----------



## VeganMight (Feb 28, 2018)




----------



## Spymaster (Feb 28, 2018)

VeganMight said:


> The problem is, vegans _are_ morally superior to carnists and no amount of pandering to their feeilings will change that - Anyone who knowingly participates in the carnist holocaust is a murderer - Morally if not legally.


Yay!


----------



## VeganMight (Feb 28, 2018)

Thank you.


----------



## VeganMight (Feb 28, 2018)

Although, reading some of your earlier replies to this thread, I'd say you were an "enthusiastic" participant to the carnist holocaust.


----------



## Spymaster (Feb 28, 2018)

You are very welcome! 

This thread needed freshening up


----------



## Old Gergl (Mar 1, 2018)

My stomach is a graveyard


----------



## Spymaster (Mar 1, 2018)

VeganMight said:


> Although, reading some of your earlier replies to this thread, I'd say you were an "enthusiastic" participant to the carnist holocaust.


Guilty as charged


----------



## VeganMight (Mar 1, 2018)

Don't take the mick, there are issues here that need to be resolved.


----------



## VeganMight (Mar 1, 2018)

Old Gergl said:


> My stomach is a graveyard



And you find it a matter to joke about? As I'm sure the slave "owners" did.


----------



## 8ball (Mar 1, 2018)

VeganMight said:


> Don't take the mick, there are issues here that need to be resolved.



A lot of meat eaters on this thread have issues with the concept of “carnism”, but a lot of vegans on this thread seem to have not quite grasped what the word means.


----------



## Opera Buffa (Mar 1, 2018)

I think I'm a morally better version of _myself_ for being vegan. The attendant fear and suffering in slaughterhouses is unbearable to me now.

But none of my friends and family are vegan and I don't think I morally better than _them_. I know that they are ignorant or uncaring about the harm they do.

So I don't do it to look down on other people, I don't look down on other people, but I need to do it to be comfortable with myself.


----------



## 8ball (Mar 1, 2018)

Opera Buffa said:


> I think I'm a morally better version of _myself_ for being vegan. The attendant fear and suffering in slaughterhouses is unbearable to me now.



Ignorant or uncaring, as opposed to having a different worldview that leads them to honestly disagree?


----------



## VeganMight (Mar 1, 2018)

Opera Buffa said:


> I think I'm a morally better version of _myself_ for being vegan. The attendant fear and suffering in slaughterhouses is unbearable to me now.
> 
> But none of my friends and family are vegan and I don't think I morally better than _them_. I know that they are ignorant or uncaring about the harm they do.
> 
> So I don't do it to look down on other people, I don't look down on other people, but I need to do it to be comfortable with myself.


 
You should look down on them - They're participating in wholly unnecessary slaughter.


----------



## VeganMight (Mar 1, 2018)

8ball said:


> Ignorant or uncaring, as opposed to having a different worldview that leads them to honestly disagree?



It doesn't matter about "worldview" or "agreement" or any cosy nonsense like that - What matters is whether or not you choose to participate in what amounts to a wholesale holocaust of sentient living creatures.


----------



## 8ball (Mar 1, 2018)

VeganMight said:


> You should look down on them - They're participating in wholly unnecessary slaughter.



This is where it starts to look like your apparent interest in the welfare of animals is a proxy for a narcissistic quest for a sense of personal purity and virtue.


----------



## 8ball (Mar 1, 2018)

VeganMight said:


> It doesn't matter about "worldview" or "agreement" or any cosy nonsense like that - What matters is whether or not you choose to participate in what amounts to a wholesale holocaust of sentient living creatures.



The word "holocaust" is where the surface is shown as scratched here.


----------



## VeganMight (Mar 1, 2018)

8ball said:


> This is where it starts to look like your apparent interest in the welfare of animals is a proxy for a narcissistic quest for a sense of personal purity and virtue.



So not participating in a holocaust of animals is "narcissistic"? Please.


----------



## VeganMight (Mar 1, 2018)

8ball said:


> The word "holocaust" is where the surface is shown as scratched here.



A few million people died in the WW2 holocaust - A few million animals die _every day_ to satisfy the appetites of gluttons - I make no apology for comparing the two. In fact, the animal holocaust is, objectively, worse.


----------



## Spymaster (Mar 1, 2018)

VeganMight said:


> ... there are issues here that need to be resolved.


Absolutely. Kidnapping, torture, slavery, and murder, for starters ...


----------



## VeganMight (Mar 1, 2018)

Spymaster said:


> Absolutely. Kidnapping, torture, slavery, and murder, for starters.



What are you talking about? Unless you're talking about the forcible imprisonment of animals for your consumption? But I doubt you have that much awareness, looking at your previous posts on this thread.


----------



## 8ball (Mar 1, 2018)

VeganMight said:


> A few million people died in the WW2 holocaust - A few million animals die _every day_ to satisfy the appetites of gluttons - I make no apology for comparing the two. In fact, the animal holocaust is, objectively, worse.



Gluttons?  It's very easy to be a vegan glutton.
The religious terms that bubble to the surface are interesting.


----------



## Spymaster (Mar 1, 2018)

VeganMight said:


> Unless you're talking about the forcible imprisonment of animals for your consumption?


That's _exactly_ what I'm talking about.


----------



## 8ball (Mar 1, 2018)

VeganMight said:


> What are you talking about? Unless you're talking about the forcible imprisonment of animals for your consumption? But I doubt you have that much awareness, looking at your previous posts on this thread.



I kind of doubt you've read more than a small selection.


----------



## VeganMight (Mar 1, 2018)

8ball said:


> Gluttons?  It's very easy to be a vegan glutton.
> The religious terms that bubble to the surface are interesting.



Why are they "interesting"? People stuff themselves with the remains of _other living creatures_? And you find that "interesting"? Are you a psychopath? (Redundant question because you won't know if you are one).


----------



## VeganMight (Mar 1, 2018)

Spymaster said:


> That's _exactly_ what I'm talking about.



And how do you feel about that?


----------



## Spymaster (Mar 1, 2018)

It's complicated


----------



## 8ball (Mar 1, 2018)

VeganMight said:


> Why are they "interesting"? People stuff themselves with the remains of _other living creatures_? And you find that "interesting"? Are you a psychopath? (Redundant question because you won't know if you are one).



Some psychopaths have more than an inkling.
If you think the majority of people are psychopaths, the issue may lie with you.

What is interesting to me is the overlaps that some vegan phrasings of arguments have with fundamentalist religious movements.

I should point out that this is not universal.  I've had quite a few productive exchanges with vegans on this thread.  Including with the ones who sometimes come out with things that look quite barking.


----------



## VeganMight (Mar 1, 2018)

We're not talking about the "in a relationship?" question on Facebook, we're talking about your participation in the deliberate slaughter of defenceless animals.

That was Spymaster  btw in response to "it's complicated".


----------



## 8ball (Mar 1, 2018)

VeganMight said:


> That was Spymaster  btw in response to "it's complicated".



I got that.
It was neatly formulated.


----------



## xenon (Mar 1, 2018)

So, another 30 pages by the weekend then.


----------



## 8ball (Mar 1, 2018)

xenon said:


> So, another 30 pages by the weekend then.



15


----------



## xenon (Mar 1, 2018)

They stuff themselves. Not you know, just eat, like a normal human. These are morally inferior gluttons, stuffing their faces with the products of a daily holocaust.


----------



## VeganMight (Mar 1, 2018)

8ball said:


> Some psychopaths have more than an inkling.
> If you think the majority of people are psychopaths, the issue may lie with you.
> 
> What is interesting to me is the overlaps that some vegan phrasings of arguments have with fundamentalist religious movements.
> ...




I don't think the majority of people are psychopaths, I believe the majority of people are idiots led to participate in the carnist holocaust by psychopaths who are blinded by their commitment to their own greed to the obscenity of the "industry" that they are in - One day people will look at the animal holocaust in much the same way they view the idea of children being forced into prostitution today.


----------



## xenon (Mar 1, 2018)

.


----------



## xenon (Mar 1, 2018)

8ball said:


> 15


Yeah, probably closer. The morning crew might have a go though.


----------



## VeganMight (Mar 1, 2018)

xenon said:


> They stuff themselves. Not you know, just eat, like a normal human. These are morally inferior gluttons, stuffing their faces with the products of a daily holocaust.



It's _not_ normal to eat the flesh of another.


----------



## xenon (Mar 1, 2018)

VeganMight said:


> It's _not_ normal to eat the flesh of another.



I don't think you know what normal means. Note, I'm not saying vegans are abnormal but claiming meat eating isn't normal... You think it's perverse. But it's clearly normal. A normative practise in much of the world since forever.


----------



## VeganMight (Mar 1, 2018)

Don't try to confuse the issue with your "scientific" terms - It's obscene to eat the flesh of another - In future years, it'll be looked upon in much the same way as cannibalism is now.


----------



## Spymaster (Mar 1, 2018)

VeganMight said:


> One day people will look at the animal holocaust in much the same way they view the idea of children being forced into prostitution today.


_Quite reasonably_, imo.


----------



## 8ball (Mar 1, 2018)

VeganMight said:


> I don't think the majority of people are psychopaths, I believe the majority of people are idiots led to participate in the carnist holocaust by psychopaths who are blinded by their commitment to their own greed to the obscenity of the "industry" that they are in - One day people will look at the animal holocaust in much the same way they view the idea of children being forced into prostitution today.



The claims on the glorious future predicated on your inevitable victory is also something that has turned up a few times on this thread.
It's very much infused with Christian tropes.  Do you see the enlightenment coming within your own lifetime?


----------



## VeganMight (Mar 1, 2018)

Why are we human? If not to have choices - And what could be a more noble choice than to choose not to consume the flesh of an living, breathing, thinking animal?


----------



## 8ball (Mar 1, 2018)

VeganMight said:


> Don't try to confuse the issue with your "scientific" terms - It's obscene to eat the flesh of another - In future years, it'll be looked upon in much the same way as cannibalism is now.



I think people have had enough of experts.


----------



## 8ball (Mar 1, 2018)

VeganMight said:


> Why are we human?



There is no why.


----------



## VeganMight (Mar 1, 2018)

8ball said:


> The claims on the glorious future predicated on your inevitable victory is also something that has turned up a few times on this thread.
> It's very much infused with Christian tropes.  Do you see the enlightenment coming within your own lifetime?



Yes, I see myself as enlightened - _Because I am enlightened_. In much the same way the abolitionists were enlightened. What of it?


----------



## VeganMight (Mar 1, 2018)

8ball said:


> I think people have had enough of experts.



You were the one bringing "science" into the debate.


----------



## xenon (Mar 1, 2018)

VeganMight said:


> Don't try to confuse the issue with your "scientific" terms - It's obscene to eat the flesh of another - In future years, it'll be looked upon in much the same way as cannibalism is now.



Don't try to confuse you with facts. OK.


----------



## VeganMight (Mar 1, 2018)

8ball said:


> There is no why.



Obviously there is no "why", except the "why" we have the power to make for ourselves - And, AFAIC, that "why", is to do what we can to prevent the continuation of the animal holocaust.


----------



## xenon (Mar 1, 2018)

Do militant vegans dream of electric sheep?


----------



## VeganMight (Mar 1, 2018)

xenon said:


> Don't try to confuse you with facts. OK.


 
Carry on consuming the cooked flesh of once living, breathing creatures - Rest assured that not too far into the future, your desires will be considered no less abhorrent than those of the paedophile.


----------



## VeganMight (Mar 1, 2018)

xenon said:


> Do militant vegans dream of electric sheep?



Oh he makes jokes about the carnage he participates in. Lovely.


----------



## xenon (Mar 1, 2018)

pfft


----------



## Spymaster (Mar 1, 2018)

VeganMight said:


> Obviously there is no "why", except the "why" we have the power to make for ourselves - And, AFAIC, that "why", is to do what we can to prevent the continuation of the animal holocaust.


I think you might be onto something with the holocaust schiz. For _some_ reason I've never looked at it like that.


----------



## 8ball (Mar 1, 2018)

VeganMight said:


> You were the one bringing "science" into the debate.



I happen to think reality has a bearing on things generally.
I'm aware that this has always been a minority view, though.


----------



## Opera Buffa (Mar 1, 2018)

xenon said:


> I don't think you know what normal means. Note, I'm not saying vegans are abnormal but claiming meat eating isn't normal... You think it's perverse. But it's clearly normal. A normative practise in much of the world since forever.



He means it isn't _right_. Public morality and what is normative is constantly changing - 200 years ago all the men on this thread would have considered it morally right and normative to beat or rape their wives.

If we're white British, we would have considered ourselves morally superior to black people or the Irish.

Popular morality _changes_, the norm changes, and conservatives don't want to let go of their old, incorrect views.

Veganism will be huge in 200 years time. But it will take that long for popular perceptions to turn around.


----------



## 8ball (Mar 1, 2018)

VeganMight said:


> Yes, I see myself as enlightened - _Because I am enlightened_. In much the same way the abolitionists were enlightened. What of it?



Good feeling, yeah?


----------



## Opera Buffa (Mar 1, 2018)

8ball said:


> Ignorant or uncaring, as opposed to having a different worldview that leads them to honestly disagree?



Trump supporters 'honestly disagree' with me, that doesn't add any credence to their opinions.


----------



## 8ball (Mar 1, 2018)

Opera Buffa said:


> Trump supporters 'honestly disagree' with me, that doesn't add any credence to their opinions.



Absolutely.  But it doesn't mean they're being paid to not agree with you.


----------



## VeganMight (Mar 1, 2018)

Spymaster said:


> I think you might be onto something with the holocaust schiz. For _some_ reason I've never seen it like that.



No, I know when I'm being ridiculed - But I'm right - All Lives matter, whether human or animal - And how else can one describe the grotesque death-factories that we call abattoirs apart from a holocaust? It's not hyperbolic to call it a holocaust, it's underestimating the seriousness to compare the animal holocaust with the WW2 holocaust.


----------



## Opera Buffa (Mar 1, 2018)

8ball said:


> Absolutely.  But it doesn't mean they're being paid to not agree with you.



Not trying to be thick here but I don't get what this means, can you rephrase it?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Mar 1, 2018)

VeganMight said:


> Why are they "interesting"? People stuff themselves with the remains of _other living creatures_? And you find that "interesting"? Are you a psychopath? (Redundant question because you won't know if you are one).


So much to pick from but I'll go for this.

Stuffing oneself with the remains of sentient (I'll be kind and edit you here, you mean sentient no doubt) beings is worthy of italics. Just saying the words is enough to demonstrate its wrongness. It is an analytic truth, for you and for others on here too.


----------



## VeganMight (Mar 1, 2018)

8ball said:


> Good feeling, yeah?



No, not at all - It horrifies me that so many so-called "reasonable" people can seemingly willingly participate  (or at least participate by doing nothing to prevent it) in a holocaust.


----------



## 8ball (Mar 1, 2018)

Opera Buffa said:


> Not trying to be thick here but I don't get what this means, can you rephrase it?



There was the stuff earlier about the scientist who had changed his mind about whether carb loading was necessarily a good idea.
It was assumed among some vegan posters that he had been paid off.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Mar 1, 2018)

Opera Buffa said:


> He means it isn't _right_. Public morality and what is normative is constantly changing - 200 years ago all the men on this thread would have considered it morally right and normative to beat or rape their wives.
> 
> If we're white British, we would have considered ourselves morally superior to black people or the Irish.
> 
> ...


None of those comparisons you've chosen is a) accurate or b) comparable.


----------



## Opera Buffa (Mar 1, 2018)

This is quite good. It's an hour long. It was shown on BBC2 about fifteen years ago, I remember watching it at the time.

I think it's a little pro-vegan/veggie, but still a fairly neutral look at the meat industry. I cannot be a part of this, what happens. It's horrific.


----------



## Spymaster (Mar 1, 2018)

VeganMight said:


> ... how else can one describe the grotesque death-factories that we call abattoirs apart from a holocaust?


Concentration camps?


----------



## VeganMight (Mar 1, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> So much to pick from but I'll go for this.
> 
> Stuffing oneself with the remains of sentient (I'll be kind and edit you here, you mean sentient no doubt) beings is worthy of italics. Just saying the words is enough to demonstrate its wrongness. It is an analytic truth, for you and for others on here too.



Actually _say_ something, will you? *"It is an analytic truth, for you and for others on here too." What's that actually supposed to mean? *It's self evidently wrong to eat animals - That's what I'm saying & there's no need to bring all your wibble into it.


----------



## Spymaster (Mar 1, 2018)

Are you in America VeganMight ?


----------



## 8ball (Mar 1, 2018)

VeganMight said:


> No, not at all - It horrifies me that so many so-called "reasonable" people can seemingly willingly participate  (or at least participate by doing nothing to prevent it) in a holocaust.



I think you protest too much here.
Good feeling to be righteous crusader before his time.

Don't you think?

Obviously the tortured stance is part of the deal.
The fight is always better than the victory.


----------



## VeganMight (Mar 1, 2018)

Spymaster said:


> Concentration camps?



How can you be aware of the truth and yet ridicule it? Have you deliberately sabotaged your own moral compass?


----------



## VeganMight (Mar 1, 2018)

8ball said:


> I think you protest too much here.
> Good feeling to be righteous crusader before his time.
> 
> Don't you think?
> ...



Keep telling yourself that. As I'm sure, the concentration camp guards told themselves - Which side do you want to be on?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Mar 1, 2018)

VeganMight said:


> How can you be aware of the truth and yet ridicule it? Have you deliberately sabotaged your own moral compass?


Among the things you have wrong is how stupid you think everyone else is. The truth is far worse than that.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Mar 1, 2018)

.


----------



## VeganMight (Mar 1, 2018)

Spymaster said:


> Are you in America VeganMight ?



No, thankfully, I'm not in that bovine death factory called America.


----------



## Opera Buffa (Mar 1, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> None of those comparisons you've chosen is a) accurate or b) comparable.



My comparisons were as to what was considered morally right or at best 'not that big of a deal' by a contemporary population. It is an accurate, comparable assessment, you're just too thick-necked to acknowledge it. But your great-grandchildren will, and they'll agree with me, and be terribly embarrassed about your old-fashioned attitudes.

Your opinions will mean nothing more than my racist grandfathers'.


----------



## VeganMight (Mar 1, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Among the things you have wrong is how stupid you think everyone else is. The truth is far worse than that.



What do you mean?


----------



## VeganMight (Mar 1, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> I don't agree that vegans are necessarily better people, however I do believe that not killing animals unnecessarily IS a morally superior stance when compared to killing animals unnecessarily.
> 
> Some of the more sensitive members get their heckles raised at such a perfectly logical and reasonable suggestion, but that's just too fucking bad. I also agree that there is a bit too much pandering to meat eaters feelings. Apparently even using the word "carnist" is some kind of deadly ninja slur and deeply offensive.
> 
> ...



They are death cultists and murderes & I won't let ideas of public "decency" silence me from saying what I know to be true.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Mar 1, 2018)

Meat should come with a warning like fags.  Plain packet and a picture of a terrified animal about to die on it.


----------



## Spymaster (Mar 1, 2018)

VeganMight said:


> No, thankfully, I'm not in that bovine death factory called America.


Cool. But I was more concerned that you may have a 5+ hour time advantage over me.

Where are you posting from (to the nearest planet)?


----------



## 8ball (Mar 1, 2018)

VeganMight said:


> Keep telling yourself that. As I'm sure, the concentration camp guards told themselves - Which side do you want to be on?



Regardless of my sympathy with some of your arguments, those with absolute confidence in their virtue and their condemnation of the “other” are exactly those whose side I don’t want to be on.


----------



## VeganMight (Mar 1, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Meat should come with a warning like fags.  Plain packet and a picture of a terrified animal about to die on it.



 Yes it should - Even though I know you're taking the mick.


----------



## VeganMight (Mar 1, 2018)

Spymaster said:


> Cool. But I was more concerned that you may have a 5+ hour time advantage over me.
> 
> Where are you posting from (to the nearest planet)?


 It's 0121 here. What else do you want to know? Carnist.


----------



## VeganMight (Mar 1, 2018)

8ball said:


> Regardless of my sympathy with some of your arguments, those with absolute confidence in their virtue and their condemnation of the “other” are exactly those whose side I don’t want to be on.


We don't want equivocators. Your morality may wobble - Like your spine.


----------



## xenon (Mar 1, 2018)

Opera Buffa said:


> He means it isn't _right_. Public morality and what is normative is constantly changing - 200 years ago all the men on this thread would have considered it morally right and normative to beat or rape their wives.
> 
> If we're white British, we would have considered ourselves morally superior to black people or the Irish.
> 
> ...



 Of course norms change.  Your mad and inaccurate analogy aside.   But meat  is  eat  across societies, across a diverse range of peoples .  For that to change wholesale, you would need to see drastic and not necessarily good changes.


----------



## Spymaster (Mar 1, 2018)

VeganMight said:


> It's 0121 here. What else do you want to know? Carnist.


Curious way for a vegan to sign-off a post.

Is it snowing there?


----------



## VeganMight (Mar 1, 2018)

xenon said:


> Of course norms change.  You’re mad and inaccurate analogy aside.   But mea  is  eat  across societies, across a diverse range of peoples .  For that to change wholesale, you would need to see drastic and not necessarily good changes.


 You idiot, murder was practiced across societies until very recently - In some places it still is. Shall we go back to that? Roll about in our own, self created filth?


----------



## VeganMight (Mar 1, 2018)

Spymaster said:


> Curious way for a vegan to sign-off a post.
> 
> Is it snowing there?



It's now 0130. I'm not sure why you find that curious. And no, it has been snowing, but not any more.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Mar 1, 2018)

.


----------



## Spymaster (Mar 1, 2018)

VeganMight said:


> ... murder was practiced across societies until very recently ...


Good job they've stopped that shit now


----------



## 8ball (Mar 1, 2018)

VeganMight said:


> We don't want equivocators. Your morality may wobble - Like your spine.



My morality is sound enough.  I’m happy enough outside the True Believer camp.  Enjoy the kool-aid, I hear it has B12 in it.


----------



## VeganMight (Mar 1, 2018)

xenon said:


> Of course norms change.  You’re mad and inaccurate analogy aside.   But mea  is  eat  across societies, across a diverse range of peoples .  For that to change wholesale, you would need to see drastic and *not necessarily good changes*.


 
Any change that reduces "meat" consumption is, by definition, a good change.


----------



## VeganMight (Mar 1, 2018)

8ball said:


> My morality is sound enough.  I’m happy enough outside the True Believer camp.  Enjoy the kool-aid, I hear it has B12 in it.



All you can do is ridicule because you have no counter argument.


----------



## 8ball (Mar 1, 2018)

VeganMight said:


> All you can do is ridicule because you have no counter argument.



Counter argument to what?

You never came up with anything resembling an argument.  A casual observer might think you were employed by KFC’s marketing department.


----------



## Spymaster (Mar 1, 2018)

VeganMight said:


> It's now 0130.


It was 0121 a minute ago. Are you Dr Who?


----------



## VeganMight (Mar 1, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> *Well I stop short of calling the majority of the meat eating public murderers directly because they'll start crying*, and I also think there is a fair amount of ignorance which allows enables the slaughter to continue which means that many of them won't see themselves as murderers, even though it is their choice that creates the demand for murdered animals.



Your choice but I will call them murderers precisely _because_ they'll start crying - Confront them with the atrocities they commit. If they don't see themselves as murderers, they need to have it impressed upon them in the strongest terms that they _are_ murderers.


----------



## VeganMight (Mar 1, 2018)

Spymaster said:


> It was 0121 a minute ago. Are you Dr Who?



It's now 0137 - Are you so bereft of an argument that you're having to resort to pedantically asking the time?


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Mar 1, 2018)

.


----------



## VeganMight (Mar 1, 2018)

8ball said:


> Counter argument to what?
> 
> You never came up with anything resembling an argument.  A casual observer might think you were employed by KFC’s marketing department.



There is no argument - Only the truth - That carnists are murderers - That carnist parents who feed their children products of the carnist industry are child abusers. No "argument" or "debate" just unpalatable truth. But sick, diseased carnists will be used to swallowing unpalatable truths with the same ease as they swallow their breakfast bacon.


----------



## Spymaster (Mar 1, 2018)

VeganMight said:


> If they don't see themselves as murderers, they need to have it impressed upon them in the strongest terms that they _are_ murderers.


You've got me on the fence. A few more holocaust equivalences might ... just ... get me over ...


----------



## VeganMight (Mar 1, 2018)

Spymaster said:


> You've got me on the fence. A few more holocaust equivalences might ... just ... get me over ...



You disgusting, _arrogant_ man - As though it matters whether you come over to the cause or not - An idiot like you, we'd be better off without. I only can hope you don't have children.


----------



## Spymaster (Mar 1, 2018)

VeganMight said:


> An idiot like you, we'd be better off without...


Ahhh, gwaaan, let me be on your side. Please?


----------



## Spymaster (Mar 1, 2018)

VeganMight said:


> I only can hope you don't have children.


Just one. 

You don't wanna know


----------



## VeganMight (Mar 1, 2018)

Spymaster said:


> Ahhh, gwaaan, let me be on your side. Please?



If you're prepared to renounce the consumption of dead animal flesh?


----------



## Spymaster (Mar 1, 2018)

VeganMight said:


> If you're prepared to renounce the consumption of dead animal flesh?


Seriously, or for a laugh?


----------



## VeganMight (Mar 1, 2018)

Spymaster said:


> Just one.
> 
> You don't wanna know



You're right, I don't want to know - If you've raised your child to be part of the carnist holocaust, then AFAIC, you're an abuser - How does that sit with your delicate carnist sensibilities?


----------



## VeganMight (Mar 1, 2018)

Spymaster said:


> Seriously, or for a laugh?



There's nothing funny about it. Why aren't you taking this seriously? I can only assume it's some sort of defense mechanism - You know on some level that what you're doing is disgusting, so  you employ the moronic ridicule as some sort of pathetic defence mechanism.


----------



## Spymaster (Mar 1, 2018)

VeganMight said:


> ... If you've raised your child to be part of the carnist holocaust, then AFAIC, you're an abuser - How does that sit with your delicate carnist sensibilities?


Badly. He's an elephant hunter but he's giving it up to become a policeman


----------



## Spymaster (Mar 1, 2018)

VeganMight said:


> Why aren't you taking this seriously?


Why am I not taking the comparisons of eating meat to the holocaust and paedophilia seriously? Hmmmm ... 


> I can only assume it's some sort of defense mechanism - You know on some level that what you're doing is disgusting, so  you employ the moronic ridicule as some sort of pathetic defence mechanism.


I think you've got me there


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Mar 1, 2018)

Hot off the press...big up to Joey C, doing great work...


----------



## VeganMight (Mar 1, 2018)

Spymaster said:


> Badly. He's an elephant hunter but he's giving it up to become a policeman



Oh, ffs, can we just call this a partial success? 8ball, sanchez and the internet's dullest liberal LBJ were all reeled in at least to a degree but I cannae wait all night for our Thraigo - Soz. In all honesty, this kinda trollery doesn't sit right, I just can't _be_ this dishonest. Obviously, it's Lengel - I'll email ya in a bit - This whole fuckin _persona_ though lol, it was fucking _primed_ like an elephant trap for Thraigo and the twat hasn't the decency to turn up. Mind you, I haven't got the patience to keep a fairly sustainable deceit going, so what does that say aboot me? Anyway, before I get banned, I'm gonna try to take the piss oota Sebastian on his daft names thread.


----------



## Spymaster (Mar 1, 2018)

You kept me up for two hours, ya cunt!


----------



## VeganMight (Mar 1, 2018)

Did ya not know? Nice one lol..


----------



## VeganMight (Mar 1, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Hot off the press...big up to Joey C, doing great work...




Dickhead btw, you've been trolled, lar.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Mar 1, 2018)

VeganMight said:


> Dickhead btw, you've been trolled, lar.


Well done knobjockey. Your trolling was better quality than the regular numpty posts so it's all good.


----------



## Spymaster (Mar 1, 2018)

VeganMight said:


> Did ya not know? Nice one lol..


I thought it was a troll but I reckoned it was a sock of one of the Veg-loons.

The holocaust shit was bang out of order though. Even for you. That’s what got my goat. PaoloSanchez seemed well on board with it though.

Going to bed.

Harry Viderchy


----------



## VeganMight (Mar 1, 2018)

Spymaster said:


> I thought it was a troll but I reckoned it was a sock of one of Veg-loons.
> 
> The holocaust shit was bang out of order though. Even for you. PaoloSanchez seemed well on board with it though.
> 
> ...



That's why I did the holocaust thing - Just to bring to the surface the dyspeptic, self loathing misanthropy that's never too far below the surface in these types. Either that or I just did it coz I'm a wanker anyway. Night though..


----------



## xenon (Mar 1, 2018)

Lengal  is a wanker  but you have to say Fairplay. That was well done.


----------



## billy_bob (Mar 1, 2018)

I remember the name Lengel, but otherwise have no idea what the back story is here. But I don't know about 'fair play' - all I can see is an obnoxious dickhead pretending to be a different kind of obnoxious dickhead.


----------



## mojo pixy (Mar 1, 2018)

Well I'm glad I didn't get involved in any of that then. I had a feeling that was some dick who would come a cropper all by themself, turned out it was all a jolly trolly jape anyway.

Hard to tell the sincere from the absurd on this thread, admittedly. But after all the accusations of trolling from PaoloSanchez it's funny to see him fall right away for a _real_ troll just because he happens to agree. That's pure gololold


----------



## Spymaster (Mar 1, 2018)

xenon said:


> Lengal  is a wanker  but you have to say Fairplay. That was well done.


He kept the lunacy just on the right side of believable. The things is, a lot of vegiloons _are like that _which is why it worked so well. PaoloSanchez fell in love with him and was agreeing with all the holocaust, paedophile, and murder shit. He’s now gone back and deleted the evidence!


----------



## 8ball (Mar 1, 2018)

VeganMight said:


> Oh, ffs, can we just call this a partial success? 8ball, sanchez and the internet's dullest liberal LBJ were all reeled in at least to a degree but I cannae wait all night for our Thraigo - Soz. In all honesty, this kinda trollery doesn't sit right, I just can't _be_ this dishonest. Obviously, it's Lengel - I'll email ya in a bit - This whole fuckin _persona_ though lol, it was fucking _primed_ like an elephant trap for Thraigo and the twat hasn't the decency to turn up. Mind you, I haven't got the patience to keep a fairly sustainable deceit going, so what does that say aboot me? Anyway, before I get banned, I'm gonna try to take the piss oota Sebastian on his daft names thread.



Maybe a little too heavy at first, but then pulled it back a little.  Nicely done, more than a partial success. 
Main point of failure was showing evidence of a sense of humour on several posts and repeating the stance rather than resorting to butthurt whining when disagreed with.  That and Thraigo going missing...

If you're going to use the term "carnist holocaust" you really need to keep it super-earnest.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Mar 1, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> But after all the accusations of trolling from PaoloSanchez it's funny to see him fall right away for a _real_ troll just because he happens to agree. That's pure gololold


The trolling admittedly very good, however, your buddies came off a lot worse than I did and got well and truly roasted. I partially agreed with some of the trolls fake "opinions" but not all, so I'm happy with what I posted.

The difference between him and you wasn't that you're not a _real_ troll, it's that he was much better than you are.


----------



## mojo pixy (Mar 1, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> The difference between him and you wasn't that you're not a _real_ troll, it's that he was much better then you are.



Thanks for admitting I'm not really a troll. Appreciated, albeit unnecessary and unasked-for.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Mar 1, 2018)

#RealCrapTroll


----------



## mojo pixy (Mar 1, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> #RealCrapTroll



Nice hash tag there, did you invent it yourself?


----------



## krtek a houby (Mar 1, 2018)

billy_bob said:


> I remember the name Lengel, but otherwise have no idea what the back story is here. But I don't know about 'fair play' - all I can see is an obnoxious dickhead pretending to be a different kind of obnoxious dickhead.



78 posts in,what, less than a day?

Dude seems pretty anxious to make a point,under many different guises. Why?


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Mar 1, 2018)

krtek a houby said:


> 78 posts in,what, less than a day?
> 
> Dude seems pretty anxious to make a point,under many different guises. Why?


Professional troll ex member with a few scores to settle.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Mar 1, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> Nice hash tag there, did you invent it yourself?
> 
> View attachment 128909


I'm surprised you know what a hashtag is and that you managed to even post an image properly.
Looks like you've at least made some progress. What page did you get up to?...


----------



## Spymaster (Mar 1, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> ... I'm happy with what I posted.


Hence all the deleted posts! 

'Eating animals is like the holocaust ... meat eaters are like paedophiles' ... you were agreeing with all that and that's what you've gone back and removed.


----------



## mojo pixy (Mar 1, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> ...I'm happy with what I posted.





Spymaster said:


> Hence all the deleted posts!



Don't laugh, it's what _everyone _does with their best posts


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Mar 1, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> Don't laugh, it's what _everyone _does with their best posts


Well I wouldn't say they're my best, but they were pretty good. Shame the same can't be said of your woeful efforts, which are probably better off deleted.


----------



## Spymaster (Mar 1, 2018)

Stop digging, dude


----------



## 8ball (Mar 1, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> #RealCrapTroll



#CanWeHaveVeganMightBackPlease

I was just about to denounce the carnist holocaust too.


----------



## ddraig (Mar 1, 2018)

so hilarious, lengel and his mate spy having larks
real funny guy lengel, the thieving cat killing racist cunt
hilarious, what japes, lolz


----------



## Spymaster (Mar 1, 2018)

ddraig said:


> so hilarious, lengel and his mate spy having larks
> real funny guy lengel, the thieving cat killing racist cunt
> hilarious, what japes, lolz


Fuck all to do with me. He was good though.


----------



## ddraig (Mar 1, 2018)

yeah a good thief, cat killing racist, lovely, lolz


----------



## ddraig (Mar 1, 2018)

billy_bob said:


> I remember the name Lengel, but otherwise have no idea what the back story is here. But I don't know about 'fair play' - all I can see is an obnoxious dickhead pretending to be a different kind of obnoxious dickhead.


massive obnoxious dickhead
https://www.urban75.net/forums/members/frances-lengel.53175/


----------



## Spymaster (Mar 1, 2018)

ddraig said:


> yeah a good thief, cat killing racist ...


Yeah, but apart from that ...


----------



## 8ball (Mar 1, 2018)

ddraig said:


> yeah a good thief, cat killing racist, lovely, lolz



Jealousy is unbecoming.


----------



## ddraig (Mar 1, 2018)

8ball said:


> Jealousy is unbecoming.


wtaf?? are you serious and want to align yourself with that poster?? 
grow the fuck up for fucks sake, and fuck off with the messing with my username in with the gang shit


----------



## 8ball (Mar 1, 2018)

ddraig said:


> wtaf?? are you serious and want to align yourself with that poster??



Quite persuasive, I thought.


----------



## ddraig (Mar 1, 2018)

8ball said:


> Quite persuasive, I thought.


yeah, lovely bloke https://www.urban75.net/forums/thre...atics-in-sat-8am.258194/page-15#post-11898454

was ignoring this shit storm of a thread, now going back to that and you can fuck off as well, this is not a fucking game


----------



## 8ball (Mar 1, 2018)

ddraig said:


> yeah, lovely bloke https://www.urban75.net/forums/thre...atics-in-sat-8am.258194/page-15#post-11898454
> 
> was ignoring this shit storm of a thread, now going back to that and you can fuck off as well, this is not a fucking game



We've had similar on this thread.  Lengel climbed down rather than pretend it never happened, though.
Not sure what exactly is "not a fucking game".

Anyway, have fun in Ignoreland.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Mar 1, 2018)

Unfortunately there are a persistent bunch of goons who are intent on disrupting and are not genuinely interested in the subject, simply here to spoil and goof around. 

They'll get bored soon enough and bugger off. (hopefully).


----------



## 8ball (Mar 1, 2018)

Disrupting what?


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Mar 1, 2018)

8ball said:


> Disrupting what?


A fuck off vegan monologue of rage!


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Mar 1, 2018)

If there's been any "rage" here it has been predominantly meat-ragers wandering in here to have a pop.


----------



## 8ball (Mar 1, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> A fuck off vegan monologue of rage!



There's the 'vegan support and recipes thread' that's ticking over nicely, but I'm not sure why this one is expected to be the preaching thread (I agree with you that it does look that way).
Anyone can open a preaching thread if they want.

Quite ironic that some people want the "do angry vegans put you off..." thread to be cleansed of meat eaters so they can be angry without having to deal with dissenters.  Maybe the answer is that angry vegans are _trying_ to repel non-vegans, and these tantrums are down to them having failed to deter all of them after so many pages.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Mar 1, 2018)

I'm basically a veggie anyway but have to have fish and that sometimes because my son is super fussy and I have up after a year of him looking not too healthy, tried eeeeverything! So I just work around him for the time being.  I laughed at the idea that fat ismpreventing the blood supply getting to my brain given I live on chickpeas and soya milk etc about 70 per cent of the time!


----------



## Spymaster (Mar 1, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> If there's been any "rage" here it has been predominantly meat-ragers wandering in here to have a pop.


You've humiliated yourself here fella. Surprised you're still posting.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Mar 1, 2018)

8ball said:


> There's the 'vegan support and recipes thread' that's ticking over nicely, but I'm not sure why this one is expected to be the preaching thread (I agree with you that it does look that way).
> Anyone can open a preaching thread if they want.
> 
> Quite ironic that some people want the "do angry vegans put you off..." thread to be cleansed of meat eaters so they can be angry without having to deal with dissenters.


I for one would welcome decent quality dissenters with good arguments, but that's not what we have in here, just nit picking numpties goofing around.


----------



## 8ball (Mar 1, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> I for one would welcome decent quality dissenters with good arguments, but that's not what we have in here, just nit picking numpties goofing around.


----------



## Spymaster (Mar 1, 2018)

8ball said:


> There's the 'vegan support and recipes thread' that's ticking over nicely, but I'm not sure why this one is expected to be the preaching thread (I agree with you that it does look that way).
> Anyone can open a preaching thread if they want.
> 
> Quite ironic that some people want the "do angry vegans put you off..." thread to be cleansed of meat eaters so they can be angry without having to deal with dissenters.  Maybe the answer is that angry vegans are _trying_ to repel non-vegans, and these tantrums are down to them having failed to deter all of them after so many pages.


There's actually no reason for the vegiloons to be posting on this thread at all. It's got nothing to do with them!!!


----------



## Spymaster (Mar 1, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> They'll get bored soon enough and bugger off. (hopefully).


 Can tell you're new round here.


----------



## 8ball (Mar 1, 2018)

Spymaster said:


> There's actually no reason for the vegiloons to be posting on this thread at all. It's got nothing to do with them!!!



Well, some of them are providing a lot of good reference material.


----------



## mojo pixy (Mar 1, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> I for one would welcome decent quality dissenters with good arguments



There are _good arguments _for eating meat, in your opinion? Let's see you expand on that then .. or backtrack wildly and deny that what you posted means what it means. Again.


----------



## 8ball (Mar 1, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> There are _good arguments _for eating meat, in your opinion? Let's see you expand on that then .. or backtrack wildly and deny that what you



I don't think it needs to be something as in-your-face as that. 
Very tangential points are enough to cause the oddest behaviour.


----------



## Watermelon Man (Mar 1, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> If there's been any "rage" here it has been predominantly meat-ragers wandering in here to have a pop.



Exactly.  They are just taking on the rage from the animals they ate, that didn't want to die.  If dead animal eaters had focused on what us vegans eat, we would give a shit. When we point out they are eating abuse, murder and suffering, they lose their shit.

Oh and talking of shit, I'm sure I read somewhere that most of the dead animals have shit all over them when consumed.


----------



## bimble (Mar 1, 2018)

Almost 5,000 posts. Has anyone been converted yet?


----------



## Spymaster (Mar 1, 2018)

Watermelon Man said:


> Exactly.  They are just taking on the rage from the animals they ate, that didn't want to die.  If dead animal eaters had focused on what us vegans eat, we would give a shit. When we point out they are eating abuse, murder and suffering, they lose their shit.
> 
> Oh and talking of shit, I'm sure I read somewhere that most of the dead animals have shit all over them when consumed.


You seem like one of the saner vegheads on here, so a question.

Would you refuse to travel in a car with leather seats, or sit on a leather sofa?


----------



## Spymaster (Mar 1, 2018)

bimble said:


> Almost 5,000 posts. Has anyone been converted yet?


I came close last night.


----------



## bimble (Mar 1, 2018)

oh yeah, I see, the carnist holocaust. Who was that??


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Mar 1, 2018)

8ball said:


> There's the 'vegan support and recipes thread' that's ticking over nicely, but I'm not sure why this one is expected to be the preaching thread (I agree with you that it does look that way).
> Anyone can open a preaching thread if they want.


Actually it started off as a light hearted thread which very quickly became predominantly a "lets have a go at vegans" thread well before my first post in here. I don't accept the nonsense about "preaching". It's a fairly typical meathead complaint even when there's no preaching taking place.



8ball said:


> Quite ironic that some people want the "do angry vegans put you off..." thread to be cleansed of meat eaters so they can be angry without having to deal with dissenters.  Maybe the answer is that angry vegans are _trying_ to repel non-vegans, and these tantrums are down to them having failed to deter all of them after so many pages.


You really should get your eyes tested. The biggest tantrums has been from your welfarist buddy, who got absolutely roasted by the troll and even transfered his embarrasing meltdown to completely unrelated threads backed by his loyal wingman and rear gunner.  As I said before, I would actually welcome genuine good quality discussion points even if they are from the opposing point of view. Unfortunately there's only carcass dross on offer.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Mar 1, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> There are _good arguments _for eating meat, in your opinion? Let's see you expand on that then .. or backtrack wildly and deny that what you posted means what it means. Again.


Expand on what exactly? Not only are you not able to quote or search properly, looks like you're not able to raise any decent points or questions. I've tried to avoid your posts because they're usually garbage, however you keep following me around and quoting me and butting in even when you're not part of the conversation. If you can bring yourself to make reasonable points in a friendly manner without the pointed accusations then I'd be more inclined to engage, however with the unfriendly tone you've set from your first response to me, I'm not really interested tbh.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Mar 1, 2018)

Watermelon Man said:


> Exactly.  They are just taking on the rage from the animals they ate, that didn't want to die.  If dead animal eaters had focused on what us vegans eat, we would give a shit. When we point out they are eating abuse, murder and suffering, they lose their shit.


Yeah, I don't quite get why they get so upset about accurate descriptions of what they condone. They need to take responsibility and own that shit.


----------



## Spymaster (Mar 1, 2018)

> Expand on what exactly? Not only are you not able to quote or search properly, looks like you're not able to raise any decent points or questions. I've tried to avoid your posts because they're usually garbage, however you keep following me around and quoting me and butting in even when you're not part of the conversation. If you can bring yourself to make reasonable points in a friendly manner without the pointed accusations then I'd be more inclined to engage, however with the unfriendly tone you've set from your first response to me, I'm not really interested tbh.


Yet here you are


----------



## mojo pixy (Mar 1, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> I've tried to avoid your posts...



Yeah, maybe try harder then because it's not going too well. Or are you one of those who simply _must _have the final word and can't settle till you have done?

Let's see.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Mar 1, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> Yeah, maybe try harder then because it's not going too well.


Well I've generously cut you a bit of slack seeing as you appear to be so desperate for my attention with your frequent "butting in" quoting me when I'm not addressing you, bordering on creepy stalking/harassment. At least that other raving lunatic nutcase with similar traits has mostly stopped although he's kinda resumed with the odd chirp.


----------



## mojo pixy (Mar 1, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> desperate for my attention


check


PaoloSanchez said:


> creepy


check


PaoloSanchez said:


> stalking/harassment


check


PaoloSanchez said:


> raving lunatic nutcase


check

Seriously, I'd just block me if I were you 
Still after that last word?


----------



## mojo pixy (Mar 1, 2018)

More to the point,



PaoloSanchez said:


> As I said earlier, I am well aware that there are some people (die hards?) who are not put off by death blood and guts, but there are also plenty that are...or at least would be if it wasn't hidden, so I don't believe I'm overestimating or underestimating anything tbh.





mojo pixy said:


> Same as the masses of people you seem believe would give up meat_ if only they knew where it came from_





PaoloSanchez said:


> That's not a claim that I have made



Care to comment?
Nah actually, don't bother.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Mar 1, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> Seriously, I'd just block me if I were you


Naaah, I'm having fun observing the behaviour of an obsessive wannabe troll. 







...keep it up and I might have enough material for a research paper.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Mar 1, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> Care to comment?


As I said earlier, when you tried this "gotcha", you need to pay a bit more attention to detail. I recommend Specsavers.



mojo pixy said:


> Nah actually, don't bother.


Oops...too late.


----------



## mojo pixy (Mar 1, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> As I said earlier, when you tried this one, you need to pay a bit more attention to detail. I recommend Specsavers.



Go on then. Fill in the ''details'' you think are missing. 

No no, I know what comes next: _It's not up to me to blah..._
All so as not to have to say, _Oh no I was wrong_, or even just, _Yeah actually I do think that, what of it?_

It's a bit crap, is all. You come on like you have something to say but you don't really go beyond cliche.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Mar 1, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> Go on then. Fill in the ''details'' you think are missing.


Naaah, can't be arsed, you can do your own donkey work.

...actually on second thoughts, you'd need to have the intelligence of a donkey and I don't think you make the grade.


----------



## mojo pixy (Mar 1, 2018)

I even said that would happen


----------



## Watermelon Man (Mar 1, 2018)

Spymaster said:


> You seem like one of the saner vegheads on here, so a question.
> 
> Would you refuse to travel in a car with leather seats, or sit on a leather sofa?



I wouldn't buy a car with leather seats or a leather sofa...  

Refusing a lift arranged or a taxi due to leather seats is a bit extreme.

Also refusing to sit on a friends leather sofa in protest .... what is that going to achieve? 

Hi...take a seat..

No thanks, I'll just stand up here and create an awkward scene and put a division between us.. 

No hate or judgement for those who take that stance...


----------



## Spymaster (Mar 1, 2018)

Watermelon Man said:


> I wouldn't buy a car with leather seats or a leather sofa...
> 
> Refusing a lift arranged or a taxi due to leather seats is a bit extreme.
> 
> Also refusing to sit on a friends leather sofa in protest .... what is that going to achieve?


Sure, but you don't find the prospect of sitting on leather upholstery repellent?


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Mar 1, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> I even said that would happen
> 
> View attachment 128989


So...Eeyore, you got any more dumb questions in your portfolio or is that it?


----------



## mojo pixy (Mar 1, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> So...Eeyore, you got any more dumb questions in your portfolio or is that it?



Keep on giving dumb answers and talking monumental shite and I'll be sure to keep the dumb questions coming.
I think I preferred it when you were addressing me in the 3rd person tbh.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Mar 1, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> Keep on giving dumb answers and talking monumental shite and I'll be sure to keep the dumb questions coming.


Well I've seen your monumental shite, and I'm raising it. 

Good fun this. 

So go on then, next dumb question...dumbass.


----------



## mojo pixy (Mar 1, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Good fun this.



Really? You're having fun? Not plumbing new depths of moral understanding or emotional intelligence, not learning new information and discussing how to apply it in real life. You're _having fun_ cunting off some stranger online for no particular reason. _Good fun this_. FFS.


----------



## keybored (Mar 1, 2018)

_"ur dumb"
"no u"_
Good thread.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Mar 1, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> Really? You're having fun? Not plumbing new depths of moral understanding or emotional intelligence, not learning new information and discussing how to apply it in real life. You're _having fun_ cunting off some stranger online for no particular reason. _Good fun this_. FFS.


Yeah. It's f'kin hilarious, cunting off a genuine cunt, giving him a taste of his/her own medicine. Why aren't you laughing? 

If you've got any interesting "new information" feel free to share it. I'll let you know if it's any good.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Mar 1, 2018)

Watermelon Man said:


> I wouldn't buy a car with leather seats or a leather sofa...
> 
> Refusing a lift arranged or a taxi due to leather seats is a bit extreme.
> 
> ...


I'm not sure what the obsession meat eaters have with these grey areas. It's as if they're just looking for excuses, diverting attention away from their own potentially immoral practices with examples of alleged "vegan extremism" and "weirdness" because apparently nearly all vegans behave in exactly the same way. 

I wouldn't buy a new car with leather seats either, but I have in the past. My current car has leather trim around the steering wheel, I visited my friends house on Sunday and sat on their white leather sofa and I once accidentally stepped on a snail. Now meat eaters can justifiably support killing and eating animals because "vegan hypocrisy tho". ffs.


----------



## 8ball (Mar 1, 2018)

bimble said:


> Almost 5,000 posts. Has anyone been converted yet?



I was just about to renounce the carnist holocaust, then they banned the Messiah and I lost my focus. 
I think we now know exactly who is in the pay of Big Meat.


----------



## 8ball (Mar 1, 2018)

Watermelon Man said:


> Exactly.  They are just taking on the rage from the animals they ate, that didn't want to die.



It's like a new homeopathy-type mechanism has been discovered!


----------



## Watermelon Man (Mar 2, 2018)

Spymaster said:


> Sure, but you don't find the prospect of sitting on leather upholstery repellent?



I have leather items from the days when I was a victim of the meat and dairy industries. 

A belt, shoes, two hats, a watch strap. 

I don't start melting when I see them... 

When I see women thinking they look glam wearing leather...i find it a bit odd. They are wearing dead dog/cow etc.

One thing that saddens me is that fur is now highly fashionable. Lots of men wearing fur these days. 

Meat and dairy eating men have much lower testosterone than vegan men. That may explain it?


----------



## andysays (Mar 2, 2018)

Watermelon Man said:


> I have leather items from the days when I was a victim of the meat and dairy industries.
> 
> A belt, shoes, two hats, a watch strap.
> 
> ...


Stench of misogyny worse than alleged stench of dead animals.


----------



## Watermelon Man (Mar 2, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> I'm not sure what the obsession meat eaters have with these grey areas. It's as if they're just looking for excuses, diverting attention away from their own potentially immoral practices with examples of alleged "vegan extremism" and "weirdness" because apparently nearly all vegans behave in exactly the same way.
> 
> I wouldn't buy a new car with leather seats either, but I have in the past. My current car has leather trim around the steering wheel, I visited my friends house on Sunday and sat on their white leather sofa and I once accidentally stepped on a snail. Now meat eaters can justifiably support killing and eating animals because "vegan hypocrisy tho". ffs.



Yeah. It's pretty evident but maybe all part of the programming? Check out interviews with Matthew Glover (veganuary) or more so with Joey Carbstrong.

The questions they don't want to ask is things like why have you stayed vegan?

What is the difference in your health?

Are you happier as a vegan?

Is your general well being better?

Predominantly the answers to those questions are going to be very positive. 

Matthew highlighted all these points well.

Joey focuses more on ethics.

Both good but Matthew's style probably more effective.


----------



## bimble (Mar 2, 2018)

Watermelon Man said:


> Meat and dairy eating men have much lower testosterone than vegan men.


That's .. intersting. Just had a google and advice if you want to raise your t levels seems to be to eat more tuna eggs beef etc.


----------



## Watermelon Man (Mar 2, 2018)

bimble said:


> That's .. intersting. Just had a google and advice if you want to raise your t levels seems to be to eat more tuna eggs beef etc.


 It must be true then...get consuming...

It's an interesting one for sure. One day I'll study in depth. In terms of masculinity I personally feel it's more masculine to be vegan.

Firstly,  the t levels.

Then there's the erections. Vegans have stronger erections.

Vegan male sweat is more attractive to women than non vegan male sweat.

There's a load of other examples but those three are quite fun ones...


----------



## SpookyFrank (Mar 2, 2018)

Watermelon Man said:


> One general observation I've made on this thread.
> 
> Meat eaters = most angriest/stressed
> Vegetarians = second most angriest/stressed
> ...



Yes, by using the word 'meatards' you really underline the point about how chilled out and intelligent you are.


----------



## DotCommunist (Mar 2, 2018)

a vegan hardon can cut diamond, so they say


----------



## stethoscope (Mar 2, 2018)

Watermelon Man said:


> It must be true then...get consuming...
> 
> It's an interesting one for sure. One day I'll study in depth. In terms of masculinity I personally feel it's more masculine to be vegan.
> 
> ...


----------



## Spymaster (Mar 2, 2018)

Watermelon Man said:


> Then there's the erections. Vegans have stronger erections.



Got any pics?


----------



## 8ball (Mar 2, 2018)

Watermelon Man said:


> It must be true then...get consuming...
> 
> It's an interesting one for sure. One day I'll study in depth. In terms of masculinity I personally feel it's more masculine to be vegan.
> 
> ...



Some say these are an evolutionary features deriving from aeons of sexual selection.

Ie. women selecting tribal leaders by choosing the worst hunter.


----------



## bimble (Mar 2, 2018)

i just watched a very NSFW video from Peta proving that 'vegans last longer'. So it must be true.


----------



## 8ball (Mar 2, 2018)

bimble said:


> i just watched a very NSFW video from Peta proving that 'vegans last longer'. So it must be true.


----------



## DotCommunist (Mar 2, 2018)

when they test the draw strength of longbows they string it then hang this weight-scale on it to test it. Thats what they should use when testing the rigidity of hardons. Bet vegans have a 160 pound draw, minimum


----------



## 8ball (Mar 2, 2018)

bimble said:


> That's .. intersting. Just had a google and advice if you want to raise your t levels seems to be to eat more tuna eggs beef etc.



Scientists paid by Big Meat.

The sight of the vegans with their mighty Swords of Justice has got them rattled.


----------



## mojo pixy (Mar 2, 2018)

Watermelon Man said:


> IIn terms of masculinity I personally feel it's more masculine to be vegan.



Is it more masculine for women too?

Other than that, keep the unevidenced assertions coming. Everyone knows fact-free posts give better erections


----------



## stethoscope (Mar 2, 2018)

Spymaster said:


> Got any pics?



I would have thought meatards would have stronger ones.


I'll get my coat.


----------



## 8ball (Mar 2, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> Is it more masculine for women too?



It's whatever you want it to be.


----------



## ElizabethofYork (Mar 2, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> I'm not sure what the obsession meat eaters have with these grey areas. It's as if they're just looking for excuses, diverting attention away from their own potentially immoral practices with examples of alleged "vegan extremism" and "weirdness" because apparently nearly all vegans behave in exactly the same way.



Do you mean *some* meat eaters?


----------



## DotCommunist (Mar 2, 2018)

8ball said:


> Scientists paid by Big Meat.
> 
> The sight of the vegans with their mighty Swords of Justice has got them rattled.


not pork swords, spam javelins or mutton muskets tho


----------



## 8ball (Mar 2, 2018)

ElizabethofYork said:


> Do you mean *some* meat eaters?



Looking for another grey area, eh?


----------



## 8ball (Mar 2, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> not pork swords, spam javelins or mutton muskets tho



Proud members of finest oak, with the girth of butternut squash.


----------



## Spymaster (Mar 2, 2018)

8ball said:


> The sight of the vegans with their mighty Swords of Justice has got them rattled.


I'm not convinced, tbh. This needs putting to the test.

ddraigo, get your cock out.


----------



## xenon (Mar 2, 2018)

Watermelon Man said:


> Exactly.  They are just taking on the rage from the animals they ate, that didn't want to die.  If dead animal eaters had focused on what us vegans eat, we would give a shit. When we point out they are eating abuse, murder and suffering, they lose their shit.
> 
> Oh and talking of shit, I'm sure I read somewhere that most of the dead animals have shit all over them when consumed.





You ever eat mushrooms


----------



## 8ball (Mar 2, 2018)

Spymaster said:


> I'm not convinced, tbh. This needs putting to the test.
> 
> ddraigo, get your cock out.



Let’s keep an open mind, though.  I’m sure it’s just a coincidence that one of our most vociferous herbivores has an acorn as an avatar.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Mar 2, 2018)

Watermelon Man said:


> Yeah. It's pretty evident but maybe all part of the programming? Check out interviews with Matthew Glover (veganuary) or more so with Joey Carbstrong.
> 
> The questions they don't want to ask is things like why have you stayed vegan?
> 
> ...


I've posted several Joey interviews already. I think his activism is brilliant.


Spoiler



Do angry vegans turn you against going vegan?

Do angry vegans turn you against going vegan?

Do angry vegans turn you against going vegan?


I also have a lot of respect for Earthling Ed...


Spoiler



Do angry vegans turn you against going vegan?


There's lots of good people about, I've also been keeping my eye on the activism of DrumAndBassVeganFace and BananaWarriorPrincess.

With regards to being "more effective", well I'm not going to knock any of the activists putting themselves out for the cause. As far as I'm concerned they're all fkin heroes. Some might be better communicators than others, some a bit loud and passionate some softer and gentler,  but as long as they're sincere they have my full support.


----------



## ddraig (Mar 2, 2018)

Spymaster said:


> I'm not convinced, tbh. This needs putting to the test.
> 
> ddraigo, get your cock out.


please stop this, i have said that i am ignoring this shitstorm of a thread and don't appreciate being tagged in this way


----------



## 8ball (Mar 2, 2018)

ddraig said:


> please stop this, i have said that i am ignoring this shitstorm of a thread and don't appreciate being tagged in this way



Didn't know you got tag alerts when ignoring thread.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Mar 2, 2018)

ddraig said:


> please stop this, i have said that i am ignoring this shitstorm of a thread and don't appreciate being tagged in this way


Dude, you're better off either completely blanking those shit stirring cunts or fighting fire with fire. Complaining isn't really going to cut it when they're purposely out to goad and provoke trying to wind you up. Play them on your own terms. Just saying.


----------



## 8ball (Mar 2, 2018)

Yeah, those fragile carnists will cave first.

Can't be more than a few Johnny CabbageWarrior posts away from getting some converts...


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Mar 2, 2018)

Watermelon Man said:


> Yeah. It's pretty evident but maybe all part of the programming? Check out interviews with Matthew Glover (veganuary) or more so with Joey Carbstrong.


...I forgot to mention that other decent Aussie bloke James Aspey...



tbh, I don't really like his voice that much but he's an awesome activist.


----------



## Watermelon Man (Mar 2, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> ...I forgot to mention that other decent Aussie bloke James Aspey...
> 
> 
> 
> tbh, I don't really like his voice that much but he's an awesome activist.




Cool story about T. Colin Campbell. Not 100% sure about him being judge and jury as to whether people are vegan or plant based. Does he carry vegan/plant based badges for people to wear after he's classified them? I like him though, I've met him once at a vegfest and he was a cool guy.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Mar 2, 2018)

Watermelon Man said:


> Not 100% sure about him being judge and jury as to whether people are vegan or plant based. Does he carry vegan/plant based badges for people to wear after he's classified them?


Wait...what? Judge and jury? That's not the message that I got from what he said there. I agree with him that being vegan is more than just eating the food. Mileage may vary. Some people just want to concentrate on their health or just on the food, that's up to them. He's not forcing anybody to acknowledge animal welfare if they don't want to, just sharing information that others may not be aware of.


----------



## Watermelon Man (Mar 2, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> I've posted several Joey interviews already. I think his activism is brilliant.
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> ...



Was chatting about this to a fellow vegan the other day.  He was quite dismissive about emo vegans.  I laughed and said, there's room for everyone.  If they are trying to make a difference then good on them.  Earthling Ed is pretty sharp - he's sussed out that the media are trying to portray vegans in a certain light - to attempt to get vegans to take on that sort of behaviour. Also that non vegans will think "all vegans are like that" (negative stereotype).. and of course drive a divide between us all.  This is quite hilarious and I can certainly relate to this in my earlier stages of veganism. But Ed seems one step ahead of all of that.  I'll check out the other people.

I do believe that it's more likely that subtle less in your face activism is a lot more effective.  I think that studies have shown this to be the case - but I'm taking another's word for it - so treading carefully with that statement.


----------



## 8ball (Mar 2, 2018)

By “emo vegan” are we talking the Ian MacKaye/Minor Threat/Straight Edge thing, or is this something newer?

Ian MacKaye - Wikipedia


----------



## editor (Mar 2, 2018)

I'm beginning to think that this thread has run its course.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Mar 2, 2018)

Watermelon Man said:


> Was chatting about this to a fellow vegan the other day.  He was quite dismissive about emo vegans.  I laughed and said, there's room for everyone.


I have no idea what an "emo vegan" is or whether I should be dismissing them, lol. 



Watermelon Man said:


> If they are trying to make a difference then good on them.  Earthling Ed is pretty sharp - he's sussed out that the media are trying to portray vegans in a certain light - to attempt to get vegans to take on that sort of behaviour. Also that non vegans will think "all vegans are like that" (negative stereotype).. and of course drive a divide between us all.  This is quite hilarious and I can certainly relate to this in my earlier stages of veganism. But Ed seems one step ahead of all of that.  I'll check out the other people.


It's quite hard to get the balance right between passion/integrity and getting the communication right. I believe it very much depends on the setting. Stuff that may work out in the street, probably won't work the same way on TV, or in a written format. It also depends on the audience too. There are a number of variables to take into account. The bottom line for me is that if you are sincere in your belief you'll eventually find the right levels to match the circumstances with experience. Joey is a good example of this. He's still learning but has come a long way from his early days and is doing good stuff in the media. Passionate but polite, even when provoked or faced with some pretty dumb folks/interviewers.


----------



## editor (Mar 2, 2018)

Spymaster  is banned from this thread for a week after several people complained about the personal abuse. I'm not monitoring this thread but will ban others who continue to post up similarly abusive content.


----------



## 8ball (Mar 2, 2018)

editor said:


> Spymaster  is banned from this thread for a week after several people complained about the personal abuse. I'm not monitoring this thread but will ban others who continue to post up similarly abusive content.



Just as a bit of guidance in this regard,  was this down to @Spymaster’s request for photographic evidence when presented with the vegans’ claim about their magnificent erections?


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Mar 2, 2018)

Watermelon Man said:


> I do believe that it's more likely that subtle less in your face activism is a lot more effective.  I think that studies have shown this to be the case - but I'm taking another's word for it - so treading carefully with that statement.


On this subject...this fella may be of interest to you if you haven't heard of him before...



The Vegan Strategist - boldly going where no vegan has gone before


----------



## editor (Mar 2, 2018)

8ball said:


> Just as a bit of guidance in this regard,  was this down to @Spymaster’s request for photographic evidence when presented with the vegans’ claim about their magnificent erections?


No idea what you're on about, sorry. The ban was in response to several reports about a post.


----------



## 8ball (Mar 2, 2018)

editor said:


> No idea what you're on about, sorry. The ban was in response to several reports about a post.



Fair enough. 

I’d assumed you’d looked at the offending post, so just trying to avoid similar pitfalls.  

If this was nothing to do with puncturing the thin skin of the perpetually priapic pugnacious then I’ll won’t persist in prying and step back from the prepuce.

Precipice, I mean.


----------



## andysays (Mar 2, 2018)

Spymaster said:


> Got any pics?


----------



## Watermelon Man (Mar 2, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> On this subject...this fella may be of interest to you if you haven't heard of him before...
> 
> 
> 
> The Vegan Strategist - boldly going where no vegan has gone before




Thanks. I'll have a look when I get a chance. Back to my comment on JA.  People can be vegan for just one reason.  Health, environment, animals, anti capitalism, feminism.  

There are people like myself who are vegan for many different reasons. Health, animals, environment, ethics, fellow human health, anti capitalism. 

The whole levels of veganism and branding "vegans" as "not being vegans" sits uncomfortable with me. 

JA is a top man but it struck me that he was being a little judgemental there. If someone is vegan to reverse their heart disease..awesome. I don't see any positive outcome of telling them they are not vegan according to your own definition. Sure, if they are decked out in fur and leather, i can understand the plant based tag then...


----------



## xenon (Mar 2, 2018)

.


----------



## Watermelon Man (Mar 2, 2018)

xenon said:


> I thought it was the carnists who were fragile...



What are you talking about?


----------



## xenon (Mar 2, 2018)

editor said:


> No idea what you're on about, sorry. The ban was in response to several reports about a post.




I thought it was the carnists who were fragile...


----------



## 8ball (Mar 2, 2018)

Watermelon Man said:


> What are you talking about?



Carnists.

Short-term memory issues, the lot of ‘em.


----------



## editor (Mar 2, 2018)

xenon said:


> I thought it was the carnists who were fragile...


I didn't note the diets of those reporting the posts.


----------



## mojo pixy (Mar 2, 2018)

I should maybe report a few posts, there are plenty on this thread cunting me off. Even in the last few pages. But as a non-vegan such insults are no doubt justified. And I'm hardly a fragile flower, sorry about that.

Actually the very idea of grown adults reporting any of the puerile stuff on this thread hurts my head a little. Especially when the reports are probably coming from posters who've posted worse than what they're reporting.


----------



## 8ball (Mar 2, 2018)

editor said:


> I didn't note the diets of those reporting the posts.



Hard to tell without a full food audit, but there may have been clues.

Were the posters robustly relaxed and good-humoured?  Possibly extremely masculine in a way that made you envious of their sexual magnetism and unflappability when standing up for the oppressed?  Was there any aura of a significant trouser bulge?

Did you have a sudden urge to smoke them a kipper, then feel shame at your disregard for the sentience of herring?

Not wanting to pry, obv.


----------



## Watermelon Man (Mar 2, 2018)

Sympathies with those burning with the sense of injustice. 

Welcome to our world.

Remember,  the animals didn't want to die or be enslaved or have their bits interfered with to make them pregnant again in the name of ££££.


----------



## 8ball (Mar 2, 2018)

Amen, brother!!!!


----------



## SpookyFrank (Mar 2, 2018)

bimble said:


> i just watched a very NSFW video from Peta proving that 'vegans last longer'. So it must be true.



In the case of PETA types I reckon they can last indefinitely on account of nobody wanting to go anywhere near their genitals or any other part of them.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Mar 2, 2018)

Watermelon Man said:


> Sympathies with those burning with the sense of injustice.
> 
> Welcome to our world.


looool,
tbf, I'm not sure what the ban was for. If it was for "get your cock out" then that doesn't seem to be worthy of a ban. Having said that the idiot that was banned has been persistently have digs and goading since forever and continued to tag yer man even though he asked him to stop. (harrassment?) I can't think of a single positive contribution that he made to this thread.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Mar 2, 2018)

A post mortem on "Februdairy"...



...reminded me of this gem...


Spoiler: Warning - sensitives may find this offensive


----------



## editor (Mar 2, 2018)

And so veganism continues to slip into the mainstream 






New Meaty Vegan Burger Arriving at Major UK Supermarket


----------



## tompinch (Mar 2, 2018)

editor said:


> And so veganism continues to slip into the mainstream
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Mainstream? Veganism has been in the mainstream for about 30 years hasn’t it?


----------



## editor (Mar 2, 2018)

tompinch said:


> Mainstream? Veganism has been in the mainstream for about 30 years hasn’t it?


Did you find it easy to buy vegan burgers in the big supermarkets 30 years ago? How about restaurants? Did you think there were many vegan options on the menu in the 90s?


----------



## 8ball (Mar 3, 2018)

tompinch said:


> Mainstream? Veganism has been in the mainstream for about 30 years hasn’t it?



I’m struggling to think what happened around 1987 in this area...


----------



## 8ball (Mar 3, 2018)

editor said:


> And so veganism continues to slip into the mainstream
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I suppose that’s true.  In the same sense that barbecue was slipping into the mainstream in 2009.


----------



## tompinch (Mar 3, 2018)

editor said:


> Did you find it easy to buy vegan burgers in the big supermarkets 30 years ago? How about restaurants? Did you think there were many vegan options on the menu in the 90s?



Who cares?

Why do vegans want a burger anyway?

To most people “burger” means “meat patty”.


----------



## 8ball (Mar 3, 2018)

tompinch said:


> Who cares?.



The markets care.  Quite a lot of industry buzz at the moment.  People looking to reduce meat intake as the pendulum swings back from low carb/high protein and Paleo.
Plus baking is all but over.

“Flexitarian” is where it’s at right now.


----------



## tompinch (Mar 3, 2018)

8ball said:


> The markets care.  Quite a lot of industry buzz at the moment.  People looking to reduce meat intake as the pendulum swings back from low carb/high protein and Paleo.
> Plus baking is all but over.
> 
> “Flexitarian” is where it’s at right now.


Which markets?


----------



## Watermelon Man (Mar 3, 2018)

editor said:


> Did you find it easy to buy vegan burgers in the big supermarkets 30 years ago? How about restaurants? Did you think there were many vegan options on the menu in the 90s?



Going back 3 years or even 3 months, it's very different.  A friend produces vegan guide books around London and he is struggling to keep up with the constant expansion. 

Veganism is a win all round. Win for your body, for the animals, for increased peace, for a world where EVERYBODY eats, better environment and of course stronger erections.

Re world hunger why do we feed animals to feed humans (to make humans sick) when there are humans starving. That makes no sense to me. 

It's great that veganism is mainstream but there's a long long way to go.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 3, 2018)

tompinch said:


> Who cares?
> 
> Why do vegans want a burger anyway?
> 
> To most people “burger” means “meat patty”.


Pls engage brain before posting as explaining simple things, like the speed and convenience of burgers of all sorts, quickly palls.


----------



## 8ball (Mar 3, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Pls engage brain before posting as explaining simple things, like the speed and convenience of burgers of all sorts, quickly palls.



They seemed to be attempting a pretty convincing burger, which was good.  And interesting that it’s Iceland doing it.

It’s more than just the speed and convenience.  And lots of vegans like substitutes of various kinds.

I took “which markets?” as the signal to bow out with that one...


----------



## mojo pixy (Mar 3, 2018)

8ball said:


> Plus baking is all but over.




I've baked two cakes in the last three weeks. I've still got ingredients in the cupboard ffs, flour tastes shit by itself.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Mar 3, 2018)

Watermelon Man said:


> Thanks. I'll have a look when I get a chance. Back to my comment on JA.  People can be vegan for just one reason.  Health, environment, animals, anti capitalism, feminism.
> 
> There are people like myself who are vegan for many different reasons. Health, animals, environment, ethics, fellow human health, anti capitalism.
> 
> ...


I guess it all boils down to what you believe the defining feature of veganism is. I'm in total agreement with JA on this subject and I don't believe that he was being judgemental at all. I think there's a core foundational principle which many people miss and that is *animal rights*.

Of course if you don't give a shit about animals and you're only abstaining from animal products for "health reasons" then that does lessen the amount of animal suffering in the world, HOWEVER, the abstention of consuming animal products doesn't in and of itself guarantee health. You can be eating "vegan food" and still be unhealthy, and you can have animal products as part of your diet and be healthy. Equating vegan food with health is a bit of a misnomer, even though vegans DO tend to be healthier. (probably cos they're a bit smarter  ) They CAN be healthier than the average Joe, but it's not a given. In my opinion, it is the animal rights which gives veganism its anchor and is it's main strength. Without the animal rights, it's just a fkin fad diet and just as fickle as all the other diets.

So the bottom line is JA pointing this out to people who are unaware is not being judgemental.


----------



## 8ball (Mar 3, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Without the animal rights, it's just a fkin fad diet and just as fickle as all the other diets.



The “flexitarian” thing is a big driver and cutting down on meat is generally likely to increase demand for certain products.

I’m not a fashion aficionado but was surprised to see a reference to a lot of people wearing fur.  I thought real fur had been “out” for quite a while.

So we have flexitarian (not vegan), “plant based” (is that eating vegan for health reasons but not being bothered about wearing leather?), “emo vegan” (no idea what that is), and a couple of levels of purity to contend with (perhaps ideological/political rather than practical).

Plenty going on there.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Mar 5, 2018)

8ball said:


> The “flexitarian” thing is a big driver and cutting down on meat is generally likely to increase demand for certain products.
> 
> I’m not a fashion aficionado but was surprised to see a reference to a lot of people wearing fur.  I thought real fur had been “out” for quite a while.
> 
> ...


imo the labels commonly attached to what people do is a bit of a side issue and is not really that important.

I have no idea what a "flexitarian" really is, it could be that it is more offensive than the dreaded "carnist" word that some folks here have been having kittens over. Without looking it up I'm guessing that it's nothing more  than a slightly modified "I eat anything" omnivorous diet with a bit less meat to make the participants feel a bit less guilty about the animals that get slaughtered on their behalf.

Obviously the less unnecessary killing the better, I think most reasonably compassionate people would at least agree on that.  (hardcore carnists probably won't care that much) The disagreement comes with how to achieve this reduced amount of killing. There are some meat eating apologists who contend that the vegan position is far too extreme and that it is the fault of vegans that so many people are still eating meat. (vegans keep shoving bits of beef down their throats?) If only vegans would accept that killing animals when we don't need to is perfectly ok then everything will be hunky dory.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Mar 5, 2018)

Excellent bit of local activism... (free brownies and "cheese")



Slowly but surely it's getting through.


----------



## Watermelon Man (Mar 5, 2018)

A bit late to this but I see vegan football club Forest Green Rovers have Sea Shepherd logo on the back of their shirts. That's cool.

I've also been listening to a lot of Joey Carbstrong on Irish radio. He's doing really well.


----------



## 8ball (Mar 5, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> imo the labels commonly attached to what people do is a bit of a side issue and is not really that important.
> 
> I have no idea what a "flexitarian" really is, it could be that it is more offensive than the dreaded "carnist" word that some folks here have been having kittens over. Without looking it up I'm guessing that it's nothing more  than a slightly modified "I eat anything" omnivorous diet with a bit less meat to make the participants feel a bit less guilty about the animals that get slaughtered on their behalf.



The "carnist" term is mostly just embarassing because so many vegans don't understand what the term means and use it to mean "omnivore".
Though the original term is sufficiently illiterate to merit no further mention imo.

Flexitarianism is the trendy new demographic that a lot of new "vegan" products are aimed at.  Its a hedge that's trying to leverage new vegans and those looking to reduce meat intake.

I don't think "the vegan position" is terribly extreme (if we take our baseline as not ingesting products from animals which have been killed for that purpose, which is as low as you can set the bar), but it depends which vegans you're talking about.  There are a great many vegan positions afaics.  I expect this will fracture into an increasing number of established camps as the number of vegans increases, since feeling unsupported has led vegans to huddle together for some time and disguised the normal internal tensions that can develop.

Or maybe their greater empathy will prevail and all vegans will mutually support each other in an era of enlightenment and mutual understanding.


----------



## mojo pixy (Mar 5, 2018)

Reflecting on the distinction certain polemicists like to make between _Plant-Based_ and truly _Vegan_, we could conclude that while Angry Vegans probably don't put people off becoming _Plant-Based_, there is a chance that Angry Vegans do put some people off _Being Vegan_.

So that would appear to be the end of the thread.
















It won't be, but it would _appear _to be.


----------



## 8ball (Mar 5, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> Reflecting on the distinction certain polemicists like to make between _Plant-Based_ and truly _Vegan_, we could conclude that while Angry Vegans probably don't put people off becoming _Plant-Based_, there is a chance that Angry Vegans do put some people off _Being Vegan_.



The confusing thing about "plant based" is that the average US diet is often referred to as "meat-based".
Almost no one in the US eats exclusively meat, and on average less than half their protein even comes from meat (edit: it adds up to more than half once you factor in dairy - link also added cos I'm like that).


----------



## mojo pixy (Mar 5, 2018)

Propaganda terminology, obvs.


----------



## 8ball (Mar 6, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> Propaganda terminology, obvs.



PETA really ramped up that side of the game.  I guess they read _Politics and The English Language_ by Orwell.


----------



## dylanredefined (Mar 6, 2018)

8ball said:


> PETA really ramped up that side of the game.  I guess they read _Politics and The English Language_ by Orwell.


 Ahh the animal lovers who love killing animals.


----------



## 8ball (Mar 6, 2018)

dylanredefined said:


> Ahh the animal lovers who love killing animals.



“Freeing” them from this life of torment.


----------



## dylanredefined (Mar 7, 2018)

Just tried some vegan cheese quite edible.


----------



## 8ball (Mar 7, 2018)

Gary.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Mar 7, 2018)

dylanredefined said:


> Just tried some vegan cheese quite edible.


Depends on the brand, it ranges from Cold-set-vomit to not-too-bad-actually.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Mar 7, 2018)

Was actually going to ask about vegan cheeses now you remind me, what brand are you on? Anyone know some good ones?


----------



## 8ball (Mar 7, 2018)

Gary.


----------



## 8ball (Mar 7, 2018)

Also, there are some suggestions earlier in this thread if you do a search.


----------



## Watermelon Man (Mar 8, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> Was actually going to ask about vegan cheeses now you remind me, what brand are you on? Anyone know some good ones?



To be honest, I'm not a massive fan.  Violife do some decent processed type cheese that I put in on my vegan burgers. Pretty decent.  Some of the stuff I've tasted at veg fests range from rank to half decent.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Mar 8, 2018)

Watermelon Man said:


> Noakes knows his stuff about running.
> 
> Doesn't have a clue about nutrition.


Mic did a pretty good examination of Professor Noakes' ideas...


----------



## 8ball (Mar 8, 2018)

Watermelon Man said:


> To be honest, I'm not a massive fan.  Violife do some decent processed type cheese that I put in on my vegan burgers. Pretty decent.



That was the one I remember being mentioned the most.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Mar 8, 2018)

Watermelon Man said:


> A bit late to this but I see vegan football club Forest Green Rovers have Sea Shepherd logo on the back of their shirts. That's cool.


RESPECT to FGR and Sea Shepherd doing great work.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Mar 8, 2018)

Watermelon Man said:


> I've also been listening to a lot of Joey Carbstrong on Irish radio. He's doing really well.


Joey is a giant and gets better every time I hear him.

Great reaction to his latest video by BWP...


_"...you cannot sit there and be silent any more, it's really important to speak up..."_


----------



## dylanredefined (Mar 8, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> Was actually going to ask about vegan cheeses now you remind me, what brand are you on? Anyone know some good ones?


 Tescos own with chilli good enough for chicken burgers


----------



## 8ball (Mar 8, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Joey is a giant...



He’s certainly taller than I expected.
Is there a story behind the silly name?


----------



## 8ball (Mar 8, 2018)

Watermelon Man said:


> To be honest, I'm not a massive fan.  Violife do some decent processed type cheese that I put in on my vegan burgers. Pretty decent.  Some of the stuff I've tasted at veg fests range from rank to half decent.



Actually, meant to ask you what you meant earlier in a reference to someone 'feeling strong' after eating steak.
Found a few references on tinternet to this.  It's not something I've experienced personally.


----------



## Watermelon Man (Mar 9, 2018)

8ball said:


> Actually, meant to ask you what you meant earlier in a reference to someone 'feeling strong' after eating steak.
> Found a few references on tinternet to this.  It's not something I've experienced personally.



Maybe psychological?  But I definitely felt stronger initially but then very sluggish for a day or so after. 

I kind of get a similar feeling after black beans without the clogged up/sluggish feeling.


----------



## 8ball (Mar 9, 2018)

Watermelon Man said:


> Maybe psychological?  But I definitely felt stronger initially but then very sluggish for a day or so after.
> 
> I kind of get a similar feeling after black beans without the clogged up/sluggish feeling.



Maybe psychological, maybe there's some nutrient involved, I guess.
A mate of mine who was a long-term veggie and packed it in said he felt 'turbo charged' after eating red meat.  Hard to say what was responsible given a single case.  He was only eating small amounts and was trying to get stuff he could square his conscience with. 

Another who was into martial arts said on a veggie diet he felt stronger and lighter, whereas after meat he felt stronger, but a little heavier and slower.
I'd suspect how people feel and their actual performance might differ, to be fair.

Re: the black beans, that would suggest to me iron might be responsible, but I wouldn't expect that much effect in the very short term.  There's also lots of B12 and folate in black beans, but as a vegan I'd expect you to have those well covered in any case.

I always find hitting a good range of fruit and vegetables, plus some healthy fats, is what makes a big difference if I'm feeling a bit off.
Especially avocado, broccoli, pulses and salmon/mackerel. With apples, sweet potatoes, peppers, carrots and tomatoes not far behind.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Mar 10, 2018)

Is it cruel to keep a pet fox... on a vegan diet?

vegan fox. Not by choice obvs.


----------



## 8ball (Mar 10, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> Is it cruel to keep a pet fox... on a vegan diet?
> 
> vegan fox. Not by choice obvs.



Possibly ok diet wise.  Whether that kind if animal is likely to be happy being kept as a pet is also up for debate.


----------



## NoXion (Mar 18, 2018)

McDonald's are apparently releasing a vegan burger in Finland and Sweden following a successful trial:

McDonald’s is rolling out its first vegan burger in the Nordics – here’s how it tastes


----------



## mojo pixy (Mar 19, 2018)

Probably fair to say that McDonalds being what it is, nothing they sell can ever really be _vegan_ as such, but can probably attain _plant-based_ status at best.


----------



## gentlegreen (Mar 19, 2018)

That fox should be outdoors grubbing up worms and beetles.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Mar 19, 2018)

Put warnings on egg boxes, says Chris Packham

_He added that he did not blame farmers for poor animal welfare because it was being driven by demand for cheap food and ignorance about its origins. He criticised the “curious moral divide” in attitudes to animal welfare at zoos and farms. “What’s the difference between a cow and a zebra?” he said. “You couldn't keep a zebra in those conditions because you’d be shut down within a week.”_


----------



## marty21 (Mar 24, 2018)

Welcome

Went for a walk , ended up in a vegan pub #asyoudo


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Mar 27, 2018)

marty21 said:


> Welcome
> 
> Went for a walk , ended up in a vegan pub #asyoudo


 
Was it any good?

...or were you assaulted by hordes of "angry vegans"?


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Mar 29, 2018)

Looking forward to watching this when it comes out...


----------



## DotCommunist (Mar 30, 2018)

meanwhile, only in america:
https://thetakeout.com/chef-with-ze..._medium=recirculation&utm_campaign=thursdayAM


----------



## fishfinger (Mar 30, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> meanwhile, only in america:
> https://thetakeout.com/chef-with-ze..._medium=recirculation&utm_campaign=thursdayAM


Canada.


----------



## DotCommunist (Mar 30, 2018)

fishfinger said:


> Canada.


same thing but flappy heads


----------



## fishfinger (Mar 30, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> same thing but flappy heads


Rascist!!!1!!1!


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Mar 30, 2018)




----------



## UnderAnOpenSky (Mar 30, 2018)

New vegan burgers. I'd quite like to try one. Although I think burgers that rare are a bit weird. 












Impossible Foods


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Mar 30, 2018)

Meatatarian Clarkson tasted one last year and wasn't too critical of it...


----------



## gentlegreen (Mar 31, 2018)

Dead man walking - is he on anyone's death watch list ?

Being almost exactly the same age, he's my portrait of Dorian Grey.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Mar 31, 2018)

Booom...


----------



## lazythursday (Mar 31, 2018)

Bloody impossible burger is wheat based. It's the Beyond Burger I'm desperate to try - a supposedly really meaty burger based on pea protein. Some other interesting pea protein stuff in New Zealand. None of these new interesting plant meats seem to make it here though, probably because quorn has block booked all supermarket freezers.


----------



## gentlegreen (Apr 1, 2018)

Having not tasted meat or poultry for 37 years, realistic burgers do not appeal.
To be fair, I probably only ever ate burgers a handful of times in the previous 21 years.
I was in Tesco earlier looking for Cauldron sausages and I knew to ignore the Linda McCartney option (I had her sausage rolls only the one time) and I noticed Tesco now do a "meat-style veggie burger" ...


----------



## ddraig (Apr 2, 2018)




----------



## 8ball (Apr 2, 2018)

gentlegreen said:


> Having not tasted meat or poultry for 37 years, realistic burgers do not appeal.



What kind of burger does the long-term non meater go for?
I find a lot of veggie ones feel like you're eating carbs in a bun.  Which is cool, but not really the burger thing for me.


----------



## gentlegreen (Apr 2, 2018)

8ball said:


> What kind of burger does the long-term non meater go for?
> I find a lot of veggie ones feel like you're eating carbs in a bun.  Which is cool, but not really the burger thing for me.


The most successful "savouries" I eat are "Mexican style burgers", Cauldron sausages and falafels, and a local producer's nut cutlets.

But I'm not sure quite what the "vegetable quarter pounders" are supposed to be about - even though I eat them - with even more mashed potato and peas ...
I confess I'm a carbaholic o:

Mostly my meals don't have a focus - in the summer I stir-fry veggies, in the winter I stew them.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Apr 2, 2018)




----------



## andysays (Apr 4, 2018)

Seems like you angry vegans are even turning people against going vegan in India.
The myth of the Indian vegetarian nation


> What are the most common myths and stereotypes about what Indians eat? The biggest myth, of course, is that India is a largely vegetarian country.





> ...Taking all this into account, say the researchers, only about 20% of Indians are actually vegetarian - much lower than common claims and stereotypes suggest.


I found this bit particularly interesting


> The government data shows that vegetarian households have higher income and consumption - are more affluent than meat-eating households.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Apr 4, 2018)

andysays said:


> Seems like you angry vegans are even turning people against going vegan in India.
> The myth of the Indian vegetarian nation


lol, really? How did you work that one out?



andysays said:


> I found this bit particularly interesting


...and what was it you found particularly interesting about that? For me there wasn't enough meat on dem data bones to draw any meaningful conclusions from it.


----------



## UnderAnOpenSky (Apr 4, 2018)

Pictures took me back mind. I loved the veggie thali served on a leaf in South India. Sad but not suprised to see they all had plastic bottles of water though.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Apr 4, 2018)

I'm surprised that none of the forum antis has jumped all over this one yet...



"Plz don't be an opportunistic political point scorer by using this tragedy to attack a movement for compassion."


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Apr 4, 2018)

JC visits Israeli dairy farm with some local activists...


----------



## Spymaster (Apr 4, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> I'm surprised that none of the forum antis has jumped all over this one yet...
> 
> 
> 
> "Plz don't be an opportunistic political point scorer by using this tragedy to attack a movement for compassion."



Proof, if it were needed, that vegans are dangerous and angry. Fortunately we don’t allow armed vegans to walk the streets in the UK which has contributed to the lack of vegunnery here and forced angry Brit vegans to rely on rhubarb clubs an tofupults.


----------



## stethoscope (Apr 4, 2018)

Natural quorn killers


----------



## DotCommunist (Apr 4, 2018)

stethoscope said:


> Natural quorn killers


texas chickpea masala


----------



## mojo pixy (Apr 4, 2018)

Battle Soyale


----------



## Spymaster (Apr 4, 2018)

The Silence of the Yams


----------



## mojo pixy (Apr 4, 2018)

Speaking of which, potential provocation of vegans in the US as the price of soy products rises ... I forsee anger.

China hits US soybeans with 25% tariff


----------



## Yossarian (Apr 4, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> Speaking of which, potential provocation of vegans in the US as the price of soy products rises ... I forsee anger.
> 
> China hits US soybeans with 25% tariff



Chinese tariffs on imports from the US are going to raise the price of soy products in China, not the US - might end up making soy a little cheaper for Americans if sales to China go down.


----------



## mojo pixy (Apr 4, 2018)

I think prices will rise in the US too, but we'll see as the process grinds on. You may be right, but farmers may stop growing it as profits dip.


----------



## mrs quoad (Apr 4, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> I'm surprised that none of the forum antis has jumped all over this one yet...
> 
> 
> 
> "Plz don't be an opportunistic political point scorer by using this tragedy to attack a movement for compassion."



It’s kinda fantastic that you’ve managed to use this as an opportunity to score points against non vegans on the basis that you’re surprised they haven’t yet point scored 

That is full on dark arts mastery, dude


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Apr 4, 2018)

Over 3 million UK residents now identify as vegan

_Veganism has skyrocketed in recent years, with more people than ever before choosing to enjoy a plant-based life.

However, this is not simply a case of a few evangelical legume-lovers ordering chickpea sandwiches in Pret A Manger, according to a new survey by comparethemarket.com, there has been a significant spike in the number of people going vegan in the UK since 2016, with more than 3.5 million Brits now identifying as such._


----------



## 8ball (Apr 4, 2018)

andysays said:


> I found this bit particularly interesting



Guess that's just the way everywhere.  Makes sense, though.


----------



## 8ball (Apr 4, 2018)

Spymaster said:


> Fortunately we don’t allow armed vegans to walk the streets in the UK which has contributed to the lack of vegunnery here and forced angry Brit vegans to rely on rhubarb clubs an tofupults.



They're still allowed knives, though.  So best lock your cat inside if they're in the area.


----------



## mr steev (Apr 4, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> View attachment 131866
> 
> Over 3 million UK residents now identify as vegan
> 
> ...



More people now ask for vegan garlic bread than the buttered one in my cafe (which isn't really a typical veggie cafe with a very broad demograph of customers) and my vegan chocolate cake sells out loads quicker than my other cakes (admittedly, the vegan cake is gorgeous and a lot of kids don't see further than the chocolate )


----------



## 8ball (Apr 4, 2018)

What does your vegan garlic bread have in place of butter?


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Apr 4, 2018)




----------



## 8ball (Apr 4, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


>







			
				Sam Culpepper said:
			
		

> Ricky Gervais opposes cruelty to the animals that are illegal to eat, and hunting in general, yet still chooses to support the rape, murder, torture and enslavement of animals so he can 'feel like a man'.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Apr 5, 2018)

^ ...well hopefully he's on his way. It can often take a while for peoples behaviours to eventually match their beliefs. It's a bit like how people can know that smoking and drinking alcohol is stupid but still do it anyway because of habit/addiction/social pressures etc. Otherwise intelligent people end up doing really stupid things like drink driving. I think he is aware of the vegan position and if he's strong enough he'll take the next logical step. He did choose "vegan wings" in his appearance on Hot Ones so may well be almost there already...


----------



## mr steev (Apr 5, 2018)

8ball said:


> What does your vegan garlic bread have in place of butter?



Vegan marg


----------



## 8ball (Apr 5, 2018)

mr steev said:


> Vegan marg



That's pretty much regular marg with a couple of trace substances removed isn't it?
Have you ever tried a vegan butter (I've no idea whether such a thing would work in garlic bread but marg doesn't feel right somehow)?


----------



## mr steev (Apr 5, 2018)

8ball said:


> That's pretty much regular marg with a couple of trace substances removed isn't it?
> Have you ever tried a vegan butter (I've no idea whether such a thing would work in garlic bread but marg doesn't feel right somehow)?



The marg isn't great tbh, but it works (along with lots of garlic and herbs). I am on the hunt for a decent butter substitute though.


----------



## William of Walworth (Apr 6, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> View attachment 131866
> 
> Over 3 million UK residents now identify as vegan
> 
> ...



On 1st April (Easter Sunday, not April Fool!  ,  The Observer had a similar article by Dan Hancox, which was massively more detailed .....  pretty interesting though, I found.

The unstoppable rise of veganism : how a fringe movement went mainstream


----------



## IC3D (Apr 6, 2018)

I made a delishious vegan chocolate cake but somehow it cost £30


----------



## NoXion (Apr 6, 2018)

mr steev said:


> Vegan marg



Barf. Margarine is heinous shit.


----------



## mojo pixy (Apr 6, 2018)

IC3D said:


> I made a delishious vegan chocolate cake but somehow it cost £30



I made a delicious non-vegan chocolate cake (4 eggs in the sponge, butter in the fudge icing), it cost about £5.

What were the most expensive ingredients in the vegan one?


----------



## 8ball (Apr 6, 2018)

IC3D said:


> I made a delishious vegan chocolate cake but somehow it cost £30



I like a bottle of whisky to chug while I’m baking, too.


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Apr 6, 2018)

mr steev said:


> The marg isn't great tbh, but it works (along with lots of garlic and herbs). I am on the hunt for a decent butter substitute though.



I haven't seen a commercial brand yet that doesn't use palm oil, so I don't buy them. Occasionally if I want something butter-like I use a bit of coconut oil. 

There are some good-looking vegan butter recipes on youtube though, e.g. this one:


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Apr 6, 2018)

William of Walworth said:


> On 1st April (Easter Sunday, not April Fool!  ,  The Observer had a similar article by Dan Hancox, which was massively more detailed .....  pretty interesting though, I found.
> 
> The unstoppable rise of veganism : how a fringe movement went mainstream


Nice one. Quite a good article I thought, much better than the usual superficial rubbish that is the norm. I liked the naming of this pie...


----------



## mr steev (Apr 6, 2018)

IC3D said:


> I made a delishious vegan chocolate cake but somehow it cost £30



I make a lovely vegan chocolate cake and it less than £2. Is it decorated with gold leaf?


----------



## 8ball (Apr 9, 2018)

mr steev said:


> I make a lovely vegan chocolate cake and it less than £2. Is it decorated with gold leaf?



Gold leaf?

<thinks..>

No, you're ok, I'm pretty sure all metals are vegan.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Apr 20, 2018)

BWP talking to the scousers...



...I went to my first cube of truth last weekend. It was good.


----------



## mojo pixy (Apr 20, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> View attachment 132091



£3 for a pie? That's jokes.


----------



## Artaxerxes (Apr 21, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> Speaking of which, potential provocation of vegans in the US as the price of soy products rises ... I forsee anger.
> 
> China hits US soybeans with 25% tariff



Hmm, is this why the tofu prices have jumped up by 50p lately?


----------



## Yossarian (Apr 21, 2018)

Artaxerxes said:


> Hmm, is this why the tofu prices have jumped up by 50p lately?



No, the tariff rise would only apply to soybeans bought in China, and it was never implemented anyway, I think your tofu supplier is just trying to fuck you over.


----------



## Artaxerxes (Apr 21, 2018)

Yossarian said:


> No, the tariff rise would only apply to soybeans bought in China, and it was never implemented anyway, I think your tofu supplier is just trying to fuck you over.



Fucking Sainsburys, I can believe it.


----------



## Calamity1971 (Apr 21, 2018)

Artaxerxes said:


> Fucking Sainsburys, I can believe it.


Lidl have the cauldron one for £1.49 at the moment .


----------



## Artaxerxes (Apr 21, 2018)

Calamity1971 said:


> Lidl have the cauldron one for £1.49 at the moment .



I am nowhere near a Lidl sadly, my locals either a shitty Tesco Express or a larger Sainsburys that I loathe.


----------



## Calamity1971 (Apr 21, 2018)

Artaxerxes said:


> I am nowhere near a Lidl sadly, my locals either a shitty Tesco Express or a larger Sainsburys that I loathe.


That's shite. I also loathe Sainsbury's for being robbing bastard's and Tesco is just crap.


----------



## Artaxerxes (Apr 21, 2018)

Calamity1971 said:


> That's shite. I also loathe Sainsbury's for being robbing bastard's and Tesco is just crap.



I used to be near Tesco Leytonstone which was pretty good, they had a shit load of cheap, basic, Indian food and ingredients and we made ourselves fat on cheap frozen samosas when they went on offer for holidays.


----------



## mrs quoad (May 9, 2018)

PSA. 

London customer makes Subway worker confess he put bacon in sandwich | Daily Mail Online


----------



## UnderAnOpenSky (May 9, 2018)

mrs quoad said:


> PSA.
> 
> London customer makes Subway worker confess he put bacon in sandwich | Daily Mail Online



sandwich artists


----------



## OzT (May 11, 2018)

Artaxerxes said:


> I used to be near Tesco Leytonstone which was pretty good, they had a shit load of cheap, basic, Indian food and ingredients and we made ourselves fat on cheap frozen samosas when they went on offer for holidays.


 
Tesco Leytonstone, singles nights on Thursdays when I used to be round there


----------



## William of Walworth (May 12, 2018)

Aldis works pretty well for veggie and vegan options, in our dull but recent shopping experiences


----------



## paolo (May 12, 2018)

I had a vegan Chilli for lunch.

“I woz robbed”

Thought it was going to be a soya bean (texture equivalent).

Next week the pub is doing a swanky six course vegan tasting menu.

Might have to give it a go.


----------



## paolo (May 12, 2018)

ETA: My animal lusting tastebuds might yet be convinced, but this last month I’ve seen no end of tasty looking vegan treats in mags like a Time Out.

I’m sure purists will say that good food is meant to look horrible, like a culinary hair shirt, it can only be good if you’re being punished. But oh my, some recent photos of vegan treats look very, very, bad. Nom. Sign me up. It’s moved on from the plate of gray beans.


----------



## Teaboy (May 16, 2018)

It's National Vegetarian Week!  Time for us to celebrate being marginally less despised by vegans then the rest of you lot.  I dunno we're probably just seen as cowards or vanguardists or something.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (May 18, 2018)

Teaboy said:


> It's National Vegetarian Week!  Time for us to celebrate being marginally less despised by vegans then the rest of you lot.  I dunno we're probably just seen as cowards or vanguardists or something.


 lol @ "despised" by vegans. Not sure that there is a whole lot of "despising" going on tbh. Most people who now call themselves vegan were once meat eaters or vegetarians. 
National Vegetarian Week appears to be a rather low key affair, or perhaps I just haven't noticed. I doesn't appear to have anywhere near the same buzz that the Veganuary campaign had, which I find surprising given that there are supposed to be more vegetarians around than vegans.


----------



## Teaboy (May 18, 2018)

I guess we just get on with our lives.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (May 18, 2018)

Teaboy said:


> I guess we just get on with our lives.


I guess so, untroubled by the ethical issues raised by animal agriculture. I imagine that it might be easier to sleep at night when you able to turn a blind eye to the atrocities involved and pretend that they don't exist. 

Nice one!


----------



## NoXion (May 21, 2018)

All agriculture involves killing or displacing animals. Stop pretending it's a qualitative rather than a quantitative difference.


----------



## ddraig (May 21, 2018)

_http://www.veggievision.tv/we-chat-...egan-chef-presenter-and-author-keith-squires/

Up to now veganism has been held as a belief but now I feel the argument is shifting. Being vegan is very logical, its healthy, ecological, tasty and doesn’t involve cruelty and suffering to animals. So it is really eating meat that is becoming a belief rather than the norm that everyone takes for granted.

It is great to see so many young people recognising this and deciding to become vegan. Also there is a huge rise in people eating more vegan meals or being flexitarian. My experience is that it is a big jump for a lot of people go vegan overnight. They are not sure how to cook the food and have other family members to consider. Or they just don’t have time or energy to make a big change_


----------



## 8ball (May 23, 2018)

Found this lying about, think it was probably meant to go in here.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (May 24, 2018)

So because plant agriculture results in the accidental killing and displacement of animals apparently this justifies the intentional mass slaughter that is an integral part of the animal agriculture.


----------



## 8ball (May 24, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> So because plant agriculture results in the accidental killing and displacement of animals apparently this justifies the intentional mass slaughter that is an integral part of the animal agriculture.



Really, who writes like this?


----------



## PaoloSanchez (May 25, 2018)

Earthling Ed having a great conversation with his friends dad on his US and Canada tour...


----------



## 8ball (May 25, 2018)

Some carnist berzerkers have taken up the "silly name" baton and are stirring up their own counter-storm on Youtube:

Ginny Bloodlett
Marcus Buddyslaughter
Protein Pete
Cindy Carnage-MaGeddon


----------



## D'wards (May 29, 2018)

Butchers 'living in fear' as vegan attacks on the rise, says Countryside Alliance


----------



## gentlegreen (May 29, 2018)

8ball said:


> Some carnist berzerkers have taken up the "silly name" baton and are stirring up their own counter-storm on Youtube:
> 
> Ginny Bloodlett
> Marcus Buddyslaughter
> ...



LOL

apparently this is a "thing" on the Interwebs ...


----------



## littlebabyjesus (May 29, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> So because plant agriculture results in the accidental killing and displacement of animals apparently this justifies the intentional mass slaughter that is an integral part of the animal agriculture.


To be accurate, there's nothing accidental about killing pest animals such as rabbits.

As for the intentional mass slaughter, that is half the story. It comes as part of a package alongside intentional mass breeding.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (May 29, 2018)




----------



## NoXion (May 29, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> So because plant agriculture results in the accidental killing and displacement of animals apparently this justifies the intentional mass slaughter that is an integral part of the animal agriculture.



I didn't say anything about justification. I doubt that rabbits care whether they are being killed to make stew or killed to stop them eating too many crops.


----------



## Jeff Robinson (May 31, 2018)

Democracy Now segment with Glenn Greenwald on how the US government - at the behest of their corporate puppet masters - protects animal abuse whilst treating animal rights activists who expose the abuse and rescue animals from it as 'terrorists':


----------



## 8ball (May 31, 2018)

V. worrying how far the term 'terrorist' has morphed - will take a look later.

Found out about a Nottingham stalwart closing this morning (many fond memories but not been in years) - bit surprised about the decision to move away from strict veg*ness by the new owners- maybe the 'flexi' thing is playing a part:

Nottingham's popular Alley Cafe Bar is to close


----------



## Jeff Robinson (May 31, 2018)

8ball said:


> V. worrying how far the term 'terrorist' has morphed - will take a look later.
> 
> Found out about a Nottingham stalwart closing this morning (many fond memories but not been in years) - bit surprised about the decision to move away from strict veg*ness by the new owners- maybe the 'flexi' thing is playing a part:
> 
> Nottingham's popular Alley Cafe Bar is to close



I have fond memories too. I remember going when it was one of the few places in Nottingham where you could get vegan options. Now you can get them pretty much everywhere. I’ve often wondered whether, paradoxically, the spread of veganism may actually in some instances lead to the decline of vegetarian/vegan restaurants that no longer serve the niche function they once were. That being said, in this instance it seems the owner decided to sell up two years ago when he took over a pub. Maybe he just wanted a change and to devote his energies elsewhere?


----------



## ddraig (May 31, 2018)

Jeff Robinson said:


> I have fond memories too. I remember going when it was one of the few places in Nottingham where you could get vegan options. Now you can get them pretty much everywhere. I’ve often wondered whether, paradoxically, the spread of veganism may actually in some instances lead to the decline of vegetarian/vegan restaurants that are no longer serve the niche function they once were. That being said, in this instance it seems the owner decided to sell up two years ago when he took over a pub. Maybe he just wanted a change and to devote his energies elsewhere?


yes, the supermarkets stocking more stuff makes the independent health food shops struggle


----------



## Yuwipi Woman (May 31, 2018)

ddraig said:


> yes, the supermarkets stocking more stuff makes the independent health food shops struggle



The shear number of shops selling "health" food has to be running a lot of independents out of business.  There's an intersection where I live that has 5 supermarkets all within a couple of blocks of each other.  All but one stocks "health food."  In fact, one long-term, independent shop, a few block away, went out of business.


----------



## 8ball (May 31, 2018)

Yuwipi Woman said:


> The shear number of shops selling "health" food has to be running a lot of independents out of business.  There's an intersection where I live that has 5 supermarkets all within a couple of blocks of each other.  All but one stocks "health food."  In fact, one long-term, independent shop, a few block away, went out of business.



I’m always foggy on what exactly “health food” is.  It feels like the distinction seems clearer in the States.


----------



## ddraig (May 31, 2018)

wholefoods (not the new ish shop)


----------



## 8ball (May 31, 2018)

ddraig said:


> wholefoods (not the new ish shop)



That sounds to me like apples, onions etc.  More greengrocer territory than e.g. Holland and Barrett or something (which is what I kind of think of).

Supermarkets have always done those.  As well as greengrocers, obv (and usually cheaper with it).


----------



## ddraig (May 31, 2018)

can't tell if genuine or looking for holes


----------



## Yuwipi Woman (May 31, 2018)

8ball said:


> I’m always foggy on what exactly “health food” is.  It feels like the distinction seems clearer in the States.



Yeah, that's why I put it in quotes.  In the US, it usually means whole-grain, organic, beans, soy, and cruelty free products.  It probably is easier to determine that in the US for the simple reason that most of the food is so gawdawful to begin with. (Whatever "cruelty free" means).


----------



## 8ball (May 31, 2018)

Yuwipi Woman said:


> Yeah, that's why I put it in quotes.  In the US, it usually means whole-grain, organic, beans, soy, and cruelty free products.  It probably is easier to determine that in the US for the simple reason that most of the food is so gawdawful to begin with.



I nearly wondered aloud whether it meant what the rest of the world calls “food”, but felt it was a bit mean.


----------



## 8ball (May 31, 2018)

ddraig said:


> can't tell if genuine or looking for holes



Is it trust issues that’s really behind your vibe, then?  

Maybe it will help if you grasp the nettle once in a while.


----------



## Yuwipi Woman (May 31, 2018)

8ball said:


> I nearly wondered aloud whether it meant what the rest of the world calls “food”, but felt it was a bit mean.



Certainly, what our great-grandparents considered "food."


----------



## 8ball (May 31, 2018)

Yuwipi Woman said:


> Certainly, what our great-grandparents considered "food."



Indeed, isn’t that one of <name forgotten>’s rules?  Not too eat too much stuff your grandparents would have recognised as food?


----------



## Yuwipi Woman (May 31, 2018)

8ball said:


> Indeed, isn’t that one of <name forgotten>’s rules?  Not too eat too much stuff your grandparents would have recognised as food?



Michael Pollen?  

He has a new book:


----------



## 8ball (May 31, 2018)

Yuwipi Woman said:


> Michael Pollen?
> 
> He has a new book:



That’s him.  Don’t know his other stuff but imo his 7 rules for eating should be taught everywhere in schools.

Edit: that book looks pretty interesting - have you read it?


----------



## Yuwipi Woman (May 31, 2018)

8ball said:


> That’s him.  Don’t know his other stuffy but imo his 7 rules for eating should be taught everywhere in schools.



At least in US schools, it would be a vast improvement over the corporate/farm lobby prepared propaganda that's served up now.


----------



## 8ball (May 31, 2018)

Yuwipi Woman said:


> At least in US schools, it would be a vast improvement over the corporate/farm lobby prepared propaganda that's served up now.



I was at a school recently and it worried me how thungs might be going re: certain kinds of market and advertising access.  

You probably missed the edit on my last post.


----------



## Yuwipi Woman (May 31, 2018)

8ball said:


> I was at a school recently and it worried me how thungs might be going re: certain kinds of market and advertising access.
> 
> You probably missed the edit on my last post.



It is disconcerting how much influence that the corporate world is attempting to have over food information.  I grew up with the standard American diet that was taught in schools.  I still remember the milk, corn, and pork board ads.  As an aging person, I've had to deal with all sorts of medical problems related to diet. 

Yes, I missed it.  I haven't read his new book, but I listened to an interview with him about it.  It sounds interesting.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jun 6, 2018)

NoXion said:


> I didn't say anything about justification. I doubt that rabbits care whether they are being killed to make stew or killed to stop them eating too many crops.


Well, the fact that apparently "all agriculture involves killing and displacing animals" is an implicit justification for animal agriculture. Plant agriculture results in several orders of magnitude _fewer _animal deaths than animal agriculture (that takes care of the "quantitative"). On top of that there are hefty negative side effects of animal agriculture, namely environmental and health which means that "qualitatively" it's a bit naff too. Animal ag is a lose lose. 
(Vegans kill more animals – 45:31)

"Veganism is a way of living which seeks to exclude, *as far as is possible and practicable*, all forms of exploitation of, and cruelty to, animals for food, clothing or any other purpose."

Human activity on this beautiful planet of ours does result in environmental damage and animal deaths, that is undoubtedly true. We should strive to minimise our negative impact, and becoming a vegan is imo a good place to start. 

(in b4 the plants rights activists make an appearance)


----------



## veganomics (Jun 7, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> lol @ "despised" by vegans. Not sure that there is a whole lot of "despising" going on tbh. Most people who now call themselves vegan were once meat eaters or vegetarians.


I kind of agree, I don't think there is much in the way of real "despising", although I do think that vegans feel that vegetarians are closer to meaters than they are to vegans, whereas vegetarians appear to see themselves as a non extreme "happy medium" between the two. They struggle with acknowledging the harm involved in the production of milk, eggs and animal skin products and would rather those not be mentioned.


----------



## 8ball (Jun 7, 2018)

Whereas vegans play the “la la la” game when anyone points out any harm they may be doing.

As well as fighting among themselves over trivial matters.

I think it’s time we gave the plants rights activists a go.  

And the Jains.


----------



## 8ball (Jun 7, 2018)

I should also point out re: the “non extreme” thing - I’m not too sure when being “extreme” became such a big deal.

It’s hardly like reality gives a fuck about Overton windows.


----------



## veganomics (Jun 8, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Well, the fact that apparently "all agriculture involves killing and displacing animals" is an implicit justification for animal agriculture. Plant agriculture results in several orders of magnitude _fewer _animal deaths than animal agriculture (that takes care of the "quantitative"). On top of that there are hefty negative side effects of animal agriculture, namely environmental and health which means that "qualitatively" it's a bit naff too. Animal ag is a lose lose.
> (Vegans kill more animals – 45:31)
> 
> "Veganism is a way of living which seeks to exclude, *as far as is possible and practicable*, all forms of exploitation of, and cruelty to, animals for food, clothing or any other purpose."
> ...


This seems to be another one of those disingenuous arguments, trying to have a dig at the arguments in favour of veganism by faking concern for small critters and plants. If they bothered with even a minimal amount of research they'd realise that MORE critters and plants are killed and more natural habitats destroyed in order to satisfy the meat eaters tastebuds. 



The search for more grey areas, edge cases and red herring arguments against veganism continues.


----------



## 8ball (Jun 8, 2018)

veganomics said:


> The search for more *grey areas*, edge cases and red herring arguments against veganism continues.



As does the mission to keep the club small and pure.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Jun 8, 2018)

veganomics said:


> I kind of agree, I don't think there is much in the way of real "despising", although I do think that vegans feel that vegetarians are closer to meaters than they are to vegans, whereas vegetarians appear to see themselves as a non extreme "happy medium" between the two. They struggle with acknowledging the harm involved in the production of milk, eggs and animal skin products and would rather those not be mentioned.


Well I do think that vegetarians have more in common with meat eaters than they do with vegans. There doesn't appear to be much in the way of an ethical component to vegetarianism, although some of them appear to believe that there is, perhaps due to lack of awareness. It appears to be just a diet. Omni's eat whatever they like guilt free, vegetarians abstain from flesh but aren't to bothered about dairy and eggs or leather. Whereas veganism as you well know is more than "just a diet".


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Jun 8, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Well I do think that vegetarians have more in common with meat eaters than they do with vegans


Yeah, we’re all on the fun side of the fence, eating cheese.


----------



## lazythursday (Jun 8, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Well I do think that vegetarians have more in common with meat eaters than they do with vegans. There doesn't appear to be much in the way of an ethical component to vegetarianism, although some of them appear to believe that there is, perhaps due to lack of awareness. It appears to be just a diet. Omni's eat whatever they like guilt free, vegetarians abstain from flesh but aren't to bothered about dairy and eggs or leather. Whereas veganism as you well know is more than "just a diet".


I don't think you can say vegetarianism is 'just a diet' as most vegetarians are doing it for ethical reasons to reduce animal suffering. Everyone can easily understand that a steak is a dead animal and a sentient being has been killed. The connection between cheese and death/cruelty is just not obvious unless you are going to actively research it. And I do think adopting a plant-based diet is often a series of steps, rather than an instant switch. Also for many people, reducing the suffering they cause is 'good enough' even though it's not removing at altogether. I guess I'm in that camp as I don't eat meat or dairy generally but I sometimes eat products that have egg as an ingredient and I occasionally eat fish. I'd like to do better, but there are practical barriers to that.


----------



## 8ball (Jun 8, 2018)

I like that vegetarians have been properly cast into the outer darkness now.


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Jun 8, 2018)

8ball said:


> I like that vegetarians have been properly cast into the outer darkness now.


They’re just not pure enough


----------



## andysays (Jun 8, 2018)

8ball said:


> I like that vegetarians have been properly cast into the outer darkness now.


Might as well go back to eating meat and torturing puppies like the rest of us carnivores...


----------



## 8ball (Jun 8, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Omni's eat whatever they like guilt free...



Oh?  I thought the fragile carnists were continually at pains to justify their evil ways...


----------



## Calamity1971 (Jun 8, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> vegetarians abstain from flesh but aren't to bothered about dairy and eggs or leather.


Not true, I went veggie at ten and also stopped wearing leather. 
You might want to ask these to change their company name 
Home


----------



## 8ball (Jun 8, 2018)

Calamity1971 said:


> Not true, I went veggie at ten and also stopped wearing leather.
> You might want to ask these to change their company name
> Home



I remember my veggie friends at Uni (over 20 years ago) having veggie Docs.


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Jun 9, 2018)

Meat traces 'found in vegetarian meals'

Oooops


----------



## 8ball (Jun 9, 2018)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> Meat traces 'found in vegetarian meals'
> 
> Oooops



Pretty inconclusive at this stage if it’s a meat-free factory and the VegSoc have tested as well as the supermarkets.

Seems to be only the Telegraph that is claiming other results, with little detail given about their testing methods.

Needs to be followed up obv because any adulteration of foods is a serious issue.


----------



## andysays (Jul 1, 2018)

Just in case anyone thought being angry was obligatory if you're vegan

Redruth vegan woman's 'shock' at frog in her Aldi lettuce


> A woman looking forward to tucking into a freshly bought lettuce got a shock when she found a frog lurking among the leaves. Shevaughan Tolputt, 37, from Carn Brea in Cornwall, bought the lettuce at Aldi in nearby Redruth. Aldi has apologised and said it is investigating how the frog got into the lettuce and offered her a refund on the 36p salad. "I was shocked, but I can also see the funny side of it," she said.


----------



## Opera Buffa (Jul 1, 2018)

BBC said:
			
		

> she said she has avoided eating the bits of the lettuce where the frog made its home.




She still ate the lettuce, just gave it a good wash


----------



## dylanredefined (Jul 2, 2018)

8ball said:


> Oh?  I thought the fragile carnists were continually at pains to justify their evil ways...


"If you can't shoot rabbits how will you shoot fascists?"


----------



## ddraig (Jul 4, 2018)

.


----------



## Toast Rider (Jul 4, 2018)

Eat what you like, says I. I've never been convinced by the vegan argument.

I'm sure that pearl of wisdom will go far... 

E2A - in answer to the question, they don't make me want to eat meat, but they certainlyy don't convince me


----------



## keybored (Jul 6, 2018)

Toast Rider said:


> Eat what you like, says I. I've never been convinced by the vegan argument.
> 
> I'm sure that pearl of wisdom will go far...
> 
> E2A - in answer to the question, they don't make me want to eat meat, but they certainlyy don't convince me


Hello Awesome.


----------



## Toast Rider (Jul 6, 2018)

keybored said:


> Hello Awesome.


thanks!


----------



## mrs quoad (Jul 30, 2018)

PETA announces 2018 UK Hottest Vegan finalists | Daily Mail Online



> He's always felt a deep connection with animals and has attended protests against Canada Goose and participated in Cube of Truth vegan outreach to speak to people on the street about vegan living.
> 
> ...
> 
> ...


----------



## ddraig (Jul 30, 2018)

Do you feel better after posting that?


----------



## 8ball (Jul 30, 2018)

A pub near me is hosting a "vegan stand-up comedy night".

Might go along - apparently selling out fast and must admit I'm curious about what it will entail.


----------



## Mrs Miggins (Jul 30, 2018)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> Meat traces 'found in vegetarian meals'
> 
> Oooops


I've said it before but many moons ago when I did a Christmas student stint at Pork Farms in Nottingham, they made the cheese and onion rolls on the same machine as the sausage rolls. That was a long time ago but it still kinda shocks me.


----------



## gentlegreen (Jul 30, 2018)

Mrs Miggins said:


> I've said it before but many moons ago when I did a Christmas student stint at Pork Farms in Nottingham, they made the cheese and onion rolls on the same machine as the sausage rolls. That was a long time ago but it still kinda shocks me.


Veggies working on a pig farm ? 

EDIT :-

Oh I see ...


----------



## mrs quoad (Jul 30, 2018)

ddraig said:


> Do you feel better after posting that?


Entertained! 

My wife is sometimes all, like, “that’s a totally unjustified stereotype / meme with no foundation in reality whatsoever!!!!” Which, as I think I said somewhere about p.1, is a very long way from my experience which was, in turn, borne out by this small and entirely non representative sample 

Edit: probably not p1, but I never claimed to be numerate! 


mrs quoad said:


> IME, one of the more prominent issues [edit: wrt being put off, and as opposed to “angry vegans”] is the tedium of single-issue vegans who don't really talk about anything but their veganism, vegan principles, veganity, and associated vegan-oriented topics of conversation.
> 
> Someone more droller than I might also reflect that, in fairness, well* over 11% of your 9 posts are not about veganism.
> 
> *let well = 0.11111111111%


----------



## ddraig (Jul 30, 2018)

why does it entertain you?


----------



## 8ball (Jul 30, 2018)

You'd hope most vegans were aware of how absolutely awful PETA are.


----------



## Brownglass (Jul 31, 2018)

Watermelon Man said:


> OK, I'll get it out in the open. I'm vegan, pleased to meet you.
> 
> I'm vegan because I believe we should treat animals much better in this world, and the environment, and our own health.
> 
> ...


I have been trying to cut down my meat intake, don't know if Quorn is a bad name round here, but it seemed pretty good in a stew.
Q is made from fungi apparently!
Was thinking on the nature of animals - so looked up that beef, pork and lamb come from other mammals.
Is it OK to eat fish coz they don't have any feelings? (Nirvana, Something in the way)
Or chicken, coz they're birds?
Vegetarian is sufficient I would think.
Or at least only white meat as it is healthier for you.
Vegans tend to have a deathly palour about them!


----------



## 8ball (Jul 31, 2018)

I have a feeling you’re not going to be here very long.


----------



## mrs quoad (Jul 31, 2018)

ddraig said:


> why does it entertain you?



You know how loyal Georgia off love island is?

_Exactly.  

_


----------



## ddraig (Jul 31, 2018)

mrs quoad said:


> You know how loyal Georgia off love island is?
> 
> _Exactly.
> 
> _


no idea who that is and never watched that programme
odd that that meme entertains you still, won't expect a proper response, fill your boots and keep scraping the barrel


----------



## mrs quoad (Jul 31, 2018)

ddraig said:


> no idea who that is and never watched that programme
> odd that that meme entertains you still, won't expect a proper response, fill your boots and keep scraping the barrel


Ktx! 

I’ll look forward to failing your standards again at some point in the not too distant future


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Jul 31, 2018)

ddraig said:


> why does it entertain you?


I’d guess it’s something to do with the well established trope of taking a situation, person and stereotype and then exaggerating it to a mildly ludicrous point for comedic effect.


----------



## Spymaster (Jul 31, 2018)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> I’d guess it’s something to do with the well established trope of taking a situation, person and stereotype and then exaggerating it to a mildly ludicrous point for comedic effect.


And the fact that I this case, it’s true.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jul 31, 2018)

8ball said:


> You'd hope most vegans were aware of how absolutely awful PETA are.



Everyone I know despises them.


----------



## existentialist (Jul 31, 2018)

Spymaster said:


> And the fact that I this case, it’s true.


Self-evidently so. In fact, the attempt to deny this is the case are almost more ludicrous than the stuff being cited. 

And if I met someone through a dating site whom it emerged was using it as a way to proselytise, I'd be out of there faster than you could say "bunny boiler"


----------



## 8ball (Jul 31, 2018)

existentialist said:


> Self-evidently so. In fact, the attempt to deny this is the case are almost more ludicrous than the stuff being cited.
> 
> And if I met someone through a dating site whom it emerged was using it as a way to proselytise, I'd be out of there faster than you could say "bunny boiler"



Although boiling bunnies is frowned upon.

Except for humane euthanasia reasons, obv.


----------



## kebabking (Jul 31, 2018)

andysays said:


> Just in case anyone thought being angry was obligatory if you're vegan
> 
> Redruth vegan woman's 'shock' at frog in her Aldi lettuce



Sorry, has yet no one noticed _Shevaughan?
_
Christ, what fucking illiterate crisp packet named, and then recorded that - or was it done over the phone and the 'reporter' so imbecilic that he'd no idea how to spell Siobhan?


----------



## ddraig (Jul 31, 2018)

chase this one quoad


----------



## existentialist (Jul 31, 2018)

kebabking said:


> Sorry, has yet no one noticed _Shevaughan?
> _
> Christ, what fucking illiterate crisp packet named, and then recorded that - or was it done over the phone and the 'reporter' so imbecilic that he'd no idea how to spell Siobhan?


Proper vegans never use a word with the "bh" letter combination


----------



## kebabking (Jul 31, 2018)

Actually, the only thing that gets on my tits about preachy vegans is the tediously sanctimonious 'ethical' and 'cruelty free' label they drape themselves in.

Personally I couldn't care less if they break wind and faint all over each other - and actually I have an interest in vegan arguments about the use of resources in livestock Vs arable food production - but fuck me sideways, being a sanctimonious, holier than thou smug cunt is not the way to win friends and influence people...

(And, dear vegans, I have a sneaky feeling that for lots of the brethren, it's not - it's about feeling all superior to the carnists and plastic vege's - that for a true vegan, animals must die at the hands of others...).


----------



## 8ball (Jul 31, 2018)

I've decided to go along to the vegan stand-up comedy night with a vegan mate of mine.

Will report back...


----------



## kebabking (Jul 31, 2018)

8ball said:


> I've decided to go along to the vegan stand-up comedy night with a vegan mate of mine.
> 
> Will report back...



Will the joke be that the Vegans can't stand up for more than a few minutes at a time?


----------



## 8ball (Jul 31, 2018)

kebabking said:


> Will the joke be that the Vegans can't stand up for more than a few minutes at a time?



I've got a feeling from looking up blurb and some names that these ones will be at the upper end of the self-awareness curve, so one of them might make that joke themselves.
We'll see, though.


----------



## Saul Goodman (Jul 31, 2018)

kebabking said:


> Actually, the only thing that gets on my tits about preachy vegans is the tediously sanctimonious 'ethical' and 'cruelty free' label they drape themselves in.
> 
> Personally I couldn't care less if they break wind and faint all over each other - and actually I have an interest in vegan arguments about the use of resources in livestock Vs arable food production - but fuck me sideways, being a sanctimonious, holier than thou smug cunt vegan is not the way to win friends and influence people...
> 
> (And, dear vegans, I have a sneaky feeling that for lots of the brethren, it's not - it's about feeling all superior to the carnists and plastic vege's - that for a true vegan, animals must die at the hands of others...).


Just kidding... but on my quest to garner more knowledge on the subject, I've been getting to know a few of more of our vegan friends. So far only 88% of them are sanctimonious cunts, so not all of them are in it for self-righteous reasons.


----------



## Spymaster (Jul 31, 2018)

8ball said:


> I've decided to go along to the vegan stand-up comedy night with a vegan mate of mine.


Why did the carnist cross the road?


----------



## andysays (Jul 31, 2018)

Spymaster said:


> Why did the carnist cross the road?


No, wait, I know this one. Does it have something to so with fragility?


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Jul 31, 2018)

Torture as usual on Britain's farms. Video shows piglets being smashed against a wall

Red Tractor accepts need for change as shoppers want more spot checks


----------



## 8ball (Jul 31, 2018)

Jeff Robinson said:


> Torture as usual on Britain's farms. Video shows piglets being smashed against a wall
> 
> Red Tractor accepts need for change as shoppers want more spot checks



I think this is a wonderful thing.

Would be a hypocrite to say otherwise.


----------



## Saul Goodman (Jul 31, 2018)

Spymaster said:


> Why did the carnist cross the road?


To carry the vegan across who wasn't strong enough to manage it himself?


----------



## Spymaster (Jul 31, 2018)

andysays said:


> No, wait, I know this one. Does it have something to so with fragility?


Possibly. I’m sure we can think of a few.

Similarly, how many vegans/carnists does it take to change a lightbulb?


----------



## Saul Goodman (Jul 31, 2018)

Spymaster said:


> Similarly, how many vegans does it take to change a lightbulb?


It depends how heavy the bulb is, but I'll hazard a guess at 12.


----------



## Brownglass (Jul 31, 2018)

8ball said:


> I have a feeling you’re not going to be here very long.


Story of my life!


----------



## existentialist (Jul 31, 2018)

andysays said:


> No, wait, I know this one. Does it have something to so with fragility?


I think chickens are going to be involved.


----------



## Brownglass (Jul 31, 2018)

existentialist said:


> I think chickens are going to be involved.


They do taste good, though!


----------



## existentialist (Jul 31, 2018)

Spymaster said:


> Possibly. I’m sure we can think of a few.
> 
> Similarly, how many vegans/carnists does it take to change a lightbulb?


One carnist, one vegan. The carnist changes the bulb, while the vegan reminds everybody that he's a vegan.


----------



## existentialist (Jul 31, 2018)

Brownglass said:


> They do taste good, though!


Wouldn't know: I'm a fragile carnist vegetarian.


----------



## 8ball (Jul 31, 2018)

existentialist said:


> One carnist, one vegan. The carnist changes the bulb, while the vegan reminds everybody that he's a vegan.



And a second vegan to steam the first vegan's vagina.


----------



## Spymaster (Jul 31, 2018)

existentialist said:


> One carnist, one vegan. The carnist changes the bulb, while the vegan reminds everybody that he's a vegan.


.... and therefore, morally superior to bulb changers.


----------



## existentialist (Jul 31, 2018)

Spymaster said:


> .... and therefore, morally superior to bulb changers.


...and decide that light is meat, so we should all be living in the dark.


----------



## 8ball (Jul 31, 2018)

Saul Goodman said:


> To carry the vegan across who wasn't strong enough to manage it himself?



To persecute the vegan who had freed the chicken from the chains of carnist oppression?

While picking up the chicken's remains for dinner, since chickens have little road sense, possibly.


----------



## Saul Goodman (Jul 31, 2018)

existentialist said:


> the vegan reminds everybody that he's a vegan.


This is what I've come to notice in my quest to learn a little more about our vegan friends.
It's like that Apple fanboi joke. How do you know someone owns an iPhone/iPad? Wait for 2 seconds and they'll tell you. The same seems to apply to the majority of vegans (in my research). They seem to be wearing veganism as a fashion* statement.

*see: moral superiority.


----------



## 8ball (Jul 31, 2018)

Saul Goodman said:


> This is what I've come to notice in my quest to learn a little more about our vegan friends.
> It's like that Apple fanboi joke. How do you know someone owns an iPhone/iPad? Wait for 2 seconds and they'll tell you. The same seems to apply to the majority of vegans (in my research). They seem to be wearing veganism as a fashion statement.



I've got an iPhone *and* an iPad.

*And* I had a vegan tea last night.
Mostly because I'd accidentally frozen my eggs, but it counts.


----------



## existentialist (Jul 31, 2018)

Saul Goodman said:


> This is what I've come to notice in my quest to learn a little more about our vegan friends.
> It's like that Apple fanboi joke. How do you know someone owns an iPhone/iPad? Wait for 2 seconds and they'll tell you. The same seems to apply to the majority of vegans (in my research). They seem to be wearing veganism as a fashion statement.


More than fashion - there is usually (but not invariably) a moralistic element


----------



## Saul Goodman (Jul 31, 2018)

existentialist said:


> More than fashion - there is usually (but not invariably) a moralistic element


Corrected as you were replying.


----------



## 8ball (Jul 31, 2018)

existentialist said:


> More than fashion - there is usually (but not invariably) a moralistic element



I think there's a notion of "purity" pervading it.

There is definitely a sub-group of vegans that look down on the sub-group of vegans that enjoy dirty processed vegan snacks.


----------



## Saul Goodman (Jul 31, 2018)

8ball said:


> I've got an iPhone *and* an iPad.
> 
> *And* I had a vegan tea last night.
> Mostly because I'd accidentally frozen my eggs, but it counts.


See, you're getting there


----------



## Brownglass (Jul 31, 2018)

Spymaster said:


> .... and therefore, morally superior to bulb changers.


As you know, there is a hierarchy to moral superiorty regarding the use of animals!


----------



## Saul Goodman (Jul 31, 2018)

8ball said:


> I think there's a notion of "purity" pervading it.
> 
> There is definitely a sub-group of vegans that look down on the sub-group of vegans that enjoy dirty processed vegan snacks.


As I'm sure there's a sub-group who look down on them for not living off the grid. One-up(down)manship seems to be the order of the day for a lot of them. It's a fight to see who can be the biggest sanctimonious cunt.


----------



## 8ball (Jul 31, 2018)

Why is vegan cheese so bad?

It was never tested on mice.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jul 31, 2018)

Spymaster said:


> how many vegans does it take to change a lightbulb?


Six. One to put the new bulb in; five others to express the intrinsic value of the dead bulb via the medium of dance.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jul 31, 2018)

I fear ddraig will spontaneously combust when he sees this. 

Vegan comedy?

Vegan. Comedy. ????


----------



## 8ball (Jul 31, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I fear ddraig will spontaneously combust when he sees this.
> 
> Vegan comedy?
> 
> Vegan. Comedy. ????



Part of me always thinks it's a bit tongue-in-cheek with him, but he's amazing at staying in character due to his undercover police training.


----------



## Saul Goodman (Jul 31, 2018)

8ball said:


> Part of me always thinks it's a bit tongue-in-cheek with him


"Whose cheeks" immediately springs to mind.


----------



## ddraig (Jul 31, 2018)

8ball said:


> Part of me always thinks it's a bit tongue-in-cheek with him, but he's amazing at staying in character due to his* undercover police training*.



why the fuck would you say this?? It's a dodgy and dangerous slur, why do it?


----------



## existentialist (Jul 31, 2018)

ddraig said:


> why the fuck would you say this?? It's a dodgy and dangerous slur, why do it?


Trust me, ddraig, _nobody_ is going to think you are an undercover policeman. Your secret is safe with us.


----------



## Saul Goodman (Jul 31, 2018)

ddraig said:


> why the fuck would you say this?? It's a dodgy and dangerous slur, why do it?


I think it was a bit tongue-in-cheek


----------



## 8ball (Jul 31, 2018)

Saul Goodman said:


> I think it was a bit tongue-in-cheek



But I managed to say it in a deadpan way because of my extensive... 

Fuck fuck fuck!! 

How do you get your username changed?


----------



## ddraig (Jul 31, 2018)

8ball said:


> But I managed to say it in a deadpan way because of my extensive...
> 
> Fuck fuck fuck!!
> 
> How do you get your username changed?


sad pathetic lying coward


----------



## 8ball (Jul 31, 2018)

ddraig said:


> sad pathetic lying coward



I've changed my mind - I was being totally serious.  

Best report my terrible slur to the mods - it's a fair cop, guv.
No pun intended, obviously.


----------



## ddraig (Jul 31, 2018)

8ball said:


> I've changed my mind - I was being totally serious.
> 
> Best report my terrible slur to the mods - it's a fair cop, guv.
> No pun intended, obviously.


why do you think it's something to joke about?


----------



## Saul Goodman (Jul 31, 2018)

ddraig said:


> sad pathetic lying coward


(un)subtle nuance isn't your thing, is it


----------



## 8ball (Jul 31, 2018)

ddraig said:


> why do you think it's something to joke about?



Now you think I'm joking.


----------



## Saul Goodman (Jul 31, 2018)

ddraig said:


> why do you think it's something to joke about?


I'd guess it's because you're so easy to wind up, and it's fun watching you froth?


----------



## ddraig (Jul 31, 2018)

8ball said:


> Now you think I'm joking.


you're quite weird and sad, pitiful


----------



## Saul Goodman (Jul 31, 2018)

ddraig said:


> you're quite weird and sad, pitiful


----------



## 8ball (Jul 31, 2018)

ddraig said:


> you're quite weird and sad, pitiful



And you like to accuse others of projection.


----------



## ddraig (Jul 31, 2018)

8ball said:


> And you like to accuse others of projection.


being a pathetic baiting liar on here keeps you away from the school gates I guess, silver lining and all


----------



## Saul Goodman (Jul 31, 2018)

ddraig said:


> being a pathetic baiting liar on here keeps you away from the school gates I guess, silver lining and all


You're a proper cunt.


----------



## ddraig (Jul 31, 2018)

Saul Goodman said:


> You're a proper cunt.


There IS a line is there??


----------



## Saul Goodman (Jul 31, 2018)

ddraig said:


> There IS a line is there??


Yes, and you just crossed it.
Post reported.


----------



## 8ball (Jul 31, 2018)

Saul Goodman said:


> You're a proper cunt.



I still can’t tell whether it’s tongue in cheek.  Fair play if it. 

Might want to get some help otherwise.


----------



## ddraig (Jul 31, 2018)

Saul Goodman said:


> Yes, and you just crossed it.
> Post reported.


in what way? what does your sick mind think I meant?
and saying someone is undercover plod is ok is it?


----------



## twentythreedom (Jul 31, 2018)

You people


----------



## Saul Goodman (Jul 31, 2018)

ddraig said:


> in what way? what does your sick mind think I meant?
> and saying someone is undercover plod is ok is it?


Fuck off you weirdo.


----------



## existentialist (Jul 31, 2018)

ddraig said:


> why do you think it's something to joke about?


Because, perhaps, the idea of someone with as little emotional regulation as you seem to have being an undercover copper is laughable?


----------



## 8ball (Jul 31, 2018)

existentialist said:


> Because, perhaps, the idea of someone with as little emotional regulation as you seem to have being an undercover copper is laughable?



And hence a pretty good cover if you can pull it off without cracking.


----------



## Saul Goodman (Jul 31, 2018)

8ball said:


> And hence a pretty good cover if you can pull it off *without cracking*.


And therein lies the problem.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Jul 31, 2018)

Spat my tea out I'm laughing so hard at this page
 No offence to anyone...but there's some genuinely very funny posts today


----------



## kebabking (Jul 31, 2018)

I wonder if vegan scene spycops - when they go to random Travelodges for their monthly debriefs - cut about in puppyskin brogues, have massive portions of Tandoori Chicken, Lamb Biryanni, and Burger King delivered, take 8 showers a day and spend the day saying _'nah, mate, i'm nothing special, just a cunt_...'?


----------



## existentialist (Jul 31, 2018)

ddraig said:


> being a pathetic baiting liar on here keeps you away from the school gates I guess, silver lining and all


Oh, and YOU'RE offended by insinuations? 

Still, I guess it's OK if you're doing it, and it's not as bad as suggesting someone's an undercover copper, is it?


----------



## existentialist (Jul 31, 2018)

ddraig said:


> There IS a line is there??


"I was only making a point", is that it?


----------



## existentialist (Jul 31, 2018)

kebabking said:


> I wonder if vegan scene spycops - when they go to random Travelodges for their monthly debriefs - cut about in puppyskin brogues, have massive portions of Tandoori Chicken, Lamb Biryanni, and Burger King delivered, take 8 showers a day and spend the day saying _'nah, mate, i'm nothing special, just a cunt_...'?


It's called "maintaining the covert persona"


----------



## Saul Goodman (Jul 31, 2018)

kebabking said:


> I wonder if vegan scene spycops - when they go to random Travelodges for their monthly debriefs - cut about in puppyskin brogues, have massive portions of Tandoori Chicken, Lamb Biryanni, and Burger King delivered, take 8 showers a day and spend the day saying _'nah, mate, i'm nothing special, just a cunt_...'?


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 29, 2018)

I missed out on the angry vegan meet up in London on Saturday. (grandson's birthday in Manchester)



I'll try and go next year, looks like it was a decent gathering.


----------



## Saul Goodman (Aug 29, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> I missed out on the angry vegan meet up in London on Saturday. (grandson's birthday in Manchester)
> 
> 
> 
> I'll try and go next year, looks like it was a decent gathering.



"A sea of vegans"
We should be so lucky


----------



## 8ball (Aug 29, 2018)

Grandson?  

Had you down as early twenties.


----------



## NoXion (Aug 29, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> I missed out on the angry vegan meet up in London on Saturday. (grandson's birthday in Manchester)
> 
> 
> 
> I'll try and go next year, looks like it was a decent gathering.




"End all animal oppression" - does that include the use of pest control measures?


----------



## Saul Goodman (Aug 29, 2018)

NoXion said:


> "End all animal oppression" - does that include the use of pest control measures?


Animal oppression that doesn't affect tofu munchers.


----------



## 8ball (Aug 29, 2018)

NoXion said:


> "End all animal oppression" - does that include the use of pest control measures?



Well, of course.  And oppression of humans by humans.  And oppression of animals by animals.

Best thing is to take off and nuke the entire site from orbit.


----------



## NoXion (Aug 29, 2018)

8ball said:


> Well, of course.  And oppression of humans by humans.  And oppression of animals by animals.
> 
> Best thing is to take off and nuke the entire site from orbit.



Vegans may be complicit in the murder and displacement of animals, but at least they don't eat their corpses, dammit!


----------



## Saul Goodman (Aug 29, 2018)

NoXion said:


> Vegans may be complicit in the murder and displacement of animals, but at least they don't eat their corpses, dammit!


So not only are they murdering cunts, they also waste the meat they murder?


----------



## NoXion (Aug 29, 2018)

Thankfully, there is a way out:



> *Non-Human Animals*
> 
> So far I've focused on suffering in just one species. This restriction of the abolitionist project is parochial; but our anthropocentric bias is deeply rooted. Hunting, killing, and exploiting members of other species enhanced the inclusive fitness of our genes in the ancestral environment. [Here we are more akin to chimpanzees than bonobos.] So unlike, say, the incest taboo, we don't have an innate predisposition to find, say, hunting and exploiting non-human animals wrong. We read that Irene Pepperberg's parrot, with whom we last shared a common ancestor several hundred million years ago, had the mental age of a three-year-old child. But it's still legal for so-called sportsmen to shoot birds for fun. If sportsmen shot babies and toddlers of our own species for fun, they'd be judged criminal sociopaths and locked up.
> 
> ...



If animal suffering is to truly be consigned to history, then we must be willing to engage in the wholesale modification of bloody-clawed nature in order to do so.


----------



## krtek a houby (Aug 29, 2018)

Saul Goodman said:


> Animal oppression that doesn't affect tofu munchers.



Tofu isn't munched, really. It's more like a yoghurt.


----------



## JimW (Aug 29, 2018)

krtek a houby said:


> Tofu isn't munched, really. It's more like a yoghurt.


Not all of it, smoked tofu and similar very chewy. The meat eaters can even enjoy blood tofu which is sort of like black pudding.


----------



## 8ball (Aug 29, 2018)

NoXion said:


> If animal suffering is to truly be consigned to history, then we must be willing to engage in the wholesale modification of bloody-clawed nature in order to do so.



Very funny bit in there about human moral intuitions not always being trustworthy.  Not a shred of any sense of self-awareness or irony.


----------



## NoXion (Aug 29, 2018)

8ball said:


> Very funny bit in there about human moral intuitions not always being trustworthy.  Not a shred of any sense of self-awareness or irony.



Are they always trustworthy, though? And intuition concerning morality is not the same thing as reasoning about it, which is what I gather the author of that page is attempting to do.


----------



## 8ball (Aug 29, 2018)

NoXion said:


> Are they always trustworthy, though? *And intuition concerning morality is not the same thing as reasoning about it, which is what I gather the author of that page is attempting to do*.



Based on faulty human moral intuitions...


----------



## NoXion (Aug 29, 2018)

8ball said:


> Based on faulty human moral intuitions...



Such as? "suffering is bad"? I'd say that's more of an observation than an intuition.

Note also that the author does not state that moral intuitions are *always* untrustworthy, only that they can be at times.


----------



## Toast Rider (Aug 29, 2018)

A vegan protest with its own black bloc


----------



## 8ball (Aug 29, 2018)

NoXion said:


> Such as? "suffering is bad"? I'd say that's more of an observation than an intuition.
> 
> Note also that the author does not state that moral intuitions are *always* untrustworthy, only that they can be at times.



Firstly, there is an inherent anthropomorphism to veganism that is hard to get around, which is located around Western sense of moral precepts.  Animals do not make the kinds of value judgments that humans do, and if they could, it wouldn't surprise me if many chose being predated on when getting old and slow, compared to a slow death from starvation.

Secondly, it was me that said that human moral intuitions are not always trustworthy.  The author of that piece said "our moral intuitions simply can't be trusted".


----------



## NoXion (Aug 29, 2018)

8ball said:


> Firstly, there is an inherent anthropomorphism to veganism that is hard to get around, which is located around Western sense of moral precepts.  Animals do not make the kinds of value judgments that humans do, and if they could, it wouldn't surprise me if many chose being predated on when getting old and slow, compared to a slow death from starvation.
> 
> Secondly, it was me that said that human moral intuitions are not always trustworthy. The author of that piece said "our moral intuitions simply can't be trusted".



Animals don't particularly care what the source of their death and suffering might be. Whether being ripped apart by a predator or starving to death, they have a deeply-ingrained instinct to continue living and thus work to avoid such fates to the best of their abilities.

And that is very much based on observation, not intuition.


----------



## 8ball (Aug 29, 2018)

NoXion said:


> Animals don't particularly care what the source of their death and suffering might be. Whether being ripped apart by a predator or starving to death, *they have a deeply-ingrained instinct to continue living and thus work to avoid such fates to the best of their abilities*.
> 
> *And that is very much based on observation, not intuition.*



Actually it isn't.  The most you can say of many animals is they avoid noxious stimuli and seek out food and mates.  It varies by species, of course.
They do what they do because previous generations that passed on their genes also did this, and those that didn't, or did it less effectively, are no longer around.

Some animals will stop doing what they need to do to continue living as soon as their genes have been passed on.  Some, like wasps, will actually cease to be able to continue processes necessary to survival once the security of the colony has been assured.

This is not true of humans, and so we project these desires onto animals as if it is universal.

In terms of suffering, I agree with you that we should seek to avoid causing suffering to sentient creatures, especially those functionally more similar to us.


----------



## JimW (Aug 29, 2018)

8ball said:


> Firstly, there is an inherent anthropomorphism to veganism that is hard to get around, which is located around Western sense of moral precepts.


Either you're misunderstanding anthropomorphism or you're just wrong in believing it's inherent. Sentimentalised views of animals are no part of my view of the issue and hardly necessary for ahimsa style personal practice, though that's such an ancient idea there's been a long debate about that with all sorts of positions taken. We're sort of rehashing arguments had in India 2,000 years ago anyway. That and other non-Western vegetarian and vegan traditions puts a lie to the latter bit too.


----------



## 8ball (Aug 29, 2018)

JimW said:


> Either you're misunderstanding anthropomorphism or you're just wrong in believing it's inherent. Sentimentalised views of animals are no part of my view of the issue and hardly necessary for ahimsa style personal practice, though that's such an ancient idea there's been a long debate about that with all sorts of positions taken. We're sort of rehashing arguments had in India 2,000 years ago anyway. That and other non-Western vegetarian and vegan traditions puts a lie to the latter bit too.



That's a fair point if we're talking about longstanding non-Western vegetarian traditions.


----------



## krtek a houby (Aug 30, 2018)

JimW said:


> Not all of it, smoked tofu and similar very chewy. The meat eaters can even enjoy blood tofu which is sort of like black pudding.



Sounds delicious, a bit like Korean sundae.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Sep 2, 2018)

NoXion said:


> "End all animal oppression" - does that include the use of pest control measures?





NoXion said:


> Vegans may be complicit in the murder and displacement of animals, but at least they don't eat their corpses, dammit!


Sigh. 
This has been done already.
I'll refer the (dis?)honourable gentleman to the current definition...

"_Veganism is a way of living which seeks to exclude, *as far as is possible and practicable*, all forms of exploitation of, and cruelty to, animals for food, clothing or any other purpose._"

I'm assuming that you are not genuinely concerned for the plight of critters killed as a by product of human activity and that you are on another one of your whataboutery missions in search of the holy grail of "gotchas". It would appear that your approach to this subject is like that of a short attention span Sun reader, so it's probably not worth my while to attempt any kind of meaningful engagement until you switch from tabloid mode and actually put some smarts into your criticisms.

The highly intelligent Ask Yourself has already given sound rebuttals to nearly all of the silly anti-vegan arguments (eg. Vegans kill more animals – 45:31 - covering your pest control example) which I have previously posted. If you're feeling brave enough you can get a live rebuttal in the "debate crucible" voice channel on his Discord server, although with your weak arguments I don't think you'd last very long unless you somehow manage to up your game.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 2, 2018)

Yawn.


----------



## existentialist (Sep 2, 2018)

cupid_stunt said:


> Yawn.


I'm willing to bet that PaoloSanchez isn't a vegan at all. It just suits his purpose to pretend to be one to stir the pot a bit.

He's probably got bacon sandwich dripping down his chin even as he posts on here...


----------



## Toast Rider (Sep 2, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Sigh.
> This has been done already.
> I'll refer the (dis?)honourable gentleman to the current definition...
> 
> ...


His argument seems to be arbitrary. It's ok to kill animals regarded as pests, but not to kill animals for food.


----------



## Saul Goodman (Sep 2, 2018)

Toast Rider said:


> His argument seems to be arbitrary. It's ok to kill animals regarded as pests, but not to kill animals for food.


Which seems very arse-about-face, to me.


----------



## Toast Rider (Sep 2, 2018)

This is a pretty startling statistic: 84% vegans/vegetarians give up within a year

Most Vegetarians Lapse After Only a Year	  |	 Smart News | Smithsonian


----------



## Saul Goodman (Sep 2, 2018)

Toast Rider said:


> This is a pretty startling statistic: 84% vegans/vegetarians give up within a year
> 
> Most Vegetarians Lapse After Only a Year	  |	 Smart News | Smithsonian


They probably realised that everybody was sick of hearing how vegan they were.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Sep 3, 2018)

Toast Rider said:


> His argument seems to be arbitrary. It's ok to kill animals regarded as pests, but not to kill animals for food.


I don't think it's arbitrary at all. He doesn't say that "it's ok to kill animals". He makes a clear distinction between "legitimate" reasons for killing animals, for example he mentions... "food contamination that can lead to sickness, destruction of wood and insulation in a house, etc". "Of course apply the least harm principle. If there is a way to do it less violently or without harm then do that". In my opinion that is a reasonable stance, and clearly not in the same league as the global mass breeding, imprisonment and slaughter of billions of land animals unnecessarily, for taste preference. Not even close, especially given the many well documented and widespread negative side effects of such actions.



Toast Rider said:


> This is a pretty startling statistic: 84% vegans/vegetarians give up within a year
> 
> Most Vegetarians Lapse After Only a Year	  |	 Smart News | Smithsonian


I'm not sure what's so "startling" about that statistic, it's in line with many new endeavours that people start with seemingly good intentions and then give up, not something that is particularly unique to folks becoming vegan. (new years resolutions, gym memberships, cessation of the ghastly smoking habit, etc are just some examples) 

The more relevant and useful statistics show a steady increase in people becoming vegan and as a result an increasing number of businesses chasing the vegan pound. So while there is a significant number who don't stay the course, it's still a growing movement and has become a lot more prominent than when I started 20 years ago, so I think there's plenty of room for optimism.


----------



## Toast Rider (Sep 3, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> I don't think it's arbitrary at all. He doesn't say that "it's ok to kill animals". He makes a clear distinction between "legitimate" reasons for killing animals, for example he mentions... "food contamination that can lead to sickness, destruction of wood and insulation in a house, etc". "Of course apply the least harm principle. If there is a way to do it less violently or without harm then do that". In my opinion that is a reasonable stance, and clearly not in the same league as the global mass breeding, imprisonment and slaughter of billions of land animals unnecessarily, for taste preference. Not even close, especially given the many well documented and widespread negative side effects of such actions.
> 
> 
> I'm not sure what's so "startling" about that statistic, it's in line with many new endeavours that people start with seemingly good intentions and then give up, not something that is particularly unique to folks becoming vegan. (new years resolutions, gym memberships, cessation of the ghastly smoking habit, etc are just some examples)
> ...


His reasons are arbitrary.

I don't disagree with them, btw. Pests are pests for a reason. I don't want my food contaminated etc either.

I do think his argument is arbitrary because he's drawing his own arbitrary line between legitimate and otherwise killing. I happen to think killing animals for food is legitimate for instance.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 3, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> I don't think it's arbitrary at all. He doesn't say that "it's ok to kill animals". He makes a clear distinction between "legitimate" reasons for killing animals, for example he mentions... "food contamination that can lead to sickness, destruction of wood and insulation in a house, etc". "Of course apply the least harm principle. If there is a way to do it less violently or without harm then do that". In my opinion that is a reasonable stance, and clearly not in the same league as the global mass breeding, imprisonment and slaughter of billions of land animals unnecessarily, for taste preference. Not even close, especially given the many well documented and widespread negative side effects of such actions.
> 
> 
> I'm not sure what's so "startling" about that statistic, it's in line with many new endeavours that people start with seemingly good intentions and then give up, not something that is particularly unique to folks becoming vegan. (new years resolutions, gym memberships, cessation of the ghastly smoking habit, etc are just some examples)
> ...


Oh, the dickhead is back.


----------



## existentialist (Sep 3, 2018)

cupid_stunt said:


> Oh, the dickhead is back.


Could it ever have been otherwise. They say the dog always returns to its vomit...


----------



## TremulousTetra (Sep 3, 2018)

I've only ever known one vegan, a very nice individual, nonjudgemental, and didn't proselytise. So, not really a thread for me. I will just wander off aimlessly into the sunset.


----------



## 8ball (Sep 3, 2018)

TremulousTetra said:


> I've only ever known one vegan, a very nice individual, nonjudgemental, and didn't proselytise. So, not really a thread for me. I will just wander off aimlessly into the sunset.



We all know at least one vegan like that.  No need to leave the thread.


----------



## 8ball (Sep 3, 2018)

Toast Rider said:


> This is a pretty startling statistic: 84% vegans/vegetarians give up within a year
> 
> Most Vegetarians Lapse After Only a Year	  |	 Smart News | Smithsonian



I think that’s not as surprising as the attrition rate between years 7 and 12, when you might expect things to be very settled.

Edit: soz - I’m talking about the vegan attrition rate, not vegetarian.


----------



## Toast Rider (Sep 3, 2018)

To clarify, the study actually says:



> 84 percent of vegetarians and vegans eventually go back to eating meat -- 53 percent of them within a year's time and more than 30 percent of them _within three months_.



So i was inaccurate to say 84% give up in a year. 53% give up in a year. It's also a 2014 study so things may have changed.

Vegans are slightly less likely to concede; 70% instead of 84%


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 3, 2018)

TremulousTetra said:


> I've only ever known one vegan, a very nice individual, nonjudgemental, and didn't proselytise. So, not really a thread for me. I will just wander off aimlessly into the sunset.



Plenty of vegans are fine, it's just the extreme & angry ones that give them a bad name, e.g. twats like PaoloSanchez & Humirax.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Sep 3, 2018)

Toast Rider said:


> I do think his argument is arbitrary because he's drawing his own arbitrary line between legitimate and otherwise killing. I happen to think killing animals for food is legitimate for instance.


Yeah...who's arbitrary line is it anyway?

_*Arbitrary* - based on random choice or personal whim, rather than any reason or system._

Based on that definition, I don't agree with your assertion that his argument is arbitrary at all. He has clearly given it plenty of thought and has drawn a distinct line between what he considers to be legitimate and non legitimate killing. I imagine that the majority of vegans would consider that killing animals for food (when not in a survival situation) is not a legitimate reason, clearly you believe otherwise, I get that.

In my opinion, there is a genuine "arbitrary line" drawn by those who believe killing that animals for food to be legit, ie why it's ok to eat some animals and not others. Eating cats, dogs and horses is frowned upon in this country but is ok in others.
#NameTheTrait


----------



## xenon (Sep 3, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Yeah...who's arbitrary line is it anyway?
> 
> _*Arbitrary* - based on random choice or personal whim, rather than any reason or system._
> 
> ...



 It’s okay to be a  bit racist  though yeah?


----------



## mojo pixy (Sep 3, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> In my opinion, there is a genuine "arbitrary line" drawn by those who believe killing that animals for food to be legit, ie why it's ok to eat some animals and not others. Eating cats, dogs and horses is frowned upon in this country but is ok in others.
> #NameTheTrait



Some cultures have a taboo around eating carnivorous or omnivorous animals. Some have taboos around specific animals for a variety of reasons. Pigs, who eats them and who doesn't? What we eat is all pretty arbitrary, not consuming sentient creatures under any circumstances (except eg by accident) has a certain consistency to it, but it's still a pretty arbitrary choice in universal terms, since this entire planet is full of creatures that survive by eating each other.


----------



## Humirax (Sep 4, 2018)

cupid_stunt said:


> Plenty of vegans are fine, it's just the extreme & angry ones that give them a bad name, e.g. twats like PaoloSanchez & Humirax.


Nice labelling there lol!


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 4, 2018)




----------



## Toast Rider (Sep 4, 2018)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Yeah...who's arbitrary line is it anyway?
> 
> _*Arbitrary* - based on random choice or personal whim, rather than any reason or system._
> 
> ...


Personal whim. That seems to be the definition used. I'm sure he has given it plenty of thought, I haven't said otherwise. I simply find his argument to be arbitrary because he's drawn a line for himself based on subjective personal whim. 

The reason we eat some animals and not others isn't deep seated; it's just how society has evolved. cats and dogs have evolved to be part of our social structure, cows and chickens and pigs haven't. Besides a cow could feed you for a year, a cat...notsomuch. We also don't need to eat every single species on the planet, only a few. Most of which we have bred for that purpose. 

I'm not sure how name the trait is relevant.


----------



## existentialist (Sep 4, 2018)

Humirax said:


> Nice labelling there lol!


If the cap fits...


----------



## Reno (Sep 5, 2018)

They've had another item on vegan meat substitutes on You and Yours today. Every time they cover that, the presenter feels compelled to read out a response from some listener along the lines of "Why have something tasting like meat when vegans/veggies don't like meat". Haven't these people ever heard of people not eating meat for ethical reasons ?

I don't eat much meat these days, but occasionally I still tuck into some critter because I love the taste of it. I'd go full veggy if there was a meat substitute which actually tastes good.


----------



## Saul Goodman (Sep 5, 2018)

Reno said:


> I'd go full veggy if there was a meat substitute which actually tastes good.


That's what herbs and spices are for.


----------



## Reno (Sep 5, 2018)

Saul Goodman said:


> That's what herbs and spices are for.



Maybe your herbs and spices turn quorn into steak, but mine don‘t.


----------



## 8ball (Sep 5, 2018)

Reno said:


> Maybe your herbs and spices turn quorn into steak, but mine don‘t.



But the right herbs and spices on a decent bit of pork are awesome.


----------



## lazythursday (Sep 5, 2018)

I gave up red meat (which I loved) when I was 18 but then for some reason a few years ago when I was about 40 I decided to dabble again. Had a few steaks. I was so fucking underwhelmed. I'd honestly rather eat a veggie burger. And I think this is the truth of it, your palette demands more of what it's used to so if you eat a lot of meat you want meat, you stop for a long time it can become a bit of an alien texture / flavour. Eat enough quorn and you will probably grow to like it more.


----------



## existentialist (Sep 5, 2018)

lazythursday said:


> I gave up red meat (which I loved) when I was 18 but then for some reason a few years ago when I was about 40 I decided to dabble again. Had a few steaks. I was so fucking underwhelmed. I'd honestly rather eat a veggie burger. And I think this is the truth of it, your palette demands more of what it's used to so if you eat a lot of meat you want meat, you stop for a long time it can become a bit of an alien texture / flavour. Eat enough quorn and you will probably grow to like it more.


Well, I'm a lifelong vegetarian (well, ever since I stopped being conned by my mum into eating covert meat and bullied by the dinnerladies into eating blatant meat), and I'm nowhere nearer liking Quorn than I was the first time I encountered the vile slime.

Now, lentils...that's a completely different matter.


----------



## andysays (Sep 6, 2018)

Toast Rider said:


> This is a pretty startling statistic: 84% vegans/vegetarians give up within a year
> 
> Most Vegetarians Lapse After Only a Year	  |	 Smart News | Smithsonian


They must get burned out by having to maintain such high levels of anger 24/7


----------



## Casual Observer (Sep 6, 2018)

andysays said:


> They must get burned out by having to maintain such high levels of anger 24/7


I've been a vegetarian for 30 years and am one of the most mellow people on here so take that back you roaring great fucking cunt.


----------



## existentialist (Sep 6, 2018)

Casual Observer said:


> I've been a vegetarian for 30 years and am one of the most mellow people on here so take that back you roaring great fucking cunt.


----------



## Toast Rider (Sep 6, 2018)

existentialist said:


> Well, I'm a lifelong vegetarian (well, ever since I stopped being conned by my mum into eating covert meat and bullied by the dinnerladies into eating blatant meat), and I'm nowhere nearer liking Quorn than I was the first time I encountered the vile slime.
> 
> Now, lentils...that's a completely different matter.


Eating lentils is like eating sand.

And not the nice kind


----------



## existentialist (Sep 6, 2018)

Toast Rider said:


> Eating lentils is like eating sand.
> 
> And not the nice kind


I shall have to agree to differ. I like a nice lentil, me.


----------



## 8ball (Sep 6, 2018)

Toast Rider said:


> Eating lentils is like eating sand.


----------



## NoXion (Sep 6, 2018)

Serial attention-seekers and animal-killing hypocrites PETA have decided that they don't like the vegan "Impossible Burger": OPINION: PETA's Attack On Impossible Foods Is A Double Standard

If they hate it, then that just makes me want to try it even more. This is a perfect example of why I think this kind of outspoken veganism is akin to religion, because along with the aforementioned hypocrisy (a stock-in-trade of priests throughout all of space-time), is the insistence that people wear hair shirts for their own spiritual good. Fuuuck that.


----------



## 8ball (Sep 6, 2018)

NoXion said:


> Serial attention-seekers and animal-killing hypocrites...



I thought that was a post by a certain Welsh oasis of dragon-based calmness when I read those starting words.


----------



## 8ball (Sep 6, 2018)

Am I right in thinking that PETA threw a wobbly because a company fed a meat-free burger to a rat?


----------



## Toast Rider (Sep 6, 2018)

8ball said:


> Am I right in thinking that PETA threw a wobbly ?



Oh yes


----------



## Teaboy (Sep 6, 2018)

Toast Rider said:


> Eating lentils is like eating sand.
> 
> And not the nice kind



I see whats happened here, you appear to be eating them straight from the packet. Try cooking them in boiling water.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 6, 2018)




----------



## 8ball (Sep 6, 2018)

Toast Rider said:


> Oh yes



On further reading, it seems like the burger people killed 188 rats during the testing, which does feel a little excessive.
I bet that's more than get electrocuted by the factory rat traps in an entire week!


----------



## existentialist (Sep 6, 2018)

8ball said:


> On further reading, it seems like the burger people killed 188 rats during the testing, which does feel a little excessive.
> I bet that's more than get electrocuted by the factory rat traps in an entire week!


What's PETA's position on rat and mouse traps?


----------



## Toast Rider (Sep 6, 2018)

Teaboy said:


> I see whats happened here, you appear to be eating them straight from the packet. Try cooking them in boiling water.


I have no intention of ever eating food like that again


----------



## existentialist (Sep 6, 2018)

Toast Rider said:


> I have no intention of ever eating food like that again


It is possible to do terrible things to lentils, but it's also possible to use them to make delicious food. But, well, if you've definitely foresworn the lentil, it just means there's all the more for the rest of us, so you won't hear me complaining


----------



## Teaboy (Sep 6, 2018)

Toast Rider said:


> I have no intention of ever eating food like that again



Ah well, I reckon I could win you over.  Puy lentils appear on many of the great dishes from the classics.

Your loss though I guess.


----------



## NoXion (Sep 6, 2018)

Lentils are OK I guess. Like beans and chickpeas, there's a bit more to them than stuff like rice, making them good for bulking out dishes. There was this orangey-red lentil soup/stew kind of thing that my mum used to make which I liked, I should try looking up the recipe for that one since it could make a good starter, or possibly a snack if it can be made quickly or stored easily.

Needs the addition of something fatty though, so I'd probably end up adding cream or something like that.

Fuck, I should have known it was a bad idea to talk about food while broke and hungry. Damn.


----------



## gentlegreen (Sep 6, 2018)

Teaboy said:


> Ah well, I reckon I could win you over.  Puy lentils appear on many of the great dishes from the classics.
> Your loss though I guess.


In France they would probably boil them up with spicy sausage or somesuch ...


----------



## gentlegreen (Sep 6, 2018)

I rarely have a "focus" in my meals.
Whenever I do, it means I'm going to consume far too many calories - rarely do a pack of four spicy beanburgers or six Cauldron sausages last me for more than one meal - and often there is a large amount of mashed spuds to go with them - the kilo of frozen peas is possibly healthful - though not as much as the broccoli they displace.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 6, 2018)

existentialist said:


> It is possible to do terrible things to lentils



It's time for meat eaters to unite & stop terrible things happening to lentils.


----------



## killer b (Sep 6, 2018)

I'm a bit baffled by the idea that lentils can be in any way compared to sand, even uncooked. Are you sure they were lentils?


----------



## Teaboy (Sep 6, 2018)

gentlegreen said:


> In France they would probably boil them up with spicy sausage or somesuch ...



Not necessarily, often just simmered in a simple court bouillon.



killer b said:


> I'm a bit baffled by the idea that lentils can be in any way compared to sand, even uncooked. Are you sure they were lentils?



It's bizarre isn't it?  Then again I remember comparing cous cous to eating sand when I first tried it.  I must have been around 11 mind.


----------



## AnnaKarpik (Sep 6, 2018)

And in other news, rice paddies give off methane. Who knew?


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Sep 7, 2018)

Reno said:


> They've had another item on vegan meat substitutes on You and Yours today. Every time they cover that, the presenter feels compelled to read out a response from some listener along the lines of "Why have something tasting like meat when vegans/veggies don't like meat". Haven't these people ever heard of people not eating meat for ethical reasons ?


There are a lot of noobs around who know very little about what goes on in the vegan domain and as a result make many assumptions based on ignorance. "If vegans hate meat so much, why do they always try to make their food taste like meat". Not heard that one before. 

I think part of the problem is to do with the fact that many people believe that vegan is simply a diet and it's just about food, when it's much more than that.



Reno said:


> I don't eat much meat these days, but occasionally I still tuck into some critter because I love the taste of it. I'd go full veggy if there was a meat substitute which actually tastes good.


There's plenty of alternatives and I'm sure you could find plenty of foods/recipes that taste very good with just a bit of effort.
"I had some vegan food once and it tasted like shit"...not heard that one before either. 

Sure we live in a predominantly non-vegan world so it's a lot easier and more convenient to find non-vegan food without having to even think about it. Those that put a high value on ethics above taste preference will be motivated to find tasty "cruelty free" food and vote with their pounds/dollars/sheckles. It really isn't that hard to do, and it's a hell of a lot easier nowadays with the social media support system and plenty of ideas and recipes available online. There's not really a good enough excuse not to try imo, although some folk go out of their way to find some.


----------



## Spymaster (Sep 7, 2018)

99% of vegans eat meat when they think no one is looking.


----------



## mojo pixy (Sep 7, 2018)

No be reasonable, only about half do that.


----------



## existentialist (Sep 7, 2018)

Spymaster said:


> 99% of vegans eat meat when they think no one is looking.


APOSTASY!


----------



## Toast Rider (Sep 7, 2018)

is it common for vegans to call people that eat meat 'carnists'?

Because I've been called that a lot online and it's a fairly ridiculous word IMO


----------



## andysays (Sep 7, 2018)

Toast Rider said:


> is it common for vegans to call people that eat meat 'carnists'?
> 
> Because I've been called that a lot online and it's a fairly ridiculous word IMO


Another example of carnist fragility


----------



## Toast Rider (Sep 7, 2018)

andysays said:


> Another example of carnist fragility


fragile like your iron intake?


----------



## 8ball (Sep 7, 2018)

andysays said:


> Another example of carnist fragility



And a counter-example.


----------



## Teaboy (Sep 7, 2018)

Spymaster said:


> 99% of vegans eat meat when they think no one is looking.



Even earthling ed?  Surely not earthling ed?  

Maybe a few more videos of earthling ed would reaffirm my faith in humanity.  Earthling ed.


----------



## Toast Rider (Sep 7, 2018)

Teaboy said:


> Even earthling ed?  Surely not earthling ed?
> 
> Maybe a few more videos of earthling ed would reaffirm my faith in humanity.  Earthling ed.


Please no, I find him very high minded


----------



## mojo pixy (Sep 7, 2018)

*Carn */kɑːn/ _excl. inf._ AUSTRALIAN/NZ

(at sporting events) a cry intended to urge on a team or player; come on!
"carn you mighty Lions!"
Derivative: Carnist, one who does this. Probably.


----------



## andysays (Sep 7, 2018)

Toast Rider said:


> fragile like your iron intake?


It was a new one on me, but it seems to be quite a popular expression on this thread...

Search Results for Query: carnist fragility


----------



## mojo pixy (Sep 7, 2018)

not to mention fragile carnality


----------



## 8ball (Sep 7, 2018)

Toast Rider said:


> Please no, I find him very high minded



Nothing wrong with strong moral principles.

Unless you meant “sanctimonious and annoying” obv.


----------



## Saul Goodman (Sep 7, 2018)

Toast Rider said:


> is it common for vegans to call people that eat meat 'carnists'?
> 
> Because I've been called that a lot online and it's a fairly ridiculous word IMO


It's extremely ironic, because if carnist was a real word, it would refer to vegans, not meat eaters.


----------



## Spymaster (Sep 10, 2018)

Vegan _on a mission to redefine the word "meat"_.


----------



## 8ball (Sep 10, 2018)

Spymaster said:


> Vegan _on a mission to redefine the word "meat"_.



I was expecting something completely different there.


----------



## gentlegreen (Sep 10, 2018)

Saul Goodman said:


> It's extremely ironic, because if carnist was a real word, it would refer to vegans, not meat eaters.


I have in the past spent far too much time winding-up theists in American PALTALK chatrooms - quite a few in there who use the term "carnal..." in a whole other way.


----------



## NoXion (Sep 10, 2018)

Spymaster said:


> Vegan _on a mission to redefine the word "meat"_.



I love this guy's whole approach. He doesn't just want to win the bellies of people going hair-shirt for moralism, he wants to appeal to the palates of everyone. His scientific attitude to replicating the experience of eating meat using solely plant-based materials, is also a welcome break from the usual happy-clappy hippy-dippy nonsense from the more outspoken human herbivores.


----------



## gentlegreen (Sep 10, 2018)

"meat" used to mean "food" in the olden days ...



> *meat (n.)*
> Old English mete "food, item of food" (paired with drink), from Proto-Germanic *mati (source also of Old Frisian mete, Old Saxon meti, Old Norse matr, Old High German maz, Gothic mats "food," Middle Dutch, Dutch metworst, German Mettwurst "type of sausage"), from PIE *mad-i-, from root *mad- "moist, wet," also with reference to food qualities, (source also of Sanskrit medas- "fat" (n.), Old Irish mat "pig;" see mast (n.2)).
> 
> Narrower sense of "flesh used as food" is first attested c. 1300; similar sense evolution in French viande "meat," originally "food." In Middle English, vegetables still could be called grene-mete (15c.). Figurative sense of "essential part" is from 1901. Dark meat, white meat popularized 19c., supposedly as euphemisms for leg and breast, but earliest sources use both terms without apparent embarrassment
> ...



meat | Origin and meaning of meat by Online Etymology Dictionary
.


----------



## Toast Rider (Sep 10, 2018)

NoXion said:


> I love this guy's whole approach. He doesn't just want to win the bellies of people going hair-shirt for moralism, he wants to appeal to the palates of everyone. His scientific attitude to replicating the experience of eating meat using solely plant-based materials, is also a welcome break from the usual happy-clappy hippy-dippy nonsense from the more outspoken human herbivores.


Is this sarcasm? I think the guy's nuts!


----------



## existentialist (Sep 10, 2018)

Toast Rider said:


> Is this sarcasm? I think the guy's nuts!


Oh, I can see what he's trying to do. It's not the approach I'd take (but then I don't _like_ eating meat, it's not just that I don't), but he's trying to address that particular need.


----------



## Toast Rider (Sep 10, 2018)

existentialist said:


> Oh, I can see what he's trying to do. It's not the approach I'd take (but then I don't _like_ eating meat, it's not just that I don't), but he's trying to address that particular need.


I would question his understanding of nutrition. But if he wants to make kale burgers then good luck to him


----------



## NoXion (Sep 10, 2018)

Toast Rider said:


> Is this sarcasm? I think the guy's nuts!



I don't see what's crazy about anything he's doing.


----------



## danny la rouge (Sep 10, 2018)

gentlegreen said:


> "meat" used to mean "food" in the olden days ...
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Was just going to post similar.


----------



## Saul Goodman (Sep 11, 2018)

I decided to try some Linda McCartney sausages yesterday. Apparently they're some of the best veggie sausages. Fuck me it's no wonder vegans are so miserable, when that's the closest they can get to a real sausage.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 11, 2018)

Saul Goodman said:


> I decided to try some Linda McCartney sausages yesterday. Apparently they're some of the best veggie sausages. Fuck me it's no wonder vegans are so miserable, when that's the closest they can get to a real sausage.


Nah. Cauldron sausages are way better imo - lincolnshire ones are really nice. Even quorn sausages are better than LM (though not vegan). LM stuff is awful. Tasteless mush.


----------



## klang (Sep 11, 2018)

Saul Goodman said:


> I decided to try some Linda McCartney sausages yesterday. Apparently they're some of the best veggie sausages. Fuck me it's no wonder vegans are so miserable, when that's the closest they can get to a real sausage.


the pies are ok.


----------



## Saul Goodman (Sep 11, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> LM stuff is awful. Tasteless mush.


No argument from me. It was like eating reconstituted shaped cardboard... but without the flavour.


----------



## existentialist (Sep 11, 2018)

Saul Goodman said:


> I decided to try some Linda McCartney sausages yesterday. Apparently they're some of the best veggie sausages. Fuck me it's no wonder vegans are so miserable, when that's the closest they can get to a real sausage.


Personally, I think they could use less sawdust. The Cauldron option beats them hands down.


----------



## Toast Rider (Sep 12, 2018)

NoXion said:


> I don't see what's crazy about anything he's doing.


I've never understood the desire to produce fake meat, particularly among people who reject meat for ethical and/or health reasons. Seems like self flagellation to me


----------



## ATOMIC SUPLEX (Sep 12, 2018)

I quite like LM sausages and burgers. . . . but then I don't really like real sausages or burgers. 
I tend to lean towards vegan if I can, but I had an egg this morning and I still eat fish, so I have a long way to go. When I have been asked what is the difference between fish meat and other meat . . . I can't answer or justify. . . apart from maybe I would be quite happy to catch and prepare my own fish, but I would never be able to kill a cow. . . or gut a chicken.


----------



## NoXion (Sep 12, 2018)

Toast Rider said:


> I've never understood the desire to produce fake meat, particularly among people who reject meat for ethical and/or health reasons. Seems like self flagellation to me



As someone who loves to eat meat, I understand it perfectly. While I personally have no problems with killing animals for food, I can easily see why someone shares my love but not my ethical position would want convincing fake meat. Another reason why people might want simulated meat, is because they don't like the environmental costs that currently come with the real thing. I love steak, but I'm not going to be a complete fool and deny that it's hardly the most efficient source of protein.

To me, the self-flagellation is to deny the satisfaction of one's palate despite the fact that alternatives are possible. Especially since there are people working on better alternatives such as this Impossible Burger, which to sounds good enough for a dedicated meat eater like me to want to try it out. Word says it'll be available in UK Tesco stores next year, so I'll look forward to reporting back on this thread to give my opinion. If it's at least as good as Quorn but without being so fucking expensive like that stuff, then I would consider that a definite success.

Although the alternative that I'm really looking forward to is cultured meat, growing the meat without the animal, but I think getting that stuff cheaply is few years off yet. But once that happens, then I see no reason for me not to become a kind of techno-vegetarian.


----------



## Saul Goodman (Sep 12, 2018)

NoXion said:


> Although the alternative that I'm really looking forward to is cultured meat, growing the meat without the animal


Vegan heads will be exploding everywhere when that happens. Imagine them having to go even a day without being able to express their superiority.


----------



## ATOMIC SUPLEX (Sep 12, 2018)

Saul Goodman said:


> Vegan heads will be exploding everywhere when that happens. Imagine them having to go even a day without being able to express their superiority.


I'm sure there are plenty that don't you know. I would equate it with perhaps the people going on about how great steak is, and how you need proper meat for a proper meal, all juicy and fat "I'm a real man, hur."
I think the trouble is most people don't really talk that much about what they eat, but the vocal outspoken ones that do are the ones who are heard.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Sep 12, 2018)

Saul Goodman said:


> Vegan heads will be exploding everywhere when that happens. Imagine them having to go even a day without being able to express their superiority.



He said, to point how how superior he is to vegans


----------



## Toast Rider (Sep 12, 2018)

ATOMIC SUPLEX said:


> I'm sure there are plenty that don't you know. I would equate it with perhaps the people going on about how great steak is, and how you need proper meat for a proper meal, all juicy and fat "I'm a real man, hur."
> I think the trouble is most people don't really talk that much about what they eat, but the vocal outspoken ones that do are the ones who are heard.


Personally I don't like the conflation of macho bullshit with eating meat. The use of 'soy boy' is an insult, or the endorsement of a carnivore diet by snake oil salesman Jordan B Petersen. Does it no favours IMO


----------



## Johnny Doe (Sep 12, 2018)

I'm a meat eater but my local's vegan cauliflower, 'wings' are so nice I have them instead of the chicken one.

It's wings Wednesday:


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 12, 2018)

Washed down with a Westmalle. Nice. 

Vegan too.


----------



## Johnny Doe (Sep 12, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Washed down with a Westmalle. Nice.
> 
> Vegan too.


I'm afraid that glass is just holding a tea light..Mine's the pint of blackcurrant squash


----------



## mojo pixy (Sep 12, 2018)

FAKE MEAT

that's my imaginary band's new name.


----------



## dessiato (Sep 13, 2018)




----------



## Spymaster (Sep 13, 2018)

dessiato said:


> View attachment 146810


I don't reckon he shot those. No gunshot wounds. Snared probably.


----------



## klang (Sep 13, 2018)

Spymaster said:


> I don't reckon he shot those. No gunshot wounds. Snared probably.


i recon he's awaiting the counter attack but ran out of sand


----------



## Saul Goodman (Sep 13, 2018)

Spymaster said:


> I don't reckon he shot those. No gunshot wounds. Snared probably.


Bored them to death, more likely. Either that or they couldn't listen to him talking vegan any longer and committed suicide.


----------



## ddraig (Sep 25, 2018)

for fucks sake, clearly the fault of angry vegans, taking over and trampling proper culture! :ffacepalm:
Pie and mash shop closes after 128 years ‘because of vegans’ | Metro News



> ‘I’ve had a few people come in off the streets asking if I do vegan pies.
> ‘It’s like some kind of bad joke – we’re a traditional pie and mash shop, of course we don’t sell vegan pies.
> .


----------



## 8ball (Sep 25, 2018)

ddraig said:


> for fucks sake, clearly the fault of angry vegans, taking over and trampling proper culture! :ffacepalm:
> Pie and mash shop closes after 128 years ‘because of vegans’ | Metro News



Just how many vegans must there be in Deptford? 

I know we don’t agree on a lot of things, but as long as it’s not a casserole with a poncey puff pastry hat, vegan pies are fine with me.


----------



## ddraig (Sep 25, 2018)

Apparently the one in Greenwich does vegan pies, not far for vegans that want pie andash to travel!

Pretty sure I've eaten in both Deptford and Greenwich shops, Greenwich much nicer


----------



## 8ball (Sep 26, 2018)

ddraig said:


> Apparently the one in Greenwich does vegan pies, not far for vegans that want pie andash to travel!
> 
> Pretty sure I've eaten in both Deptford and Greenwich shops, Greenwich much nicer



Is Deptford some kind of Hebden Bridge for vegans?

Would take an awful lot to put a pie shop out of business, even if they point-blank refused to do any vegan pies.

Not sure what they have to gain from telling this to the Metro.


----------



## 8ball (Sep 26, 2018)

It might be really, really bad of me to say this, but the Millwall flag with the George Cross in the premises and that...

Some really bad people might be minded to think there are other social changes aside from gentrification and vegans that this guy might have a problem with.

I’m gentrificated as fuck and I love a pie, me.

Edit: I’d say this is the clincher: “Finally, Simon quipped that most people who now walk past the café don’t even know what pie and mash is”

Sadness ahead of Deptford pie and mash shop closing down after 128 years


----------



## ddraig (Sep 26, 2018)

Not been Deptford for easy 10 years but can picture it full of gentrifier types


----------



## 8ball (Sep 26, 2018)

ddraig said:


> Not been Deptford for easy 10 years but can picture it full of gentrifier types



I like a quinoa, fois gras, eel and leg of dog pie of an evening.  Alienates every fucker. 

And baby gravy.


----------



## 8ball (Sep 26, 2018)

ddraig said:


> Not been Deptford for easy 10 years but can picture it full of gentrifier types



And is there any of London that *hasn’t* been gentrified yet?

They’ve been doing that shit for aaages!


----------



## mojo pixy (Sep 26, 2018)

The Birds Nest used to do a decent vegan BBQ on all-dayers


----------



## 8ball (Sep 26, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> The Birds Nest used to do a decent vegan BBQ on all-dayers



That is something I’ve yet to experience.  Though tbf those Iceland burgers went well on the barbie.


----------



## existentialist (Sep 26, 2018)

ddraig said:


> Apparently the one in Greenwich does vegan pies, not far for vegans that want pie andash to travel!
> 
> Pretty sure I've eaten in both Deptford and Greenwich shops, Greenwich much nicer


Yes, they don't put sour grapes in the pies in Greenwich.


----------



## bellaozzydog (Sep 26, 2018)

Is the new fabreeze advert taking the piss out of vegans

I’m neither vegan or sensitive and thought it does


----------



## ddraig (Sep 26, 2018)

apparently the pie and mash story is bollocks!



> *No, This Pie And Mash Shop Hasn't Closed Due To 'Veganism'*
> *The manager of the shop in Deptford said all his customers have moved away.*


----------



## 8ball (Sep 26, 2018)

ddraig said:


> apparently the pie and mash story is bollocks!



I think we’d worked out it was bollocks.  Gets him a little publicity for his new venture, I guess..


----------



## pug (Sep 27, 2018)

There used to be two pie and mash shops in Deptford High st, his and the one opposite which was better, at one time they both advertised 'vegetarian' pies in the window, the only time I went in his shop was with a veggie and her pie was filled with mashed potato like on bodger and badger.


----------



## Saul Goodman (Sep 27, 2018)

pug said:


> There used to be two pie and mash shops in Deptford High st, his and the one opposite which was better, at one time they both advertised 'vegetarian' pies in the window, the only time I went in his shop was with a veggie and her pie was filled with mashed potato like on bodger and badger.


I hope it was only mashed potato


----------



## SpookyFrank (Sep 27, 2018)

8ball said:


> I like a quinoa, fois gras, eel and leg of dog pie of an evening.  Alienates every fucker.
> 
> And baby gravy.



Sounds OK to me, better baby gravy than some fucking green shit with parsley in it. Long as they're kosher babies.


----------



## sealion (Sep 27, 2018)

ddraig said:


> for fucks sake, clearly the fault of angry vegans, taking over and trampling proper culture


Your words not his. They ae closing for other reasons, the lazy metro failed to report that. You've been clickbaited!


----------



## existentialist (Sep 27, 2018)

pug said:


> There used to be two pie and mash shops in Deptford High st, his and the one opposite which was better, at one time they both advertised 'vegetarian' pies in the window, the only time I went in his shop was with a veggie and her pie was filled with mashed potato like on bodger and badger.


I remember going into a pub in West Wales one Sunday lunchtime and asking if they did a vegetarian Sunday lunch. They said yes, so I ordered a beef one and a vegetarian one. When they arrived, mine was identical to the beef one, complete with gravy, except for the absence of beef. Identical in price, too. When I suggested that they could have been a bit more honest about it, they got quite arsey.

Whore's Bed, Templeton, that is why I have never been back to your miserable pub in over 10 years.


----------



## ddraig (Sep 27, 2018)

sealion said:


> Your words not his. They ae closing for other reasons, the lazy metro failed to report that. You've been clickbaited!


And I came back to post the clarification, that ok?


----------



## existentialist (Sep 27, 2018)

ddraig said:


> And I came back to post the clarification, that ok?


And there was I, thinking you'd come to radiate waves of calm, vegan, tranquility.


----------



## The39thStep (Sep 27, 2018)

A friend who I haven't seen for decades might be coming over to visit me in Portugal. She mentioned she was a vegetarian so I asked my Portuguese friends about nice restaurants that had dishes without meat or fish. They looked absolutely bewildered. I've looked at loads of menus online but I can only find non meat/fish starters. Soups/ cheese/ tomato rice. So I'll have to pop in to a couple and ask them if they can assist. I'm not a bad cook so we can eat at home but it's nice to go out and have a meal.


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Sep 27, 2018)

The39thStep said:


> A friend who I haven't seen for decades might be coming over to visit me in Portugal. She mentioned she was a vegetarian so I asked my Portuguese friends about nice restaurants that had dishes without meat or fish. They looked absolutely bewildered. I've looked at loads of menus online but I can only find non meat/fish starters. Soups/ cheese/ tomato rice. So I'll have to pop in to a couple and ask them if they can assist. I'm not a bad cook so we can eat at home but it's nice to go out and have a meal.



This may be of help: https://www.happycow.net/europe/portugal/


----------



## 8ball (Sep 27, 2018)

Portuguese custard tarts.


----------



## sealion (Sep 27, 2018)

8ball said:


> It might be really, really bad of me to say this, but the Millwall flag with the George Cross in the premises and that.


Go to Stockwell, Elephant and castle where there's a large Portuguese and Brazilian community and you'll see national flags, as well as club flags, Porto, Gremino etc. Matees pie shop is a walk from Millwalls ground, i'd be surprised to see a West ham  flag on display.


8ball said:


> Some really bad people might be minded to think there are other social changes aside from gentrification and vegans that this guy might have a problem with.


Yes they would, without thinking about or knowing that, the working class people been shunted from the now hip Deptford are from all over, there's been a large afro caribean community, chinese, vietnamese. irish there for decades. They are all being socially cleansed to outer London. Those people/communities are being replaced by the white middle classes, see Brixton, Hackney, Peckham etc. They're not colour and nationality of people you are implying he wants away from.


----------



## sealion (Sep 27, 2018)

ddraig said:


> And I came back to post the clarification, that ok?


Good boy.


----------



## 8ball (Sep 27, 2018)

sealion said:


> Yes they would, without thinking about or knowing that, the working class people been shunted from the now hip Deptford are from all over, there's been a large afro caribean community, chinese, vietnamese. irish there for decades. They are all being socially cleansed to outer London. Those people/communities are being replaced by the white middle classes, see Brixton, Hackney, Peckham etc. They're not colour and nationality of people you are implying he wants away from.



Maybe someone should let pie boy know that.


----------



## The39thStep (Sep 27, 2018)

8ball said:


> Portuguese custard tarts.


Pastel de Natas and salads may not be of sufficient varity for a week


----------



## 8ball (Sep 27, 2018)

The39thStep said:


> Pastel de Natas and salads may not be of sufficient varity for a week



Bollocks to salads!


----------



## mojo pixy (Sep 27, 2018)

8ball said:


> Bollocks to salads!



YWIMC

(vegans, look away)


----------



## ddraig (Sep 27, 2018)

sealion said:


> Good boy.


cheers bossman


----------



## ddraig (Sep 27, 2018)

The39thStep said:


> A friend who I haven't seen for decades might be coming over to visit me in Portugal. She mentioned she was a vegetarian so I asked my Portuguese friends about nice restaurants that had dishes without meat or fish. They looked absolutely bewildered. I've looked at loads of menus online but I can only find non meat/fish starters. Soups/ cheese/ tomato rice. So I'll have to pop in to a couple and ask them if they can assist. I'm not a bad cook so we can eat at home but it's nice to go out and have a meal.


I had chips and salad or quesedilas (sp?) when in Portugal many years ago and they were indeed bewildered, must be better by now


----------



## sealion (Sep 27, 2018)

8ball said:


> Maybe someone should let pie boy know that.


I would imagine he'd know that being from there. It still won't stop a prick like you trying to throw mud.


----------



## sealion (Sep 27, 2018)

Banners in Deptford


----------



## editor (Sep 27, 2018)

Just saw a FB friend going on and on about some vegan fake meat thing that has outraged him to the core of his soul, with a fleet of equally enraged friends of his all joining in to decry the food. 

Why the fuck do they care?


----------



## 8ball (Sep 27, 2018)

sealion said:


> I would imagine he'd know that being from there. It still won't stop a prick like you trying to throw mud.



Aye, known for their accuracy of perception, I would think.


----------



## 8ball (Sep 27, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> YWIMC
> 
> (vegans, look away)



It wasn’t a recipe suggestion request, but cheers anyway.


----------



## 8ball (Sep 27, 2018)

editor said:


> Just saw a FB friend going on and on about some vegan fake meat thing that has outraged him to the core of his soul, with a fleet of equally enraged friends of his all joining in to decry the food.
> 
> Why the fuck do they care?



Vegan FB friend?


----------



## sealion (Sep 27, 2018)

8ball said:


> Aye, known for their accuracy of perception, I would think.


Who , working class people ?


----------



## 8ball (Sep 27, 2018)

sealion said:


> Who , working class people ?


----------



## editor (Sep 27, 2018)

8ball said:


> Vegan FB friend?


No, a meat eater who saw a photo of a vegan meat substitute and went ballistic.


----------



## sealion (Sep 27, 2018)

8ball said:


>


Grin all you like, your ignorance and snobbery is priceless.


----------



## 8ball (Sep 27, 2018)

editor said:


> No, a meat eater who saw a photo of a vegan meat substitute and went ballistic.



Bizarre.  I only have experience of vegans getting a cob on about meat substitutes.  I don’t think it’s productive but at least it’s understandable.


----------



## 8ball (Sep 27, 2018)

sealion said:


> Grin all you like, your ignorance and snobbery is priceless.



Your idiocy and lack of insight is sadly less so.  I could go to Twitter for that.


----------



## editor (Sep 27, 2018)

8ball said:


> Bizarre.  I only have experience of vegans getting a cob on about meat substitutes.


I'm sure you do.


----------



## 8ball (Sep 27, 2018)

editor said:


> I'm sure you do.



Indeed.  <nods sagely and backs away slowly>


----------



## sealion (Sep 27, 2018)

8ball said:


> Your idiocy and lack of insight is sadly less so.


 Irony alert


----------



## 8ball (Sep 27, 2018)

sealion said:


> Irony alert



Is it a full moon tonight or is Twitter down or something.


----------



## sealion (Sep 27, 2018)

8ball said:


> It might be really, really bad of me to say this, but the Millwall flag with the George Cross in the premises and that...
> 
> Some really bad people might be minded to think there are other social changes aside from gentrification and vegans that this guy might have a problem with.


----------



## 8ball (Sep 27, 2018)

Was there maybe meant to be a gif or something attached there?


----------



## sealion (Sep 27, 2018)

8ball said:


> Was there maybe meant to be a gif or something attached there?


I'm still looking for that Millwall flag you say he has in the window  i know exactly what your post meant, as do you. It makes you wonder why they stayed so long, only now when it's full of whites he decides to fuck off  Get back to twitter it needs you


----------



## The39thStep (Sep 27, 2018)

ddraig said:


> I had chips and salad or quesedilas (sp?) when in Portugal many years ago and they were indeed bewildered, must be better by now


er no.Could buy buy her egg and chips but its not going to be a memorable night.


----------



## 8ball (Sep 27, 2018)

sealion said:


> I'm still looking for that Millwall flag you say he has in the window  i know exactly what your post meant, as do you. It makes you wonder why they stayed so long, only now when it's full of whites he decides to fuck off  Get back to twitter it needs you



Riiiight.  So how is the ethnic profile of Deptford looking now, as opposed to 5 years ago, and 25 years ago?

You might also want to try checking out both the links posted on the thread, and the words, if you’re having trouble finding stuff.


----------



## sealion (Sep 27, 2018)

8ball said:


> Riiiight. So how is the ethnic profile of Deptford looking now, as opposed to 5 years ago, and 25 years ago?


As you'd imagine it would be due the gentrifaction. I suppose you will require stats and charts too! I put up a link about social cleansing around that area, that should give you an idea.


8ball said:


> You might also want to try checking out both the links posted on the thread, and the words, if you’re having trouble finding stuff.


I have read the article several times from several outlets, he is quoted differntly in a few of them. Now about this Millwall flag that doesn't exist


----------



## 8ball (Sep 27, 2018)

Fuck’s sake - at least usually I get paid for indulging idiots... 

I may come back and explain things nice and slowly when I can be arsed or are sufficiently bored.

Good enough?


----------



## sealion (Sep 27, 2018)

8ball said:


> Fuck’s sake - at least usually I get paid for indulging idiots...
> 
> I may come back and explain things nice and slowly when I can be arsed or are sufficiently bored.
> 
> Good enough?


Oh, i should be grateful for your time time now   Explain yourself, where's the Millwall flag?
What other social changes might this bloke have a problem with?


----------



## 8ball (Sep 27, 2018)

sealion said:


> Oh, i should be grateful for your time time now   Explain yourself, where's the Millwall flag?
> What other social changes might this bloke have a problem with?



Well, you're getting it at infinitely below market rates, and I really have no reason to explain myself beyond what I've already said, so you could at least consider yourself more than duly indulged.

Your flag is in the Sun article.  Note that I never said at any point that it was in a window.


----------



## sealion (Sep 27, 2018)

8ball said:


> Well, you're getting it at infinitely below market rates, and I really have no reason to explain myself beyond what I've already said, so you could at least consider yourself more than duly indulged.


Thought not.It still makes you a cunt.


8ball said:


> Your flag is in the Sun article.


I don't read the racist rag, it's for idiots, nor is it my flag. It wasn't in the original link either, also that bloke is not a Millwall fan. h2h, over and out.


----------



## ddraig (Sep 28, 2018)

editor said:


> Just saw a FB friend going on and on about some vegan fake meat thing that has outraged him to the core of his soul, with a fleet of equally enraged friends of his all joining in to decry the food.
> 
> Why the fuck do they care?


bonkers init! saw people kicking off and getting angry at dominoes doing vegan pizzas, it's weird as they're not stopping doing meat ones


----------



## D'wards (Nov 1, 2018)

Sitwell should realise we live in a post-joke world now. 

Nice of the writer to publish his email 

Waitrose magazine editor quits after joke about killing vegans

Waitrose magazine editor quits after joke about killing vegans


----------



## 8ball (Nov 1, 2018)

D'wards said:


> Sitwell should realise we live in a post-joke world now.



If it had been a good joke he's have been getting death threats.

I went to a vegan stand-up comedy gig a few weeks back...


----------



## killer b (Nov 1, 2018)

Do you think if a member of Waitrose floor staff made a similar joke when asked about what vegan food they had would keep their job? I wonder what the difference is?


----------



## D'wards (Nov 1, 2018)

I feel quite sorry for the writer Selene- she pitched an article about hostility to vegans, and the buzzfeed journalist saw that email and realised that was the story. 

She's getting a lot of grief on Twitter, with a lot of people suggesting she may be hoist by her own petard as a lot of editors may actively avoid her now.


----------



## 8ball (Nov 1, 2018)

killer b said:


> I wonder what the difference is?



Qu'elle mysterioso...


----------



## Spymaster (Nov 1, 2018)

killer b said:


> Do you think if a member of Waitrose floor staff made a similar joke when asked about what vegan food they had would keep their job?


I actually think they would (or certainly should), tbh. It's a 'bollocking-for-being-a-dickhead' offence, not a job losing one.


----------



## killer b (Nov 1, 2018)

bullshit.


----------



## killer b (Nov 1, 2018)

either way, fuck him.


----------



## killer b (Nov 1, 2018)

The Waitrose magazine isn't an organ of free speech and political expression, it's and advertising pamphlet - it exists purely to sell Waitrose products. Including their vegan products.


----------



## Spymaster (Nov 1, 2018)

But this was a private email exchange between him and this Nelson woman. I actually think she's out of order making it public.


----------



## 8ball (Nov 1, 2018)

Spymaster said:


> But this was a private e,mail exchange between him and this Nelson woman. I actually think she's out of order making it public.



She's a whistleblower highlighting institutional oppression.


----------



## killer b (Nov 1, 2018)

Why? He's a vulgar bully, and the email demonstrates that. I'm fine with bullying emails sent in professional contexts being made public. The only reason he's walking is because in this one he also alienates a large and growing part of Waitrose's customer base.


----------



## 8ball (Nov 1, 2018)

killer b said:


> The Waitrose magazine isn't an organ of free speech and political expression, it's and advertising pamphlet - it exists purely to sell Waitrose products. Including their vegan products.



Exactly.  Waitrose are bang in the market segment for the expansion demographic for such products and having someone in charge with such predilections means likely missing out on a whole load of marketing opportunities.  Quite aside from any negative publicity.


----------



## Saul Goodman (Nov 1, 2018)

8ball said:


> I went to a vegan stand-up comedy gig a few weeks back...


How long did they manage to stand for?


----------



## 8ball (Nov 1, 2018)

Saul Goodman said:


> How long did they manage to stand for?



There was a lot of very competent standing involved.


----------



## Yossarian (Nov 1, 2018)

From Popbitch:


> William Sitwell is currently being held aloft as the latest victim of PC culture, kicked out of the editor's chair at Waitrose Magazine simply for making an ill-judged joke about trapping and killing vegans to a freelance journalist who pitched him a vegan column – but there may be a touch more to the situation that just that. Sitwell has apparently been considered something of an office liability for a while now, so it's no real surprise that his post-lunch emails were a little near the knuckle.
> 
> Coming back to work one afternoon, rather refreshed after a longish lunch break, he loudly announced to the office "It smells of cunt in here!" Then, on another occasion, he was ushered out of a client meeting for turning up in similarly good spirits (he then used this unexpectedly free time to pop back out for a top-up). And the less said about his nights on the town with Hardeep Singh Kohli, the better...


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Nov 1, 2018)

I like making jokes about veganism as much as the next man but how the fuck is anyone reading that and thinking it’s anything other than really intimidating? What a weirdo


----------



## Spymaster (Nov 1, 2018)

Yossarian said:


> From Popbitch:


Seems like the fella's a bit of a knob then.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Nov 2, 2018)

I'm outraged about this Waitrose thing. Outraged.

Tarnishing the good reputation of Waitrose's marketing department, I mean how much more heinous do crimes get? First this, then next people will start saying that avocados taste like nothing and that if sourdough was actually any good we wouldn't have invented yeast. Then the whole aspirational system collapses into chaos.


----------



## Spymaster (Nov 2, 2018)

Don’t be a plank, Frank.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Nov 2, 2018)




----------



## 8ball (Nov 2, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> View attachment 151496



I guess if someone ate the slugs and snails it would do something towards mitigating the situation.


----------



## rekil (Nov 2, 2018)

> The heir presumptive to a baronetcy and a descendent of the writers Edith Osbert and Sacheverell Sitwell, the Old Etonian also hosts supper clubs at his family’s 17th-century manor house in Northamptonshire.


The prosecution rests.


----------



## andysays (Nov 2, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> View attachment 151496


I thought it had been conclusively proved beyond any shadow of a doubt on this very thread that it's fragile carnists who are unaware of/in denial about the cruelty involved in their adopted lifestyle and not vegans who everyone knows are both totally aware and totally good.


----------



## NoXion (Nov 2, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> View attachment 151496



Not just invertebrates, but also vermin with more developed nervous systems: Protecting grain from mice and rat threats


----------



## MrSpikey (Nov 3, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> First this, then next people will start saying that avocados taste like nothing and that if sourdough was actually any good we wouldn't have invented yeast.



Not many people realize that sourdough is actually made using yeast. I think it's a cultural thing.


----------



## hash tag (Nov 23, 2018)

This is ridiculous PETA demands village of Wool changes it's name because it 'promotes cruelty'


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Nov 23, 2018)

hash tag said:


> This is ridiculous PETA demands village of Wool changes it's name because it 'promotes cruelty'


Let’s be fair though, PETA being fucking ridiculous is hardly news


----------



## 8ball (Nov 23, 2018)

I live in a town called Beeston.
Expecting to receive their demands that we rename it to "Slaver's Hill".


----------



## hash tag (Nov 23, 2018)

Beeston? Surely Notts?


----------



## 8ball (Nov 23, 2018)

hash tag said:


> Beeston? Surely Notts?



Indeedy.


----------



## NoXion (Nov 23, 2018)

PETA are fuckwits and hypocrites who are not above making use of pseudoscience or sleazy sexuality to make their point. If I were a vegan I'd want them to shut the fuck up and disappear already.


----------



## ddraig (Nov 23, 2018)

Peta are indeed dickheads and facepalmy


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Nov 23, 2018)

Beer in Devon, think of the bugs killed to harvest the hops  should be renamed booze-slaughter


----------



## Yossarian (Nov 23, 2018)

"How about you just lose the S and become Upper and Lower Laughter?"


----------



## Saul Goodman (Nov 23, 2018)

ddraig said:


> Peta are indeed dickheads and facepalmy


As opposed to the majority of vegans, who aren't dickheads at all and never warrant a fucking massive facepalm.


----------



## ddraig (Nov 23, 2018)

Saul Goodman said:


> As opposed to the majority of vegans, who aren't dickheads at all and never warrant a fucking massive facepalm.


well done!


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Nov 23, 2018)

Saul Goodman said:


> As opposed to the majority of vegans, who aren't dickheads at all and never warrant a fucking massive facepalm.


Nah I know heaps that are sound. But the more than the odd evangelical too. I mean it’s a bit stifling when you revisit old haunts in Glasgow and they’ve all gone vegan but the grub they sell is great!


----------



## Raheem (Nov 24, 2018)

hash tag said:


> This is ridiculous PETA demands village of Wool changes it's name because it 'promotes cruelty'


I've stayed there, and before they think about changing their name they need to think about bus rides that cost less than a meal in a restaurant. And also pavements.


----------



## gentlegreen (Nov 24, 2018)

Yossarian said:


> View attachment 153449
> 
> "How about you just lose the S and become Upper and Lower Laughter?"


The *name* of the village derives form the Old English term "slough" meaning "wet land". The manor of *Upper Slaughter* is recorded in the Domesday Book of 1086; the *Slaughter* family acquired it in the late 12th century.


----------



## hash tag (Nov 24, 2018)

Slaughter hardly vegan friendly; thats on the list.


----------



## kebabking (Nov 24, 2018)

There was a vegan in our local last night - gave the dogs something to chew...


----------



## 8ball (Nov 24, 2018)

Saul Goodman said:


> As opposed to the majority of vegans, who aren't dickheads at all and never warrant a fucking massive facepalm.



That wasn’t really warranted- I expect a whole heap of vegans are just doing their thing, not eating animals.


----------



## Calamity1971 (Nov 24, 2018)

8ball said:


> That wasn’t really warranted-


But hardly surprising.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Dec 3, 2018)

> A tribunal is to be asked to decide whether veganism is a "philosophical belief" akin to a religion, in a landmark legal action.
> 
> Jordi Casamitjana says he was sacked by the League Against Cruel Sports after disclosing it invested pension funds in firms involved in animal testing.
> 
> ...



This is one to watch.



> To qualify as a philosophical belief, veganism must:
> 
> be genuinely held
> be a belief as to a weighty and substantial aspect of human life and behaviour
> ...


----------



## andysays (Dec 3, 2018)

cupid_stunt said:


> This is one to watch.


Surely if he's claiming discrimination because he's a vegan, the first thing he would need to demonstrate that a non-vegan who did something similar wouldn't be sacked


----------



## marty21 (Dec 3, 2018)

cupid_stunt said:


> This is one to watch.


Certainly limits his employment prospects,  and claiming any benefits since there must be a vegan ethical objection to most employers and the DWP/Government. Plus if he is self employed how can he be positive that the people or organisations he does business with are ethical vegans ?


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Dec 3, 2018)

andysays said:


> Surely if he's claiming discrimination because he's a vegan, the first thing he would need to demonstrate that a non-vegan who did something similar wouldn't be sacked


Well, quite. The man is quite clearly a colossal bellend.


----------



## prunus (Dec 3, 2018)

andysays said:


> Surely if he's claiming discrimination because he's a vegan, the first thing he would need to demonstrate that a non-vegan who did something similar wouldn't be sacked



Not necessarily - he’s effectively claiming a religion equivalence, and religion, because it standardly has bullshit crazy beliefs built in, means that discrimination claims work slightly differently; Such that, if someone is doing something that would normally get them reprimanded/sacked whatever is doing that something because of genuine religious beliefs/laws/crazy hoodoo then they cannot be reprimanded, even though a non-religious person (or indeed a person of a different entirely correct religion with different arbitrary rules) would be treated differently. Or so I understand it from extensive HR training over the years. So if he’s claiming he had to do what he did because of *religous* views, rather than just ordinary rational views, he could be protected.


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Dec 3, 2018)

prunus said:


> Not necessarily - he’s effectively claiming a religion equivalence, and religion, because it standardly has bullshit crazy beliefs built in, means that discrimination claims work slightly differently; Such that, if someone is doing something that would normally get them reprimanded/sacked whatever is doing that something because of genuine religious beliefs/laws/crazy hoodoo then they cannot be reprimanded, even though a non-religious person (or indeed a person of a different entirely correct religion with different arbitrary rules) would be treated differently. Or so I understand it from extensive HR training over the years. So if he’s claiming he had to do what he did because of *religous* views, rather than just ordinary rational views, he could be protected.


In other words, religion is yet again shown to be an absolute crock of shite that should have no special exemptions. Fucks sake.

One day I'll do a shit on my bosses desk, it's OK, my personal magic sky pixie says I have to, please don't fire me.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Dec 3, 2018)

Raheem said:


> I've stayed there, and before they think about changing their name they need to think about bus rides that cost less than a meal in a restaurant.



Subsidies for non-profitable rural bus routes are one of many things that have faced the axe thanks to local authority funding cuts. This is often ruinous, particularly for the young and the elderly, and can only hasten the descent of rural Devon into a place of holiday home ghost towns.

But I'm sure blaming the locals will help.

e2a: I see Wool is in Dorset, not Devon. I retract everything I said above because who gives a fuck about people from Dorset?


----------



## andysays (Dec 3, 2018)

prunus said:


> Not necessarily - he’s effectively claiming a religion equivalence, and religion, because it standardly has bullshit crazy beliefs built in, means that discrimination claims work slightly differently; Such that, if someone is doing something that would normally get them reprimanded/sacked whatever is doing that something because of genuine religious beliefs/laws/crazy hoodoo then they cannot be reprimanded, even though a non-religious person (or indeed a person of a different entirely correct religion with different arbitrary rules) would be treated differently. Or so I understand it from extensive HR training over the years. So if he’s claiming he had to do what he did because of *religous* views, rather than just ordinary rational views, he could be protected.


It would be one thing to claim he shouldn't be forced to eat meat, wear leather shoes etc because of his beliefs, that would be fair enough, but this is something else.

I'm sure there must be cases where someone has claimed a religious justification for something similar, but if it counts as gross misconduct, I  don't see why religious people or vegans should be able to claim a get-out where others can't - this last bit is crucially important IMO


----------



## ddraig (Dec 9, 2018)

My beef with vegans says more about me than them | David Mitchell


----------



## existentialist (Dec 9, 2018)

ddraig said:


> My beef with vegans says more about me than them | David Mitchell


And?


----------



## Raheem (Dec 9, 2018)

Spam. On a thread about veganism. It's just not right.


----------



## gentlegreen (Dec 22, 2018)

.


----------



## gentlegreen (Dec 22, 2018)

It was a middle of the night posting from a French publication which I didn't read properly so I assumed these were continued protests in France and a case of the French taking their protests more seriously as usual.

Des vegans forment une chaîne humaine pour empêcher les gens d’acheter de la dinde pour Noël

But of course it was Brighton - and Waitrose (at least they were targetting the middle classes ... )

Vegans asked to leave Waitrose store after Christmas turkey protest


----------



## Spymaster (Dec 22, 2018)

gentlegreen said:


> But of course it was Brighton - and Waitrose (at least they were targetting the middle classes ... )
> 
> Vegans asked to leave Waitrose store after Christmas turkey protest


They _are_ the middle class!

Gotta like the other shoppers ignoring them and just getting on wirh buying their meat.


----------



## brogdale (Dec 25, 2018)

From twatter (obvs)...an un-named Russian butcher does their bit for vegetarianism/veganism  

Enjoy your Tuesday dinners!


----------



## brogdale (Dec 25, 2018)




----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Dec 25, 2018)

brogdale said:


> View attachment 156788



Urgh, what’s that green stuff???


----------



## brogdale (Dec 25, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Urgh, what’s that green stuff???


Should I have used a trigger friendly *spoiler*?


----------



## Artaxerxes (Dec 25, 2018)

brogdale said:


> View attachment 156788



What's the context here? Anniversary of Leningrad?


----------



## Mordi (Dec 25, 2018)

Artaxerxes said:


> What's the context here? Anniversary of Leningrad?



A bit like the centenary of the first world war you can pick any given day to commemorate something from a siege that lasted over two years.


----------



## brogdale (Dec 25, 2018)

I *think* it was a Russian butcher having a bit of a laff tbh


----------



## ddraig (Dec 27, 2018)

not posted yet?!? 
Vegans banned by pub during hunt


----------



## Saul Goodman (Dec 27, 2018)

ddraig said:


> not posted yet?!?
> Vegans banned by pub during hunt


That's fucking outrageous! It's into, not in to.


----------



## greenfield (Dec 27, 2018)

The other week I went to my local Labour party Xmas social and got into a "debate" with a vegan lady during which I thought I would be really clever and take the piss. I thought I was being really original with my "Hitler was a vegetarian", "what about B12" stuff but of course she'd heard it all before.

She was patient enough to actually treat me more seriously than I merited. In the end I promised to watch Land of Hope and Glory, a documentary showing what goes on in British farms and slaughterhouses. I'd seen stuff like that before, bit I'd been able to dismiss it as American, thinking standards were bound to be much higher over here.

Once I'd seen it I realised that if I carried on eating animals, then it would mean something was wrong with me. Once you see the Matrix you can't unsee it.

I've been Vegan ever since. I'm finally living my long-held values and morals. Eating with empathy.


----------



## NoXion (Dec 27, 2018)

greenfield said:


> The other week I went to my local Labour party Xmas social and got into a "debate" with a vegan lady during which I thought I would be really clever and take the piss. I thought I was being really original work my "Hitler was a vegetarian", "what about B12" stuff but of course she'd heard it all before.
> 
> She was patient enough to actually treat me more seriously than I merited. In the end I promised to watch Land of Hope and Glory, a documentary showing what goes on in British farms and slaughterhouses. I'd seen stuff like that before, bit Is been able to dismiss it as American and that standards were bound to be much higher over here.
> 
> ...



Cool story bro


----------



## greenfield (Dec 27, 2018)

NoXion said:


> Cool story bro



Watch the documentary


----------



## ddraig (Dec 27, 2018)

greenfield said:


> Watch the documentary


you sadly won't get much sense from majority of posters here just digs, abuse and "bantz"


----------



## Spymaster (Dec 27, 2018)

greenfield said:


> Watch the documentary


Thing is, most of the vegans who regularly post on here are proselytising dickheads with chunky chips on their shoulders, so nobody pays any attention.


----------



## NoXion (Dec 27, 2018)

greenfield said:


> Watch the documentary



No thanks. I'm not really into consuming propaganda from a group with an obvious ideological axe to grind. 

But here's the thing; I can grant that everything in that film is true, and it still wouldn't be a convincing argument for veganism. No more than the fact that poor people in developing countries are being hideously exploited to mine rare earth minerals or assemble electronics, is a valid reason to stop using my desktop PC.

It does sound like a very convincing argument for better standards, or perhaps the better enforcement of current standards, with regards to animal slaughter in the UK. I'm sure government spending cuts for bodies like the Food Standards Agency and similar bodies have done nothing to improve matters.


----------



## greenfield (Dec 27, 2018)

You really should watch it.

ETA: It's not about poor welfare standards as such, although cheap, industrial-produced meat cannot by definition come from animals that have had any quality of life at all. It's about the process of slaughter  where all animals, free-range, organic or factory-farmed, end up


----------



## Spymaster (Dec 27, 2018)




----------



## existentialist (Dec 27, 2018)

ddraig said:


> not posted yet?!?
> Vegans banned by pub during hunt


Easy enough - and I'm not even a vegan. Or a sab. That pub goes on my shit list. If they want to be that picky about their punters, I'm only too happy to return the compliment.

ETA: I notice from the article that an employee has been suspended in connection with the sign. Good.


----------



## Saul Goodman (Dec 27, 2018)

greenfield said:


> Watch the documentary


Will it make tofu taste like a well seared sirloin?


----------



## NoXion (Dec 27, 2018)

greenfield said:


> You really should watch it.
> 
> ETA: It's not about poor welfare standards as such, although cheap, industrial-produced meat cannot by definition come from animals that have had any quality of life at all. It's about the process of slaughter  where all animals, free-range, organic or factory-farmed, end up



I wasn't just talking about standards of welfare, although those are of course important. I was talking about standards in general.

The process of slaughter results in dead animals. Nobody who has any inkling of how meat is produced thinks otherwise.

Now, I don't have a problem with the general idea of killing animals for the purposes of feeding humans. But militant vegans do. This is why even if this country were to have higher standards as well as decent enforcement of those standards, that wouldn't be good enough for the militant vegans. Even if every animal that ends up on someone's plate lived a life of luxury from its day of birth to moment it dies, "meat is murder", and people who murder others don't get let off for cosseting their victims first, do they? Militant vegans take it as axiomatic that exploiting animals for any purpose is inherently evil (even for cases which are mutually beneficial, such as beekeeping), and so in their eyes any talk of improving standards is skirting around the central issue, as they perceive it.

If militant vegans are using recorded incidents of animal abuse by slaughterhouse workers as an argument against meat eating in general, then they are engaging in a rhetorical sleight of hand.


----------



## 8ball (Dec 27, 2018)

NoXion said:


> If militant vegans are using recorded incidents of animal abuse by slaughterhouse workers as an argument against meat eating in general, then they are engaging in a rhetorical sleight of hand.



Though being fair, it still works as an argument against eating meat with the way things currently are.


----------



## NoXion (Dec 27, 2018)

8ball said:


> Though being fair, it still works as an argument against eating meat with the way things currently are.



I reckon I'd have a hard time finding *any* non-essential services or consumer goods that don't have any ethical problems involved in their production or implementation. What makes meat so special?


----------



## greenfield (Dec 27, 2018)

I know Im repeating myself, but it's (mostly) about the process of slaughter on an industrial scale itself. The smell, the screaming, the blood. The environment is inherently dehumanising and the effects of that brutalising dehumanising environment on those who work there is that abuse of animals is inevitable.


----------



## Saul Goodman (Dec 27, 2018)

greenfield said:


> I know Im repeating myself, but it's (mostly) about the process of slaughter on an industrial scale itself. The smell, the screaming, the blood. The environment is inherently dehumanising and the effects of that brutalising dehumanising environment on those who work there is that abuse of animals is inevitable.


My mate worked at an abattoir for over 30 years. He was never involved in any scenes from Scarface, and he hasn't hacked his family to pieces with a spoon... yet.


----------



## greenfield (Dec 27, 2018)

Not what I was saying though, was it?


----------



## Saul Goodman (Dec 27, 2018)

greenfield said:


> Not what I was saying though, was it?


Yes.
You invented a post hoc fallacy, stating that the killing of animals inevitably turns their killers into monsters. My mate isn't a monster, neither were any of his mates that I'd met. They just went to work and did their job, like most other people.


----------



## NoXion (Dec 27, 2018)

greenfield said:


> I know Im repeating myself, but it's (mostly) about the process of slaughter on an industrial scale itself. The smell, the screaming, the blood. The environment is inherently dehumanising and the effects of that brutalising dehumanising environment on those who work there is that abuse of animals is inevitable.



I don't believe that, and this is why:



> *Animals lives are their right:*
> Founded in 2016, Surge is a grassroots animal rights organisation determined to create a world where compassion towards all non-human animals is the norm. Our aim is to spread awareness through large-scale campaigns, filmmaking and investigative work. Surge is committed to positive community building, teamwork and the abolition of animal use.
> 
> Our vision is a world in which all animals are free from oppression and violence, our vision is therefore of a vegan world. Surge focuses on veganism as we believe that it is through veganism that we'll all collectively end the oppression of non-human animals.



This is from "Our Vision", a statement of aims and purposes by SURGE, the group who made the film. Rather more grand and sweeping than what you're implying. A "vegan world" wouldn't just be a world in which there is no industrial animal slaughter, but rather a world in which there is no animal slaughter at all.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Dec 27, 2018)

Abattoirs are massively fucked-up places. Some people might be able to cope with working in them, but that doesn't mean that they aren't fucked up.


----------



## bellaozzydog (Dec 27, 2018)

An acquaintance of mine tells anyone drinking/buying milk that’s its “rape juice”

I agree with the principles of veganism but you can’t sell it by offending people/making them so uncomfortable and making children cry. It’s not the way to sell it


----------



## Saul Goodman (Dec 27, 2018)

bellaozzydog said:


> An acquaintance of mine tells anyone drinking/buying milk that’s its “rape juice”


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Dec 28, 2018)

Finally just seen this in a shop in Thailand, something vegans and carnists can appreciate together...


----------



## Teaboy (Dec 28, 2018)

They've been selling vegetarian crispy duck in the UK for a while now.

Personally I think its a bit dumb calling it that, not that I think anyone is fooled mind.  Veg sausages and burgers are fine I reckon because its more about the shape but when a specific animal is mentioned its clearly false labeling.  See also veg roast beef etc.  I don't know why they just don't label it as veg sunday roast etc.


----------



## JimW (Dec 28, 2018)

There's a long tradition of Buddhist fake meat feasts, famous restaurant here in Beijing that does whole fake fish with crispy skin etc if that's your thing. Lots of temples have similar.


----------



## NoXion (Dec 28, 2018)

Those noodle pot things are brilliant by the way, there's a shop near my place that sells a large, extra spicy version and they're excellent as part of a quick and tasty lunch at work.







To bring that rumination back somewhere vaguely relating to the topic at hand, if the ingredients list is any guide then they're suitable for vegan diets as well!


----------



## bellaozzydog (Dec 28, 2018)

JimW said:


> There's a long tradition of Buddhist fake meat feasts, famous restaurant here in Beijing that does whole fake fish with crispy skin etc if that's your thing. Lots of temples have similar.



I’ve been eating fake kebab meat. It’s mega tasty.

Probably as unhealthy as the real stuff as well wins all round.

Probably been asked before but why are there fat vegans? I understand a veggie diet with dairy/eggs can be an issue for healthy eating, I was in a relationship with a veggie for five years and she basically only ate yellow food cheese, chips, omelette, crisps etc


----------



## UnderAnOpenSky (Dec 28, 2018)

bellaozzydog said:


> I’ve been eating fake kebab meat. It’s mega tasty.
> 
> Probably as unhealthy as the real stuff as well wins all round.
> 
> Probably been asked before but why are there fat vegans? I understand a veggie diet with dairy/eggs can be an issue for healthy eating, I was in a relationship with a veggie for five years and she basically only ate yellow food cheese, chips, omelette, crisps etc



Chips and biscuits can be vegan...


----------



## NoXion (Dec 28, 2018)

None of the people I've ever known to be vegan were fat. If anything, they tended to be on the skinny side. Not as emaciated as I am, but definitely slim.

I've always put that down to an assumption that for anyone who goes to the trouble of eliminating all animal products from their diet, it generally doesn't take much of a leap for them to watch what they eat in general.


----------



## greenfield (Dec 28, 2018)

Saul Goodman said:


>



Hilarious isn't it?


----------



## Spymaster (Dec 28, 2018)

greenfield said:


> Hilarious isn't it?


Ridiculous, more like.


----------



## greenfield (Dec 28, 2018)

Spymaster said:


> Ridiculous, more like.


Actually, I think the whole issue, your 'story' about your mate, and also this thread, are rather sad.


----------



## IC3D (Dec 28, 2018)

Spymaster said:


> Ridiculous, more like.


----------



## Spymaster (Dec 28, 2018)

greenfield said:


> Actually, I think the whole issue, your 'story' about your mate, and also this thread, are rather sad.


Not sure which story you mean (I think you're referring to someone else) but sad, to me, is someone who can't think for themselves and has their mind changed by propaganda vids. Noxion has made some good points to you on this thread. You've ignored them. Typical.


----------



## gentlegreen (Dec 28, 2018)

I'm strictly vegan when it comes to recreational calories.
This Xmas I've been surprised that they've managed to sneak dairy into ALL the supermarket mince pies.   /


----------



## existentialist (Dec 28, 2018)

greenfield said:


> Hilarious isn't it?


Depends on your sense of humour, I suppose. Hyperbole often is funny.


----------



## existentialist (Dec 28, 2018)

greenfield said:


> Actually, I think the whole issue, your 'story' about your mate, and also this thread, are rather sad.


It's all about the perspective. Your desperate attempts to play the disinterested party just happening to have seen a video you're dying to recommend has a certain pathos about it...


----------



## greenfield (Dec 28, 2018)

Ah so I'm a long-standing militant vegan who sneaked in, lying about having discussions and watching the reality of slaughterhouses, lying about having my mind changed to fool you, did I?

Now that is funny. And ridiculous. I find the rudeness and defensiveness of some posters on this thread just weird tbh.

I used to eat meat until a couple of weeks ago. Now, I'm really glad that I don't. That's all.


----------



## greenfield (Dec 28, 2018)

greenfield said:


> Ah so I'm a long-standing militant vegan who sneaked in, lying about having discussions and watching the reality of slaughterhouses, lying about having my mind changed to fool you, did I?
> 
> Now that is funny. And ridiculous. I find the rudeness and defensiveness of some posters on this thread just weird tbh.
> 
> I used to eat meat until a couple of weeks ago. Now, I'm really glad that I don't. That's all.



ETA: I'm not attacking anyone, or blaming others for their choices. I'm simply saying what has led me to make the choice I have.


----------



## existentialist (Dec 28, 2018)

greenfield said:


> Ah so I'm a long-standing militant vegan who sneaked in, lying about having discussions and watching the reality of slaughterhouses, lying about having my mind changed to fool you, did I?
> 
> Now that is funny. And ridiculous. I find the rudeness and defensiveness of some posters on this thread just weird tbh.
> 
> I used to eat meat until a couple of weeks ago. Now, I'm really glad that I don't. That's all.


Cool story bro. This is becoming a habit.


----------



## Spymaster (Dec 28, 2018)

greenfield said:


> ETA: I'm not attacking anyone, or blaming others for their choices. I'm simply saying what has led me to make the choice I have.


It's the urging of other people (who have put as much, if not more, thought into their food choices as you have) to "watch the video", the arrogant assumption that you are better informed, and your support of hyperbole like "rape juice" that's irritated people. Typical of preachy vegans. You'll be calling us _carnists_ soon.


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Dec 28, 2018)

greenfield said:


> ETA: I'm not attacking anyone, or blaming others for their choices. I'm simply saying what has led me to make the choice I have.



Best to just ignore these sad sacks of shit greenfield. Good on you for being open-minded and living in accordance with your values.


----------



## Spymaster (Dec 28, 2018)

Jeff Robinson said:


> Best to just ignore these sad sacks of shit greenfield. Good on you for being open-minded and living in accordance with your values.


Jeff's right greenfield . There are a number of vegan love in threads where you'll be treated far more gently. This thread is not one of them and is actually critical of veganism and its evangelisers.


----------



## greenfield (Dec 28, 2018)

Spymaster said:


> It's the urging of other people (who have put as much, if not more, thought into their food choices as you have) to "watch the video", the arrogant assumption that you are better informed, and your support of hyperbole like "rape juice" that's irritated people. Typical of preachy vegans. You'll be calling us _carnists_ soon.



I never used the term "rape juice". I never would


----------



## Spymaster (Dec 28, 2018)

greenfield said:


> I never used the term "rape juice". I never would


Nobody said you did.


----------



## Saul Goodman (Dec 28, 2018)

greenfield said:


> I used to eat meat until a couple of weeks ago.


There's nothing worse than a freshly converted vegan preaching to meat eaters.


----------



## 8ball (Dec 28, 2018)

Saul Goodman said:


> There's nothing worse than a freshly converted vegan preaching to meat eaters.



I expect they're pretty annoying to other vegans once they've converted back.


----------



## mojo pixy (Dec 29, 2018)

bellaozzydog said:


> Probably been asked before but why are there fat vegans?



Nuts and oils are fattening .. more importantly, sugar is vegan


----------



## 8ball (Dec 29, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> Nuts and oils are fattening .. more importantly, sugar is vegan



Except honey.


----------



## Saul Goodman (Dec 29, 2018)

8ball said:


> Except honey.


So if I decided to go vegan, I couldn't have honey nut cornflakes? Fuck that!


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Dec 29, 2018)

8ball said:


> Except honey.



Bee-rape-goo.


----------



## mojo pixy (Dec 29, 2018)

8ball said:


> Except honey.



Well that's why I wrote sugar and not honey.
and not lard.


----------



## Orang Utan (Dec 29, 2018)

Angry meat eaters are making me want to go vegan


----------



## Spymaster (Dec 29, 2018)

Orang Utan said:


> Angry meat eaters are making me want to go vegan


Go for it. I'll give you a month!


----------



## 8ball (Dec 30, 2018)

Orang Utan said:


> Angry meat eaters are making me want to go vegan



When did you meet one of those?


----------



## Orang Utan (Dec 30, 2018)

8ball said:


> When did you meet one of those?


They're all over this thread


----------



## Thimble Queen (Dec 30, 2018)

Orang Utan said:


> Angry meat eaters are making me want to go vegan



Cheese though!


----------



## 8ball (Dec 30, 2018)

Orang Utan said:


> They're all over this thread



Can you name one?


----------



## Orang Utan (Dec 30, 2018)

8ball said:


> Can you name one?


Yes


----------



## 8ball (Jan 1, 2019)

Orang Utan said:


> Yes



Clearly not.


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 1, 2019)

8ball said:


> Clearly not.


I can, but won't as what would d be the point of singling any out


----------



## 8ball (Jan 1, 2019)

Orang Utan said:


> I can, but won't as what would d be the point of singling any out



Well, it would most likely just confirm that you're playing "I know you are, but what am I?", and haven't thought through your point.


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 1, 2019)

8ball said:


> Well, it would most likely just confirm that you're playing "I know you are, but what am I?", and haven't thought through your point.


No, it's just a long thread with many angry posts and I'm not obliged to satisfy you, especially when all it would do would make them angrier on the first day of a year i want to start with harmony rather than dischord.


----------



## existentialist (Jan 1, 2019)

8ball said:


> Well, it would most likely just confirm that you're playing "I know you are, but what am I?", and haven't thought through your point.


I honestly believe that you're wasting your time, 8ball. This is a pattern I've seen repeated time and again, and it never goes anywhere.


----------



## 8ball (Jan 1, 2019)

existentialist said:


> I honestly believe that you're wasting your time, 8ball. This is a pattern I've seen repeated time and again, and it never goes anywhere.



I guess posts can look a little different from the other side of the fence.  The most recent forthright posts seems to be from Saul and Spy, which come over to me as amused rather than angry.
I guess that guy who put up the "no vegans" sign at that pub could be counted, plus certain French farmers and butchers, but I don't see anything of that ilk here.

(I'm not counting things like referring to PETA as fuckwits either - that's not anger, just common sense)


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 1, 2019)

Yes, it's pointless arguing with people who have such entrenched positions, so why continue?


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 1, 2019)

8ball said:


> I guess posts can look a little different from the other side of the fence.  The most recent forthright posts seems to be from Saul and Spy, which come over to me as amused rather than angry.
> I guess that guy who put up the "no vegans" sign at that pub could be counted, plus certain French farmers and butchers, but I don't see anything of that ilk here.
> 
> (I'm not counting things like referring to PETA as fuckwits either - that's not anger, just common sense)


Where you see amusement, i see contempt


----------



## existentialist (Jan 1, 2019)

8ball said:


> I guess posts can look a little different from the other side of the fence.  The most recent forthright posts seems to be from Saul and Spy, which come over to me as amused rather than angry.
> I guess that guy who put up the "no vegans" sign at that pub could be counted, plus certain French farmers and butchers, but I don't see anything of that ilk here.
> 
> (I'm not counting things like referring to PETA as fuckwits either - that's not anger, just common sense)


I'd agree. I'm not even sure that the pub sign bloke was necessarily angry - just rather blinkered and impulsive.


----------



## Mr Retro (Jan 2, 2019)

There is a programme on C4 tonight “The Truth About Vegans”. I think the title shows it will be anything but the truth and I expect it to be biased against veganism. But I’m prepared to be surprised.


----------



## andysays (Jan 2, 2019)

Good to see the time away hasn't changed you, Orang Utan


----------



## 8ball (Jan 2, 2019)

Mr Retro said:


> There is a programme on C4 tonight “The Truth About Vegans”. I think the title shows it will be anything but the truth and I expect it to be biased against veganism. But I’m prepared to be surprised.



What would "the truth about vegans" be, then?


----------



## Mr Retro (Jan 2, 2019)

8ball said:


> What would "the truth about vegans" be, then?


Good question. One I suspect C4 will come no where near answering or even make an attempt to do so.


----------



## 8ball (Jan 2, 2019)

Mr Retro said:


> Good question. One I suspect C4 will come no where near answering or even make an attempt to do so.



I'd have thought vegans and veganism would be too familiar these days for such a programme to be particularly educational.
Especially when about half the people watching will be vegans hoping to find something to be offended by.


----------



## William of Walworth (Jan 2, 2019)

8ball said:


> Especially when about half the people watching will be vegans hoping to find something to be offended by.



And the other half anti-vegans eagerly looking for something to attack?


----------



## The39thStep (Jan 2, 2019)

Greggs is launching vegan sausage rolls


----------



## existentialist (Jan 2, 2019)

William of Walworth said:


> And the other half anti-vegans eagerly looking for something to attack?


I think, if I were an anti-vegan looking for something to attack, I'd probably be looking elsewhere than a crowdpleaser documentary off the telly, TBF.


----------



## William of Walworth (Jan 2, 2019)

existentialist : I was just making a sharp counterpoint in response to 8ball 's, rather than being particularly serious 

I think festivaldeb actually wants us to watch this C4 programme tonight, but I'll be starting with a completely open mind before we do, because so far I know a big phat zero about it!


----------



## andysays (Jan 2, 2019)

8ball said:


> What would "the truth about vegans" be, then?


Apparently,  they don't eat meat and some of them are angry


----------



## Calamity1971 (Jan 2, 2019)

William of Walworth said:


> existentialist : I was just making a sharp counterpoint in response to 8ball 's, rather than being particularly serious
> 
> I think festivaldeb actually wants us to watch this C4 programme tonight, but I'll be starting with a completely open mind before we do, because so far I know a big phat zero about it!


Looks like they are focusing on the extremist side of it.


----------



## William of Walworth (Jan 2, 2019)

Calamity1971 said:


> Looks like they are focusing on the extremist side of it.



OK, that'll be fun ... or not


----------



## William of Walworth (Jan 2, 2019)

I'm not a vegan, have always just been veggie since being brought up as one from birth.

I tend to react, or try to react, to all people (vegans, fellow-veggies and meat-eaters) as I find them. _In practice_ I've always tended to find that *far* more people in all three categories are fairly laid back about their own and others people's personal life-choices and ethics.

Those being ranting loudmouthed loons about any of it are surely *well* outnumbered by the sane.


----------



## 8ball (Jan 2, 2019)

The39thStep said:


> Greggs is launching vegan sausage rolls



*   IT'S AN OUTRAGE!!!   *


----------



## existentialist (Jan 2, 2019)

William of Walworth said:


> I'm not a vegan, have always just been veggie since being brought up as one from birth.
> 
> I tend to react, or try to react, to all people (vegans, fellow-veggies and meat-eaters) as I find them. _In practice_ I've always tended to find that *far* more people in all three categories are fairly laid back about their own and others people's personal life-choices and ethics.
> 
> Those being ranting loudmouthed loons about any of it are surely *well* outnumbered by the sane.


They may be outnumbered, but they tend to be more visible. As a non-ethical vegetarian, I get fairly tired of being lectured about why I should be vegetarian by people who often eat more meat than I do (the _soi-disant_ "pescatarian", for example), because it's apparently not enough for them that I'm not eating meat - I'm supposed to be not eating it for the right reasons . And there have been more than a handful of the vegan tendency who tend to regard vegetarians somewhat pityingly, a bit like churchgoing Christians do about those who haven't yet been saved by the love of our Lord Jesus Christ.

I have known a few vegans who just quietly get on with it, and for all I know there were a load more whose dietary choices I was utterly ignorant of - which is just as it should be, unless I'm making them dinner


----------



## existentialist (Jan 2, 2019)

8ball said:


> *   IT'S AN OUTRAGE!!!   *




TBF, I was a bit disappointed that they'd gone down the Quorn route. There are much nicer ways to de-meat dishes.


----------



## 8ball (Jan 2, 2019)

existentialist said:


> As a non-ethical vegetarian, I get fairly tired of being lectured about why I should be vegetarian by people who often eat more meat than I do (the _soi-disant_ "pescatarian", for example), because it's apparently not enough for them that I'm not eating meat - I'm supposed to be not eating it for the right reasons .



There's a bit of occasional scuffling among vegans along these lines too.
The "philosophical vegans" don't always make happy bedfellows with the "environmentalists" and/or the "health-conscious" ones.

(Most vegans are in it for a mixture of reasons, obv)


----------



## neonwilderness (Jan 2, 2019)

The39thStep said:


> Greggs is launching vegan sausage rolls





8ball said:


> *   IT'S AN OUTRAGE!!!   *


There is quite a lot of outrage on their Facebook post about this


----------



## ddraig (Jan 2, 2019)

Angry carnists proper kicking off FFS!! 

Greggs Launched A Vegan Sausage Roll And Meat Eaters Were Angry, So Greggs Got Sassy - Totally Vegan Buzz


----------



## stavros (Jan 2, 2019)

C4 programme about veganism on tonight, at 10pm I think.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jan 2, 2019)

ddraig said:


> Angry carnists proper kicking off FFS!!
> 
> Greggs Launched A Vegan Sausage Roll And Meat Eaters Were Angry, So Greggs Got Sassy - Totally Vegan Buzz





> The bakery chain sells 1.5 million meat sausage rolls a week. The roll comes just in time for the start of Veganuary – with more than 100,000 people signed up to try veganism at the start of 2019.



Veganuary.


----------



## 8ball (Jan 2, 2019)

ddraig said:


> Angry carnists proper kicking off FFS!!
> 
> Greggs Launched A Vegan Sausage Roll And Meat Eaters Were Angry, So Greggs Got Sassy - Totally Vegan Buzz



It looks more like a tiny number of the kind of BTL comments you expect from tinternet.


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Jan 2, 2019)

ddraig said:


> Angry carnists proper kicking off FFS!!
> 
> Greggs Launched A Vegan Sausage Roll And Meat Eaters Were Angry, So Greggs Got Sassy - Totally Vegan Buzz


----------



## bellaozzydog (Jan 3, 2019)

Did anyone watch channel 4 dispatches tonight

“The truth about vegans”

Absolute fucking hatchet job. I genuinely wonder who pitched it and I who paid for it. NUF and country alliance looking at the slant of it.

Vegans = bonkers, antisemetic, psycho, terrorists
Farmers= honest hard working folks who love their livestock


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Jan 3, 2019)

ddraig said:


> Angry carnists proper kicking off FFS!!
> 
> Greggs Launched A Vegan Sausage Roll And Meat Eaters Were Angry, So Greggs Got Sassy - Totally Vegan Buzz


If that’s your idea of “proper kicking off” come down my local, The Red Lion, with me on a Friday night, it’ll blow your mind...


----------



## William of Walworth (Jan 3, 2019)

bellaozzydog said:


> Did anyone watch channel 4 dispatches tonight
> 
> “The truth about vegans”
> 
> ...



We never watched this in the end, and by the look of the above, I'm pretty glad we didn't 

Turned out that festivaldeb's plan was to watch an altogether different (BBC) programme on last night callled Dirty Vegan, a cookery programme which was much more positive apparantly. 
Didn't watch it myself, I was still out , but it looks as if this mini-series could be fun


----------



## 8ball (Jan 3, 2019)

bellaozzydog said:


> Did anyone watch channel 4 dispatches tonight
> 
> “The truth about vegans”
> 
> ...


----------



## Mr Retro (Jan 3, 2019)

William of Walworth said:


> We never watched this in the end, and by the look of the above, I'm pretty glad we didn't


Neither did we. I suspected it would be something like it was and then saw a twitter clip of the vegan lady at a sheep farm so knew it wouldn't be balanced.  

Pity, there are a lot of people chancing "Veganuary" atm and something more honest should have been the way for C4 to approach it. I understand the veganuary thing is irritating in the extreme for some people but if you are hoping for more people to become Vegan and Vegetarian who cares what way they get into it?


----------



## 8ball (Jan 3, 2019)

Mr Retro said:


> Neither did we. I suspected it would be something like it was and then saw a twitter clip of the vegan lady at a sheep farm so knew it wouldn't be balanced.



I hope you've written a stiffly worded letter to C4.


----------



## Mr Retro (Jan 3, 2019)

8ball said:


> I hope you've written a stiffly worded letter to C4.


I suspect that’s more your kind of thing?


----------



## 8ball (Jan 3, 2019)

Mr Retro said:


> I suspect that’s more your kind of thing?



I might actually watch something first before cracking open the green ink, myself.


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Jan 3, 2019)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> If that’s your idea of “proper kicking off” come down my local, The Red Lion, with me on a Friday night, it’ll blow your mind...



The Red Lion? I know of it, a pub for sissy boys apparently. You should come down my local, The Pitbull and Knuckle Duster, to see what a real boozer for real men looks like.


----------



## 8ball (Jan 3, 2019)

Jeff Robinson said:


> The Red Lion? I know of it, a pub for sissy boys apparently. You should come down my local, The Pitbull and Knuckle Duster, to see what a real boozer for real men looks like.



A mate of mine got done over with a spiraliser down there once - they had to pack the wound with quinoa til the ambulance arrived.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jan 3, 2019)

Is Gregg's new policy of force feeding vegan sausage rolls to its customers a step too far? Im undecided. As long as they are not halal - that would be a bit too much even for a liberal metropolitan elite snowflake feminazi commie like myself.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jan 3, 2019)

re: the channel 4 dispatches thing - just a wild shot in the dark here - but are any of the _living marxism/Institute of Ideas_ cultists involved in the making of this?


----------



## andysays (Jan 3, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> Is Gregg's new policy of force feeding vegan sausage rolls to its customers a step too far? Im undecided. As long as they are not halal - that would be a bit too much even for a liberal metropolitan elite snowflake feminazi commie like myself.


I heard they were lacing them with heroin and then feeding them to school kids to make them addicted to veganism


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Jan 3, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> re: the channel 4 dispatches thing - just a wild shot in the dark here - but are any of the _living marxism/Institute of Ideas_ cultists involved in the making of this?



tbf the documentary was actually a mixed bag. It was not anti-vegan or anti-veganism, in fact the presenter is doing veganuary and had positive things to say about the rise of veganism. On the other hand it was critical of some of the rhetoric and tactics deployed by animal rights groups, including trespass and saving/stealing animals from factory farms. This was rather weak and sensationalist tbh and didn't really land any good punches. Also featured some desperate attempts to make the owner of a hellish looking factory farm look like the good guy who'd been stitched up for purely ideological reasons.

It's hard to know whether the effect of the documentary will be to shift public opinion more in favour or against veganism, I suspect it will have very little effect either way.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jan 3, 2019)

Jeff Robinson said:


> tbf the documentary was actually a mixed bag. It was not anti-vegan or anti-veganism, in fact the presenter is doing veganuary and had positive things to say about the rise of veganism. On the other hand it was critical of some of the rhetoric and tactics deployed by animal rights groups, including trespass and saving/stealing animals from factory farms. This was rather weak and sensationalist tbh and didn't really land any good punches. Also featured some desperate attempts to make the owner of a hellish looking factory farm look like the good guy who'd been stitched up for purely ideological reasons.
> 
> It's hard to know whether the effect of the documentary will be to shift public opinion more in favour or against veganism, I suspect it will have very little effect either way.



smear by association though? calling it "the truth about vegans" and then  concentrating on the more batshit end of the animal rights movement. Its like   calling it "the truth about people who exercise" and going on about royd rage.


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Jan 3, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> smear by association though? calling it "the truth about vegans" and then  concentrating on the more batshit end of the animal rights movement. Its like   calling it "the truth about people who exercise" and going on about royd rage.



True, it seems like 'clickbait' has basically infected every aspect of the media now.


----------



## Red Sky (Jan 3, 2019)

bellaozzydog said:


> Did anyone watch channel 4 dispatches tonight
> 
> “The truth about vegans”
> 
> ...



Must have been a bit of damp squib. Militant veganism these days is about slagging people off on TripAdvisor rather than setting fire to stuff and grave robbery.


----------



## 8ball (Jan 3, 2019)

Jeff Robinson said:


> tbf the documentary was actually a mixed bag...



Yeah, it was far more “lazy, lowest-common-denominator bollocks” than it was a hatchet job.

The amount of time devoted to that farmer and the “Viva” group was disproportionate.


----------



## mojo pixy (Jan 3, 2019)

Jeff Robinson said:


> True, it seems like 'clickbait' has basically infected every aspect of the media now.



Ten amazing facts you NEED to know about vegans before you join them...


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jan 3, 2019)

YOU WONT BELIEVE  what goes into a vegan sausage roll!


----------



## 8ball (Jan 3, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> YOU WONT BELIEVE  what goes into a vegan sausage roll!



Vegans SLAMMED by CARNIST Channel
4 “journalist”.


----------



## prunus (Jan 4, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> YOU WONT BELIEVE  what goes into a vegan sausage roll!



Is it vegetables?


----------



## 8ball (Jan 4, 2019)

prunus said:


> Is it vegetables?



INCREDIBLY NOT!!


----------



## mojo pixy (Jan 4, 2019)

IT'S VEGANS

*floss*


----------



## ddraig (Jan 4, 2019)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> If that’s your idea of “proper kicking off” come down my local, The Red Lion, with me on a Friday night, it’ll blow your mind...


As in Twitter/online kicking off not your hardman local (where you're obviously the hardest)


----------



## existentialist (Jan 4, 2019)

ddraig said:


> As in Twitter/online kicking off not your hardman local (where you're obviously the hardest)


I'd be well 'ard, if it wasn't for the vegetarianism


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Jan 4, 2019)

ddraig said:


> As in Twitter/online kicking off


No. Really? 

(As an aside, my local pub is rough as fuck and I avoid it like the plague. What was hilarious was The Guardian once recommending it as a good place to visit due to the stunning original Victorian tile work that’s still in the back bar. If any of their readers made it out alive I’d be surprised )


----------



## ddraig (Jan 4, 2019)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> No. Really?
> 
> (As an aside, my local pub is rough as fuck and I avoid it like the plague. What was hilarious was The Guardian once recommending it as a good place to visit due to the stunning original Victorian tile work that’s still in the back bar. If any of their readers made it out alive I’d be surprised )


yes, REALLY
so what was the point of your pub comment?


----------



## Spymaster (Jan 4, 2019)

ddraig said:


> so what was the point of your pub comment?


He was pointing out your hyperbole and finding amusement in your definition of "proper kicking off".


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Jan 4, 2019)

ddraig said:


> yes, REALLY
> so what was the point of your pub comment?


Mild amusement with your concept of “kicking off” coupled with the fact you are somewhat sensitive when it comes to this subject.


----------



## ddraig (Jan 4, 2019)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> Mild amusement with your concept of “kicking off” coupled with the fact you are somewhat sensitive when it comes to this subject.


worth it then, LOLZ!!


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Jan 4, 2019)

ddraig said:


> worth it then, LOLZ!!


----------



## Saul Goodman (Jan 4, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> YOU WONT BELIEVE  what goes into a vegan sausage roll!


A vegan met somebody who hadn't yet been informed of said veganism. You won't believe what happened next!


----------



## mojo pixy (Jan 4, 2019)

They shared a delicious picnic of vegan sausage rolls, chips and mushy peas washed down with a nice cold can of Thatchers, and shared tales of the ol' front line, while watching the sun set over the sea. They probably shared a joint, I don't know. It's my scene so they did.

And nobody gave a fuck amen


----------



## hash tag (Jan 5, 2019)

Veganism has certainly upset this Councillor Farming county 'no place for vegan ads'


----------



## existentialist (Jan 5, 2019)

hash tag said:


> Veganism has certainly upset this Councillor Farming county 'no place for vegan ads'


Angry carnist. Off topic. Post reported


----------



## T & P (Jan 5, 2019)

I think he meant to say vegangelists, not vegangalists.

I like the term 'vegangelists' as it happens


----------



## rekil (Jan 5, 2019)

I am fully committed to unconditional carnism on the basis of this prick's antics alone.



13+ minutes of content.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 5, 2019)

If for example the Greggs’s roll turned out to contain eyelids and foreskins, is there any legal comeback your vegan can have once they’ve munched a bunch of ‘em?


----------



## Saul Goodman (Jan 5, 2019)

copliker said:


> I am fully committed to unconditional carnism on the basis of this prick's antics alone.
> 
> 
> 
> 13+ minutes of content.



Funny as fuck that he queued for so long and they didn't have any.


----------



## hash tag (Jan 15, 2019)

I think I might feel safer in a vegan restaurant from now on Tory Politician Jacob Rees-Mogg Would Refuse To Eat In A Vegan Restaurant


----------



## NoXion (Jan 15, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> If for example the Greggs’s roll turned out to contain eyelids and foreskins, is there any legal comeback your vegan can have once they’ve munched a bunch of ‘em?



I'm pretty sure that selling products advertised as vegan, that turn out to contain animal products, would be some kind of false advertising. It is certainly deceptive. That sort of thing can and should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. Mislabelling hurts all consumers and it is in everyone's interest that it be strongly discouraged.


----------



## existentialist (Jan 15, 2019)

hash tag said:


> I think I might feel safer in a vegan restaurant from now on Tory Politician Jacob Rees-Mogg Would Refuse To Eat In A Vegan Restaurant


That's pretty much all you need to know about the cunt. Well, that and the fact he calls his kids names like mcmlxvii


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 22, 2019)

Vegan activist banned from Guildford's Tunsgate Quarter



> A vegan peace activist has been banned from Guildford's Tunsgate Quarter shopping centre after complaints from customers.
> 
> Monica Lilley, 68, a well-known vegan campaigner from Guildford, claims she had only been passing through the shopping centre and "smiling at people".



This is the woman who kicked off during the armistice service a couple of years ago.


----------



## NoXion (Jan 22, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Vegan activist banned from Guildford's Tunsgate Quarter
> 
> 
> 
> This is the woman who kicked off during the armistice service a couple of years ago.



I didn't hear about the armistice thing. Were they serving ham sandwiches or something?


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 22, 2019)

NoXion said:


> I didn't hear about the armistice thing. Were they serving ham sandwiches or something?



No, just doing the silence at 11am, she barged in and started shouting the odds. She seems to have a similar level of social awareness as my five year old.


----------



## hash tag (Jan 22, 2019)

You shouldn't blame her, she was only the messenger


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jan 22, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> No, just doing the silence at 11am, she barged in and started shouting the odds. She seems to have a similar level of social awareness as my five year old.


Ah the bairns are still more aware, my son managed to observe a whole hours silence once aged 4, but if he shouts in a cafe to annoy those at the adjacent table it’s probably fair enough


----------



## petee (Jan 26, 2019)

no, but this one might

Yahoo is now part of Oath


----------



## hash tag (Feb 18, 2019)

Going vegan, want a punch in the mouth?
BBC News - NatWest worker told customer 'vegans should be punched'
Bank customer told 'vegans should be punched'


----------



## 8ball (Feb 18, 2019)

hash tag said:


> Going vegan, want a punch in the mouth?
> BBC News - NatWest worker told customer 'vegans should be punched'
> Bank customer told 'vegans should be punched'



Maybe their pop-up investments aren't paying as well as expected.


----------



## ddraig (Mar 8, 2019)

More angry vegans!! Err I mean  angry carnists  
Vegan pie scoops top award and causes outrage among culinary elite


----------



## keybored (Mar 8, 2019)

ddraig said:


> More angry vegans!! Err I mean  angry carnists
> Vegan pie scoops top award and causes outrage among culinary elite


It's ironic that the guy who created it floods the local shops with meat products.


----------



## likesfish (Mar 24, 2019)

WATCH: Man eats raw pig's head outside vegan festival

A lone protestor makes a stand against vegans by noming down on a raw pigs head outside vegfest I salute you. You glorious mad bastard


----------



## editor (Mar 24, 2019)

likesfish said:


> WATCH: Man eats raw pig's head outside vegan festival
> 
> A lone protestor makes a stand against vegans by noming down on a raw pigs head outside vegfest I salute you. You glorious mad bastard


He's not glorious. He's a fucking twat.


----------



## BristolEcho (Mar 24, 2019)

likesfish said:


> WATCH: Man eats raw pig's head outside vegan festival
> 
> A lone protestor makes a stand against vegans by noming down on a raw pigs head outside vegfest I salute you. You glorious mad bastard



What exactly is he standing against?


----------



## likesfish (Mar 24, 2019)

fuck knows  thats what makes it so insane


----------



## T & P (Mar 24, 2019)

I really don’t get people like that. In essence I guess it’s no different from, say, homophobes who are not religious and whose only problem with homosexuality is that they find the thought of gay sex repulsive. 

I myself find cider, baked beans or liver disgusting but don’t berate those who love them. I mean, why would you?


----------



## likesfish (Mar 24, 2019)

direct action vegans have been annoying people around brighton


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Mar 25, 2019)

likesfish said:


> WATCH: Man eats raw pig's head outside vegan festival
> 
> A lone protestor makes a stand against vegans by noming down on a raw pigs head outside vegfest I salute you. You glorious mad bastard


He is a well known anti-vegan nutjob that believes in flat earth and all sorts of other nonsense...



...I've posted other videos by this loon and his other animal brain eating wacko, Milkjar.


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Mar 25, 2019)

https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2019/03/22/vegan-youtube-star-rawvana-gets-caught-eating-meat-camera/


----------



## editor (Mar 25, 2019)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2019/03/22/vegan-youtube-star-rawvana-gets-caught-eating-meat-camera/


What do you expect from a YouTube 'influencer'?


----------



## Spymaster (Mar 25, 2019)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2019/03/22/vegan-youtube-star-rawvana-gets-caught-eating-meat-camera/


They all do it


----------



## sojourner (Mar 25, 2019)

likesfish said:


> WATCH: Man eats raw pig's head outside vegan festival
> 
> A lone protestor makes a stand against vegans by noming down on a raw pigs head outside vegfest I salute you. You glorious mad bastard


Why the fuck would you salute this cunt?


----------



## likesfish (Mar 25, 2019)

because its an act of bizarre madness


----------



## sojourner (Mar 25, 2019)

likesfish said:


> because its an act of bizarre madness


I don't see the justification at all.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Mar 25, 2019)

editor said:


> What do you expect from a YouTube 'influencer'?


Not that there's anything inherently wrong in being a "YouTube influencer" (whatever they are). The Rawvana story is old news, but it's interesting to see the anti-vegans rejoicing at each "failure".  



There have been a number of "why I'm no longer vegan" youtubers whch is not that surprising given that a fair number of folk treat it as just a diet, and it's common for most dieters (be they "vegan" or not) to quit after a short period.


----------



## editor (Mar 25, 2019)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Not that there's anything inherently wrong in being a "YouTube influencer" (whatever they are). The Rawvana story is old news, but it's interesting to see the anti-vegans rejoicing at each "failure".
> 
> 
> 
> There have been a number of "why I'm no longer vegan" youtubers whch is not that surprising given that a fair number of folk treat it as just a diet, and it's common for most dieters (be they "vegan" or not) to quit after a short period.


Who gives a flying fuck what this weirdly obsessed twat thinks about anything?


----------



## pug (Mar 25, 2019)

likesfish said:


> WATCH: Man eats raw pig's head outside vegan festival
> 
> A lone protestor makes a stand against vegans by noming down on a raw pigs head outside vegfest I salute you. You glorious mad bastard



some high quality comments there -



> john60 							24th March 3:34 am
> 5 likes
> What a sick individual , I hope he dies a horrible death.
> 
> Last Updated: 24th March 5:22 pm


----------



## cuppa tee (Mar 25, 2019)

this is a vegan take on black pudding that is allegedly being served up in Spain


----------



## editor (Mar 25, 2019)

pug said:


> some high quality comments there -


The anti-vegan cunt thrives on hate so, whatevs. Plus, it's on YouTube. What do you expect?


----------



## pug (Mar 25, 2019)

that was from the argus, but yes clearly the kind of reaction he wants by doing it.


----------



## editor (Mar 25, 2019)

cuppa tee said:


> this is a vegan take on black pudding that is allegedly being served up in Spain


I'd wager that around 0.001% of vegans would be interested in eating a blood sausage.


----------



## gentlegreen (Mar 25, 2019)

That is so weird. I used that today as an analogy on an anti-woo forum when highlighting who should do the blood-letting.

 by the way ...


----------



## cuppa tee (Mar 25, 2019)

editor said:


> I'd wager that around 0.001% of vegans would be interested in eating a blood sausage.


You have more faith in human nature than me.....if an edgy supper club rocked up in Brixton offering vampire veganism I'd wager it would sell out  no problemo.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Mar 25, 2019)

editor said:


> Who gives a flying fuck what this weirdly obsessed twat thinks about anything?


I presume you're not referring to Rawvana as the "weirdly obsessed twat". She is the youtube influencer with nearly half a million subscribers on her English channel and nearly 2 million on her Spanish one. I've not seen any of her vids tbh, but she appeared to be a reasonable Youtuber (although I could be wrong). So with that big following, when she says she's no longer vegan, it will get noticed, especially by the anti-vegans who love this sort of shit.

Now if I'm correct and sv3rige is the meatheaded twat you are referring to, then yes, I concur, he's a first class numpty, and yes he does appear to be very obsessed with vegans. 

I don't think that being on youtube automatically means that the video is going to be rubbish. Mic the Vegan being a fine example of well researched and well presented Youtube content.


----------



## editor (Mar 25, 2019)

cuppa tee said:


> You have more faith in human nature than me.....if an edgy supper club rocked up in Brixton offering vampire veganism I'd wager it would sell out  no problemo.


It really wouldn't you know. It's a ridiculous idea.


----------



## cuppa tee (Mar 25, 2019)

editor said:


> It really wouldn't you know. It's a ridiculous idea.



People said that about the cereal killer cafe.


----------



## Spymaster (Mar 25, 2019)

cuppa tee said:


> People said that about the cereal killer cafe.


Those chaps are knocking it out of the park now!


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Mar 26, 2019)

Looks like the anti-vegan swat team are planning another bombing raid...


----------



## editor (Mar 26, 2019)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Looks like the anti-vegan swat team are planning another bombing raid...



What's a "real issue" and what kind of "support" does it need?


----------



## 8ball (Mar 26, 2019)

cuppa tee said:


> You have more faith in human nature than me.....if an edgy supper club rocked up in Brixton offering vampire veganism I'd wager it would sell out  no problemo.



I can imagine all the smug chatter about how their blood tastes *sooo* much better darling.

And then there are vegan zombies, and we all know what they eat....



Spoiler



GRAAAIINS...!


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Mar 26, 2019)

editor said:


> What's a "real issue" and what kind of "support" does it need?


Well according to these clowns, vegans are apparently making everyone sick and need to be stopped. So they would like fellow meatheads to join their campaign to rid the world of the evils of veganism. I think Alex Jones and Infowars are on the same wavelength, veganism is apparently a globalist cult that is fucking things up for the planet and needs to be opposed. So they intend to target vegan gatherings with some lovely raw meat eating buffoonery.


----------



## 8ball (Mar 26, 2019)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Well according to these clowns, vegans are apparently making everyone sick and need to be stopped.



They do look like they might be vegan.
At the more rosy-cheeked end of the spectrum.


----------



## editor (Mar 26, 2019)

8ball said:


> They do look like they might be vegan.
> At the more rosy-cheeked end of the spectrum.


Vegans can be all shades of colour, just like meat eaters.


----------



## 8ball (Mar 26, 2019)

editor said:


> Vegans can be all shades of colour, just like meat eaters.



A spectrum.
Like I said.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Mar 26, 2019)

editor said:


> Vegans can be all shades of colour, just like meat eaters.


I've long since learned to give a Ocho bollocks nonsensical comments a wide berth. I think they're supposed to be funny.

Speaking of funny characters, I think the antics of the antivegs is more likely to make more people want to go vegan. I mean just look a these fuckwits...

...have they no shame?


----------



## Sprocket. (Mar 26, 2019)

Surely there’s another thread addressing abusers of pig’s heads!


----------



## 8ball (Mar 26, 2019)

I don’t get why they’re eating it uncooked.


----------



## Spymaster (Mar 26, 2019)

8ball said:


> I don’t get why they’re eating it uncooked.


It'd be a better and tastier action if they just set up a bbq and grilled steaks for people.


----------



## 8ball (Mar 26, 2019)

Spymaster said:


> It'd be a better and tastier action if they just set up a bbq and grilled steaks for people.



Liver on a bbq isn’t something that ever occurred to me...

Possibly a popular Croatian thing, according to Google.


----------



## Spymaster (Mar 26, 2019)

8ball said:


> Liver on a bbq isn’t something that ever occurred to me...
> 
> Possibly a popular Croatian thing, according to Google.


I reckon it'd be too dry done on a bbq. Kidneys on the other hand ...


----------



## 8ball (Mar 26, 2019)

Spymaster said:


> I reckon it'd be too dry done on a bbq...



Marinade, dry with a paper towel, then dip in melted butter, apparently.


----------



## Spymaster (Mar 26, 2019)

8ball said:


> Marinade, dry with a paper towel, then dip in melted butter, apparently.


Liver or kidney?


----------



## 8ball (Mar 26, 2019)

Spymaster said:


> Liver or kidney?



Liver.

Kidneys are a bit more complicated to prepare.


----------



## editor (Mar 26, 2019)

PaoloSanchez said:


> I've long since learned to give a Ocho bollocks nonsensical comments a wide berth. I think they're supposed to be funny.
> 
> Speaking of funny characters, I think the antics of the antivegs is more likely to make more people want to go vegan. I mean just look a these fuckwits...
> 
> ...have they no shame?



Be great if he picked up some bottom-emptying, unpleasant food poisoning for his moronic showboating twathood.


----------



## T & P (Apr 3, 2019)

Raw liver is so last week... Eating raw squirrels as a form of anti-vegan protest is the done thing now...

Man eats raw squirrel to taunt vegans but freaks out meat eaters instead | Metro News

What a complete fucking wanker  

ETA: The Metro article doesn't seem to mention that he got arrested for his efforts as well


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Apr 3, 2019)

Squirrels are vermin, so don't suppose there's any offence in eating a dead one, Something, incidentally, even my dog doesn't do, she kills plenty of the fuckers, never eats them though.


----------



## T & P (Apr 3, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Squirrels are vermin, so don't suppose there's any offence in eating a dead one, Something, incidentally, even my dog doesn't do, she kills plenty of the fuckers, never eats them though.


Perhaps he was arrested under one of those 'causing distress to the public' charges. The dead woodpecker chick hanging from his neck is fucking vile.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Apr 3, 2019)

T & P said:


> Perhaps he was arrested under one of those 'causing distress to the public' charges. The dead woodpecker chick hanging from his neck is fucking vile.



The guy's a fucking nobber of the highest order. Who cares if someone chooses not to eat meat? Guy needs to get laid.


----------



## Spymaster (Apr 3, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> The guy's a fucking nobber of the highest order. Who cares if someone chooses not to eat meat? Guy needs to get laid.


He's a massive dickhead but the only difference between him and the vegheads that he's protesting are the silly meat props. Take away the liver, squirrel, and other dead stuff and all he's doing is what vegan nutters have been doing left right and centre, especially down on the south coast for some reason.


----------



## gentlegreen (Apr 3, 2019)

I bet he takes prophylactic worming tablets ...


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Apr 3, 2019)

Spymaster said:


> He's a massive dickhead but the only difference between him and the vegheads that he's protesting are the silly meat props. Take away the liver, squirrel, and other dead stuff and all he's doing is what vegan nutters have been doing left right and centre, especially down on the south coast for some reason.



Well quite, all people are fucking scumbags, bring back the Plague and have a decent cull


----------



## Calamity1971 (Apr 3, 2019)

T & P said:


> . The dead woodpecker chick hanging from his neck is fucking vile.


What a fucking arsehole .


----------



## Calamity1971 (Apr 3, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Guy needs to get laid.


Guy needs to get laid out by a swift kick to the bollocks.


----------



## T & P (Apr 3, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


> I bet he takes prophylactic worming tablets ...


Yeah, quite. Eating the raw liver of a pig or cow or whatever it was that the other bloke ate last week is minging enough. But eating a raw squirrel seems particularly idiotic and only marginally less reckless than Russian Roulette.


----------



## Spymaster (Apr 3, 2019)

T & P said:


> Yeah, quite. Eating the raw liver of a pig or cow or whatever it came from, like the other bloke did last week, is bad enough, but eating a raw squirrel seems particularly idiotic.


I think it’s the same bloke. The Swedish bellend.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Apr 3, 2019)

He's a Latvian who lives in Germany.


----------



## T & P (Apr 3, 2019)

Spymaster said:


> I think it’s the same bloke. The Swedish bellend.


I was thinking of the guy shown in the video just upthread in post 5617. That's not the same bloke is it?


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Apr 3, 2019)

T & P said:


> Raw liver is so last week... Eating raw squirrels as a form of anti-vegan protest is the done thing now...
> 
> Man eats raw squirrel to taunt vegans but freaks out meat eaters instead | Metro News
> 
> ...



He's got form, he's been doing this for a couple of years along with his buddy Milkjar.



tbh, I think he's probably doing veganism a favour with this sort of publicity.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Apr 3, 2019)

editor said:


> Be great if he picked up some bottom-emptying, unpleasant food poisoning for his moronic showboating twathood.


I believe he has been hospitalised and was seriously ill resulting from his raw meat eating escapades.


----------



## T & P (Apr 3, 2019)

PaoloSanchez said:


> He's got form, he's been doing this for a couple of years along with his buddy Milkjar.
> 
> 
> 
> tbh, I think he's probably doing veganism a favour with this sort of publicity.



I'm amazed he's still alive, or at least still free of chronic explosive diarrhoea if he's been doing this gig regularly 

ETA: I see you've just addressed that question above.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Apr 3, 2019)

T & P said:


> I'm amazed he's still alive, or at least still free of chronic explosive diarrhoea if he's been doing this gig regularly


Well, according to him, it's perfectly normal, natural and healthy to eat raw meat and he claims that veganism is extremely unhealthy and is part of some NWO Agenda 21 depopulation program designed to make everyone sick and kill us all off.  Frank Tufano is another strong advocate of the "carnivore diet" who has livestream debated with vegans saying similar things, ie vegans are all sick and unhealthy and deluded.


----------



## 8ball (Apr 4, 2019)

T & P said:


> I'm amazed he's still alive, or at least still free of chronic explosive diarrhoea if he's been doing this gig regularly



Most likely riddled with brain-eating worms.


----------



## gentlegreen (Apr 4, 2019)

I can see the point of eating meat raw if you're trapped in Arctic conditions and desperate for carbs (glycogen) - though I'm not absolutely sure it wouldn't survive cooking ...(just realised the other issue is lack of fuel o: )

But it's cooking that was the key advance in human nutrition.


----------



## Artaxerxes (Apr 4, 2019)

The EU are apparently building on the "I can't Call It Butter if it's Not Milk Based" legislation and moving onto doing the same for burgers and sausages, etc.

Christ does anyone actually give a shit a veggie burger is called a burger and if they do can they get a life or a better hobby.


----------



## gentlegreen (Apr 4, 2019)

We probably could do with coming up with more inspiring names for things ..


----------



## Artaxerxes (Apr 4, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


> We probably could do with coming up with more inspiring names for things ..



I'd mostly like the attempt to make vegetarian food to stop exactly replicating meat.

I don't want a bloody oozing beetroot burger, I just want one that tastes absolutely amazing.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Apr 5, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


> We probably could do with coming up with more inspiring names for things ..



Nausages


----------



## SpookyFrank (Apr 5, 2019)

Facon


----------



## 8ball (Apr 5, 2019)

Springmock

(Springbok was the first thing a mate of mine ate when his vegetarianism cracked)


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Apr 5, 2019)

Artaxerxes said:


> The EU are apparently building on the "I can't Call It Butter if it's Not Milk Based" legislation and moving onto doing the same for burgers and sausages, etc.
> 
> Christ does anyone actually give a shit a veggie burger is called a burger and if they do can they get a life or a better hobby.



Consumers don't care, the meat and dairy industries do, and they spend huge amounts of money lobbying the EU to enact deceptive, protectionist measures to safeguard their profits.


----------



## gentlegreen (Apr 5, 2019)

Veggie burgers renamed 'veggie discs' under proposed new EU rules

Someone has suggested "vegan pucks"


----------



## NoXion (Apr 5, 2019)

Jeff Robinson said:


> Consumers don't care, the meat and dairy industries do, and they spend huge amounts of money lobbying the EU to enact deceptive, protectionist measures to safeguard their profits.



Speak for yourself. I for one like the fact that stuff like Clover spread etc is clearly labelled as being distinct from real butter. If that's protectionist then I see nothing inherently wrong with that, just as there's nothing inherently wrong with protectionism in general (what are you, some kind of "free trade" nut?). As for deceptive, I'd say that clearly demarcating different products is the *opposite* of deceptive.


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Apr 5, 2019)

NoXion said:


> Speak for yourself. I for one like the fact that stuff like Clover spread etc is clearly labelled as being distinct from real butter. If that's protectionist then I see nothing inherently wrong with that, just as there's nothing inherently wrong with protectionism in general (what are you, some kind of "free trade" nut?). As for deceptive, I'd say that clearly demarcating different products is the *opposite* of deceptive.



Do you think ‘veggie burgers’ ‘vegan sausages’ or ‘tofu steaks’ are deceptive or confusing labels?


----------



## gentlegreen (Apr 5, 2019)

Jeff Robinson said:


> Do you think ‘veggie burgers’ ‘vegan sausages’ or ‘tofu steaks’ are deceptive or confusing labels?


I'm guessing it's a language thing - plus I'm guessing there are far more veggies in the UK than anywhere else ....


----------



## harpo (Apr 5, 2019)

It's not the EU, it's codex alimentarus which is an internationally agreed standard.


----------



## gentlegreen (Apr 5, 2019)

harpo said:


> It's not the EU, it's codex alimentarus which is an internationally agreed standard.


Ok even more understandable.


----------



## gentlegreen (Apr 5, 2019)

Just learned that there are massively more veggie restaurants in Iceland even than in the UK !


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Apr 5, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


> I'm guessing it's a language thing - plus I'm guessing there are far more veggies in the UK than anywhere else ....



I’ve eaten at vegan and vegetarian restaurants across Europe and they all use terms like ‘burger’. In fact, I’ve never heard anybody in over 30 years refer to veggie burgers as anything other than ‘burgers’. This proposal is an assault on everyday language at the behest of animal agribuisness industries who are rattled about the potential of losing their market share to plant-based alternatives.


----------



## NoXion (Apr 5, 2019)

Jeff Robinson said:


> Do you think ‘veggie burgers’ ‘vegan sausages’ or ‘tofu steaks’ are deceptive or confusing labels?



Not particularly. But neither is calling them something else. If companies that make stuff like I Can't Believe It's Not Butter can turn that legal distinction into a marketing opportunity, then I'm not really seeing the problem. Besides, if the Great Awakening of Global Veganism really is a thing, then people won't give a shit whether the things they eat are called Vegan Sausages or Savoury Protein Tubes. They'll eat them anyway.


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Apr 5, 2019)

NoXion said:


> Not particularly. But neither is calling them something else. If companies that make stuff like I Can't Believe It's Not Butter can turn that legal distinction into a marketing opportunity, then I'm not really seeing the problem. Besides, if the Great Awakening of Global Veganism really is a thing, then people won't give a shit whether the things they eat are called Vegan Sausages or Savoury Protein Tubes. They'll eat them anyway.



Calling a burger a disk or a sausage a tube is less clear and more deceptive than allowing producers to continue to call them what literally everyone already does call them. This is obvious to anybody without an ideological axe to grind. You’re making a fool out of yourself by pretending otherwise.


----------



## NoXion (Apr 5, 2019)

Jeff Robinson said:


> Calling a burger a disk or a sausage a tube is less clear and more deceptive than allowing producers to continue to call them what literally everyone already does call them. This is obvious to anybody without an ideological axe to grind. You’re making a fool out of yourself by pretending otherwise.



How is it deceptive? You're one to talk about grinding ideological axes, good grief, as if vegan activism isn't a thing.


----------



## 8ball (Apr 5, 2019)

Jeff Robinson said:


> Calling a burger a disk or a sausage a tube is less clear and more deceptive than allowing producers to continue to call them what literally everyone already does call them. This is obvious to anybody without an ideological axe to grind. You’re making a fool out of yourself by pretending otherwise.



Veggie sausages and veggie burgers have been around for a pretty long time now.  I'd definitely be more rather than less puzzled if I had to hunt through a load of stuff with names like "veggie coasters" and "topologically phallic vegetable entities" to find them.


----------



## existentialist (Apr 5, 2019)

Isn't this just straight bananas all over again?


----------



## gentlegreen (Apr 5, 2019)

existentialist said:


> Isn't this just straight bananas all over again?


Somewhat reassuringly .. I'm starting to worry about the Indie.


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Jul 1, 2019)

I don't have a subscription to the economist, but the opening paragraphs to this article are beautifully acerbic and sarcastic:

'The European Union gets a lot of flak. All right, it isn’t literally blasted with anti-aircraft fire, but you know what we mean. One ongoing battle (ok, nobody died) involves the use of words. Earlier this year, the European Parliament’s agriculture committee voted to prohibit the terms “burger”, “sausage”, “escalope” and “steak” to describe products that do not contain any meat. It was inspired by the European Court of Justice’s decision in 2017 to ban the use of “milk”, “butter” and “cream” for non-dairy products. Exceptions were made for “ice cream” and “almond milk”, but “soya milk” went down the drain, lest consumers assume it had been extracted from the soya udder of a soya cow. The court has yet to rule on the milk of human kindness.

'Greens are mounting a campaign against the committee’s decision, which they suspect is supported not only by linguistic purists but also by the meat industry. This newspaper thinks the parliament is quite right to protect citizens from the confusion they would no doubt feel were they to find that no part of a “veggie burger” was made of the flesh of a dead animal. Indeed, this praiseworthy initiative needs to go further.'

Europe heroically defends itself against veggie burgers


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jul 1, 2019)

The (microbial) culture war continues. Who is arsed about a burger made of beans being called a bean burger ffs


----------



## gentlegreen (Jul 1, 2019)

I have to confess I always found Tesco's "vegetable quarter pounders" hilarious.
Small mashed potato patties with carrots and peas.


----------



## Teaboy (Jul 1, 2019)

A sausage describes the shape of something as does a burger to an extent.  Both burgers and sausages can be any type of meat so whats the difference with vegetables?  Should a pie be only called a pie if it has meat in it?

There is some stupid labeling out there such as vegetarian crispy duck or vegetarian roast beef dinner.  Things that specifically relate to a certain animal should really contain that animal.


----------



## 8ball (Jul 1, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> A sausage describes the shape of something as does a burger to an extent.  Both burgers and sausages can be any type of meat so whats the difference with vegetables?  Should a pie be only called a pie if it has meat in it?
> 
> There is some stupid labeling out there such as vegetarian crispy duck or vegetarian roast beef dinner.  Things that specifically relate to a certain animal should really contain that animal.



Vegetarian roast beef dinner is new one on me, though I guess it tells you what to expect and I'm not sure what would be better.


----------



## Southlondon (Jul 1, 2019)

I was bitterly disappointed to discover my hot dog contained no actual dog meat at all. This mislabelling has to stop. Thank god for the EU I say


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jul 1, 2019)

Where does this leave crisps? Think they already make clear they are beef flavoured not beef or whatever (dunno if it is true but once read the only pringles which weren't suitable for vegans were the sour cream ones) but maybe they should have much bigger prominent warnings on packets saying 'NOT REAL BEEF' or maybe the world should get a grip ffs


----------



## 8ball (Jul 1, 2019)

It's like we never learned anything from the "hedgehog crisps" fiasco.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jul 1, 2019)

8ball said:


> It's like we never learned anything from the "hedgehog crisps" fiasco.



I used to get Dragon crisps when I was a kid, they were great and afaik no disclaimers


----------



## gentlegreen (Jul 1, 2019)

I somehow missed that - it was around the time I'd just embarked on 20 years of complete veganism.



> Bizarrely, a settlement was finally reached when Mr Lewis, of Hedgehog Foods, interviewed gypsies who actually did eat baked hedgehogs, to ascertain the flavour of hedgehogs. Mr Lewis then commissioned a flavourings firm to duplicate the flavour as closely as possible and changed the labels from "hedgehog flavoured" to "hedgehog flavour" and all interests were satisfied!



Hedgehog Flavoured Crisps


----------



## 8ball (Jul 1, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> I used to get Dragon crisps when I was a kid, they were great and afaik no disclaimers



Not sure about "great".  I'd peg them as the "Corona pop" of crisps.

Though there was a satisfying brittle crunchiness about them.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jul 1, 2019)

8ball said:


> Not sure about "great".  I'd peg them as the "Corona pop" of crisps.



Well Corona pop was great


----------



## gentlegreen (Jul 1, 2019)

Didn't they come up with "vegetable discs" or somesuch - or was that just anti-EU bollocks ?

Do angry vegans turn you against going vegan?


----------



## 8ball (Jul 1, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Well Corona pop was great



The "red flavour" was great, and the lemonade was ok.
The other flavours, not so much.

Guess the green one was acceptable in a pinch.


----------



## Rivendelboy (Jul 1, 2019)

T & P said:


> Raw liver is so last week... Eating raw squirrels as a form of anti-vegan protest is the done thing now...
> 
> Man eats raw squirrel to taunt vegans but freaks out meat eaters instead | Metro News
> 
> ...



sv3rige or whatever he calls himself is an arsehole and, from what i've heard, also not actually a non-vegan.

This sort of stupid shit is only done for clicks and views. He's an idiot.


gentlegreen said:


> Just learned that there are massively more veggie restaurants in Iceland even than in the UK !


There's only about half a million vegans in the UK. 

As to the original question. The answer is yes. _Obviously _not all vegans are scumbags, but the one's I've encountered on Google+/Youtube and Discord are, quite honestly, some of the worst people I've ever tried to have a conversation with.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jul 1, 2019)

I never encountered anybody on Google+, not a soul


----------



## 8ball (Jul 1, 2019)

Rivendelboy said:


> sv3rige or whatever he calls himself is an arsehole and, from what i've heard, also not actually a non-vegan.


----------



## Rivendelboy (Jul 1, 2019)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Well, according to him, it's perfectly normal, natural and healthy to eat raw meat and he claims that veganism is extremely unhealthy and is part of some NWO Agenda 21 depopulation program designed to make everyone sick and kill us all off.  Frank Tufano is another strong advocate of the "carnivore diet" who has livestream debated with vegans saying similar things, ie vegans are all sick and unhealthy and deluded.


Frank has actually been very critical of Sv3ridge. He's an odd one; like's his makeup and looks like a toy doll  but he seems genuine, and does back up what he says with citations. I'm not sure he's 100% correct, but he doesn't appear to be in bad shape. Of course off screen he could be eating tofu and juicing kale.


----------



## Spymaster (Jul 1, 2019)

Rivendelboy said:


> ... not actually a non-vegan.


That looks horrible. Are you saying _he is _a vegan?


----------



## Rivendelboy (Jul 1, 2019)

8ball said:


>


Don't feel sad, the guy's a crank. That should be obvious. His diet is irrelevant. The hardcore vegans I encountered on Discord were all Sam Harris Jordan Peterson fans who used terms like 'cuck' seriously. There's arseholes and there's food


----------



## Rivendelboy (Jul 1, 2019)

Spymaster said:


> That looks horrible. Are you saying _he is _a vegan?


By non-vegan I mean carnivore. He claims to be anti-plants (iirc), but (again iirc) isn't


----------



## 8ball (Jul 1, 2019)

Rivendelboy said:


> There's arseholes and there's food



Ideally not in close proximity.


----------



## Spymaster (Jul 1, 2019)

Rivendelboy said:


> By non-vegan I mean carnivore. He claims to be anti-plants (iirc), but (again iirc) isn't


Ok. Double-negative fail. 

So you are saying he IS a carnivore but he's NOT "anti plants" (is anti-plants a thing?)


----------



## 8ball (Jul 1, 2019)

Spymaster said:


> Ok. Double-negative fail.
> 
> So you are saying he IS a carnivore but he's NOT "anti plants" (is anti-plants a thing?)



Yeah, there are some "full carnivore" types, some of whom only eat meat and some green leafy veg, and some who forego the veg entirelty.
Some people who have health problems have been known to get better on such diets.  It seems likely a lot of the effect is down to eliminating something that was previously causing problems.


----------



## Rivendelboy (Jul 1, 2019)

Spymaster said:


> Ok. Double-negative fail.
> 
> So you are saying he IS a carnivore but he's NOT "anti plants" (is anti-plants a thing?)


But he claims to be. So the point I'm painfully trying to make is that he's a hypocrite.


----------



## JimW (Jul 1, 2019)

The meaty bit in a burger is the "patty" isn't it?


----------



## Rivendelboy (Jul 1, 2019)

JimW said:


> The meaty bit in a burger is the "patty" isn't it?


I believe so


----------



## UnderAnOpenSky (Jul 16, 2019)

From one extreme to another. Although I'm suprised the equivalent of social services havnt been involved. Shows how adaptable we are as a species though. Not that I'd want to share a bathroom with her.

Former vegan turned carnivore eats raw bone-marrow for breakfast


----------



## gentlegreen (Jul 16, 2019)




----------



## cupid_stunt (Jul 16, 2019)

UnderAnOpenSky said:


> From one extreme to another. Although I'm suprised the equivalent of social services havnt been involved. Shows how adaptable we are as a species though. Not that I'd want to share a bathroom with her.
> 
> Former vegan turned carnivore eats raw bone-marrow for breakfast



I wish I hadn't clicked on that link, and read it. 

Anyone got a source for mind bleach?


----------



## Athos (Jul 16, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> I wish I hadn't clicked on that link, and read it.
> 
> Anyone got a source for mind bleach?



At least she came good eventually.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jul 16, 2019)

Athos said:


> At least she came good eventually.



Eating raw meat is not 'coming good', IMO, she's a fucking weirdo.


----------



## Athos (Jul 16, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Eating raw meat is not 'coming good', IMO, she's a fucking weirdo.



I wasn't entirely serious!

To be honest, I don't care what she does, but that she's doing it to her kid is fucking ridiculous.


----------



## gentlegreen (Jul 16, 2019)

Feeding raw brains to your child.
What could possibly go wrong ?


----------



## Rivendelboy (Jul 16, 2019)

Don't really see the problem with eating bone marrow. Unusual, certainly. Unhealthy, not a bit.


----------



## Rivendelboy (Jul 16, 2019)

UnderAnOpenSky said:


> From one extreme to another. Although I'm suprised the equivalent of social services havnt been involved. Shows how adaptable we are as a species though. Not that I'd want to share a bathroom with her.
> 
> Former vegan turned carnivore eats raw bone-marrow for breakfast


Why should social services be involved? Is there any evidence the kid is sick or suffering?


----------



## Flavour (Jul 16, 2019)

Agreed. there's nothing wrong with eating raw meat. all carnivores do it. and it's still common in many parts of the world.


----------



## gentlegreen (Jul 16, 2019)

No veggies eh ?

Matshishkapeu - Wikipedia


----------



## gentlegreen (Jul 16, 2019)

Flavour said:


> Agreed. there's nothing wrong with eating raw meat. all carnivores do it. and it's still common in many parts of the world.


And most of 'em would eat fruit and veggies in a flash if they were available.


----------



## Flavour (Jul 16, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


> And most of 'em would eat fruit and veggies in a flash if they were available.



no they wouldn't. you're arrogant and eurocentric. you don't know what you're talking about.


----------



## gentlegreen (Jul 16, 2019)

Flavour said:


> no they wouldn't. you're arrogant and eurocentric. you don't know what you're talking about.


LOL


----------



## Athos (Jul 16, 2019)

There's nothing wrong with eating raw meat (I do it, too).  There is something wrong with making your child eat only raw meat,  though!


----------



## Spymaster (Jul 16, 2019)

Athos said:


> There's nothing wrong with eating raw meat (I do it, too).  There is something wrong with making your child eat only raw meat,  though!


Unless you have to, why would you? It seems like she’s trying to make some silly point. That said, I guess there are plenty of vegans who force their lifestyles on their kids so is she any worse than them?


----------



## UnderAnOpenSky (Jul 16, 2019)

Athos said:


> There's nothing wrong with eating raw meat (I do it, too).  There is something wrong with making your child eat only raw meat,  though!



I think this is the key point. Only eating it is a bit suss. Imagine their packed lunches....


----------



## Rivendelboy (Jul 16, 2019)

Athos said:


> There's nothing wrong with eating raw meat (I do it, too).  There is something wrong with making your child eat only raw meat,  though!


Why?

All parents make their children eat certain food and restrict others, that's how parenting works.



Spymaster said:


> Unless you have to, why would you? It seems like she’s trying to make some silly point. That said, I guess there are plenty of vegans who force their lifestyles on their kids so is she any worse than them?



lifestyle and diet aren't entirely synonymous. It's a problem when vegans do it because a plant only diet isn't nutritonally complete.


----------



## Rivendelboy (Jul 16, 2019)

UnderAnOpenSky said:


> I think this is the key point. Only eating it is a bit suss. Imagine their packed lunches....



Again this is just cultural. Why shoudl it be any worse than a packed lunch full of fruit, processed grains, and vegetables?


----------



## Athos (Jul 16, 2019)

Spymaster said:


> Unless you have to, why would you? It seems like she’s trying to make some silly point. That said, I guess there are plenty of vegans who force their lifestyles on their kids so is she any worse than them?



Both ae wong when they result in a child not getting the nutrients they need.


----------



## Athos (Jul 16, 2019)

Rivendelboy said:


> Why?
> 
> All parents make their children eat certain food and restrict others, that's how parenting works.
> 
> ...



A meat only diet isn't nutritionally complete either.


----------



## Spymaster (Jul 16, 2019)

Rivendelboy said:


> lifestyle and diet aren't entirely synonymous.


Well of course not but we're clearly discussing diets here. 


> It's a problem when vegans do it because a plant only diet isn't nutritonally complete.


And the same would apply to a meat only diet for humans.


----------



## joustmaster (Jul 16, 2019)

Athos said:


> A meat only diet isn't nutritionally complete either.


Thats not true.


----------



## Rivendelboy (Jul 16, 2019)

Spymaster said:


> Well of course not but we're clearly discussing diets here.
> 
> And the same would apply to a meat only diet for humans.


Only if it can be shown to be unhealthy.


----------



## Orang Utan (Jul 16, 2019)

Rivendelboy said:


> a plant only diet isn't nutritonally complete.


it can be. you can get enough protein if you eat plenty of pulses


----------



## 8ball (Jul 16, 2019)

Orang Utan said:


> it can be. you can get enough protein if you eat plenty of pulses


----------



## Rivendelboy (Jul 16, 2019)

Athos said:


> A meat only diet isn't nutritionally complete either.


The argument made is that the amount of nutrients actually needed are sufficient when sourced from meat. For example, vitamin c isn't needed in the amounts the NHS lists if you're not eating carbs (essentially speaking) because it competes in the body for the same biological pathways. Since meat eaters on this diet aren't enduring scurvy, it doesn't seem to be a factor.


----------



## Rivendelboy (Jul 16, 2019)

Orang Utan said:


> it can be. you can get enough protein if you eat plenty of pulses


Body needs more than just protein


----------



## Orang Utan (Jul 16, 2019)

Rivendelboy said:


> Body needs more than just protein


yet there are millions of healthy vegans


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jul 16, 2019)

I think it is different because there is less chance of getting mad cow disease from eating raw carrot than from raw cow brain tbh lads


----------



## Rivendelboy (Jul 16, 2019)

Orang Utan said:


> yet there are millions of healthy vegans


Except the one in the article mentioned.

And many others. 

I've no idea how many vegans are or aren't healthy and neither do you. All we can do is point to what we know exists in plant food and what doesn't.


----------



## Rivendelboy (Jul 16, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> I think it is different because there is less chance of getting mad cow disease from eating raw carrot than from raw cow brain tbh lads


There's less chance getting mad cow disease from eating anything that isn't a cow, so what?


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jul 16, 2019)

Rivendelboy said:


> There's less chance getting mad cow disease from eating anything that isn't a cow, so what?


So that's why feeding a two year old raw cow brain is a bad idea that probably should result in some sort of child protection intervention and isn't comparable with feeding a child a balanced vegetarian or vegan diet


----------



## 8ball (Jul 16, 2019)

One thing I've noticed is that it common for healthy people to take up vegetarianism or veganism with health in mind as one of the benefits, but when they go back to eating meat it is not to 'become healthier' but is because they have actually become ill.

Hard to say how common this is, taken across all veg*ns, of course.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jul 16, 2019)

Also brain specifically is a bit of a no no when it comes to the old CJD


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jul 16, 2019)

Also the lads shits must be horrific


----------



## 8ball (Jul 16, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Also brain specifically is a bit of a no no when it comes to the old CJD



Yeah, can't say I find the idea of raw brain of animal too appealing.  Not sure if I've ever eaten brain, for that matter...


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jul 16, 2019)

8ball said:


> Yeah, can't say I find the idea of raw brain of animal too appealing.  Not sure if I've ever eaten brain, for that matter...


I've eaten a lot of cheap shit reconstituted meat down the years so I probably have but would I intentionally eat brain, no


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jul 16, 2019)

Anyway whatever you think of veganism, these meat evangelist types are weird dicks aren't they


----------



## Athos (Jul 16, 2019)

joustmaster said:


> Thats not true.





Rivendelboy said:


> The argument made is that the amount of nutrients actually needed are sufficient when sourced from meat. For example, vitamin c isn't needed in the amounts the NHS lists if you're not eating carbs (essentially speaking) because it competes in the body for the same biological pathways. Since meat eaters on this diet aren't enduring scurvy, it doesn't seem to be a factor.



You'll find some crank on the internet to say anything.  I will wait for a credible source, based on extensive, methodologically-sound longitudinal studies before I force an extreme diet on my kids.


----------



## Poot (Jul 16, 2019)

I think if you are the person doing the shopping and cooking you are entitled to do as you please. I wont buy or cook dead animal and my kids are totally healthy. It's your conscience.


----------



## 8ball (Jul 16, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Anyway whatever you think of veganism, these meat evangelist types are weird dicks aren't they



Can't disagree there.  Usually former vegans it seems, but then veganism has always attracted people with an odd relationship to food.  I figure that's because it's a good cover story for all manners of eating disorder, so that will likely change as the number of vegans increases.  Maybe the "super-carny front" will become the natural home for those people.


----------



## joustmaster (Jul 16, 2019)

Athos said:


> You'll find some crank on the internet to say anything.  I will wait for a credible source, based on extensive, methodologically-sound longitudinal studies before I force an extreme diet on my kids.


The Inuit.


----------



## Athos (Jul 16, 2019)

Poot said:


> I think if you are the person doing the shopping and cooking you are entitled to do as you please. I wont buy or cook dead animal and my kids are totally healthy. It's your conscience.



Up to point. 

Couple guilty of feeding toddler vegan diet so restrictive she was malnourished


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jul 16, 2019)

8ball said:


> Can't disagree there.  Usually former vegans it seems, but then veganism has always attracted people with an odd relationship to food.  I figure that's because it's a good cover story for all manners of eating disorder, so that will likely change as the number of vegans increases.  Maybe the "super-carny front" will become the natural home for those people.


Paleo types are always dicks too


----------



## Athos (Jul 16, 2019)

joustmaster said:


> The Inuit.


Don't eat a meat-only diet.


----------



## 8ball (Jul 16, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Paleo types are always dicks too



I've never met one.

Not from London.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jul 16, 2019)

Tbf I feed my kid wotsits and babybels so I probably shouldn't be calling for dietary related state intervention


----------



## Poot (Jul 16, 2019)

Athos said:


> Up to point.
> 
> Couple guilty of feeding toddler vegan diet so restrictive she was malnourished


Of course. I have known of a child who consumed so much sugar that her teeth had to be removed. Same principle - neglectful parents.


----------



## Rivendelboy (Jul 16, 2019)

Athos said:


> You'll find some crank on the internet to say anything.  I will wait for a credible source, based on extensive, methodologically-sound longitudinal studies before I force an extreme diet on my kids.


Sure, but assuming it's extreme shows you're already acting from a subjective point of view. 

I don't know what a longitudinal study means, but I doubt you'll find the kind of evidence you're looking for. I'm not aware there's much research on this. However you can look into the work done by people like Amber O Hearn who's pretty rigourous on this topic. There's various seminars given by her and others on youtube from Low Card conventions. I don't have links to hand. Personally I eat some veg, carnivory isn't the hill I'm willing to die on, but there are many people who, I believe, follow it and aren't suffering. Many report a reversal of symptoms - and they aren't all the daughters of well known conservative pro capitalist crank psychologists either 

All I would say is that it doesn't offend me that people eat vegan, or not, but I do object to the current dietary dogma that is being used, incorrectly IMO, to help fight climate change. I certainly don't want to live in a vegan world.



Proper Tidy said:


> Anyway whatever you think of veganism, these meat evangelist types are weird dicks aren't they



Sure, some are. But same can be said of veganism. IN the end science of nutrition is irrelevant as to how people behave. I went to a Vegan discord server full of Sam Harris fans and was dogpiled 20-1 by a guy claiming to be a doctor who refused to provide evidence as to his claims and instead wanted to bully me for asking


----------



## joustmaster (Jul 16, 2019)

Athos said:


> Don't eat a meat-only diet.


Some do. 
You can get all the nutrition you need from animals.


----------



## Rivendelboy (Jul 16, 2019)

Poot said:


> I think if you are the person doing the shopping and cooking you are entitled to do as you please. I wont buy or cook dead animal and my kids are totally healthy. It's your conscience.


How do you they source b12 or fatty acids?


----------



## andysays (Jul 16, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Anyway whatever you think of veganism, these meat evangelist types are weird dicks aren't they


Maybe we need a "do angry carnivores turn you against going carnivore?" thread...


----------



## 8ball (Jul 16, 2019)

Rivendelboy said:


> How do you they source b12 or fatty acids?



I'm going to guess eggs and dairy are on the menu.
(other sources are available)


----------



## 8ball (Jul 16, 2019)

andysays said:


> Maybe we need a "do angry carnivores turn you against going carnivore?" thread...



"Do angry omnivores turn you against eating?"


----------



## Poot (Jul 16, 2019)

Rivendelboy said:


> How do you they source b12 or fatty acids?


Various places. I only said that i wont have dead animal in the house. I turn a blind eye if they eat it at school. I can assure you that as an almost 100% plant-fuelled long distance runner i am healthier than pretty much everyone i know.

Eta less fun obviously. But healthier.


----------



## gentlegreen (Jul 16, 2019)

B12 is super-cheap.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jul 16, 2019)

Athos said:


> Up to point.
> 
> Couple guilty of feeding toddler vegan diet so restrictive she was malnourished



Fucking hell. 

There's another similiar case here:
Swedish parents jailed for putting baby daughter on vegan diet


----------



## 8ball (Jul 16, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Fucking hell.
> 
> There's another similiar case here:
> Swedish parents jailed for putting baby daughter on vegan diet



It's not a good start in life when your parents don't know the difference between cheese and heroin.


----------



## UnderAnOpenSky (Jul 16, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Paleo types are always dicks too


----------



## Athos (Jul 16, 2019)

joustmaster said:


> Some do.
> You can get all the nutrition you need from animals.



First, I'm unaware of any Inuit who eat only meat.
Secondly, I'm not sure there's robust scientific evidence for your claim. 
Thirdly, there's a difference between surviving and thriving. 
Fourtly, Inuit have higher levels of various health issues, and a lower life expectancy. 
Fifthly, it's arguable that, through 6,000 years of separation, ibis may have adapted to such a diet in a way this weirdo's kid hasn't.


----------



## joustmaster (Jul 16, 2019)

Athos said:


> First, I'm unaware of any Inuit who eat only meat.
> Secondly, I'm not sure there's robust scientific evidence for your claim.
> Thirdly, there's a difference between surviving and thriving.
> Fourtly, Inuit have higher levels of various health issues, and a lower life expectancy.
> Fifthly, it's arguable that, through 6,000 years of separation, ibis may have adapted to such a diet in a way this weirdo's kid hasn't.


I'm not talking about some kids diet.

I'm simply saying you are wrong in that :


Athos said:


> A meat only diet isn't nutritionally complete either.



It can be. Eating animals can provide you with 100% of the nutrition that you need.


----------



## campanula (Jul 16, 2019)

I was often hungry as a child. Honestly, my parents would count slices of bread so you were in trouble if you nicked any. Shoplifting was my only source of frivolities such as sweets of biscuits. Apart from Brussel sprouts, there really isn't much I would refuse to eat. I can't help seeing a lot of foodie faffing as a bit...decadent...but have an awfully sweet tooth. Horses for courses but imo, undue emphasis on any food (other than nutritional calorific needs for survival) can lead to an emotionally unbalanced outlook.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jul 16, 2019)

I think Inuits do have a traditional diet which is exclusively or at least overwhelmingly meat - remember watching a telly show about people in Siberia that lived off raw fermented whale and walrus meat/blubber and fuck all else.

But that's borne of necessity as nothing fucking grows in the Arctic circle and is probably a better example of the adaptability of humans than it is of a good diet. Also apparently they are massively prone to strokes and Google tells me that their life expectancy is pretty shit.


----------



## gentlegreen (Jul 16, 2019)

I struggle to imagine walking into my local Aldi and bypassing all the lovely fruit and veggies and buying only dead animals.
And weekend mornings without toast and coffee ?
And to think I get accused of having a restrictive diet ...


----------



## 8ball (Jul 16, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


> I struggle to imagine walking into my local Aldi and bypassing all the lovely fruit and veggies and buying only dead animals.
> And weekend mornings without toast and coffee ?
> And to think I get accused of having a restrictive diet ...



I listened to a debate that Jordan Peterson was in and he was asked about his all-meat diet - he said he wouldn't wish it on anyone.


----------



## Athos (Jul 16, 2019)

joustmaster said:


> I'm not talking about some kids diet.
> 
> I'm simply saying you are wrong in that :
> 
> ...



So you keep asserting.  I'm yet to see the evidence.


----------



## joustmaster (Jul 16, 2019)

Athos said:


> So you keep asserting.  I'm yet to see the evidence.


What can't you get from eating animal?


----------



## Poot (Jul 16, 2019)

joustmaster said:


> What can't you get from eating animal?


Fibre.


----------



## 8ball (Jul 16, 2019)

Poot said:


> Fibre.



Not an essential nutrient.


----------



## joustmaster (Jul 16, 2019)

Poot said:


> Fibre.


"Fibre has never been shown to be an essential component of the human diet. Indeed there have been societies such as the Inuit and Mongolians that ate only small infrequent amounts of plants, and they were not unhealthy."


----------



## 8ball (Jul 16, 2019)

joustmaster said:


> "Fibre has never been shown to be an essential component of the human diet. Indeed there have been societies such as the Inuit and Mongolians that ate only small infrequent amounts of plants, and they were not unhealthy."



A mate of mine went to Mongolia for his honeymoon.  At one point after another all meat dish (he had recently lapsed from vegetarianism) he asked his host "don't you ever eat any vegetables?" and was told "sure we do.  the animals eat the vegetables, and we eat the animals".


----------



## Poot (Jul 16, 2019)

More evidence that fibre cuts bowel cancer risk

I mean it's your bum, and your conscience, and when I find myself googling Inuit Bowel Cancer Statistics I probably ought to go out and enjoy the sunshine...


----------



## Rivendelboy (Jul 16, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


> B12 is super-cheap.


It's free with every steak


----------



## 8ball (Jul 16, 2019)

Poot said:


> More evidence that fibre cuts bowel cancer risk
> 
> I mean it's your bum, and your conscience, and when I find myself googling Inuit Bowel Cancer Statistics I probably ought to go out and enjoy the sunshine...



I'm mostly surprised that that is such a weak result from such a significant meta-analysis.
But yeah, nice to have fibre in your diet, I do believe this is the consensus.

If you're picking "nice to have" nutrients etc. it's very easy to pick holes in a vegan diet too, though.


----------



## joustmaster (Jul 16, 2019)

Poot said:


> More evidence that fibre cuts bowel cancer risk
> 
> I mean it's your bum, and your conscience, and when I find myself googling Inuit Bowel Cancer Statistics I probably ought to go out and enjoy the sunshine...


I'm not eating a carnivore diet. It sounds awful. 

I'm just saying you can have a balanced diet whilst doing so.


----------



## gentlegreen (Jul 16, 2019)

Rivendelboy said:


> It's free with every steak


What if you love eating plants and have no appetite for steak ?
I would struggle to integrate it into my diet - it would displace other things I need.
I would miss my massive morning dump too.


----------



## 8ball (Jul 16, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


> What if you love eating plants and have no appetite for steak ?
> I would struggle to integrate it into my diet - it would displace other things I need.
> I would miss my massive morning dump too.



If I was a vegan I think I'd supplement with a regular vegan vitamin supplement*, some extra D3 and creatine, carnosine, l-carnitine and DHA.  Plus some extra haem iron if I was female.**

* - one with biotin in it - they don't all have it - or maybe just eat lots of almonds and mushrooms..
** - less likely to happen than becoming a vegan, marginally


----------



## Rivendelboy (Jul 16, 2019)

Poot said:


> More evidence that fibre cuts bowel cancer risk
> 
> I mean it's your bum, and your conscience, and when I find myself googling Inuit Bowel Cancer Statistics I probably ought to go out and enjoy the sunshine...


What's the actual risk? If you're not at risk from bowel cancer than cutting it isn't much of an issue. 

Also what is meant by 'fibre'. I can get fibre from all sorts of food, some of which are shit and others less so. 

is the epidemiological? It just says "associated with", not directly causal. So for instance if you're eating more fibre, and thus reducing yoru risk, is that because you're eating less shit, or more fibre?


----------



## Rivendelboy (Jul 16, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


> What if you love eating plants and have no appetite for steak ?
> I would struggle to integrate it into my diet - it would displace other things I need.
> I would miss my massive morning dump too.


Well you should eat waht you enjoy, if you dont' enjoy meat don't eat it! 

However, regardless your body needs b12. That's non-negotiable. Without it you die


----------



## 8ball (Jul 16, 2019)

Rivendelboy said:


> If you're not at risk from bowel cancer than cutting it isn't much of an issue.



How are you determining who is "at risk"?


----------



## Rivendelboy (Jul 16, 2019)

8ball said:


> How are you determining who is "at risk"?


I'm talking about relative risk vs absolute risk. For example it's impressive to read "X cuts chance of Big Cancers by 50%!" 

But if your absolute risk of Big Cancers is 2%, because of your diet for example, then your risk of Big Cancers is now...1%!

Factor in the benefits or consequences of introducing X into your life or diet and maybe that's not worth it.


----------



## Rivendelboy (Jul 16, 2019)

campanula said:


> I was often hungry as a child. Honestly, my parents would count slices of bread so you were in trouble if you nicked any. Shoplifting was my only source of frivolities such as sweets of biscuits. Apart from Brussel sprouts, there really isn't much I would refuse to eat. I can't help seeing a lot of foodie faffing as a bit...decadent...but have an awfully sweet tooth. Horses for courses but imo, undue emphasis on any food (other than nutritional calorific needs for survival) can lead to an emotionally unbalanced outlook.


Only if a) you're eating unhealthily and b) you live in a society that finds your diet to be wildly unusual.


----------



## Rivendelboy (Jul 16, 2019)

8ball said:


> I listened to a debate that Jordan Peterson was in and he was asked about his all-meat diet - he said he wouldn't wish it on anyone.


I'm almost entirely certain he's only in it for the money. Like everything that shitbag is involved in. It's a poipular diet amongst the millenial wankers he panders to. The people that use the term "soy boy" as a genuine insult and think eating meat is correct and masculine etc. I hate that crap, and I hate him too. Fucking rich bastard


----------



## 8ball (Jul 16, 2019)

Rivendelboy said:


> I'm talking about relative risk vs absolute risk. For example it's impressive to read "X cuts chance of Big Cancers by 50%!"
> 
> But if your absolute risk of Big Cancers is 2%, because of your diet for example, then your risk of Big Cancers is now...1%!
> 
> Factor in the benefits or consequences of introducing X into your life or diet and maybe that's not worth it.



Always a good way of thinking about the numbers. 

To illustrate - I think the chance of getting bowel cancer over a lifetime is very close to 1%

So, we have the following life choices:

i) Fairly normal diet - no bacon or processed meats or barbecues - 1% risk
ii) *Lots* of bran and whole grains - no bacon or processed meats or barbecues - 0.8% risk
iii) Mmmm... bacon and barbecues... 2% risk (quoted in papers as "100% increase in risk")

So now we are balancing the happiness of bacon and barbecues against a 1 in 100 *increase* in chance of getting an illness that has a pretty high cure rate (which is increasing).  If you like bacon and barbecues it's looking like a good bet seeing how you have to die of _something_.


----------



## Poot (Jul 16, 2019)

Rivendelboy said:


> What's the actual risk? If you're not at risk from bowel cancer than cutting it isn't much of an issue.
> 
> Also what is meant by 'fibre'. I can get fibre from all sorts of food, some of which are shit and others less so.
> 
> is the epidemiological? It just says "associated with", not directly causal. So for instance if you're eating more fibre, and thus reducing yoru risk, is that because you're eating less shit, or more fibre?



Dietary fiber - Wikipedia

It's important to take in food that the body can't break down to keep bowel function strong and speed up metabolism. Yes it's causal. Look, I'm not a scientist so I can only tell you that in my lived experience I feel a lot better with a very high fibre diet. And whilst other women of my age battle hair loss and dull skin and brittle nails, I look very well. And I feel great and full of energy. But as soon as I start with the bread and cheese and the pizza and pasta and shit like that, instead of the high fibre and almost entirely plant-based diet, it all goes wrong.


----------



## 8ball (Jul 16, 2019)

Poot said:


> ...I feel great and full of energy. But as soon as I start with the bread and cheese and the pizza and pasta and shit like that, instead of the high fibre and almost entirely plant-based diet, it all goes wrong.



Those white refined carbs do me in too.


----------



## Rivendelboy (Jul 16, 2019)

8ball said:


> Always a good way of thinking about the numbers.
> 
> To illustrate - I think the chance of getting bowel cancer over a lifetime is very close to 1%
> 
> ...



It's not just "the happiness of bacon"  it's the neutritional benefits of what you're eating. 
Likewise adding bran and whole grains doesn't necessarily mean goodness. Those things contain more than just fibre. Grains aren't, imo, healthy. 

That's what I mean by factoring in nutritional considerations.

And that assumes that eating bacon gives you arse cancer. The evidence for that is wholly suspect. 



Poot said:


> Dietary fiber - Wikipedia
> 
> It's important to take in food that the body can't break down to keep bowel function strong and speed up metabolism. Yes it's causal. Look, I'm not a scientist so I can only tell you that in my lived experience I feel a lot better with a very high fibre diet. And whilst other women of my age battle hair loss and dull skin and brittle nails, I look very well. And I feel great and full of energy. But as soon as I start with the bread and cheese and the pizza and pasta and shit like that, instead of the high fibre and almost entirely plant-based diet, it all goes wrong.



Is it important? For some perhaps. Others seem to manage just fine. In the end does it really make sense to fill your body with stuff it can't digest? That's all fibre is. There may be some beenfits in terms of short term fatty acids and good bacteria, I'm uncertain myself. 

Bread is almost entirely shit to eat. It wont' be the cheese (though it can constipate due to casein/lactose apparently). But I felt the same for years. It made me fat and gave me blood sugar problems. So i cut it out. I used to love bread. Grain is terrible.

There was a study, very small cohort unfortuantely, that found reducing fibre entirely was correlated with healthy bowel movements and relief from constipation


----------



## Athos (Jul 16, 2019)

joustmaster said:


> What can't you get from eating animal?



I tell you what, you link me to a decent scientific study that supports your assertion, and we'll start from there.


----------



## gentlegreen (Jul 16, 2019)

Rivendelboy said:


> There was a study, very small cohort unfortuantely, that found reducing fibre entirely was correlated with healthy bowel movements and relief from constipation



This weirdo ?



Konstantin Monastyrsky

To be compared with Ugandans and bowel and heart health and some of the highest fibre consumption on the planet.


----------



## 8ball (Jul 16, 2019)

Athos said:


> I tell you what, you link me to a decent scientific study that supports your assertion, and we'll start from there.



What is the precise claim you are disputing here?  That you can get all the nutrition you need from animal foods / meat?


----------



## Athos (Jul 16, 2019)

8ball said:


> What is the precise claim you are disputing here?  That you can get all the nutrition you need from animal foods / meat?



Yes.  But, that depends in part what you mean by 'need', and how long you live in what state.  Obviously, you can get all you 'need' from water, on one understanding.


----------



## Rivendelboy (Jul 16, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


> This weirdo ?
> 
> View attachment 177578
> 
> ...



Here's the study: Stopping or reducing dietary fiber intake reduces constipation and its associated symptoms


----------



## Rivendelboy (Jul 16, 2019)

Athos said:


> Yes.  But, that depends in part what you mean by 'need', and how long you live in what state.  Obviously, you can get all you 'need' from water, on one understanding.


You don't need a study to tell you, you can just look up what's in meat.


----------



## gentlegreen (Jul 16, 2019)

I'll stick with my hefty fibre consumption and almost zero constipation.
That's another thing I would miss - I have never understood why people prefer anaemic grains and flours.


----------



## Saul Goodman (Jul 16, 2019)

Athos said:


> I tell you what, you link me to a decent scientific study that supports your assertion, and we'll start from there.


Wasn't it you who asserted that we shouldn't eat a meat only diet? Maybe it's you who should be providing evidence to back up your assertion?


----------



## 8ball (Jul 16, 2019)

Rivendelboy said:


> You don't need a study to tell you, you can just look up what's in meat.



Looking and seeing that a food appears to have everything in it is very different to verifying by experiment, as I'm sure you know. 

That said, there are plenty of cases of people living only on meat for a year, out of both circumstance and for experimental reasons.


----------



## 8ball (Jul 16, 2019)

Oh, and here's a study from nearly a century ago, which was actually done in order to see what happens to the kidneys and metabolism.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jul 16, 2019)

Why would anybody not want to eat some vegetables and fruit and stuff though. What's the point. There's no ethical principle. It's just being a bellend really innit


----------



## 8ball (Jul 16, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Why would anybody not want to eat some vegetables and fruit and stuff though. What's the point. There's no ethical principle. It's just being a bellend really innit



I read that and missed the initial "not" at first.
Now that I'm reading it right, it makes a little more sense, but not much.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jul 16, 2019)

8ball said:


> I read that and missed the initial "not" at first.
> Now that I'm reading it right, it makes a little more sense, but not much.


What doesn't make sense


----------



## 8ball (Jul 16, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> What doesn't make sense



I can't really see the line of logic from diet->utility->morality->bellendery.  They're more like independent sentences.
As for the 'utility' point - in the case of some people on the all-meat diet, it seems to be an extreme form of elimination diet and they get ill with a lot of other foods.


----------



## Athos (Jul 16, 2019)

Saul Goodman said:


> Wasn't it you who asserted that we shouldn't eat a meat only diet? Maybe it's you who should be providing evidence to back up your assertion?


No, I don't care what you do!


----------



## kebabking (Jul 16, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Why would anybody not want to eat some vegetables and fruit and stuff though. What's the point. There's no ethical principle. It's just being a bellend really innit



This.

A burger with tomato and lettuce tastes better than just a burger, a steak with mushrooms, chips, tomatoes and a bit of salad tastes better than just a steak, a Bolognese with tomatoes, celery, mushrooms and onions tastes better than just fried up mince.

Not eating fruit and vegetables has no ethical or health benefits, it's about having room-clearing, protein laden farts...


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jul 16, 2019)

8ball said:


> I can't really see the line of logic from diet->utility->morality->bellendery.  They're more like independent sentences.
> As for the 'utility' point - in the case of some people on the all-meat diet, it seems to be an extreme form of elimination diet and they get ill with a lot of other foods.


Nobody really gets ill from eating some veg though, it's bollocks isn't it. Veganism at least has an ethical consistency, people eating raw liver and living a life without a bit of onion to go with it are just weirdos. And yes bellends


----------



## 8ball (Jul 16, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Nobody really gets ill from eating some veg though, it's bollocks isn't it.



I get something very similar to German measles for about a week if I eat shiitake mushrooms.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jul 16, 2019)

8ball said:


> I get something very similar to German measles for about a week if I eat shiitake mushrooms.


I hate mushrooms tbf


----------



## 8ball (Jul 16, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> I hate mushrooms tbf



I love mushrooms.  Including shiitake mushrooms, though those ones don't love me back.


----------



## joustmaster (Jul 16, 2019)

Athos said:


> Yes.  But, that depends in part what you mean by 'need', and how long you live in what state.  Obviously, you can get all you 'need' from water, on one understanding.


Thats the most stupid most I've ever read.


----------



## fishfinger (Jul 16, 2019)

8ball said:


> I get something very similar to German measles for about a week if I eat shiitake mushrooms.


They're not veg though...


----------



## joustmaster (Jul 16, 2019)

Athos said:


> I tell you what, you link me to a decent scientific study that supports your assertion, and we'll start from there.


You put forward your claim that for some reason people can't survive on animals. Even if the animals clearly contain all the nutrients a human needs.

You need to show me why.


----------



## Athos (Jul 16, 2019)

joustmaster said:


> You put forward your claim that for some reason people can't survive on animals. Even if the animals clearly contain all the nutrients a human needs.
> 
> You need to show me why.



Lol.  I really don't.


----------



## 8ball (Jul 16, 2019)

fishfinger said:


> They're not veg though...



No, technically not, though PT’s original description was “vegetables and fruit and _stuff”
_
People can have similar reactions to vegetables, though.


----------



## Athos (Jul 16, 2019)

joustmaster said:


> Thats the most stupid most I've ever read.


Irony.


----------



## 8ball (Jul 16, 2019)

Athos said:


> Lol.  I really don't.



This is rather like speaking to someone who disputes that humans went to the moon, and demands detailed technical data before accepting anything.


----------



## fishfinger (Jul 16, 2019)

8ball said:


> No, technically not, though PT’s original description was “vegetables and fruit and _stuff”
> _
> People can have similar reactions to vegetables, though.


"and stuff"


----------



## Saul Goodman (Jul 16, 2019)

Athos said:


> Lol.  I really don't.



Then you admit you were wrong. Now we can move on.


----------



## Athos (Jul 16, 2019)

8ball said:


> This is rather like speaking to someone who disputes that humans went to the moon, and demands detailed technical data before accepting anything.



Not detailed data just one example of a single human (preferably outside the Inuit) that has lived their whole life on a meat-only diet, which hasn't been shortened by that lifestyle.


----------



## Athos (Jul 16, 2019)

Saul Goodman said:


> Then you admit you were wrong. Now we can move on.



Please quote the post of mine which contains an assertion which you think is wrong.


----------



## 8ball (Jul 16, 2019)

Athos said:


> Not detailed data just one example of a single human (preferably outside the Inuit) that has lived their whole life on a meat-only diet, which hasn't been shortened by that lifestyle.



How would you determine that someone's life _hadn't_ been shortened by something?


----------



## 8ball (Jul 16, 2019)

fishfinger said:


> "and stuff"



I was basically translating that as "the greengrocer's, or relevant section of supermarket".


----------



## rubbershoes (Jul 16, 2019)

kebabking said:


> Not eating fruit and vegetables has no ethical or health benefits, it's about having room-clearing, protein laden farts...



(( Mrs kebabking ))


----------



## Athos (Jul 16, 2019)

8ball said:


> How would you determine that someone's life _hadn't_ been shortened by something?



Admittedly that would be hard for an individual case; so maybe, like I said before, you'd need some wider studies to look into the effects of only eating meat.  Because, presently, the nearest we have is the fact that the Inuit (who eat a meat-high, but not meat-only diet) have a shorter life-expectancy; but that data is insufficient to draw a robust conclusion as it doesn't control for other factors.


----------



## joustmaster (Jul 16, 2019)

This:



Athos said:


> Not detailed data just one example of a single human (preferably outside the Inuit) that has lived their whole life on a meat-only diet, which hasn't been shortened by that lifestyle.



From this:


Athos said:


> A meat only diet isn't nutritionally complete either.



"I'm wrong and I'm moving these goalposts so I am right"


----------



## Athos (Jul 16, 2019)

joustmaster said:


> This:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



No, not at all.

Ok, so what you dispute is my claim that a meat-only diet isn't nutritionally complete?

Of course it's not; it doesn't include e.g. fibre.

Clue: even your claimed 'adequate to survive' isn't the same as 'complete.'


----------



## joustmaster (Jul 16, 2019)

Athos said:


> No, not at all.
> 
> Ok, so what you dispute is my claim that a meat-only diet isn't nutritionally complete?
> 
> ...


Is fibre a nutrient?


----------



## Rivendelboy (Jul 16, 2019)

8ball said:


> Looking and seeing that a food appears to have everything in it is very different to verifying by experiment, as I'm sure you know.
> 
> That said, there are plenty of cases of people living only on meat for a year, out of both circumstance and for experimental reasons.


It's that experimentation that tells us what a food contains.

Though of course individual taste and tolerance are a separate question. I think we can take that aspect as understood.


----------



## 8ball (Jul 16, 2019)

joustmaster said:


> Is fibre a nutrient?



Oh dear, Athos, the keeper saw that feint a mile off. 

Tbf, you should have given that one a break of a few more pages.


----------



## Poot (Jul 16, 2019)

Surely there's no vitamin C in meat, for a start? Wouldn't you get scurvy and then your teeth would fall out and you'd have to live off tofu anyway?


----------



## 8ball (Jul 16, 2019)

Poot said:


> Surely there's no vitamin C in meat, for a start? Wouldn't you get scurvy and then your teeth would fall out and you'd have to live off tofu anyway?



Teeny bit.  If you're not eating carbs, you need a lot less vitamin C.  Those sailors in the old story that led to the term "limeys" were eating meat and bread/biscuits.


----------



## Saul Goodman (Jul 16, 2019)

Athos said:


> Please quote the post of mine which contains an assertion which you think is wrong.


I'd like you to provide evidence for the following.



Athos said:


> Don't eat a meat-only diet.





Athos said:


> A meat only diet isn't nutritionally complete either.


----------



## Rivendelboy (Jul 16, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Why would anybody not want to eat some vegetables and fruit and stuff though. What's the point. There's no ethical principle. It's just being a bellend really innit


Eating no veg makes you a 'bellend'? How so?



kebabking said:


> This.
> 
> A burger with tomato and lettuce tastes better than just a burger, a steak with mushrooms, chips, tomatoes and a bit of salad tastes better than just a steak, a Bolognese with tomatoes, celery, mushrooms and onions tastes better than just fried up mince.
> 
> Not eating fruit and vegetables has no ethical or health benefits, it's about having room-clearing, protein laden farts...


That's just taste preference. So what? The argument made by carnivores isn't based on ethics as much as health, though there are arguments made in support of proper farming practices that are wholly benefical to the environment and could well be less damaging, in terms of killing animals. 



Proper Tidy said:


> Nobody really gets ill from eating some veg though, it's bollocks isn't it. Veganism at least has an ethical consistency, people eating raw liver and living a life without a bit of onion to go with it are just weirdos. And yes bellends



Plenty of people get ill from eating veg, what a bizarre comment. 

Veganism isn't ethically consistent given how crop agriculture and plant harvesting also involve animal death and displacement and can also cause environmental damage that isn't healed by the presence of livestock grazing.

You're just being childish.


----------



## Athos (Jul 16, 2019)

joustmaster said:


> Is fibre a nutrient?


Yes.

From here: Nutrient - Wikipedia

*Non-essential nutrients*
Non-essential nutrients are substances within foods that can have a significant impact on health; these substances can be beneficial or toxic.[_medical citation needed_] For example, dietary fiber is not absorbed in the human digestive tract, but is important in maintaining the bulk of a bowel movement to avoid constipation.[_medical citation needed_] A subset of dietary fiber, soluble fiber, can be metabolized by bacteria residing in the large intestine.[19][20][21] Soluble fiber is marketed as serving a prebiotic function – promoting "healthy" intestinal bacteria.[_citation needed_] Bacterial metabolism of soluble fiber also produces short-chain fatty acids like butyric acid, which may be absorbed into intestinal cells as a source of calories.[19][20][21]


----------



## joustmaster (Jul 16, 2019)

Poot said:


> Surely there's no vitamin C in meat, for a start? Wouldn't you get scurvy and then your teeth would fall out and you'd have to live off tofu anyway?


Liver is full of it.


----------



## 8ball (Jul 16, 2019)

Saul Goodman said:


> I'd like you to provide evidence for the following.



It's everyone else's job to prove it *is* nutritionally complete via a process of proof that he has agreed himself is not logically possible. 

It's a pretty good wind-up tbf.


----------



## Athos (Jul 16, 2019)

Saul Goodman said:


> I'd like you to provide evidence for the following.



That the Inuit don't eat a meat only diet:  Inuit cuisine - Wikipedia

The second I've backed up above.


----------



## joustmaster (Jul 16, 2019)

Athos said:


> Yes.
> 
> From here: Nutrient - Wikipedia
> 
> ...


Did you just post a link that describes it as a non essential nutrient? 
Mate, I'm not sure what point you are trying to make


----------



## joustmaster (Jul 16, 2019)

Athos said:


> That the Inuit don't eat a meat only diet:  Inuit cuisine - Wikipedia
> 
> The second I've backed up above.


Some of them do, sometimes.


----------



## fishfinger (Jul 16, 2019)

Athos said:


> Yes.
> 
> From here: Nutrient - Wikipedia
> 
> [_medical citation needed_]...[_medical citation needed_] ...[_citation needed_]...


----------



## gentlegreen (Jul 16, 2019)

I'd forgotten about that - and it's definitely important to eat the meat raw - that's also how they got enough carbs.



> One of the theories is that it's actually the raw meat and fish, the main component of their diet, which does have a significant amount of Vitamin C in. The Inuit living on fresh raw meat and fresh raw fish would actually manage to get enough vitamin C, and particularly, there's a lovely traditional Inuit staple called muktuk which is the skin of the beluga whale, and this has a lot of vitamin C in it. Also, the organs of sea mammals and, apparently, *the stomach contents of caribou,* though I'm not sure they would actually eat that - maybe they just fed it to the dogs!



How do Inuit cope without fresh vegetables and vitamin C?


----------



## joustmaster (Jul 16, 2019)

lol @ citation needed


----------



## Athos (Jul 16, 2019)

joustmaster said:


> Did you just post a link that describes it as a non essential nutrient?
> Mate, I'm not sure what point you are trying to make



You don't seem to understand the difference between being nutritionally complete (which is what I disputed), and something being a non-essential nutirent.


----------



## 8ball (Jul 16, 2019)

Athos said:


> Yes.



In the sense of being something that _some_ organisms can use for nourishment, but goes right through us (or gets eaten by bacteria in our gut), then ... yes, I guess. 

Those goalposts are looking a _really_ odd shape now.


----------



## joustmaster (Jul 16, 2019)

Athos said:


> You don;t seem to understand the difference between being nutritionally complete (which is what I disputed), and something being a non-essential nutirent.


keep wheeling those goalposts. If you go far enough with them you will be able to tell yourself that you were right on the internet, and you'll be able to sleep well.


----------



## Athos (Jul 16, 2019)

The point is that fibre is defined as a nutrient.  Which is what I said that seemed to be being disputed.  That requires no citation, albeit some of the further claims for it, do - claims I've not made.


----------



## 8ball (Jul 16, 2019)

Athos said:


> You don't seem to understand the difference between being nutritionally complete (which is what I disputed), and something being a non-essential nutirent.



The fact that something is not an essential nutrient, does not mean it is a non-essential nutrient.  I don't think you understand what "nutritionally complete" means either, especially with reference to non-essential nutrients.


----------



## Saul Goodman (Jul 16, 2019)

Athos said:


> You don't seem to understand the difference between being nutritionally complete (which is what I disputed), and something being a non-essential nutirent.


LOL!!! 
If it isn't an essential nutrient, then something nutritionally complete doesn't need to contain it


----------



## Athos (Jul 16, 2019)

joustmaster said:


> keep wheeling those goalposts. If you go far enough with them you will be able to tell yourself that you were right on the internet, and you'll be able to sleep well.



  As it happens I do think I was right, but I'm happy to agree to disagree.  Because I really couldn't care less whether or not you agree with me.


----------



## joustmaster (Jul 16, 2019)

They could just eat some pig skin and chicken feathers. 
There's your fibre.


----------



## Athos (Jul 16, 2019)

Saul Goodman said:


> LOL!!!
> If it isn't an essential nutrient, then something nutritionally complete doesn't need to contain it



Lot's of sets are considered incomplete for missing non-essential elements.

But, as fun as this has been, I've got to go out now.


----------



## 8ball (Jul 16, 2019)

joustmaster said:


> They could just eat some pig skin and chicken feathers.
> There's your fibre.


----------



## gentlegreen (Jul 16, 2019)

There are quite a few things which may technically not be "essential" nutrients, but which are beneficial to health - like the defensive sulphur compounds in cruciferous greens.
And the "anti-nutrients" cited accusingly by the paleo crowd are being found to have benefits.

The super-high fibre *traditional *diet of Ugandans has been correlated with their almost non-existent bowel diverticula and super-low coronary heart disease.


----------



## 8ball (Jul 16, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


> There are quite a few things which may technically not be "essential" nutrients, but which are beneficial to health - like the defensive sulphur compounds in cruciferous greens.
> And the "anti-nutrients" cited accusingly by the paleo crowd are being found to have benefits.



They _are_ "not essential nutrients".  They are _not_ "non-essential nutrients".

Dammit!


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jul 16, 2019)

Rivendelboy said:


> Eating no veg makes you a 'bellend'? How so?



The question that answers itself


----------



## gentlegreen (Jul 16, 2019)

Neandertals ate stomach goop, and you can too


----------



## Rivendelboy (Jul 17, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


> I'll stick with my hefty fibre consumption and almost zero constipation.
> That's another thing I would miss - I have never understood why people prefer anaemic grains and flours.


what do you eat?


----------



## Rivendelboy (Jul 17, 2019)

Poot said:


> Various places. I only said that i wont have dead animal in the house. I turn a blind eye if they eat it at school. I can assure you that as an almost 100% plant-fuelled long distance runner i am healthier than pretty much everyone i know.
> 
> Eta less fun obviously. But healthier.


What do you eat to sustain a running lifestyle?


----------



## Poot (Jul 17, 2019)

Well today I have a big fruit salad with soy yoghurt, dried fruit and about 3 kinds of seeds for breakfast. Lunch is a salad with 5 kinds of nuts and chickpeas and balsamic. This evening I'm not sure yet but I'm thinking of some sort of lentil curry with spinach and coconut milk maybe and rice. I take supplements because I'm menopausal. And I exercise a lot.

I should also tell you that I'm not vegan, just vegan-ish. I have a weakness for cheese.


----------



## gentlegreen (Jul 17, 2019)

Rivendelboy said:


> what do you eat?


My current main meal is my avatar - or at least most of the ingredients are there - I also add some of my home-grown leafy mung sprouts, and tahini.


----------



## AnnaKarpik (Jul 17, 2019)

8ball said:


> One thing I've noticed is that it common for healthy people to take up vegetarianism or veganism with health in mind as one of the benefits, but when they go back to eating meat it is not to 'become healthier' but is because they have actually become ill.
> 
> Hard to say how common this is, taken across all veg*ns, of course.



I suspect, based on no evidence whatever just limited experience, that Europeans and North Americans who adopt a vegetarian/vegan diet are trying to replicate their standard omnivorous fare in vegan form and it doesn't necessarily work. Replacing a piece of meat with a piece of pretend meat might be healthier by some measures but pretend meat has been cobbled together by people whose interest is profit rather than health. Same applies to all manufactured "substitute" foods. I doubt that anyone eating loads of processed foods feels particularly healthy.

A transition away from meat/fish/dairy to a healthier diet is much easier once you are used to eating meals that use bits of flesh as decoration.


----------



## Rivendelboy (Jul 17, 2019)

Poot said:


> Well today I have a big fruit salad with soy yoghurt, dried fruit and about 3 kinds of seeds for breakfast. Lunch is a salad with 5 kinds of nuts and chickpeas and balsamic. This evening I'm not sure yet but I'm thinking of some sort of lentil curry with spinach and coconut milk maybe and rice. I take supplements because I'm menopausal. And I exercise a lot.
> 
> I should also tell you that I'm not vegan, just vegan-ish. I have a weakness for cheese.


Do you (or any vegan/plant food enthusiast reading) have any concerns about anti nutrients?

That is one the major drivers behind the carnivore diet.


----------



## gentlegreen (Jul 17, 2019)

Trypsin inhibitors - yum - I thrive on undercooked kidney beans


----------



## gentlegreen (Jul 17, 2019)

I'm 59 years old.
I was brought up in a household where the bread was white and the rest of the food was mostly  brown and white in colour - maybe with frozen peas and tinned tomatoes for contrast.
If there were any other veggies they would have been soundly boiled into submission.
We never had salad and even red peppers were "foreign muck".

At 21 I acquired a hippy flatmate who introduced me to veggies and whole grains and I never looked back.
In nearly 40 years, I have never once worried about "anti-nutrients" - apart from oxalates - I still  view spinach with suspicion - and rhubarb needs insane amounts of sugar to make it edible.


----------



## Poot (Jul 17, 2019)

Rivendelboy said:


> Do you (or any vegan/plant food enthusiast reading) have any concerns about anti nutrients?
> 
> That is one the major drivers behind the carnivore diet.


Nope. Never given it much thought. Should i?


----------



## philosophical (Jul 17, 2019)

My vegetarian diet is very poor, my fault, but it does mean not deliberately killing animals as far as I know.


----------



## gentlegreen (Jul 17, 2019)

Antinutrient maximisation :-
The anaemic sprouts you buy in the supermarket are very nice, and you can eat them when they first sprout, but I like to get some vitamin C with my beans and the fibre doesn't go amiss.


----------



## gentlegreen (Jul 17, 2019)

Bloody hell.

I just did a search for "antinutrients" on Youtube and am reminded of my diet revamp in 2015 - with the likes of Weston Price - who looked at archaeology and for some completely inexplicable reason found bones, but not plant residues ...

It just struck me that this is all a bit like creationism - "where are the intermediate fossils ?"

The other parallel - in this case with the "fine tuning" fallacy is when they look at individual plants and say "look at all these poisons !!!! " - whereas they might instead look at humans thriving on plant foods ...

Food Guidelines - Blue Zones


----------



## Rivendelboy (Jul 17, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


> Bloody hell.
> 
> I just did a search for "antinutrients" on Youtube and am reminded of my diet revamp in 2015 - with the likes of Weston Price - who looked at archaeology and for some completely inexplicable reason found bones, but not plant residues ...
> 
> ...


How is itr like creationism? Food does contain antinutrients and they do have an effect. The question is to what degree


----------



## gentlegreen (Jul 17, 2019)

Rivendelboy said:


> How is itr like creationism? Food does contain antinutrients and they do have an effect. The question is to what degree


As with us homo sapiens looking back at the red shift of the stars and the snow on our TV sets, we can now choose to look back at how we arrived here and work out what positive things these "antinutrients" may well be bringing us.

Who knows, we MIGHT find a way to beat even the healthy longevity of the inhabitants of the blue zones, but more likely they will try to synthesise the substances for various reasons.

What exactly are you aiming to achieve by eating a diet that hasn't ever promoted long life. ? Is it something to do with the anomalous _relative _longevity of the Inuit considering their saturated fat consumption  ?


----------



## gentlegreen (Jul 17, 2019)

What I'm trying to say in a rather convoluted way, is why are you not starting with the diets of the longest lived / healthiest ageing people on the planet ?


----------



## Rivendelboy (Jul 17, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


> As with us homo sapiens looking back at the red shift of the stars and the snow on our TV sets, we can now choose to look back at how we arrived here and work out what positive things these "antinutrients" may well be bringing us.
> 
> Who knows, we MIGHT find a way to beat even the healthy longevity of the inhabitants of the blue zones, but more likely they will try to synthesise the substances for various reasons.
> 
> What exactly are you aiming to achieve by eating a diet that hasn't ever promoted long life. ? Is it something to do with the anomalous _relative _longevity of the Inuit considering their saturated fat consumption  ?


I don't understand how this addresses the issue I raised.

I've already said: i'm not promoting a carnivore diet. I do eat meat much more than veg, but I do eat veg and some seeds (flax, mainly).

What do you mean by long life?


----------



## Rivendelboy (Jul 17, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


> What I'm trying to say in a rather convoluted way, is why are you not starting with the diets of the longest lived / healthiest ageing people on the planet ?


Who are they and what diet is that? Do you have citations?


----------



## 8ball (Jul 17, 2019)

Rivendelboy said:


> How is itr like creationism? Food does contain antinutrients and they do have an effect. The question is to what degree



I think it’s both overly stated and overly simplistic.  For starters, some “anti nutrients” are actually
nutrients being preferentially absorbed when in the presence of others, and many of the other substances show positive benefits.


----------



## gentlegreen (Jul 17, 2019)

Rivendelboy said:


> Who are they and what diet is that? Do you have citations?


So you've done all this research and have somehow missed the Blue Zone and the Adventist study ?
I take it you're familiar with Weston-Price, Pritikin et al.  ?

I'm not going to pretend I'm even massively interested in the science and I tend to rely on biased vegan-friendly meta-analysts like Michael Greger.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jul 17, 2019)

Is this still going on.

The strongest argument anti-vegans (for lack of a better descriptor) have is that humans are omnivores, have evolved over millions of years on a diet which contains meat, and rely on nutrients or whatever that are easily found in meat and not so easily replaced with a wholly plant based diet.

Which is undermined a bit by weirdos and edgelords living off raw liver and trying to make a case that eating plants is bad for you


----------



## gentlegreen (Jul 17, 2019)

I have to confess that oily fish definitely nudges into the bottom of my nutritarian list to feed my massive brain with fatty acids into old age - though I will have to catch them myself and plan to make do with ground flaxseed on my morning cereal for the time being - now that I'm starting my working day with muesli (I used to add it to my weekend bread, but have recently developed a taste for non-concrete loaves)


----------



## Artaxerxes (Jul 17, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


> I'm 59 years old.
> I was brought up in a household where the bread was white and the rest of the food was mostly  brown and white in colour - maybe with frozen peas and tinned tomatoes for contrast.
> If there were any other veggies they would have been soundly boiled into submission.
> We never had salad and even red peppers were "foreign muck".
> ...



Never understood why people bother with rhubarb.


----------



## gentlegreen (Jul 17, 2019)

Artaxerxes said:


> Never understood why people bother with rhubarb.


I believe the root was used medicinally (and probably ineffectually), presumably then they found they could grow it in Yorkshire and cheap sugar made it edible.
It's not unwelcome in a crumble, but I no longer see sugar as an option.


----------



## Artaxerxes (Jul 17, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


> I believe the root was used medicinally (and probably ineffectually), presumably then they found they could grow it in Yorkshire and cheap sugar made it edible.
> It's not unwelcome in a crumble, but I no longer see sugar as an option.



Yeah I mostly assume it's just easy to grow and with enough sugar anythings edible.


----------



## gentlegreen (Jul 17, 2019)

Tesco used to make a smoothie that included rhubarb, but I twice had it explode - once at home it stained the upstairs ceiling and at work it blew the fridge door open one weekend ...

 

Those were the days when I thought it was OK to get fat so long as it was on fruit juice ... for a while I was spending more on smoothies than my band A council tax.


----------



## Rivendelboy (Jul 17, 2019)

8ball said:


> I think it’s both overly stated and overly simplistic.  For starters, some “anti nutrients” are actually
> nutrients being preferentially absorbed when in the presence of others, and many of the other substances show positive benefits.


Yes there is an argument that antinutrients through positive stress on the body can help. 

However they also affect the absorption of other nutrients. Oxalates for example affect calcium. They are found in enormous amounts in Spinach which we are told is a healthy food.


----------



## Rivendelboy (Jul 17, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


> So you've done all this research and have somehow missed the Blue Zone and the Adventist study ?
> I take it you're familiar with Weston-Price, Pritikin et al.  ?
> 
> I'm not going to pretend I'm even massively interested in the science and I tend to rely on biased vegan-friendly meta-analysts like Michael Greger.


I made no claims to doing any specific amount of research. 

I wouldn't trust Greger as far as I could throw him, he's notoriously biased and, fwiw, looks like a ghoul.


----------



## gentlegreen (Jul 17, 2019)

So what is your opinion of the blue zone approach ?


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jul 17, 2019)

Rivendelboy said:


> Yes there is an argument that antinutrients through positive stress on the body can help.
> 
> However they also affect the absorption of other nutrients. Oxalates for example affect calcium. They are found in enormous amounts in Spinach which we are told is a healthy food.


I don't think thinking about food like this is healthy


----------



## Saul Goodman (Jul 17, 2019)

Artaxerxes said:


> Never understood why people bother with rhubarb.


Because rhubarb pie is fucking awesome!


----------



## gentlegreen (Jul 17, 2019)

I'm not an obsessive follower of Michael Greger or any of them.
 I learned from his video about the 40 year old vegan who died of heart disease and I've taken tips from his "daily dozen"

Nothing much he says is particularly controversial though I don't pay much attention to the cited  research involving dripping Berry Juice on to cancer cells....

I'm constantly amazed at the likes of John McDougall holding summer courses but then some people place more importance on cooking and recipes.

We've got a "nutritional therapist" in Bristol trying to stop 5G and it's a "profession" I do not understand ... It's basically eat more veggies and fruit and less of everything else and do more exercise...

The only thing that's made me sick in 40 years is eating a lot of cake which is now far too easily available to vegans.
30-odd years ago choosing that diet kept me thin.


----------



## Rivendelboy (Jul 17, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> I don't think thinking about food like this is healthy


Why?


----------



## Rivendelboy (Jul 17, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


> So what is your opinion of the blue zone approach ?


I don't really have one, I've heard conflicting opinions as to what the people in, for example, Okinawa eat.

Dr Aseem Malhotra (Tom Watson's diet 'guru' ) recommends a diet based on the mediterranean region of Pioppi. BAsically eat lots of olive oil. He knows what he's talking about, but it's still too carby for my tastes. I can't do grains. That region was, iirc, ignored by Ancel Keys in his study - as was actual facts since he never agreed cholesterol was a problem anyway.


----------



## gentlegreen (Jul 17, 2019)

Conflicting reports about the Okinawans ?
"Diet actually centred on pork" or some such ?
well purple sweet potatoes are in short supply anyway but how about the seventh Day Adventist study ?

Extremely well-documented


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jul 17, 2019)

Rivendelboy said:


> Why?


Because eating should be fun?


----------



## gentlegreen (Jul 17, 2019)

Christ I just googled and came across "the real okinawan diet" and heaps more meatist stuff   I hadn't realised it had got so bad

John McDougall has an expression "people like to hear good news about their bad habits."..


----------



## UnderAnOpenSky (Jul 17, 2019)

Artaxerxes said:


> Never understood why people bother with rhubarb.



Nice in gin...


----------



## Saul Goodman (Jul 17, 2019)

UnderAnOpenSky said:


> Nice in gin...


As is cucumber.


----------



## kenny g (Jul 17, 2019)

Mung bean with Lincolnshire spring greens for lunch. Porridge , milk and 100% cocoa for breakfast, meat for dinner with beer. Seems to tick most boxes.


----------



## 8ball (Jul 17, 2019)

Rivendelboy said:


> Yes there is an argument that antinutrients through positive stress on the body can help.
> 
> However they also affect the absorption of other nutrients. Oxalates for example affect calcium. They are found in enormous amounts in Spinach which we are told is a healthy food.



Not just that but isofalavonoids (iirc) and various other phytochemicals show some good evidence for protecting against certain diseases.  

And yes, they can affect the uptake of certain minerals.  Oxalates in spinach, as well as affecting calcium, also partly negates the iron content.

It becomes very much more complex when you start putting whole meals together from multiple ingredients, though, and I don’t think there is enough evidence for the case that some “exteme carnies” take.


----------



## 8ball (Jul 17, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> I don't think thinking about food like this is healthy



I’m totally in agreement here.  Food is about a lot more than just breaking things down inti constituent molecules.

I think the dietary advice from the last 30 years was probably too kind to sugar and refined carbs, but overall if you go for something similar to the “Mediterranean diet” and have a decent amount of variety in there, that there’s plenty of evidence that you won’t go far wrong.


----------



## gentlegreen (Jul 18, 2019)

I was only reminded yesterday searching on Youtube and finding a whole new load of YouTube "experts" (sv3rige et al.), of why I gave up on my diet of 2015 and settled for eating what I liked and being fat.

As a temporary diabetic, I almost immediately had to give up on the main UK diabetes support forum because of the craziness, so signed up to one committed to reversal through lifestyle change and my heart sank when I saw that at the top of the group was an "instruction" from the admin. that we needed to "detox".

The Internet massively facilitates obsession.


----------



## pardon (Jul 20, 2019)

Saul Goodman said:


> Because rhubarb pie is fucking awesome!



Rhubarb can just fuck off and die


----------



## karanight (Jul 20, 2019)

It always baffles me that veggies and vegans want something like a burger or a sausage, as in veggie burger and veggie sausage, or nut loaf instead of meat loaf.  Why do they insist that the food they're eating has to look like the very thing they don't want to eat


----------



## Poot (Jul 20, 2019)

karanight said:


> It always baffles me that veggies and vegans want something like a burger or a sausage, as in veggie burger and veggie sausage, or nut loaf instead of meat loaf.  Why do they insist that the food they're eating has to look like the very thing they don't want to eat


It has to look like something. Also some people like the meat product but not the cruelty so choose a veggie version.


----------



## karanight (Jul 20, 2019)

Poot said:


> It has to look like something.


It does but I know how much effort goes into making the food look like meat


Poot said:


> Also some people like the meat product but not the cruelty so choose a veggie version.


I don't like the cruelty and always try to but free range meat and eggs.  The problem is, free range meat is very expensive so I don't always do that.  
Indecently, I worked with a veggie and he always said that we shouldn't eat anything with eyes.  being flippant, I asked him if he ate spuds. he went ballistic. Now that is what gets the back of meat eaters up. They need to lighten up and laugh along with everyone.  I was a veggie for a while but found bacon on toast too hard to give up so I ate veggie and bacon butties.


----------



## nyxx (Jul 20, 2019)

Nah, meat eaters like you need to develop some manners.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jul 20, 2019)

Dunno if everybody aware of this but the burgers and sausages don't fall of the cows and pigs fully formed. They're not natural cuts.


----------



## Saul Goodman (Jul 20, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Dunno if everybody aware of this but the burgers and sausages don't fall of the cows and pigs fully formed. They're not natural cuts.


Really? You're a mine of information!


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jul 20, 2019)

Anyway I'd imagine people make burgers out of vegetables in the shape of burgers for same reason people people make burgers out of beef mince in the shape of burgers. So they fit in buns.


----------



## karanight (Jul 20, 2019)

nyxx said:


> Nah, meat eaters like you need to develop some manners.


That's just the kind of childish comment that does you no good at all.
If you want to encourage people to eat veggie and vegan style you'll have to start putting forward constructive comments.  I wasn't rude to you but you had to respond like that.  Maybe you should let someone else answer for you


----------



## Rivendelboy (Jul 20, 2019)

Poot said:


> It has to look like something. Also some people like the meat product but not the cruelty so choose a veggie version.


because vegan food is cruelty free? 

shots fired!


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Jul 20, 2019)

karanight said:


> That's just the kind of childish comment that does you no good at all.
> If you want to encourage people to eat veggie and vegan style you'll have to start putting forward constructive comments.  I wasn't rude to you but you had to respond like that.  Maybe you should let someone else answer for you



New?
Arguments can be far more robust than what nyxx wrote.


----------



## Artaxerxes (Jul 20, 2019)

Rivendelboy said:


> because vegan food is cruelty free?
> 
> shots fired!



The whole point of vegan food is there are no shots fired.

Except at the vegans by irate butchers apparently.


----------



## Rivendelboy (Jul 20, 2019)

Artaxerxes said:


> The whole point of vegan food is there are no shots fired.
> 
> Except at the vegans by irate butchers apparently.


"shots fired" is a quip referring to a provocative statement made in the discourse.

the point I was provocatively making was that vegan food production isn't death free


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jul 20, 2019)

Rivendelboy said:


> a quip referring to a provocative statement made in the discourse



.


----------



## Poot (Jul 20, 2019)

Rivendelboy said:


> "shots fired" is a quip referring to a provocative statement made in the discourse.
> 
> the point I was provocatively making was that vegan food production isn't death free



It's provocative to describe vegan food as cruelty-free? Is it really? You're about to tell me that meat is so much less cruel?


----------



## Poot (Jul 20, 2019)

karanight said:


> It does but I know how much effort goes into making the food look like meat



 I really think a burger shape, which is the logical shape to fit in a bun (as has been mentioned) does not take 'so much effort'. Do you really think it takes a lot of effort?! How do you think it should be shaped?


----------



## Funky_monks (Jul 20, 2019)

Rivendelboy said:


> "shots fired" is a quip referring to a provocative statement made in the discourse.
> 
> the point I was provocatively making was that vegan food production isn't death free


Of course it isn't, no food is.

Arable production will require the extermination of insect pests - either by chemical or biological means (ie you can distribute something that preys on the pest). Loads of rodents etc will die in the combine (birds of prey love harvest time), larger pests (birds, rats rabbits) will also be killed.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jul 20, 2019)

Tbf we'll never know what came first, the burger or the bun. Which was made to fit which, a mystery


----------



## BristolEcho (Jul 20, 2019)

karanight said:


> It does but I know how much effort goes into making the food look like meat
> 
> I don't like the cruelty and always try to but free range meat and eggs.  The problem is, free range meat is very expensive so I don't always do that.
> Indecently, I worked with a veggie and he always said that we shouldn't eat anything with eyes.  being flippant, I asked him if he ate spuds. he went ballistic. Now that is what gets the back of meat eaters up. They need to lighten up and laugh along with everyone.  I was a veggie for a while but found bacon on toast too hard to give up so I ate veggie and bacon butties.



Your mate sounds like an idiot. At the same time though I've come across loads of meat eaters that get upset at my choice to not eat meat. I personally don't care what they do.


----------



## nyxx (Jul 20, 2019)

1. What kind of a snowflake can’t cope with the suggestion that they improve their manners

2. What do you think cattle are fed on

3. What makes you think it’s my responsibility to persuade anyone to change their dietary habits. It’s up to you what you do. 

4. I’m not even vegan I just don’t kid myself that when I consume dairy I’m somehow not complicit in cruelty


----------



## karanight (Jul 20, 2019)

Poot said:


> I really think a burger shape, which is the logical shape to fit in a bun (as has been mentioned) does not take 'so much effort'. Do you really think it takes a lot of effort?! How do you think it should be shaped


As mentioned, I was a veggie for a while and yes we made 'burgers' that looked like meat from soya. It was the waste from soya after making tofu, (which we didn't like)
After creating burger shaped lumps of soya we cooked them and ate them on buns. The 'burgers' we made were a bugga to get them to stay as one. How stupid was that.  The next time we cooked the soya waste we just had it as it was.  It was then that I realised how daft it all is to make veg look like meat.  By all means make the food convenient to eat but  going to the effort of making it look like meat and even telling friends that it taste like meat is a bit ridiculous.  If you want meat eaters to stop eating meat tell them how great the food is.  Veggie food can be awesome but lots of my friends that are veggie don't go to the effort of making great veggie food, they go and buy cardboard from the big food stores and eat that
How can you say that veggie bacon is right.  It's either veg or meat
I do agree that we eat too much meat though


----------



## karanight (Jul 20, 2019)

BristolEcho said:


> Your mate sounds like an idiot. At the same time though I've come across loads of meat eaters that get upset at my choice to not eat meat. I personally don't care what they do.


My mate was an idiot but unfortunately most fanatics are.
As to why meat eaters getting upset because you won't eat meat is a bit like smokers trying their level best to get someone trying to give it up to carry on smoking.  Then same can be said for drinkers.  We all just got to be ourselves


----------



## 8ball (Jul 21, 2019)

BristolEcho said:


> Your mate sounds like an idiot. At the same time though I've come across loads of meat eaters that get upset at my choice to not eat meat. I personally don't care what they do.



Getting upset at someone not eating something is pretty weird tbf.

With certain rare exceptions (if your friend only eats carrots and gets sick that’s a bit different).


----------



## gentlegreen (Jul 21, 2019)

Shaping things into patties can make it convenient to cook, carry and deploy.
And there's a reason we tend to prefer toast to muesli at least some of the time.
Though if I did have a lot of okara floating around, I suppose I might well lightly cook it and then chuck it in a stir-fry rather than trying to make it stick together with something calorific.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 27, 2019)

So, apparently, making veg "look like meat" (whatever that means) is a bit daft. Respectfully I disagree with that viewpoint.
Dr Milton Mills summed this up quite well I thought in his talk about the "Biology of disgust".

_"The reason humans first skin, pluck and bleed, and then cut and shape animal flesh into smooth, rounded, hand-sized objects is so that it will mimic edible plant parts and thereby circumvent our innate disgust response!"_

Most of the meat that is bought in supermarkets is several steps removed and disguised from it's true origins, which is rather convenient because otherwise I suspect that many would find it off putting. Bloody rotting animal flesh isn't really that appealing which is probably why the meat marketers give those images a wide berth.

I think it's ok to make plant based burgers, bacon, nuggets, milks etc. Why not? 

Most would agree that wholefoods are on the whole healthier than processed, however I'm not sure why making a plant based burger taste similar to a meat based one should be an issue, or "daft".


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 27, 2019)

PaoloSanchez said:


> So, apparently, making veg "look like meat" (whatever that means) is a bit daft. Respectfully I disagree with that viewpoint.
> Dr Milton Mills summed this up quite well I thought in his talk about the "Biology of disgust".
> 
> _"The reason humans first skin, pluck and bleed, and then cut and shape animal flesh into smooth, rounded, hand-sized objects is so that it will mimic edible plant parts and thereby circumvent our innate disgust response!"_
> ...


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 27, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


>




sounds a bit Clash like.


----------



## Saul Goodman (Aug 27, 2019)

PaoloSanchez said:
			
		

> Dr Milton Mills summed this up quite well I thought in his talk about the "Biology of disgust".
> 
> _"The reason humans first skin, pluck and bleed, and then cut and shape animal flesh into smooth, rounded, hand-sized objects is so that it will mimic edible plant parts and thereby circumvent our innate disgust response!"_


 Dr Milton sounds like a complete fucking idiot. The reason we cut meat into the shapes and sizes we cut them into is because that's the shape and size they are on the animal


----------



## JimW (Aug 27, 2019)

Never grab a pig by the sausage.


----------



## Funky_monks (Aug 27, 2019)

Saul Goodman said:


> Dr Milton sounds like a complete fucking idiot. The reason we cut meat into the shapes and sizes we cut them into is because that's the shape and size they are on the animal



I was about to ask what field of study Dr Milton was in.
We bleed animals to stop the meat spoiling.
We pluck them because feathers are inedible, as is the skin of larger animals (where skin is edible, we tend to leave it on see: birds). Both feathers and skins are very useful made into other things, which is probably why we started doing it. 
What cuts of an animal look like plants?
Smaller animals are often cooked whole (Rabbits, most birds) and look very much like an animal.
Does a leg of lamb look like anything else? A shoulder of pork? 
Even highly trimmed cuts look like meat, and are the shape they are because that's the shape they grow in.....


----------



## Rivendelboy (Aug 27, 2019)

PaoloSanchez said:


> _"The reason humans first skin, pluck and bleed, and then cut and shape animal flesh into smooth, rounded, hand-sized objects is so that it will mimic edible plant parts and thereby circumvent our innate disgust response!"_


certainly we live in a culture concerned with the aesthetics of food, but I don't think I agree with this statement at all. WE prepare meat for a variety of reasons, not least of all because shoving a cow into the cooker is a bit difficult. 

I wouldn't say cut and prepared meat resembles plants at all. I've never thought so


----------



## 8ball (Aug 27, 2019)

PaoloSanchez said:


> "_The reason humans first skin, pluck and bleed, and then cut and shape animal flesh into smooth, rounded, hand-sized objects is so that it will mimic edible plant parts and thereby circumvent our innate disgust response!"_



Real urbans.


----------



## existentialist (Aug 27, 2019)

karanight said:


> It does but I know how much effort goes into making the food look like meat
> 
> I don't like the cruelty and always try to but free range meat and eggs.  The problem is, free range meat is very expensive so I don't always do that.
> Indecently, I worked with a veggie and he always said that we shouldn't eat anything with eyes.  being flippant, I asked him if he ate spuds. he went ballistic. Now that is what gets the back of meat eaters up. They need to lighten up and laugh along with everyone.  I was a veggie for a while but found bacon on toast too hard to give up so I ate veggie and bacon butties.


I use the eyes thing, and I've had the same smartarse response. I then qualify it by pointing out that it is necessary for the eyes to be able to follow you around the room.

It is possible to be a vegetarian and still have a sense of humour, despite widely accepted belief


----------



## Artaxerxes (Aug 27, 2019)

Saul Goodman said:


> Dr Milton sounds like a complete fucking idiot. The reason we cut meat into the shapes and sizes we cut them into is because that's the shape and size they are on the animal


----------



## Poot (Aug 27, 2019)

existentialist said:


> I use the eyes thing, and I've had the same smartarse response. I then qualify it by pointing out that it is necessary for the eyes to be able to follow you around the room.
> 
> It is possible to be a vegetarian and still have a sense of humour, despite widely accepted belief


Because of their unusual ability to twist their neck 180 degrees, owls can look you in the eye while you microwave them.


----------



## Saul Goodman (Aug 27, 2019)

Artaxerxes said:


>


I've never seen the inside of a fairy.


----------



## gentlegreen (Aug 27, 2019)

Hearts are actually bum shapes - QI-type FACT.


----------



## 8ball (Aug 27, 2019)

Something has gone horribly wrong here:


----------



## Proper Tidy (Aug 27, 2019)

Trying to think of a natural plant form that looks like a burger or a nugget


----------



## 8ball (Aug 27, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Trying to think of a natural plant form that looks like a burger or a nugget



Small potatoes are kind of nuggety.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Aug 27, 2019)

8ball said:


> Small potatoes are kind of nuggety.


True although lack the two sided flatness. I suppose a corncob could be nature's sausage


----------



## Combustible (Aug 27, 2019)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Dr Milton Mills summed this up quite well I thought in his talk about the "Biology of disgust".
> 
> _"The reason humans first skin, pluck and bleed, and then cut and shape animal flesh into smooth, rounded, hand-sized objects is so that it will mimic edible plant parts and thereby circumvent our innate disgust response!"_



Dr Milton Mill's seems to have a very narrow definition of human behaviour. For example in Chinese cuisine, a large amount of highly recognizable animal parts are served, including animals' heads, organs, feet, claws, and a lot of meat on the bone. Why aren't all these Chinese people trying to circumvent their innate disgust response?


----------



## Proper Tidy (Aug 27, 2019)

I have seen (might have been on here) a ham fanny, I remember it was upsetting


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 27, 2019)

Funky_monks said:


> I was about to ask what field of study Dr Milton was in.
> We bleed animals to stop the meat spoiling.
> We pluck them because feathers are inedible, as is the skin of larger animals (where skin is edible, we tend to leave it on see: birds). Both feathers and skins are very useful made into other things, which is probably why we started doing it.
> What cuts of an animal look like plants?
> ...


I'm not sure if his field of study is relevant tbh,
The presentation on the biology of disgust gives context behind what I quoted from his talk, and I don't believe he was trying to say that we are trying to make a cow look exactly like a carrot. 

The main theme behind what he was saying is that in order for many of us to eat meat and not be disgusted by it we have to heavily modify it by giving it more plant like qualities.

The comment about it being daft to "make veg look/taste like meat"  is rather curious because it would appear that we spend quite a lot of time and energy distancing meat from it's true origins. What animal does a burger, a nugget, a slice of ham,  or a rasher of bacon look like? 

The sort of tastes textures and smells associated with dead flesh that would cause an obligate carnivore/omnivore to salivate and drool appears to not quite have the same effect on us, until it is seasoned, cooked, dried or preserved.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Aug 27, 2019)

Honestly Paulo I don't think this is right. For instance, all farmers and butchers would be vegan.


----------



## Funky_monks (Aug 27, 2019)

PaoloSanchez said:


> I'm not sure if his field of study is relevant tbh,
> The presentation on the biology of disgust gives context behind what I quoted from his talk, and I don't believe he was trying to say that we are trying to make a cow look exactly like a carrot.
> 
> The main theme behind what he was saying is that in order for many of us to eat meat and not be disgusted by it we have to heavily modify it by giving it more plant like qualities.
> ...



What's plant-like about any of the cuts of meat I mentioned please?
Cutting meat into smaller portions is a direct response to a change in lifestyle- people have less time to cook now. Go back barely a generation and legs of lamb, belly, chops with the rib on, shoulders of lamb/mutton/pork, rib of beef, whole roast poultry, trotters, offal, cow heel etc etc was not unusual.

Its utter bollocks of the highest order.

Cooking meat doesn't make it plant-like either, but what it does do is make it much safer to eat, so presumably, preferring it like that confers a significant evolutionary advantage.

His field of study is incredibly relevant, because he's clearly no idea what he's talking about, so if his field of study is unrelated to biology/ecology/anthropology etc he isn't a total moron.


----------



## MickiQ (Aug 27, 2019)

I have been to more one Hog Roast and it is clearly obvious that the star attraction was once a pig, I've never seen anyone respond in disgust (I certainly haven't) though I suspect by the very nature of the event there are unlikely to be any vegans present.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 27, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Honestly Paulo I don't think this is right. For instance, all farmers and butchers would be vegan.


All farmers and butchers? Perhaps not.

Livestock farmers mostly outsource the slaughtering bit to the abattoirs, and abattoir workers and butchers wouldn't be doing if if they weren't ok with it. (or had no other choice). ...and even then there appears to be some evidence suggesting that there may be problems associated with this kind of continued exposure to that nastiness...

Slaughtering for a living: A hermeneutic phenomenological perspective on the well-being of slaughterhouse employees

If the sight and smell of dead animals was so enticing surely the marketing folk would be using those images in their advertising campaigns instead of going out of their way to distance the realities from the public.

Of course there are some people who have no problem looking at that stuff, probably the ones that can happily work at an abattoir/butcher or can eat a squirrel raw, however imo more people that you might think would have an aversion to witnessing such cruelty and would be put off were they to be exposed to it more regularly.

Perhaps we've all gone a bit soft, eh?


----------



## Saul Goodman (Aug 27, 2019)

PaoloSanchez said:


> I'm not sure if his field of study is relevant tbh,
> The presentation on the biology of disgust gives context behind what I quoted from his talk, and I don't believe he was trying to say that we are trying to make a cow look exactly like a carrot.
> 
> The main theme behind what he was saying is that in order for many of us to eat meat and not be disgusted by it we have to heavily modify it by giving it more plant like qualities.
> ...


We don't make burgers to kid people they're not eating animals.  What do you suggest we do to keep cuts of meat looking like the animals they originated from? The only way a cow can be kept looking like a cow is to serve the fucking thing whole. I'm not Desperate Dan. I can't eat a whole cow. You do realise that cuts of meat don't even remotely resemble the animal they came from, right? 

This:


> The main theme behind what he was saying is that in order for many of us to eat meat and not be disgusted by it we have to heavily modify it by giving it more plant like qualities.


Is utter bollocks. I've been eating meat all my life, and I've yet to eat a piece that looks anything like a plant.
Dr Milton Mills' research also seems to indicate that a vegan diet can cure HIV


----------



## existentialist (Aug 27, 2019)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Perhaps we've all gone a bit soft, eh?


I don't know about "angry vegans", but your smug certainty certainly doesn't endear the vegan cause to me much.


----------



## MickiQ (Aug 27, 2019)

The belief that humans have a disgust response to a dead animal is ludicrous we just haven't had time to evolve one and it would be counter-productive anyway, the human race is about 3000 generations old and for the first 2500-2700 of those we were hunter gatherers who were very used to killing, skinning and cooking animals, For almost all the rest most people up until the last century would either keep small animals and certainly bought fresh meat (clearly from dead animals) from butchers. The buying of food in plastic packaging from supermarkets is 2 generations old at most. This guy is trying to pass vegetarianism off as the natural state of humans, it isn't we're omnivores and evolution has given us digestive systems that are meant to cope with a mixed diet. People in the west undoubtably do eat a diet that is too rich in meat especially red meat since we aren't true carnivores, we're basically scavengers whose big brains have enabled us to opt out of the natural order of things.


----------



## existentialist (Aug 27, 2019)

MickiQ said:


> The belief that humans have a disgust response to a dead animal is ludicrous we just haven't had time to evolve one and it would be counter-productive anyway, the human race is about 3000 generations old and for the first 2500-2700 of those we were hunter gatherers who were very used to killing, skinning and cooking animals, For almost all the rest most people up until the last century would either keep small animals and certainly bought fresh meat (clearly from dead animals) from butchers. The buying of food in plastic packaging from supermarkets is 2 generations old at most. This guy is trying to pass vegetarianism off as the natural state of humans, it isn't we're omnivores and evolution has given us digestive systems that are meant to cope with a mixed diet. People in the west undoubtably do eat a diet that is too rich in meat especially red meat since we aren't true carnivores, we're basically scavengers whose big brains have enabled us to opt out of the natural order of things.


I can't cite a source, but I have a strong feeling that the "disgust response" being discussed here is not an innate thing, but learned. Young children left to their own devices display no indication towards disgust around pretty much anything. The disgust tends to arise in response to scuttling animals, bitter tastes, and nasty smells.


----------



## Saul Goodman (Aug 27, 2019)

I do like how this chicken has been disguised.







It's all but invisible on that bed of vegetables.


----------



## MickiQ (Aug 27, 2019)

Saul Goodman said:


> I do like how this chicken has been disguised.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Once it's all cooked and crispy it will blend into the background even more


----------



## Saul Goodman (Aug 27, 2019)

It's a marvel, isn't it, how a butcher has cleverly disguised this T-bone steak...






... as an aubergine. 

It could easily infiltrate a vegan cook-off.


----------



## Funky_monks (Aug 27, 2019)

existentialist said:


> I can't cite a source, but I have a strong feeling that the "disgust response" being discussed here is not an innate thing, but learned. Young children left to their own devices display no indication towards disgust around pretty much anything. The disgust tends to arise in response to scuttling animals, bitter tastes, and nasty smells.



I think that there's a certain age that it kicks in, possibly in response to the anthropomorphism in children's films, books and TV (not that there's anything wrong with the stories).
My daughter has known it all her life - I used to get lots of free pheasants from the shoot and when my neighbour has been a keeper, I've been out with him to take rabbits etc, which got gutted etc in the kitchen (I looked after her a lot as a nipper). I've raised and killed chickens and she's often watched - she just doesn't have that disgust thing at all.


----------



## Poot (Aug 27, 2019)

I find chunks of dead animal quite offputting. I also don't really understand why you would eat one animal and not another. For example your dog gets a graze on her leg and you feel sympathy but you're fine with watching someone cut a pig's leg off to make into bacon. You could eat dog too, you know. Apparently it's quite tasty. But for some reason people are squeamish about that. I don't know how they draw a distinction. I was also baffled by the horse meat scandal. Surely if you are eating a cow anyway a bit of horse won't matter? After all, if I'm eating a mushroom stroganoff I don't complain if it has red pepper in it.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 27, 2019)

MickiQ said:


> The belief that humans have a disgust response to a dead animal is ludicrous we just haven't had time to evolve one and it would be counter-productive anyway, the human race is about 3000 generations old and for the first 2500-2700 of those we were hunter gatherers who were very used to killing, skinning and cooking animals, For almost all the rest most people up until the last century would either keep small animals and certainly bought fresh meat (clearly from dead animals) from butchers. The buying of food in plastic packaging from supermarkets is 2 generations old at most. This guy is trying to pass vegetarianism off as the natural state of humans, it isn't we're omnivores and evolution has given us digestive systems that are meant to cope with a mixed diet. People in the west undoubtably do eat a diet that is too rich in meat especially red meat since we aren't true carnivores, we're basically scavengers whose big brains have enabled us to opt out of the natural order of things.


Well, I disagree with most of that (I think). We just haven't had time to evolve a disgust response? I'm not sure if that's actually true or what you've based that on.

Regarding the "we are omnivores" argument, I think this has been covered many times and again, I disagree with that but I cba to type out all the reasons, especially when Mic has already done a good job of it (with science and references) which was then thoroughly debunked by naysayers.


----------



## UnderAnOpenSky (Aug 27, 2019)

MickiQ said:


> anyway, the human race is about 3000 generations old .



Eh? 

Sumer - Wikipedia


----------



## MickiQ (Aug 27, 2019)

UnderAnOpenSky said:


> Eh?
> 
> Sumer - Wikipedia


That is the stupidest response ever, Sumer is the first civilisation, Homo Sapiens (which we are) has been around for something like 120,000 - 300,000 years, we have been around as a species a lot longer than even our earliest civilisation.
Homo sapiens - Simple English Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## Funky_monks (Aug 27, 2019)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Well, I disagree with most of that (I think). We just haven't had time to evolve a disgust response? I'm not sure if that's actually true or what you've based that on.
> 
> Regarding the "we are omnivores" argument, I think this has been covered many times and again, I disagree with that but I cba to type out all the reasons, especially when Mic has already done a good job of it (with science and references) which was then thoroughly debunked by naysayers.



Are you seriously saying we've evolved a disgust response since my grandparents generation?


----------



## Saul Goodman (Aug 27, 2019)

I honestly believe that the reason more people don't go vegan is because their spokespersons always seem to be batshit crazy, and people are either scared to be tarred with the same brush, or scared they'll turn into 'that' person.


----------



## Poot (Aug 27, 2019)

Saul Goodman said:


> I honestly believe that the reason more people don't go vegan is because their spokespersons always seem to be batshit crazy, and people are either scared to be tarred with the same brush, or scared they'll turn into 'that' person.


Being vegan is very, very restrictive. You're essentially saying 'if you EVER catch me eating minstrels at the bus stop, you can call me a hypocrite'. So you need to be the sort of person who is very, very sure of themselves. Which is, yeah, often that sort of person.


----------



## Funky_monks (Aug 27, 2019)

Saul Goodman said:


> I honestly believe that the reason more people don't go vegan is because their spokespersons always seem to be batshit crazy, and people are either scared to be tarred with the same brush, or scared they'll turn into 'that' person.



Its embarrassing. My girlfriend is a vegan and found the disgust response notion as utterly ridiculous as I did, when I showed her the thread.


----------



## Saul Goodman (Aug 27, 2019)

Funky_monks said:


> Its embarrassing. My girlfriend is a vegan and found the disgust response notion as utterly ridiculous as I did, when I showed her the thread.


Don't get me wrong, I'm sure there are plenty of sane vegans, but the self-appointed ambassadors and spokespersons of veganism always seem to be completely detached from reality.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 27, 2019)

Funky_monks said:


> Are you seriously saying we've evolved a disgust response since my grandparents generation?


Nope, that's not at all what I'm saying. It is your premise that we were hunter gatherers for thousands of years and therefore could not have a disgust response otherwise we would have starved that I disagree with, and your "we are omnivores" point. As I said Mic covered both of those and other oft cited "objections" quite well so there's no need for me to repeat them.


----------



## Funky_monks (Aug 27, 2019)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Nope, that's not at all what I'm saying. It is your premise that we were hunter gatherers for thousands of years and therefore could not have a disgust response otherwise we would have starved that I disagree with, and your "we are omnivores" point. As I said Mic covered both of those and other oft cited "objections" quite well so there's no need for me to repeat them.



You disagree that humans are omnivorous?

Please explain our digestive system and dentition. TIA.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 27, 2019)

Poot said:


> Being vegan is very, very restrictive. You're essentially saying 'if you EVER catch me eating minstrels at the bus stop, you can call me a hypocrite'. So you need to be the sort of person who is very, very sure of themselves. Which is, yeah, often that sort of person.


I can see why some would believe it to be "restrictive" but I don't believe it is at all, and imo, it's much more than "just a diet". It's an ethical/moral position. 

Of course in a world that is +90% non vegan it can be a bit of a challenge to align your actions with your morals especially when you confronted by naysayers and dickheads who just want to have a dig but imo it's best to ignore them as much as possible.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 27, 2019)

Funky_monks said:


> You disagree that humans are omnivorous?
> 
> Please explain our digestive system and dentition. TIA.


I refer the honourable gentleman to the answer I gave some posts ago, (tl;dr cba). It's already been done, and done very well imo. I will repost the relevant material which you are free to watch or ignore.



...and debunked here...


----------



## Funky_monks (Aug 27, 2019)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Of course in a world that is +90% non vegan it can be a bit of a challenge to align your actions with your morals especially when you confronted by naysayers and dickheads who just want to have a dig but imo it's best to ignore them as much as possible.



I'm sorry, but being challenged on utter drivel does not constitute "naysaying". 

To be fair though, I've met more than a few vegans in my life and you are the first to espouse the theories of loons like Dr Milton.

What's his doctorate in please?


----------



## Funky_monks (Aug 27, 2019)

PaoloSanchez said:


> I refer the honourable gentleman to the answer I gave some posts ago, (tl;dr cba). It's already been done, and done very well imo. I will repost the relevant material which you are free to watch or ignore.
> 
> 
> 
> ...and debunked here...




I'm sorry but that is drivel.
We can't digest cellulose - which is why we lack a rumen. It's also why cooking vegetables helps digestion.
High levels of cholesterol didn't really exist as little as two generations ago.
What percentage of the Masai have high blood pressure?
Homo sapiens is the ultimate generalist.
We have populations who thrive on blubber and seal meat for a lot of the year (Inuit) and those who thrive on a more varied diet.

What do you make of all the anthropology that supports humans as being hunter-gatherers until the dawn of farming?


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 27, 2019)

Funky_monks said:


> I'm sorry, but being challenged on utter drivel does not constitute "naysaying".
> 
> To be fair though, I've met more than a few vegans in my life and you are the first to espouse the theories of loons like Dr Milton.
> 
> What's his doctorate in please?


Right, ok. I don't think I'll be bothering to reply to your future posts as you appear to be one of those dickheads I was referring to earlier. Of course I'll stand corrected if I'm mistaken.

So you dismissed Dr Mills stuff as "utter drivel" and that he is a loon without actually listening to what he had to say and without any citations of your own...and what are your credentials...sir?


----------



## Funky_monks (Aug 27, 2019)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Right, ok. I don't think I'll be bothering to reply to your future posts as you appear to be one of those dickheads I was referring to earlier. Of course I'll stand corrected if I'm mistaken.
> 
> So you dismissed Dr Mills stuff as "utter drivel" and that he is a loon without actually listening to what he had to say and without any citations of your own...and what are your credentials...sir?



Off the top of my head: BSc (hons), MSc, both in the biological sciences. Currently a degree level lecturer, also in the biological sciences whilst completing my PhD.

Still, nice swerve - what's Dr Mills subject please?


----------



## Saul Goodman (Aug 27, 2019)

Funky_monks said:


> Off the top of my head: BSc (hons), MSc, both in the biological sciences. Currently a degree level lecturer, also in the biological sciences whilst completing my PhD.


Ouch...! That's gonna smart!


----------



## existentialist (Aug 27, 2019)

Funky_monks said:


> Off the top of my head: BSc (hons), MSc, both in the biological sciences. Currently a degree level lecturer, also in the biological sciences whilst completing my PhD.
> 
> Still, nice swerve - what's Dr Mills subject please?


Good luck...


----------



## Funky_monks (Aug 27, 2019)

"The gorilla is an undisputed herbivore".... ffs!

Am I going to have to post videos of Bonobo chimps hunting monkeys?

Edited to add:
Also explain:
The Inuit,
The Masai,
Any other non agrarian society you care to name,
Cave paintings clearly depicting hunting, 
The advent of animal agriculture C3000 years ago,
The genesis of the human/dog relationship,
Etc
Etc


----------



## Rivendelboy (Aug 27, 2019)

PaoloSanchez said:


> I refer the honourable gentleman to the answer I gave some posts ago, (tl;dr cba). It's already been done, and done very well imo. I will repost the relevant material which you are free to watch or ignore.
> 
> 
> 
> ...and debunked here...



Why would you listen to mic the vegan?


----------



## Funky_monks (Aug 27, 2019)

For clarity, I'm in no way saying that humans can't survive on a largely plant based diet, given the right plants being available, and I really have no problem with the people who don't want to eat meat because they don't like killing.

But, the notion that humans did not evolve to have an omnivorous diet is batshit.
Yes, ommivory is a sliding scale. Some human populations ate much less meat than others. This doesn't mean humans aren't omnivores.

Name a pre-agricultural vegan society please?


----------



## binka (Aug 27, 2019)

fwiw I think if you're trying to convince someone of your point of view then a YouTube video is a crap way to do it. If you post a link to an article there's a reasonable chance I might read it, or at least read the first paragraph to see how boring it is. If you post a YouTube video there's zero chance I'm watching any of it


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 27, 2019)

binka said:


> fwiw I think if you're trying to convince someone of your point of view then a YouTube video is a crap way to do it. If you post a link to an article there's a reasonable chance I might read it, or at least read the first paragraph to see how boring it is. If you post a YouTube video there's zero chance I'm watching any of it


Again everybody's different. You could say the same for posting in a forum or any other social media platform. They are all often dismissed as a waste of time.

It's not my job to try and convince anybody. I post things that make sense to me and that may be presented in a better and more succinct way that I am able to. People are free to choose whether they want to read/watch whatever I post. There's no compulsion involved, and if folks want to poke their fingers in their ears and say "la la la la didn't read/didn't watch" that's entirely up to them. 

My preference is for respectful and meaningful engagement with people that are genuinely interested in the topic (even those that strongly disagree) and I'm not so interested in the folks who simply want to have a dig. So if you're not watching anything on youtube simply because it's on youtube that's entirely up to you. 

As far as getting the vegan message out there, well it's happening anyway, almost in spite of the sometimes overwhelming opposition. There's a hell of a lot more awareness and interest in the topic now than there was 20 years ago when I started.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 27, 2019)

Rivendelboy said:


> Why would you listen to mic the vegan?


Why not? He's a good egg and I like his content.


----------



## binka (Aug 27, 2019)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Again everybody's different. You could say the same for posting in a forum or any other social media platform. They are all often dismissed as a waste of time.
> 
> It's not my job to try and convince anybody. I post things that make sense to me and that may be presented in a better and more succinct way that I am able to. People are free to choose whether they want to read/watch whatever I post. There's no compulsion involved, and if folks want to poke their fingers in their ears and say "la la la la didn't read/didn't watch" that's entirely up to them.
> 
> ...


I was just politely pointing out if you want to convince people then just posting a video is unlikely to achieve much, I'm happy to spend 30 seconds briefly reading something but I'm not going to spend 10 minutes (or more) watching a YouTube video. But if you're not bothered then I'm not either so let's forget it


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 28, 2019)

binka said:


> I was just politely pointing out if you want to convince people then just posting a video is unlikely to achieve much, I'm happy to spend 30 seconds briefly reading something but I'm not going to spend 10 minutes (or more) watching a YouTube video.


Yes I got that the first time, and thanks for pointing that out. Like I said, I tend to post material that supports or illustrates a point I'm trying to make as part of the discussion. If you're not interested then that's perfectly ok. It's not for everybody and I'm not here to proselytise. If I think a youtube video summarizes a point I'm trying to make then I'll post it. Same for a link to an article or scientific paper. Folks are free to view or read whatever takes their fancy. Some people have an aversion to watching youtube videos and some prefer them. Whatever floats yer boat.


----------



## Poot (Aug 28, 2019)

PaoloSanchez said:


> I can see why some would believe it to be "restrictive" but I don't believe it is at all, and imo, it's much more than "just a diet". It's an ethical/moral position.
> 
> Of course in a world that is +90% non vegan it can be a bit of a challenge to align your actions with your morals especially when you confronted by naysayers and dickheads who just want to have a dig but imo it's best to ignore them as much as possible.



Tbh you've kind of proven my point rather than disproving it. I think veganism puts people off eating less animal product. I find myself saying 'I'm not a vegan but...' in the same way as my mother in law says 'I'm not a feminist but...' which can't be good can it? If it's an ethical/moral position then what't the point in swapping to a veggie burger but still drinking milk with it? People shouldn't feel abashed about making that choice. It's a good choice. 

Of course those who enter any conversation about eating less meat by shouting 'I'm having a nice juicy steak for my tea!1 Yummy!!' can fuck off, too. That goes without saying.


----------



## joustmaster (Aug 28, 2019)

PaoloSanchez said:


> So, apparently, making veg "look like meat" (whatever that means) is a bit daft. Respectfully I disagree with that viewpoint.
> Dr Milton Mills summed this up quite well I thought in his talk about the "Biology of disgust".
> 
> _"The reason humans first skin, pluck and bleed, and then cut and shape animal flesh into smooth, rounded, hand-sized objects is so that it will mimic edible plant parts and thereby circumvent our innate disgust response!"_
> ...


This stuff reminds me of the bit in Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas when they crash the DEA's drug conference and the expert is spouting all sorts of mad nonsense.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 28, 2019)

Poot said:


> Tbh you've kind of proven my point rather than disproving it. I think veganism puts people off eating less animal product. I find myself saying 'I'm not a vegan but...' in the same way as my mother in law says 'I'm not a feminist but...' which can't be good can it?


I'm not sure what point I've proven tbh. Does veganism "put people off eating less animal product?". I'm not sure that is true but I'm quite happy to hear any evidence you have to the contrary, personal anecdotes aside. Most reports appear to indicate a steady increase in the amount of vegans, and although the numbers are still far too low imo, there's been an consistent and observable upward trend. Of course there are going to be folks like Piers Morgan and his ilk that go out of their way to dismiss and denegrate, and you may notice some of the posters in here doing the same thing. I believe it's the "argument from incredulity" fallacy. They just don't like it and rather than trying to understand end engage, they prefer to mock and dismiss. 



Poot said:


> If it's an ethical/moral position then what't the point in swapping to a veggie burger but still drinking milk with it? People shouldn't feel abashed about making that choice. It's a good choice.


I'm not sure what you're saying here tbh. Who exactly is having a veggie burger and washing it down with cows milk? Whoever it is I doubt if they'd be thought of as being vegan. Probably vegetarian/flexitarian/reducitarian (or perhaps Sanitarian).

Indeed it is a moral/ethical position and folks who adopt that position would not regard drinking cows milk to be aligned with their moral/ethical position.



Poot said:


> Of course those who enter any conversation about eating less meat by shouting 'I'm having a nice juicy steak for my tea!1 Yummy!!' can fuck off, too. That goes without saying.


Quite often it's the old "BACON!". I try to give folks a chance to properly engage, but if they simply want to be dismissive jerks, I'll just blank them continue on my merry way.


----------



## Spymaster (Aug 28, 2019)

Funky_monks said:


> I was about to ask what field of study Dr Milton was in.
> We bleed animals to stop the meat spoiling.
> We pluck them because feathers are inedible, as is the skin of larger animals (where skin is edible, we tend to leave it on see: birds). Both feathers and skins are very useful made into other things, which is probably why we started doing it.
> What cuts of an animal look like plants?
> ...


Dr Milton is a right fucking bellend by the sound of it.


----------



## Spymaster (Aug 28, 2019)

PaoloSanchez said:


> I'm not sure if his field of study is relevant tbh


----------



## Spymaster (Aug 28, 2019)

PaoloSanchez said:


> The main theme behind what he was saying is that in order for many of us to eat meat and not be disgusted by it we have to heavily modify it by giving it more plant like qualities.


----------



## Funky_monks (Aug 28, 2019)

A straw poll of the several vegans in my department concluded that Dr Milton is bonkers.

Anthropologists were mildly upset that he'd apparently utterly disregarded their entire field of study...


----------



## Spymaster (Aug 28, 2019)

Funky_monks said:


> What's plant-like about any of the cuts of meat I mentioned please?
> Cutting meat into smaller portions is a direct response to a change in lifestyle- people have less time to cook now. Go back barely a generation and legs of lamb, belly, chops with the rib on, shoulders of lamb/mutton/pork, rib of beef, whole roast poultry, trotters, offal, cow heel etc etc was not unusual.
> 
> Its utter bollocks of the highest order.
> ...


This is PaoloSanchez you're arguing with here. He'll stick you on ignore when he can't answer your questions.


----------



## Spymaster (Aug 28, 2019)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Right, ok. I don't think I'll be bothering to reply to your future posts ...


Well there's a surprise!


----------



## Spymaster (Aug 28, 2019)

PaoloSanchez said:


> So you dismissed Dr Mills stuff as "utter drivel" and that he is a loon without actually listening to what he had to say and without any citations of your own...and what are your credentials...sir?





Funky_monks said:


> Off the top of my head: BSc (hons), MSc, both in the biological sciences. Currently a degree level lecturer, also in the biological sciences whilst completing my PhD.



  

Bye bye, PaoloSanchez !


----------



## joustmaster (Aug 28, 2019)

It's interesting isn't it?
This mad doctor that was posted up thread, and Pablo posting almost blindly religious about him, is exactly what the thread title is about.

After a quick google he's an outpatient doctor at a hospital and not related to this stuff at all.
His stuff hasn't been picked up and published in a journal.
And he has some peta connection.

So yes. This is a good example of a crackers vegan making me feel distanced from the idea of vegaism.


----------



## Poot (Aug 28, 2019)

PaoloSanchez said:


> I'm not sure what you're saying here tbh. Who exactly is having a veggie burger and washing it down with cows milk? Whoever it is I doubt if they'd be thought of as being vegan. Probably vegetarian/flexitarian/reducitarian (or perhaps Sanitarian).[/QUOTE



Why do they have to *be* anything? Why can't they just consume less animal products? That's what i am saying. It doesnt have to be a special club!


----------



## Saul Goodman (Aug 28, 2019)

PaoloSanchez said:


> As far as getting the vegan message out there, well it's happening anyway, almost in spite of the sometimes overwhelming opposition. There's a hell of a lot more awareness and interest in the topic now than there was 20 years ago when I started.


I don't believe anyone thinks this is a bad thing. I think it's great that people are eating less meat, and if some give it up completely, all the better, as it offsets the meat footprint for those of us who have no intention of giving it up. It's a win win situation, and if people are, as you say, giving up meat, despite (some) vegans doing their utmost to alienate these people, then we're surely heading in the right direction.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Aug 28, 2019)

Funky_monks said:


> What's plant-like about any of the cuts of meat I mentioned please?
> Cutting meat into smaller portions is a direct response to a change in lifestyle- people have less time to cook now. Go back barely a generation and legs of lamb, belly, chops with the rib on, shoulders of lamb/mutton/pork, rib of beef, whole roast poultry, trotters, offal, cow heel etc etc was not unusual.
> 
> Its utter bollocks of the highest order.
> ...



Had trotters a couple of months ago. Fucking lovely.


----------



## Saul Goodman (Aug 28, 2019)

ViolentPanda said:


> Had trotters a couple of months ago. Fucking lovely.


Were they disguised as broccoli?


----------



## ViolentPanda (Aug 28, 2019)

Poot said:


> Tbh you've kind of proven my point rather than disproving it. I think veganism puts people off eating less animal product. I find myself saying 'I'm not a vegan but...' in the same way as my mother in law says 'I'm not a feminist but...' which can't be good can it? If it's an ethical/moral position then what't the point in swapping to a veggie burger but still drinking milk with it? People shouldn't feel abashed about making that choice. It's a good choice.
> 
> Of course those who enter any conversation about eating less meat by shouting 'I'm having a nice juicy steak for my tea!1 Yummy!!' can fuck off, too. That goes without saying.



I kind of agree, which makes me feel sad, as you're a wrong-un who thinks that bacon is made from a pig's leg.


----------



## Poot (Aug 28, 2019)

ViolentPanda said:


> I kind of agree, which makes me feel sad, as you're a wrong-un who thinks that bacon is made from a pig's leg.



 I know it's not its leg _really_. But you lose arguments if you admit to using artistic license.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Aug 28, 2019)

Poot said:


> Why do they have to *be* anything? Why can't they just consume less animal products? That's what i am saying. It doesnt have to be a special club!



Precisely. I still eat meat, but I don't eat much of it. I try to eat "local" veg and fruit, as opposed to runner beans grown in Kenya, or potatoes grown in Poland. 
It should be about good sense, and you don't NEED a 36oz steak to enjoy a steak. Personally, I like to leave some room for the fried spuds and mushrooms.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Aug 28, 2019)

Poot said:


> I know it's not its leg _really_. But you lose arguments if you admit to using artistic license.



I mentioned it because it made me laugh. I heard this voice (my Dad) in my head saying "you don't waste the leg on bacon! in an incredulous manner. He worked as a butcher for about a decade, and was always perturbed when people said stupid things about meat, like the woman who asked for no kidney in her steak and kidney.


----------



## Funky_monks (Aug 28, 2019)

Early man preparing to suppress his disgust reaction and cut a deer into florets...


----------



## Proper Tidy (Aug 28, 2019)

Funky_monks said:


> Early man preparing to suppress his disgust reaction and cut a deer into florets...View attachment 182390


I think he's playing the harp and the deer has just stopped to listen tbh, open to interpretation at the least


----------



## Proper Tidy (Aug 28, 2019)

Impressive balancing on that branch too


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 29, 2019)

joustmaster said:


> It's interesting isn't it?
> This mad doctor that was posted up thread, and Pablo posting almost blindly religious about him, is exactly what the thread title is about.


Indeed, it's very interesting. I'm not sure I'd agree with the "blindly religious" bit though. In my opinion he made some very interesting points some of which make sense to me. It would appear that some in here disagree but that's ok. Would have been nice to see a well thought out critique of the points he made rather than straight up ad-hom dismissals, but I guess we can't have everything we want, eh?



joustmaster said:


> After a quick google he's an outpatient doctor at a hospital and not related to this stuff at all.
> His stuff hasn't been picked up and published in a journal.
> And he has some peta connection.


Not exactly in depth research there, but I guess it's a start. As for medical qualifications "not related to this stuff at all", well it kinda is. He most likely does know a thing or two about the human anatomy. His presentation crossed multiple disciplines and imo, the accuracy (or lack thereof) of the points he raised in his talk are far more relevant than his credentials. Even the fella in here who claims to be on his way to a PHD and is allegedly credentialed up to his eyeballs is unable to muster a decent quality referenced rebuttal on any of Dr Mills points so far, almost completely devoid of facts and mostly cries of "utter bollocks" and "me and my mates say he's f'kin nuts...so there".

...and on that point, what qualifications do you have to be able to contest Dr Mills' work?  



joustmaster said:


> So yes. This is a good example of a crackers vegan making me feel distanced from the idea of vegaism.


Okaaaay. Some people just need an excuse, and any excuse will do. Sensible balanced and rational people will take their time to look at the evidence before jumping to a conclusion. Claiming that the behaviour of a particularly individual is what is stopping people considering veganism is just a bit of a lazy cop out imo.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 29, 2019)

Poot said:


> Why do they have to *be* anything? Why can't they just consume less animal products? That's what i am saying. It doesnt have to be a special club!


So what's wrong with people organising themselves into groups based on a common interest? It's a perfectly normal thing to do isn't it?

The foundation of veganism is based on not harming animals unnecessarily wherever possible. There are some principles that are absolutist in their nature, like for example, taking a position on child abuse or wife beating. Most rational and morraly balanced people would want to see those disgusting behaviours eliminated and wouldn't just be calling for a mere reduction..."lets have a rape free Monday". In my opinion the principles of veganism are similarly absolutist, so eating less meat doesn't really cut it from an ethical perspective, in the same way that a campaign against violence to women wouldn't have members who wanted to allow wife beatings only at the weekend.

I think part of the confusion stems from the fact that many people (including many vegans) believe that veganism is all about diet and that simply eating "vegan food" is good enough and that makes one a vegan. I shall repeat, it is an ethical/moral position, and the diet is just one of the ways of putting that position into practice.


----------



## joustmaster (Aug 29, 2019)

PaoloSanchez said:


> ...and on that point, what qualifications do you have to be able to contest Dr Mills' work?


None. Which is why i didn't try to argue the facts. I just checked to see if any other credible people, who have the qualifications that I lack, agree with him. (Spoiler: they didn't.)



> Okaaaay. Some people just need an excuse, and any excuse will do. Sensible balanced and rational people will take their time to look at the evidence before jumping to a conclusion. Claiming that the behaviour of a particularly individual is what is stopping people considering veganism is just a bit of a lazy cop out imo.


It's what the thread is about.


----------



## Poot (Aug 29, 2019)

I killed a fly yesterday, does that count? I will probably kill a mouse if I discover one as I seem to every autumn. Does that count? Or is there some sort of *shock horror* grey area? Actually, how would you deal with a mouse infestation? 

I guess that despite being 99% vegan, I will never be a vegan. Never mind.


----------



## Rivendelboy (Aug 29, 2019)

Poot said:


> I killed a fly yesterday, does that count? I will probably kill a mouse if I discover one as I seem to every autumn. Does that count? Or is there some sort of *shock horror* grey area? Actually, how would you deal with a mouse infestation?
> 
> I guess that despite being 99% vegan, I will never be a vegan. Never mind.


Vegans, IME, argue that killing animals _unecessarily_ is wrong - we don't need meat ergo killing animals for it is unnecessary.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 29, 2019)

joustmaster said:


> None. Which is why i didn't try to argue the facts. I just checked to see if any other credible people, who have the qualifications that I lack, agree with him. (Spoiler: they didn't.)


So a hasty google search yielding comments from as yet unnamed "credible people" who didn't agree with him is all the evidence that you needed to conclude that Dr Mills is a mad man. Yeaaaah, ok. Well hope you don't mind if I don't take your word for it, and check for myself.
#ShowYourWorking

Here's one dude with creds that appears to be on the same page as Dr Mills...




joustmaster said:


> It's what the thread is about.


Yes it is. (sortof) ...and it just demonstrates how fickle some people can be. Rather than take the time and do some quality research of their own, they'd rather latch on to the quickest anti-vegan results that google can throw up and use the rather lame (imo) excuse of "vegans behaving badly".


----------



## joustmaster (Aug 29, 2019)

PaoloSanchez said:


> So a hasty google search yielding comments from as yet unnamed "credible people" who didn't agree with him is all the evidence that you needed to conclude that Dr Mills is a mad man. Yeaaaah, ok. Well hope you don't mind if I don't take your word for it, and check for myself.
> #ShowYourWorking
> 
> Here's one dude with creds that appears to be on the same page as Dr Mills...
> ...



I'm not anti vegan

I searched your doctor mills name against journals. I found one entry that he had that was not related to this. That's it.

I'm not going to do research. I'm not qualified. I'm going to let others share their knowledge on the subject and trust them.


----------



## existentialist (Aug 29, 2019)

joustmaster said:


> I'm not anti vegan
> 
> I searched your doctor mills name against journals. I found one entry that he had that was not related to this. That's it.
> 
> I'm not going to do research. I'm not qualified. I'm going to let others share their knowledge on the subject and trust them.


I admire your persistence, but reason rarely prevails against zealotry. Fortunately, in this case, the zealotry is so self-evidently just that, that it's unlikely to pass unnoticed


----------



## AnnaKarpik (Aug 29, 2019)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Indeed, it's very interesting. I'm not sure I'd agree with the "blindly religious" bit though. In my opinion he made some very interesting points some of which make sense to me. It would appear that some in here disagree but that's ok. Would have been nice to see a well thought out critique of the points he made rather than straight up ad-hom dismissals, but I guess we can't have everything we want, eh?
> 
> <snip>


Basically this guy says things that you want to hear. He is not making 'interesting points' that require 'a  well thought out critique' - he's come up with a  idea that is not supported by any facts whatever.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 29, 2019)

Poot said:


> I killed a fly yesterday, does that count? I will probably kill a mouse if I discover one as I seem to every autumn. Does that count? Or is there some sort of *shock horror* grey area? Actually, how would you deal with a mouse infestation?


tbh, yeah those are grey areas, aren't they? I do find those marginal arguments a bit of a distraction from the fundamental issue tbh. 

As far as "vermin" goes, I try not to kill "pests" if possible. When we had mice I used a makeshift Heath Robinson like paper roll "trap" (a bit like this) and liberated them to fields away from the house. 



Poot said:


> I guess that despite being 99% vegan, I will never be a vegan. Never mind.


Honestly, I'm not sure what your issue is. Is it that you don't want to feel "left out" if you have the occaisional slice of bacon? Well, it shouldn't bother you what other people think, you do what you believe to be right, regardless of the opinions of others. Go where your own conscience takes you.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 29, 2019)

joustmaster said:


> I'm not anti vegan
> 
> I searched your doctor mills name against journals. I found one entry that he had that was not related to this. That's it.
> 
> I'm not going to do research. I'm not qualified. I'm going to let others share their knowledge on the subject and trust them.


lol @ "your doctor" (no he isn't)

So your lack of results in a particular search (search terms not revealed) gave you enough qualification to label Dr Mills as a loon?
Riiiiight. I'm beginning to see how this works.

It's probably best we leave it there unless you feel like continuing.

btw Nat Dominy has plenty of writing on the subject too...

Nathaniel J. Dominy - Publications


----------



## Poot (Aug 29, 2019)

PaoloSanchez said:


> tbh, yeah those are grey areas, aren't they? I do find those marginal arguments a bit of a distraction from the fundamental issue tbh.
> 
> As far as "vermin" goes, I try not to kill "pests" if possible. When we had mice I used a makeshift Heath Robinson like paper roll "trap" (a bit like this) and liberated them to fields away from the house.
> 
> Honestly, I'm not sure what your issue is. Is it that you don't want to feel "left out" if you have the occaisional slice of bacon? Well, it shouldn't bother you what other people think, you do what you believe to be right, regardless of the opinions of others. Go where your own conscience takes you.


I have no intention of ever eating meat. I havent done for years. But i dont think it makes me a member of a group. You were talking about 'rape free mondays' before and i just cant imagjne getting that worked up about it. And i find those funny labels ('flexitarian'?) Odd.


----------



## joustmaster (Aug 29, 2019)

PaoloSanchez said:


> lol @ "your doctor"
> 
> So your lack of results in a particular search (search terms not revealed) gave you enough qualification to label Dr Mills as a loon?
> Riiiiight. I'm beginning to see how this works.
> ...


I couldn't find anyone from the scientific community backing him up. That's all.  
If someone tells me something new and unusual I have a quick check to see if the science community are agreeing and backing it up in journals etc. If no one is, then I will not listen to it.


----------



## MickiQ (Aug 29, 2019)

PaoloSanchez said:


> tbh, yeah those are grey areas, aren't they? I do find those marginal arguments a bit of a distraction from the fundamental issue tbh.
> 
> As far as "vermin" goes, I try not to kill "pests" if possible. When we had mice I used a makeshift Heath Robinson like paper roll "trap" (a bit like this) and liberated them to fields away from the house.


I work with a guy who has a humane mousetrap brings them to work and releases them on the carpark 20 miles away from their loved ones, When I discovered mice were getting in the garage I told Mrs Q I would do the same, her response was "have you gone soft in your old age, kill the little sods"


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 29, 2019)

Poot said:


> I have no intention of ever eating meat. I havent done for years. But i dont think it makes me a member of a group.


If you don't want to be in a group, I don't think anybody is forcing to be, are they?



Poot said:


> You were talking about 'rape free mondays' before and i just cant imagjne getting that worked up about it. And i find those funny labels ('flexitarian'?) Odd.


Labels and groups are for convenience and are not mandatory, so you're not obliged to be included if you don't want to be. In a way I agree with you, in an ideal world we shouldn't need to use the word "vegan" at all. In the same way there isn't a word for people who abstain from eating human flesh. (as far as I know). Not eating human flesh is the norm so we don't need a group or word for it. Human flesh eaters are not the norm so we have the word cannibal.  In our non ideal world eating meat is the norm, but in the future (according to Simon Amstel) hopefully it will become the exception with veganism being the norm and meat eaters having a special word (Carnist?)

Anyhoo, this weekend I'm off to the Vegan Campout where I'll be happy to rub shoulders with like minded folk for a change. Unfortunately it looks like it will be pissing down with rain, but I won't let that spoil the occasion. 

https://www.vegancampout.co.uk/

/shamelessplug


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 29, 2019)

joustmaster said:


> I couldn't find anyone from the scientific community backing him up. That's all.
> If someone tells me something new and unusual I have a quick check to see if the science community are agreeing and backing it up in journals etc. If no one is, then I will not listen to it.


Fair enough. If your search terms are inaccurate then perhaps you won't find anything. Also just because he didn't have a paper in your particular search doesn't mean that he doesn't know what he's talking about or that you are in any way qualified to call him mad.

Anyway I think I've made my point, like I said, best to leave it there.

Have a nice day sir.


----------



## Funky_monks (Aug 29, 2019)

PaoloSanchez said:


> So a hasty google search yielding comments from as yet unnamed "credible people" who didn't agree with him is all the evidence that you needed to conclude that Dr Mills is a mad man. Yeaaaah, ok. Well hope you don't mind if I don't take your word for it, and check for myself.
> #ShowYourWorking
> 
> Here's one dude with creds that appears to be on the same page as Dr Mills...
> ...




I've watched that video and the guy says nothing whatsoever that aligns with Dr Mills at all.
To summarise the video (comments in brackets mine):
1) Humans definitely have eaten meat as far back as we can determine in the timeline of their existence. It was at generally less than 25% (so omnivorous, then)
2) We don't have carnivorous dentition (obviously, nobody is suggesting that we are carnivores) and therefore can't chew meat as efficiently as they can (we can't chew/digest plants as efficiently as herbivores either - they are all incisors and molars. Meat is very easily digested, which is why carnivores have such short digestive tracts). 
3) We have amylase, and so can digest starch (we can't digest cellulose though).
4) Most human habitats have plants, so it made sense to eat them, apart from arctic ones. (See also: prehistoric ice ages).
5) Our tendency to eat meat may not be responsible for increase in brain size (not particularly controversial. I'd always thought that the theory went that it had more to do with fish/shellfish which humans consume in abundance when available, see: middens).

Are you now backtracking or did you actually not watch the video you posted, which contradicts both the previous videos you posted and DrMills?


----------



## Spymaster (Aug 29, 2019)

Funky_monks said:


> I've watched that video and the guy says nothing whatsoever that aligns with Dr Mills at all.
> To summarise the video (comments in brackets mine):
> 1) Humans definitely have eaten meat as far back as we can determine in the timeline of their existence. It was at generally less than 25% (so omnivorous, then)
> 2) We don't have carnivorous dentition (obviously, nobody is suggesting that we are carnivores) and therefore can't chew meat as efficiently as they can (we can't chew/digest plants as efficiently as herbivores either - they are all incisors and molars. Meat is very easily digested, which is why carnivores have such short digestive tracts).
> ...


Chances are he's put you on ignore after you confounded him yesterday.

Don't expect him to respond.


----------



## existentialist (Aug 29, 2019)

joustmaster said:


> I couldn't find anyone from the scientific community backing him up. That's all.
> If someone tells me something new and unusual I have a quick check to see if the science community are agreeing and backing it up in journals etc. If no one is, then I will not listen to it.


Ahhhh, but what you're _supposed_ to do is believe unquestioningly everything that supports PaoloSanchez' view until incontrovertible evidence (whose existence is inconceivable) emerges to the contrary.

And you have to have better qualifications than those being claimed by the alleged charlatan to be allowed to call them out.


----------



## Teaboy (Aug 29, 2019)

There are numerous good reasons to adopt a veg / vegan diet should you wish.  The idea that humans aren't supposed to eat meat kind of strikes me as a bit pointless and just a dead end.


----------



## Saul Goodman (Aug 29, 2019)

Spymaster said:


> Chances are he's put you on ignore after you confounded him yesterday.
> 
> Don't expect him to respond.


He put me on ignore ages ago, when I called him out on his racism.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 29, 2019)

Funky_monks said:


> I've watched that video and the guy says nothing whatsoever that aligns with Dr Mills at all.
> To summarise the video (comments in brackets mine):
> 1) Humans definitely have eaten meat as far back as we can determine in the timeline of their existence. It was at generally less than 25% (so omnivorous, then)
> 2) We don't have carnivorous dentition (obviously, nobody is suggesting that we are carnivores) and therefore can't chew meat as efficiently as they can (we can't chew/digest plants as efficiently as herbivores either - they are all incisors and molars. Meat is very easily digested, which is why carnivores have such short digestive tracts).
> ...


Oh dear, a bit of selective ripe cherry picking going on there. In response to some of your points...

1) What Nat actually said (without the spin)... 2:53 _"Humans tend to rely FIRST AND FOREMOST on plant foods that they can find in the environment"_

3:18 _"Behaviourally people are plastic and some people eat meat but anatomically I'd say we're not adapted to eating meat AT ALL, our teeth are too big, the enamels too thin, the cusp on our teeth are too short, so we simply don't have the adaptations that you would need to chew meat efficiently. Anyone can look at the teeth of their dog or cat and they can see what teeth should like if you're going to eat meat and our teeth don't match, so you can say that we've evolved a face and a mouth that's for eating something else that's NOT MEAT..."  _

2) Wait...wasn't dentition one of the things you were using to support your argument earlier? (Canines tho...not heard that one before  ).

3) We can't digest cellulose? And...? What does that prove? It's a similar red herring to the rumens comment you made earlier. Both irrelevant imo.

Now it could be that you have a different understanding and use of the terms omnivore and herbivore so I will clarify my understanding and use of those terms. I use them, as Nat was in his video, in the anatomical sense rather than the behavioural. A herbivore eats mainly plant material which is a more general use of the term, the common more restrictive use applies only to grazing animals which have special unique adaptations necessary to eat and properly digest grasses and leaves (and the cellulose you mentioned). An anatomical omnivore has adaptations which allow it to catch, kill and eat it's prey which humans do not have (without the use of tools and technology). Our anatomy and  biochemistry (ABC) is closer to that of an herbivore than to an anatomical omnivore.



Funky_monks said:


> Are you now backtracking or did you actually not watch the video you posted, which contradicts both the previous videos you posted and DrMills?


This is rather odd, because it was through Dr Mills referencing Nat that I found out about him, and Mic the Vegan included a clip of Nat talking in his video that I posted earlier. Perhaps you are projecting the fact that you yourself haven't watched them onto me. (or you missed those bits while skipping through). I know for sure that initially you ad-hom dismissed him before you watched anything because you couldn't have in the time I posted the original video. So where precisely is the contradiction?


----------



## existentialist (Aug 29, 2019)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Oh dear, a bit of selective ripe cherry picking going on there. In response to some of your points...
> 
> 1) What Nat actually said (without the spin)... 2:53 _"Humans tend to rely FIRST AND FOREMOST on plant foods that they can find in the environment"_


Fucking hell, but you're a patronising cunt!


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Aug 29, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> There are numerous good reasons to adopt a veg / vegan diet should you wish.  The idea that humans aren't supposed to eat meat kind of strikes me as a bit pointless and just a dead end.


It's true that some people don't enjoy these types of discussions, but then they're not obliged to participate. There's plenty of other topics in the ocean if one believes this to be a "pointless" endeavour.


----------



## Poot (Aug 29, 2019)

But, but... cats eat beef and I've yet to see one bring down a cow, and chickens aren't vegetarian and they don't have teeth at all!

Funny thing, physiology.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Aug 29, 2019)

I swear people have lost their shit about food in last decade or so. Weirdos eating raw liver and stuff on the street, mad fuckers claiming it's healthy to live just on meat, other mad fuckers claiming it's evolutionary wrong to eat meat or something, what the fuck


----------



## Saul Goodman (Aug 29, 2019)

existentialist said:


> Fucking hell, but you're a cunt!


FFY


----------



## Saul Goodman (Aug 29, 2019)

PaoloSanchez said:


> 3:18 _"Behaviourally people are plastic and some people eat meat but anatomically I'd say we're not adapted to eating meat AT ALL, our teeth are too big, the enamels too thin, the cusp on our teeth are too short, so we simply don't have the adaptations that you would need to chew meat efficiently. Anyone can look at the teeth of their dog or cat and they can see what teeth should like if you're going to eat meat and our teeth don't match, so you can say that we've evolved a face and a mouth that's for eating something else that's NOT MEAT..."  _
> 
> 2) Wait...wasn't dentition one of the things you were using to support your argument earlier? (Canines tho...not heard that one before  ).


I see a flaw in your rebuttal (quelle sur-fucking-prise)... I don't know if you've noticed, but wild animals tend to eat raw mean. We've been cooking ours for quite a while.


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Aug 29, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> There are numerous good reasons to adopt a veg / vegan diet should you wish.  The idea that humans aren't supposed to eat meat kind of strikes me as a bit pointless and just a dead end.



Completely agree. PaoloSanchez, you're doing nothing to help the cause of veganism here.


----------



## Funky_monks (Aug 29, 2019)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Oh dear, a bit of selective ripe cherry picking going on there. In response to some of your points...
> 
> 1) What Nat actually said (without the spin)... 2:53 _"Humans tend to rely FIRST AND FOREMOST on plant foods that they can find in the environment"_
> 
> ...



1) 25% (as he said) is "mostly" plant material isn't it, numbnuts?

2) Who's cherry picking? As I said, you don't need to chew meat as efficiently as a carnivore to make it a good energy source, it's very easy to digest. Also for "meat" you seem to be focusing on large herbivorous animals, discounting insects, shellfish, fish, crustaceans etc., all of which are "meat", all of which are known to have been a significant food source in the evolution of man - which is why I mentioned middens. Essentially, you've managed to miss my point (again) - we don't have specialised dentition, ie unlike both carnivores and herbivores. This is why Homo sapiens is often described as "the ultimate generalist". You do know that canines are for piercing/holding prey (except for where they have evolved for other, display reasons - see: gorillas etc) don't you? Its premolars that do the slicing...

3) You made it relevant by lumping all carbohydrates together. We can digest some, but not others.

The contradiction is that the video I responded to directly disagreed with your premise that humans "aren't supposed" to eat animals by suggesting that about 25% of our diet has been made up of animals. Which makes us omnivorous, not herbivorous.
Our nearest common ancestor, the chimpanzee has very similar dentition/digestive system and is also omnivorous- most famously, they are known to hunt and kill monkeys.

Humans have two amazing adaptations for hunting and killing prey: large brains and the opposable thumb.


----------



## Saul Goodman (Aug 29, 2019)

Funky_monks said:


> 1) 25% (as he said) is "mostly" plant material isn't it, numbnuts?
> 
> 2) Who's cherry picking? As I said, you don't need to chew meat as efficiently as a carnivore to make it a good energy source, it's very easy to digest. Also for "meat" you seem to be focusing on large herbivorous animals, discounting insects, shellfish, fish, crustaceans etc., all of which are "meat", all of which are known to have been a significant food source in the evolution of man - which is why I mentioned middens. Essentially, you've managed to miss my point (again) - we don't have specialised dentition, ie unlike both carnivores and herbivores. This is why Homo sapiens is often described as "the ultimate generalist". You do know that canines are for piercing/holding prey (except for where they have evolved for other, display reasons - see: gorillas etc) don't you? Its premolars that do the slicing...
> 
> ...


Even Jeff Robinson, a fellow vegan, is telling him to STFU. That probably says all that needs to be said about his outrageous assertions.


----------



## UnderAnOpenSky (Aug 31, 2019)

Thinking of going vegan? Here's how your body changes from day one on a plant-based diet


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 4, 2019)

https://time.com



> *Vegan Sues Neighbors for Barbecuing in Their Own Backyard Because She 'Can't Go Out There'*


----------



## 8ball (Sep 4, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> https://time.com



Has some overtones of a bullying campaign towards a sensitive neighbour by an obnoxious family, and that the press has seen an opportunity to drag the matter sideways into the culture wars.


----------



## 8ball (Sep 4, 2019)

UnderAnOpenSky said:


> Thinking of going vegan? Here's how your body changes from day one on a plant-based diet



On which day of plant-based eating do you get the power to see through paywalls?


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 4, 2019)

8ball said:


> Has some overtones of a bullying campaign towards a sensitive neighbour by an obnoxious family, and that the press has seen an opportunity to drag the matter sideways into the culture wars.



Yeah, their children were playing in their garden and everything.


----------



## 8ball (Sep 4, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Yeah, their children were playing in their garden and everything.



That's very early on in the _Bumper Book of Cunt's Tricks_, that one (the "we were just doing something harmless, Miss" thing - I expect most posters here have been on one or both sides of that at some point).

Tbf the last paragraph is rather puzzling and paints her in a more clearly dubious light.

Still, remove the word vegan from the headline and the one place it appears in the article, and it's just a rather dull story about a neighbours dispute.

This puts a slightly different spin on the tone of things for me.


----------



## MickiQ (Sep 4, 2019)

Whenever we have a barbecue my neighbours seem to invent excuses to come round with the poorly disguised aim of cribbing a burger.


----------



## 8ball (Sep 4, 2019)

MickiQ said:


> Whenever we have a barbecue my neighbours seem to invent excuses to come round with the poorly disguised aim of cribbing a burger.



You need a special subset of "neighbour burgers", prepared in a manner that ensures they only do it once.


----------



## Funky_monks (Sep 4, 2019)

To be honest, she sounds quite vulnerable, and I do know that the press have no issues in exploiting the mentally vulnerable to get a good story.


----------



## UnderAnOpenSky (Sep 4, 2019)

8ball said:


> On which day of plant-based eating do you get the power to see through paywalls?



Weirdly I could see. That's a fair point. I can't normally see there articles.


----------



## gentlegreen (Sep 4, 2019)

UnderAnOpenSky said:


> Thinking of going vegan? Here's how your body changes from day one on a plant-based diet


I'm constantly amazed by all this as one who made the change nearly 40 years ago - all these "I tried vegan for a month and failed because of meat deficiency" ...

The one thing I remember from back then is mahoosive, fairly firm poos that blocked the bog - I don't recall when that stopped - not sure it's even a good idea.

I was not much into physical activity back then so I don't know how that was affected.


----------



## gentlegreen (Sep 4, 2019)

UnderAnOpenSky said:


> Weirdly I could see. That's a fair point. I can't normally see there articles.


A likely story nudge nudge wink wink


----------



## 8ball (Sep 4, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


> I'm constantly amazed by all this as one who made the change nearly 40 years ago - all these "I tried vegan for a month and failed because of meat deficiency" ...



I'd assumed the article was about health *benefits* (I can only see the headline and a few lines of text).

And it takes way more than a month to get serious meat deficiency, as any fule no.

Usually between 5 and 8 years.


----------



## dylanredefined (Sep 4, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


> I'm constantly amazed by all this as one who made the change nearly 40 years ago - all these "I tried vegan for a month and failed because of meat deficiency" ...
> 
> The one thing I remember from back then is mahoosive, fairly firm poos that blocked the bog - I don't recall when that stopped - not sure it's even a good idea.
> 
> I was not much into physical activity back then so I don't know how that was affected.


 Unless you are really committed  to change it is bound to fail all you need then is excuses. I like meat fish and dairy so never going to be a vegan through choice. Still wouldnt attend a barbecue to annoy a vegan that's just being a dick.


----------



## gentlegreen (Sep 4, 2019)

dylanredefined said:


> Unless you are really committed  to change it is bound to fail all you need then is excuses. I like meat fish and dairy so never going to be a vegan through choice. Still wouldnt attend a barbecue to annoy a vegan that's just being a dick.


In my case I killed a mouse and felt bad about it, then there was the delightful _*perversity *_of going vegan in 1981 - and going from not eating veggies apart from spuds and frozen peas to spending Saturday charging about trying to see how many different kinds I could get - and I routinely ate 7 grains - and then I discovered sprouting ...I was just a bit of a hippy in my early 20s ... a shame I didn't try riding a pushbike for another 6 years ...

Fish is only seriously going to get back in when I'm catching them myself - and even then they only marginally fit into the nutritarian diet ... and sparingly ...


----------



## joustmaster (Sep 5, 2019)

Deadly vegan lifestyle choice destroying lives and families

Vegans and vegetarians may have higher stroke risk


----------



## gentlegreen (Sep 5, 2019)

From the BBC, that bastion of quality journalism.

Long term nutrition research is so crap.

Have we had "choline" yet ?


----------



## 8ball (Sep 5, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


> From the BBC, that bastion of quality journalism.
> 
> Long term nutrition research is so crap.
> 
> Have we had "choline" yet ?



Very little to actually pick at, at face value.

Headline isn't ideal, but it's better than a lot of stuff that gets dragged out on these threads.  Also a very large sample size over quite a long span, and very early on the Beeb do say that nothing can be concluded about causes based on this information, merely that a correlation has been noticed.  Some interesting speculation about vegetarian convenience foods too, I thought.

If it had been a _lower_ stroke risk for vegetarians I have little doubt this would be a glowing example of science journalism referring to a study of the highest calibre possible.

Obviously "Deadly vegan lifestyle choice destroying lives and families" was just joustmaster indulging in a bit of silliness - it doesn't reflect the article at all.


----------



## Monkeygrinder's Organ (Sep 5, 2019)

The article mentions that veggies/vegans have a lower risk of coronary heart disease and a higher risk of stroke (with substantially more cases of CHD). It then goes on to ignore the heart disease risk and ask 'does this show that veggie/vegan diets are bad for you.' Nice work.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 5, 2019)

Monkeygrinder's Organ said:


> The article mentions that veggies/vegans have a lower risk of coronary heart disease and a higher risk of stroke (with substantially more cases of CHD). It then goes on to ignore the heart disease risk and ask 'does this show that veggie/vegan diets are bad for you.' Nice work.


Not a science type but does this not suggest the healthiest diet is mostly plant with moderate meat consumption


----------



## 8ball (Sep 5, 2019)

Monkeygrinder's Organ said:


> The article mentions that veggies/vegans have a lower risk of coronary heart disease and a higher risk of stroke (with substantially more cases of CHD). It then goes on to ignore the heart disease risk and ask 'does this show that veggie/vegan diets are bad for you.' Nice work.



Interestingly, vitamin K was mentioned at all, and neither does the BMJ report.  I expected it to pop up somewhere...



Proper Tidy said:


> Not a science type but does this not suggest the healthiest diet is mostly plant with moderate meat consumption



The BMJ and the Beeb have taken pains to not be quite so blunt, thank you very much! 
But not really - they were very targeted in what they were looking at (just ischaemic heart disease and stroke risk).

edit: have just noticed that my lunch is vegan...
edit2: actually, there's butter on the garlic bread...  so close!


----------



## Funky_monks (Sep 5, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Not a science type but does this not suggest the healthiest diet is mostly plant with moderate meat consumption



You mean a healthy, balanced diet?

Who knew?


----------



## existentialist (Sep 5, 2019)

Some of the vegans I have known were making seriously dubious food choices - lots of highly processed stuff, eg "vegan mayonnaise" and other preparations. I'm sure the same is true of vegetarians,  too. So it may well be that some vegans/vegetarians are capable of consuming diets that are extremely poor for long-term health...


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 5, 2019)

Funky_monks said:


> You mean a healthy, balanced diet?
> 
> Who knew?


Tbf I'm not arsed what people eat and find recent fascination with people's diets (and increase in weird diets like paleo and those freaks who eat raw liver and brain for the lols) a bit odd, but yeah hardly a surprise that eating a balanced diet with everything in moderation is, you know, sensible


----------



## 8ball (Sep 5, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Tbf I'm not arsed what people eat and find recent fascination with people's diets (and increase in weird diets like paleo and those freaks who eat raw liver and brain for the lols) a bit odd, but yeah hardly a surprise that eating a balanced diet with everything in moderation is, you know, sensible



Dunno how 'recent' you're thinking of, but it seems dietary fads have been around for a good long time.

Took a look on wikipedia and apparently the first fad diet was in the 1830s.  There were lots of them early on that were created by members of religious minorities and were related to a kind of spiritual hygiene.

Then, more recently (since the 1970s anyway), it seems to be solely health-based, and it's interesting that we've kind of gone back to the expunging of sin.


----------



## gentlegreen (Sep 5, 2019)

8ball said:


> Interestingly, vitamin K was mentioned at all, and neither does the BMJ report.  I expected it to pop up somewhere...


Is that a problem for vegans ?
I'm surprised I can bleed at all given the amount of greens I eat these days.


----------



## 8ball (Sep 5, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


> Is that a problem for vegans ?
> I'm surprised I can bleed at all given the amount of greens I eat these days.



I was more just thinking that if you have a deficiency of vitamin K*, then your blood clotting will not be working so well, a major clotting chemical pathway is entirely dependent on vitamin K.
The deficiency will make you ill in other ways, but your risk of blood clots (which is closely tied to indicators collated on this trial) will be lower.

I think vitamin K deficiency would be less likely in veg<>ns than meat eaters (some of whom may barely ever touch a vegetable), and their levels would certainly be higher in general (I've been a bit crap with the veggies recently, and the amount of warfarin** I need to take to reach the optimal level for my personal health conditions has markedly dropped).

So one area of speculation might be that enough meat eaters are just slightly deficient enough in vitamin K to have increased their general clotting risk to a level above the evolutionarily optimal*** level, which is probably a little on the 'sticky' side for modern life (I go around with a clotting rate about a third of a normal person and haven't noticeably suffered from it when having the odd bump and scrape), and hence have the slightly higher clotting risk.

On the other hand, the veg<>ns are likely to be benefitting from the vitamin in ways that more than offset this effect and are not measured by this particular study.****

And might also benefit in the case of a serious accident.

* - which is in a lot of things but green leafy veg is really packed
** - its anticoagulant effect is modulated by working as a vitamin K antagonist
*** - as well as mitigating agaist blood clots, the rate of clotting has a major effect on risk of wound infection, which was a major threat during pretty much our entire evolutionary history - we should also bear in mind that strokes and ischaemic heart disease tend to occur after reproductive age, and so the negative selection effect would be limited
**** - we should bear in mind that a study that tries to measure too many things is generally a bad one


----------



## gentlegreen (Sep 6, 2019)




----------



## Rivendelboy (Sep 6, 2019)

I predict Neal Barnard, a well known vegan activist, doesn't believe the kind of science he agrees when it slams red meat


----------



## Saul Goodman (Sep 6, 2019)

Rivendelboy said:


> I predict Neal Barnard, a well known vegan activist, doesn't believe the kind of science he agrees when it slams red meat


Are you suggesting that vegan activists could possibly be guilty of talking absolute shite?


----------



## 8ball (Sep 6, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


>




I suspect a few things are overstated here, but the general thrust is imo broadly plausible.

It seems reasonable that the major benefits of eating meat for most of our evolutionary history were down to gaining large amounts of calories and nutrients that were not otherwise attainable, and that there were certain implicit trade-offs.

That’s not to say I think we are well adapted to anything approaching veganism (though some people thrive on such a diet, and likely many more once a few supplements are introduced).

Tl;dr. Eat your vegetables, dammit!


----------



## 8ball (Sep 6, 2019)

Rivendelboy said:


> I predict Neal Barnard, a well known vegan activist, doesn't believe the kind of science he agrees when it slams red meat



What would that be based on?


----------



## Saul Goodman (Sep 6, 2019)

8ball said:


> I suspect a few things are overstated here, but the general thrust is imo broadly plausible.
> 
> It seems reasonable that the major benefits of eating meat for most of our evolutionary history were down to gaining large amounts of calories and nutrients that were not otherwise attainable, and that there were certain implicit trade-offs.
> 
> That’s not to say I think we are well adapted to anything approaching veganism (though some people thrive on such a diet, and likely many more once a few supplements are introduced).


We could all be using Nokia 3310s (or equivalents). We could also be self-flagellating, but we choose not to, because we like to enjoy things... we enjoy not being miserable cunts.


----------



## 8ball (Sep 6, 2019)

Saul Goodman said:


> We could all be using Nokia 3310s (or equivalents). We could also be self-flagellating, but we choose not to, because we like to enjoy things... we enjoy not being miserable cunts.



What is your point, caller?


----------



## Saul Goodman (Sep 6, 2019)

8ball said:


> What is your point, caller?


My point is that I enjoy eating meat. I like the taste, and no time soon am I going to swap that for fortified reconstituted cardboard.


----------



## gentlegreen (Sep 7, 2019)

I usually find Michel Klaper too annoying with his "no oil ever" mantra, but I'm glad I watched this - it starts with him explaining how his medical training was useless for the diseases that actually kill people - it must be agonising to spend 40 years watching patients slowly die and feeling helpless.

But he adds something here which I didn't know about - how the mythological sources of B12 are actually problematic and it will change how I take mine. (My levels always test OK due to fortified foods, but I've decided to start taking more.)
Video set to just before B12 section.


----------



## UnderAnOpenSky (Sep 7, 2019)

Cartoon in the guardian. Sadly can't see a way to paste it directly here. 

Vegans! Why won't they leave us alone to consume the flesh of tortured animals in peace? | First Dog on the Moon


----------



## Rivendelboy (Sep 7, 2019)

8ball said:


> What would that be based on?


His support for the claims red meat causes cancer.


----------



## Rivendelboy (Sep 7, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


> I usually find Michel Klaper too annoying with his "no oil ever" mantra, but I'm glad I watched this - it starts with him explaining how his medical training was useless for the diseases that actually kill people - it must be agonising to spend 40 years watching patients slowly die and feeling helpless.
> 
> But he adds something here which I didn't know about - how the mythological sources of B12 are actually problematic and it will change how I take mine. (My levels always test OK due to fortified foods, but I've decided to start taking more.)
> Video set to just before B12 section.



No oil ever seems utterly ridiculous. Even olive oil has been shown to be healthy, Dr Aseem Malhotra (Tom Watson's diet guru ) who is a cardiologist seems to know what he's talking about on this. 

What do you mean by a mythological source (i have not watched the clip)? Dragon meat? Griffin liver?


----------



## gentlegreen (Sep 7, 2019)

Doesn't Malhotra recommend lard ?

There are not-quite B12 compounds in seaweed that block B12 receptors - so my daily chewing of kelp "biltong" was not a good idea.


----------



## Rivendelboy (Sep 7, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


> Doesn't Malhotra recommend lard ?
> 
> There are not-quite B12 compounds in seaweed that block B12 receptors - so my daily chewing of kelp "biltong" was not a good idea.


He's not against fat, lard is just pork fat and perfectly fine. The only bad fat is the processed transfat rubbish. Hydrogenated stuff. There are some issues around balance of omega 3 and 6. Some keto advocates make claims about vegetable oils on that basis, plus they are less stable (IIRC) than animal fats. But generally he's pro olive oil and advocates a mediterraean low carb(ish) diet on that basis. PErsonally I draw the line at drinking butter.


----------



## 8ball (Sep 7, 2019)

Rivendelboy said:


> His support for the claims red meat causes cancer.




High red meat consumption is linked to an increased risk of bowel cancer, I believe (not sure whether they have totally teased apart the link with processed meat, which really ups the risk and I’m expecting a general row about the chemicals used in processing bacon at some point).

This article is just postulating a partial mechanism for that.  I don’t know about risk re: other cancers.


----------



## 8ball (Sep 7, 2019)

UnderAnOpenSky said:


> Cartoon in the guardian. Sadly can't see a way to paste it directly here.
> 
> Vegans! Why won't they leave us alone to consume the flesh of tortured animals in peace? | First Dog on the Moon



Feeling in a helpful mood (slight wonkiness at the bottom, but am posting from a phone).


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Sep 7, 2019)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Anyhoo, this weekend I'm off to the Vegan Campout where I'll be happy to rub shoulders with like minded folk for a change. Unfortunately it looks like it will be pissing down with rain, but I won't let that spoil the occasion.
> 
> https://www.vegancampout.co.uk/
> 
> /shamelessplug


Been there, done that, bought the t-shirts...


...and hung out with hordes of angry seething vegans.

Dipped in and out of the event over the weekend, unfortunately couldn't stay because we had to attend to my gravely ill mother-in-law, however, the turnout was FANTASTIC and it was very well organised imo. Met and chatted with loads of nice people, including the Hench Herbivore himself.  Akala was there on Saturday night but we didn't get to see him.


Vegan Campout Pics


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Sep 7, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


> I usually find Michel Klaper too annoying with his "no oil ever" mantra, but I'm glad I watched this - it starts with him explaining how his medical training was useless for the diseases that actually kill people - it must be agonising to spend 40 years watching patients slowly die and feeling helpless.
> 
> But he adds something here which I didn't know about - how the mythological sources of B12 are actually problematic and it will change how I take mine. (My levels always test OK due to fortified foods, but I've decided to start taking more.)
> Video set to just before B12 section.



He was at the campout last weekend. I saw him doing his walkabout with loads of people queuing up to talk to him. I didn't get to see his talk. 
With respect to the "no oil" thing. I don't really have a problem with that, oils are not really wholefoods, are super refined and are very easy to over consume. I would imagine that would be better to source fats from wholefoods wherever possible. I remember listening to a talk by Dr Jeff Novick a while back regarding the supposed benefits of the "Mediterranean Diet".



My B12 levels have also been fine without supplementation so far, but I have occasionally take a BetterYou mouth spray.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 7, 2019)

Sick food


----------



## Rivendelboy (Sep 7, 2019)

PaoloSanchez said:


> He was at the campout last weekend. I saw him doing his walkabout with loads of people queuing up to talk to him. I didn't get to see his talk.
> With respect to the "no oil" thing. I don't really have a problem with that, oils are not really wholefoods, are super refined and are very easy to over consume. I would imagine that would be better to source fats from wholefoods wherever possible. I remember listening to a talk by Dr Jeff Novick a while back regarding the supposed benefits of the "Mediterranean Diet".
> 
> 
> ...



I think I'ma listen to an actual cardiologist with proper medical training than..."jeff nelson".


----------



## gentlegreen (Sep 7, 2019)

I was just shown several violently anti-vegan French pieces based on that Oxford study .. then a truly vile millennial keto youtuber with 39k subscribers called Frank Tufano attacking Klaper (e.g. "he's 71 and looks 20 years older") and veganism along with all the coments. WTF is happening at the moment. ?

Manipulation : le “véganisme” s’inscrit dans le cadre des programmes d’abrutissement et de crétinisation des nouvelles générations

I haven't figured out who these particular people are.

There's a strong Luddite tradition in France - not only thinking you need meat several times a day, but obsessed with "bio" ("organic", anti-GM / glyphosate/ Monsanto). several mayors defying government and imposing draconian anti-pesticide rulings.
Life won't be all roses living there.


----------



## gentlegreen (Sep 7, 2019)

Rivendelboy said:


> I think I'ma listen to an actual cardiologist with proper medical training than..."jeff nelson".


Blimey he's apparently an anti-nut nut 

Additional Comments on more VegSource/Jeff Nelson anti- nut videos – April 2019

I just bought a shed-load of assorted nuts and have my eye on a new chestnut tree I discovered last week...


----------



## UnderAnOpenSky (Sep 7, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


> I was just shown several violently anti-vegan French pieces based on that Oxford study .. then a truly vile millennial keto youtuber with 39k subscribers called Frank Tufano attacking Klaper (e.g. "he's 71 and looks 20 years older") and veganism along with all the coments. WTF is happening at the moment. ?
> 
> Manipulation : le “véganisme” s’inscrit dans le cadre des programmes d’abrutissement et de crétinisation des nouvelles générations
> 
> ...





gentlegreen said:


> I was just shown several violently anti-vegan French pieces based on that Oxford study .. then a truly vile millennial keto youtuber with 39k subscribers called Frank Tufano attacking Klaper (e.g. "he's 71 and looks 20 years older") and veganism along with all the coments. WTF is happening at the moment. ?
> 
> Manipulation : le “véganisme” s’inscrit dans le cadre des programmes d’abrutissement et de crétinisation des nouvelles générations
> 
> ...



Couldn't think why a country that has loads of small farmers and steeped in rich tradition could be against huge corporations having more control of their agricultural system.


----------



## gentlegreen (Sep 7, 2019)

The mayors want to stop small farmers using glyphosate.
And blanket banning of GM tech hurts everyone.
There are nutters out there trying to wind the clock back to pre- Borlaugh times.
I don't know enough to say whether it's large or small Breton pig units that are causing the massive green algae  problems.


----------



## UnderAnOpenSky (Sep 7, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


> The mayors want to stop small farmers using glyphosate.
> And blanket banning of GM tech hurts everyone.
> There are nutters out there trying to wind the clock back to pre- Borlaugh times.
> I don't know enough to say whether it's large or small Breton pig units that are causing the massive green algae  problems.



If that's what the local populations want then fair play to them... 

There's a whole lot that is fucked up with the current food system. I'm not anti GM per say, but I dont want to hand more power to the likes of Monsanto or see continued degradation of our soils or the effect huge mono cultures has on our natural environment.


----------



## Saul Goodman (Sep 7, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


> The mayors want to stop small farmers using glyphosate.
> And blanket banning of GM tech hurts everyone.
> There are nutters out there trying to wind the clock back to pre- Borlaugh times.
> I don't know enough to say whether it's large or small Breton pig units that are causing the massive green algae  problems.


as UnderAnOpenSky said, it's their decision, and fair play to them for sticking to their guns. It'll either put them out of business or it won't but either way it surely can't be seen as a bad thing,


----------



## gentlegreen (Sep 7, 2019)

Purchase of particular seeds or chemicals is not compulsory farmers choose to do so because they work.


----------



## UnderAnOpenSky (Sep 7, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


> Purchase of particular seeds or chemicals is not compulsory farmers choose to do so because they work.



Well yes. For the profit motive. Taken to the extreme so does cutting down rain forrest.


----------



## gentlegreen (Sep 7, 2019)

Except these modern technologies are good for the environment.


----------



## UnderAnOpenSky (Sep 7, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


> Except these modern technologies are good for the environment.



Bollocks. They may be better then what went before but we are stripping soils of fertility and seeing a decreasing amount of wild life in our countryside.


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Sep 7, 2019)

Rivendelboy said:


> I think I'ma listen to an actual cardiologist with proper medical training than..."jeff nelson".


Actually it's Jeff Novick doing the presentation, but anyway thanks for that piece of information although it's not really any of my business who you listen to, but anyway there are a few of those "actual cardiologists" knocking around too...



...Dr Montgomery is in the same ball park as Dr Novick...but you can listen to whoever you want to. Whatever floats your boat.

I'd rather listen to folks who are more on the side and advocate for prevention (ie real health professionals and not sickness management professionals). Why wait until after the horse has already bolted?


----------



## PaoloSanchez (Sep 7, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


> I was just shown several violently anti-vegan French pieces based on that Oxford study .. then a truly vile millennial keto youtuber with 39k subscribers called Frank Tufano attacking Klaper (e.g. "he's 71 and looks 20 years older") and veganism along with all the coments. WTF is happening at the moment. ?


Yeah, it's not really a new phenomena, people love to attach themselves like a limpet to any story that they think gives veganism a bloody nose. The BBC website usually has a half baked "headline story" knocking knocking some aspect of veganism every 2 to 3 months. 

As for Mr Tufano. I'd put him in the same ball park as Sv3rige. They are both rabid anti vegan activists. Here is the caveman doing his Fred Flinstone impression and gatecrashing an AV gathering.  Paul did lose his shit a bit and became the mythical "angry vegan" when confronted with this level of stupid...


----------



## Saul Goodman (Sep 7, 2019)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Yeah, it's not really a new phenomena, people love to attach themselves like a limpet to any story that they think gives veganism a bloody nose. The BBC website usually has a half baked "headline story" knocking knocking some aspect of veganism every 2 to 3 months.
> 
> As for Mr Tufano. I'd put him in the same ball park as Sv3rige. They are both rabid anti vegan activists. Here is the caveman doing his Fred Flinstone impression and gatecrashing an AV gathering.  Paul did lose his shit a bit and became the mythical "angry vegan" when confronted with this level of stupid...



What percentage of meat eaters do you think are anti-vegan? Conversely, what percentage of vegans do you think are anti-meat-eater?


----------



## Rivendelboy (Sep 8, 2019)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Actually it's Jeff Novick doing the presentation, but anyway thanks for that piece of information although it's not really any of my business who you listen to, but anyway there are a few of those "actual cardiologists" knocking around too...
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Why indeed.


----------



## Rivendelboy (Sep 8, 2019)

PaoloSanchez said:


> Yeah, it's not really a new phenomena, people love to attach themselves like a limpet to any story that they think gives veganism a bloody nose. The BBC website usually has a half baked "headline story" knocking knocking some aspect of veganism every 2 to 3 months.
> 
> As for Mr Tufano. I'd put him in the same ball park as Sv3rige. They are both rabid anti vegan activists. Here is the caveman doing his Fred Flinstone impression and gatecrashing an AV gathering.  Paul did lose his shit a bit and became the mythical "angry vegan" when confronted with this level of stupid...



If you think Tufano, even dressed up like a caveman, is remotely akin to a dmonstrable lunatic like Sv3rige then you have no objectivity. The first source cited on that link is from Cowspiracy. Not remotely credible. That film is pure vegan propaganda. It's also edited; the vegan guy makes poor arguments that jump cut when he flounders. His attitude is dreadful and he argues fallaciously

I'm by no mean's Frank's biggest fans and have criticised some of his views publicly (by which i mean on forums that he has responded to). However he at least tries to cite credible sources (watch his videos) and has done research. I don't eat his diet, I'm not convinced by it, but your claim is spurious and this is fairly obviously a hit piece. In no way does he attack people. He has videos where he criticises vegan diets and epople who, at the risk of their own health, advocate it, as well as utter morons like 'Vegangains', a popular youtube vegan body builder who has some dreadful views.

I don't think dressing up like fred flintstone is any worse than the vegan guy at the start of the clip with his aggressive attitude, or any of the other violently unpleasant vegan activists, or misinformed clowns who, like for example, Earthling Ed. He argues against the supposed environmental impact of meat while _jetting around the world _to do street activism in places like America. Who's funding that?

IME vegans are way more aggressive and overbearing than their opponents, on balance.


----------



## gentlegreen (Sep 8, 2019)

Rivendelboy said:


> I'm by no mean's Frank's biggest fans and have criticised some of his views publicly (by which i mean on forums that he has responded to). However he at least tries to cite credible sources (watch his videos) and has done research. I don't eat his diet, I'm not convinced by it, but your claim is spurious and this is fairly obviously a hit piece. In no way does he attack people. He has videos where he criticises vegan diets and epople who, at the risk of their own health, advocate it, as well as utter morons like 'Vegangains', a popular youtube vegan body builder who has some dreadful views.



 suppose it could be purely accidental that Klaper's video was washed out, but comments on that video (no way was I going to actually WATCH it) obsessed about him looking older than his age.
Tufano looks distinctly peaky to me ...


----------



## Artaxerxes (Sep 8, 2019)

Olive oil is fantastic.


----------



## Rivendelboy (Sep 8, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


> suppose it could be purely accidental that Klaper's video was washed out, but comments on that video (no way was I going to actually WATCH it) obsessed about him looking older than his age.
> Tufano looks distinctly peaky to me ...
> 
> View attachment 183581


I have no idea what you're talking about here or why Tufano's appearance is relevant.


----------



## Rivendelboy (Sep 8, 2019)

If I eat a burger, but don't intend to kill a cow, does that justify it morally?


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 8, 2019)

Would suggest anybody who wears fancy dress to protest a vegan gathering is a dickhead. Life's short, find something worth bothering protesting or just spend time with loved ones or something


----------



## 8ball (Sep 8, 2019)

Saul Goodman said:


> What percentage of meat eaters do you think are anti-vegan? Conversely, what percentage of vegans do you think are anti-meat-eater?



It’s mostly just self-id culture wars bollocks that has seen a recent uptick in carnie extremists imo. 
The recent relative boom in the popularity of veganism provided something convenient to rail against.

Was talking about this yesterday with a friend who became vegan fairly recently.  Her boyfriend has been a vegan for 20 years and back then there were a lot of reasons to feel embattled, but she doesn’t at all. 

There are plenty of YouTube/Twitter brats and opportunists, but they’re pretty easy to ignore if you’re not into that.


----------



## gentlegreen (Sep 8, 2019)

Rivendelboy said:


> I have no idea what you're talking about here or why Tufano's appearance is relevant.


Tufano appears to be a sickly-looking young twat with an overblown opinion of his own expertise - which makes it ironic that he would accuse a 71 year old man of looking old - glancing at his videos, he seems to be somewhat obsessed about how others should look - so fair game I reckon.

I don't think even that man with no neck likes him much.


----------



## Rivendelboy (Sep 8, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


> Tufano appears to be a sickly-looking young twat with an overblown opinion of his own expertise - which makes it ironic that he would accuse a 71 year old man of looking old - glancing at his videos, he seems to be somewhat obsessed about how others should look - so fair game I reckon.
> 
> I don't think even that man with no neck likes him much.


How is any of this relevant? Your argumentation is as unpleasant and poor as that Bashir guy you linked to. If he had spoken to me like that preaching on the street i'd told him to go fuck himself.


----------



## gentlegreen (Sep 8, 2019)

Rivendelboy said:


> How is any of this relevant? Your argumentation is as unpleasant and poor as that Bashir guy you linked to. If he had spoken to me like that preaching on the street i'd told him to go fuck himself.


It wasn't me who linked that footage of the twat in his Fred Flintstone outfit.


----------



## Rivendelboy (Sep 8, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


> It wasn't me who linked that footage of the twat in his Fred Flintstone outfit.


You're arguing that Frank's appearance is relevant and you haven't explained why.


----------



## gentlegreen (Sep 8, 2019)




----------



## gentlegreen (Sep 8, 2019)

I wish I hadn't mentioned him now - plenty of idiots on the other side - like "Fully Raw Christina" et al. (and I only know about HER idiocy thanks to "Unnatural Vegan" - the only young vegan youtuber I used to subscribe to), but the keto/carnist "community" seems to have different motivations.


----------



## gentlegreen (Sep 8, 2019)

That French reference I posted earlier seems to be a conspiratard site - my Android phone is offering me such trash these days.


----------



## Rivendelboy (Sep 8, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


> View attachment 183588


You are trying argue that his critique of Klaper is invalid because, according to you, he's a "sickly-looking young twat". Tell me again how I'm missing the point. 

You haven't put forward an argument and are just getting defensive. Would you like to evidence your position, or shall i assume you haven't a fucking clue?

Tufano may enjoy wearing make up and have excessive vanity, but sickly looking? give me a break.


----------



## Rivendelboy (Sep 8, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


> I wish I hadn't mentioned him now - plenty of idiots on the other side - like "Fully Raw Christina" et al. (and I only know about HER idiocy thanks to "Unnatural Vegan" - the only young vegan youtuber I used to subscribe to), but the keto/carnist "community" seems to have different motivations.


There's no shame in being wrong, the problem with someone like Paul Bashir is that he's dishonest and aggressive and doesn't address points put to him. He also deflects from criticism. This is evident from the video he puts as his lead video on his own YT page. In the discussion with Tufano he namechecks Vegan Gains as if he's someone worth listening to. Vegan Gains is a vile bully who publicly was pleased his granddad died (he believed it was because he ate fat and meat) and has also publicly said babies should be killed. He is a psychopath, and I mention him because he is a popular figure in the (Youtube at least) vegan community. For further evidence of this community and it's utter unpleasantness, go to the discord server of a would be philosphper (and Sam Harris fanboy) called 'Ask Yourself'. The guy is a complete cunt as are his vile acolytes. All bullies.

Yes of course there are arseholes who advocate meat, including carnivore diet. But I have never encountered the same degree of organised shaming and emotional bullying, backed up only by appeals to emotion (edited factory farming footage). I don't want to deal with people liek that and I don't want to be people like that. Eat what you like, try and be a decent person. That's all.


----------



## Poot (Sep 8, 2019)

Rivendelboy said:


> If I eat a burger, but don't intend to kill a cow, does that justify it morally?


I think the cow would notice that it was missing.


----------



## Rivendelboy (Sep 8, 2019)

Poot said:


> I think the cow would notice that it was missing.


The common vegan argument is that it's ok when animals die in the production of food if that wasn't the intention. Eg, we harvest wheat, mice die in the field, but their deaths are 'accidental', the intent isn't to kill them but to produce the wheat.

My intention is to eat meat, not to kill cattle.

In both cases animal death is involved and unavoidable.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 8, 2019)

What do cows eat


----------



## Poot (Sep 8, 2019)

Rivendelboy said:


> The common vegan argument is that it's ok when animals die in the production of food if that wasn't the intention. Eg, we harvest wheat, mice die in the field, but their deaths are 'accidental', the intent isn't to kill them but to produce the wheat.
> 
> My intention is to eat meat, not to kill cattle.
> 
> In both cases animal death is involved and unavoidable.


So some dead field mice are like the massive global meat industry, are they? 

Fuck it, I've gone over this so many times I can't be bothered.


----------



## Rivendelboy (Sep 8, 2019)

Poot said:


> So some dead field mice are like the massive global meat industry, are they?
> 
> Fuck it, I've gone over this so many times I can't be bothered.


Ok then


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Sep 8, 2019)

Rivendelboy said:


> The common vegan argument is that it's ok when animals die in the production of food if that wasn't the intention. Eg, we harvest wheat, mice die in the field, but their deaths are 'accidental', the intent isn't to kill them but to produce the wheat.
> 
> My intention is to eat meat, not to kill cattle.
> 
> In both cases animal death is involved and unavoidable.



*Your* intention is not the relevant one though. The animal agriculture industry intends to kill the animals whereas the accidental deaths of field animals are, by definition, not intended by the crop agriculture industry.

When you buy meat you intend to support the intentional killing of animals whereas when you buy plants you intend to purchase a product that may have involved the death of field animals.


----------



## gentlegreen (Sep 15, 2019)

I was about to post about the prestigious group of (French-speaking) Belgian doctors who recently claimed a vegan diet needed constant medical intervention and possible legal action against parents, but this rebuttal beat me to it.



> "On May 16, the press relayed the opinion of the Royal Academy of Medicine of Belgium proscribing the vegan diet for children, adolescents, pregnant and lactating women, leaving to other categories of people the responsibility of this dietary regime and its consequences."
> 
> "The ARMB depends on the Wallonia Brussels Federation. Its Dutch-speaking counterpart, the Konijnklijke Academie voor Geneeskunde van België, has not delivered a joint opinion on the effects of veganism on health."



Google Translate

Non, un régime alimentaire végétalien ne présente pas de danger pour la santé - notre-planete.info

The French news feed on my phone is pretty horrific in terms of anti-veggie crap and woo - I already turned off "gylyphosate" and "Monsanto" as subjects.


----------



## Rivendelboy (Sep 15, 2019)

Poot said:


> So some dead field mice are like the massive global meat industry, are they?
> 
> Fuck it, I've gone over this so many times I can't be bothered.


Some eggs harvested from a chicken coup in the backyard aren't like the massive global meat industry either, so what?


----------



## Poot (Sep 15, 2019)

Rivendelboy said:


> Some eggs harvested from a chicken coup in the backyard aren't like the massive global meat industry either, so what?


No. That's right. Some eggs from some chickens aren't like the global meat industry. I have no idea what you're trying to argue here. But I'd enjoy watching a chicken coup.


----------



## gentlegreen (Sep 15, 2019)

Poot said:


> But I'd enjoy watching a chicken coup.


----------



## Rivendelboy (Sep 15, 2019)

Poot said:


> No. That's right. Some eggs from some chickens aren't like the global meat industry. I have no idea what you're trying to argue here. But I'd enjoy watching a chicken coup.


the same point as you.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 15, 2019)

Animal Farm 2: Commando Henrietta


----------



## Funky_monks (Sep 16, 2019)

The arable/fruit and veg farming industry does intentionally kill animals in their millions, though.

Will nobody think of the flea beetles?


----------



## gentlegreen (Sep 24, 2019)

Meanwhile in France at their version of DEFRA ...

A certain Jocylene Porcher bemoans that vegans are too matey with high tech industry in their quest for meat alternatives.

Not only does she have personal connections to the pork industry, her family name MEANS pig-keeper !

Végans et industriels : le pavé dans la mare d’une sociologue montpelliéraine


----------



## 8ball (Sep 24, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


> Meanwhile in France at their version of DEFRA ...
> 
> A certain Jocylene Porcher bemoans that vegans are too matey with high tech industry in their quest for meat alternatives.
> 
> ...



Seems to me (anecdotal - just my observations ) that most of these high-tech replacements are eaten by meat-eaters looking for the odd meat-free alternative, whereas vegans tend to eat completely different stuff day to day.

I got bought a vegan cookbook by a friend and the main thing was that lots of the ingredients are things I don’t tend to have in the house (not that it would be a massive hassle to get them in).


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 24, 2019)

Bad news for Tina Donkey-nonce


----------



## gentlegreen (Sep 24, 2019)

8ball said:


> Seems to me (anecdotal - just my observations ) that most of these high-tech replacements are eaten by meat-eaters looking for the odd meat-free alternative, whereas vegans tend to eat completely different stuff day to day.
> 
> I got bought a vegan cookbook by a friend and the main thing was that lots of the ingredients are things I don’t tend to have in the house (not that it would be a massive hassle to get them in).


Indeed.
My meals aren't even based around a savoury thing really these days - though it has to be said I'm needing to save 800kcals at the moment ...
In practice my meals are based around broccoli or sprouts - now *there's* something to really freak out a French viandiste....

Those realistic burgers look absolutely revolting to me - and in their attempt to emulate meat, they're compromising the benefits of plant-based food.


----------



## 8ball (Sep 24, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


> Indeed.
> My meals aren't even based around a savoury thing really these days - though it has to be said I'm needing to save 800kcals at the moment ...
> In practice my meals are based around broccoli or sprouts - now *there's* something to really freak out a French viandiste....
> 
> Those realistic burgers look absolutely revolting to me - and in their attempt to emulate meat, they're compromising the benefits of plant-based food.



Lots of nice umami things you can do that are vegan, mind.

I don’t really agree with the second part - they’re trying to add nutrients that actually emulate some of the benefits of meat, as opposed to trying to replace plant-based fare (which is obv something I think we generally need more of).

Those are things you can easily supplement, obv.  It’s just that I don’t think these things are aimed at vegans on the whole, aside from as the occasional treat for the occasional carno-nostalgist (which I think are a minority with vegans, especially those who have switched for moral reasons).


----------



## gentlegreen (Sep 26, 2019)

Several Francophone sites are claiming a new "gotcha" - shellaced lemons ...

Shellac - Wikipedia

La rondelle de citron, l’entorse surprenante (et méconnue) au régime vegan

Oh look - it's *Belgium* again. 

EDIT :-

Pourquoi les vegans feraient mieux d’éviter les céréales du petit déjeuner

Vitamin D from lanolin apparently...


----------



## UnderAnOpenSky (Sep 27, 2019)

Vegan 'traumatised for life' after being served pork sausage roll at Greggs | Metro News


----------



## 8ball (Sep 27, 2019)

UnderAnOpenSky said:


> Vegan 'traumatised for life' after being served pork sausage roll at Greggs | Metro News



The pig, of course, is the real victim in all of this.


----------



## Saul Goodman (Sep 27, 2019)

UnderAnOpenSky said:


> Vegan 'traumatised for life' after being served pork sausage roll at Greggs | Metro News


Vegan orders sausage roll and discovers it contains sausage


----------



## Rivendelboy (Sep 27, 2019)

Presumably she didn't _ask_ for a sausage roll.

Though she doesn't actually say this.

Presumably also her comment about being traumatised is intentionally hyperbolic.


----------



## Saul Goodman (Sep 28, 2019)

Rivendelboy said:


> Presumably she didn't _ask_ for a sausage roll.
> 
> Though she doesn't actually say this.
> 
> Presumably also her comment about being traumatised is intentionally hyperbolic.


She asked for a sausage roll.


----------



## andysays (Sep 28, 2019)

Saul Goodman said:


> She asked for a sausage roll.


The story is strangely uninformative on the issue of what she asked for.

But this does raise again the question of whether it's appropriate or sensible to call a vegetarian substitute a sausage roll, if only because of the possibility of mistakes occurring


----------



## Rivendelboy (Sep 28, 2019)

andysays said:


> The story is strangely uninformative on the issue of what she asked for.
> 
> But this does raise again the question of whether it's appropriate or sensible to call a vegetarian substitute a sausage roll, if only because of the possibility of mistakes occurring


Surely then you'd ask for a veggie sausage roll. When I used to eat their awful food I would go for a veggie sausage roll, mainly because the meat option tasted like satan himself had spewed out the meat after gargling with sulfur


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 28, 2019)

Should electric cars be called cars because they don't use petrol!!!


----------



## andysays (Sep 28, 2019)

Rivendelboy said:


> Surely then you'd ask for a veggie sausage roll. When I used to eat their awful food I would go for a veggie sausage roll, mainly because the meat option tasted like satan himself had spewed out the meat after gargling with sulfur


Possibly (we don't know because the article omits this detail) the woman *did* ask for a veggie sausage roll, but whoever served her misheard and *thought* she'd asked for a(n ordinary ie containing pork) sausage roll.


----------



## Rivendelboy (Sep 28, 2019)

andysays said:


> Possibly (we don't know because the article omits this detail) the woman *did* ask for a veggie sausage roll, but whoever served her misheard and *thought* she'd asked for a(n ordinary ie containing pork) sausage roll.


Well that's unfortunate and accidents happen. They offered her thirty quid compensation and she refused. That's her right, but I'm unclear why and what she feels she gains


----------



## 8ball (Sep 28, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Should electric cars be called cars because they don't use petrol!!!



Depends whether they’re being towed by a horse.


----------



## hash tag (Oct 8, 2019)

I gather that animal extinction have set up a fruit n veg market at Springfield.
"tofu never screams"


----------



## Rivendelboy (Oct 8, 2019)

hash tag said:


> I gather that animal extinction have set up a fruit n veg market at Springfield.
> "tofu never screams"


are they affiliated with XR?


----------



## hash tag (Oct 8, 2019)

I imagine so


----------



## Saul Goodman (Oct 8, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Should electric cars be called cars because they don't use petrol!!!


Yes.


----------



## gentlegreen (Oct 8, 2019)




----------



## Proper Tidy (Oct 8, 2019)

Saul Goodman said:


> Yes.


I agree and apply the same logic to sausages and burgers (although not those cauliflower wings somebody mentioned recently, too much that)


----------



## Saul Goodman (Oct 8, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> I agree and apply the same logic to sausages and burgers (although not those cauliflower wings somebody mentioned recently, too much that)


I actually agree. Meat doesn't have a monopoly on nouns. If you can have a beef burger, a chicken burger, a lamb burger, a steak burger, etc. Then you can have a burger containing non-meat products. Same applies to sausages.
It's very petty trying to claim exclusive use of these terms


----------



## 8ball (Oct 8, 2019)

Saul Goodman said:


> I actually agree. Meat doesn't have a monopoly on nouns. If you can have a beer burger, a chicken burger, a lamb burger, a steak burger, etc. Then you can have a burger containing non-meat products. Same applies to sausages.
> It's very petty trying to claim exclusive use of these terms



I guess if certain languages have semantics going on, I can see why there would be arguments in terms of trade rights etc., but when it comes to English it's very silly.

Also, "cauliflower wings" - lol!


----------



## Flavour (Oct 8, 2019)

Given that burger is short for hamburger and burg itself meaning town, burger just means townsman in German. In French it would be bourgeois. Ever think about that eh, you poncey "burger" eaters


----------



## Proper Tidy (Oct 8, 2019)

Flavour said:


> Given that burger is short for hamburger and burg itself meaning town, burger just means townsman in German. In French it would be bourgeois. Ever think about that eh, you poncey "burger" eaters


Surely eating a bourgeois(ie) is good though


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Oct 8, 2019)

8ball said:


> Also, "cauliflower wings" - lol!



Don't knock em till you try em.


----------



## 8ball (Oct 8, 2019)

Jeff Robinson said:


> Don't knock em till you try em.



They look perfectly nice, but "wings"?
Weren't the "I saw you coming" crowd flogging "cauliflower steak" not too long ago?


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Oct 8, 2019)

8ball said:


> They look perfectly nice, but "wings"?
> Weren't the "I saw you coming" crowd flogging "cauliflower steak" not too long ago?



They work surprisingly well as buffalo wings, you can even buy vegan raunch and blue cheese dressing to dunk them in.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Oct 8, 2019)

Still though, wings is pushing it a bit, nobody uses cauliflower to fly. They look tasty though


----------



## CNT36 (Oct 8, 2019)

Cauliflower "wings" are bloody handsome. Bit of sauce and there's little difference in taste. Cauliflower "steak" is worth avoiding though.


----------



## Artaxerxes (Oct 8, 2019)

I didn't get any popcorn with my last order of popcorn chicken neither


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Oct 8, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Still though, wings is pushing it a bit, nobody uses cauliflower to fly. They look tasty though



Then again, buffalo don’t have wings either


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Oct 9, 2019)

Jeff Robinson said:


> Don't knock em till you try em.



That looks really good.


----------



## mr steev (Oct 9, 2019)

Lupa said:


> That looks really good.



When done right they are lovely, a satisfying chewy texture with a bit of a crunch. When done badly they are not so great, squishy cauliflower covered in sauce


----------



## 8ball (Oct 9, 2019)

mr steev said:


> When done badly they are not so great, squishy cauliflower covered in sauce



Although that pretty much describes cauliflower cheese. 

I don't know whether there is a vegan cheese which makes good caulflower cheese tbf.


----------



## gentlegreen (Oct 22, 2019)

Somewhat annoyed by this sort of crap. Speaking as one who got obese and diabetic on a mostly vegan, mostly WFPB diet  - I certainly consider the vegan diet to be the most *moral* diet and it's potentially a very healthy diet.

The people who run this outfit are type 1 diabetics and serious athletes and live on a massively exotic / expensive largely raw fruit diet.

It's perpetuating the bollocks that all you need to do to fix diabetes is go WFPB.
"Caloric restriction" is taboo in these circles, but the person in these photos has clearly been eating fewer calories and has lost a heck of a lot of weight.

You will never see vegan nutritionists acknowledging the Newcastle study for diabetes control where they used a crash diet based on yucky dairy diet shakes.


----------



## 8ball (Oct 22, 2019)

Testimonial "evidence" with health stuff is a red flag imo, especially when someone is shilling a "cure".
I got diagnosed with peripheral neuropathy by a GP, which later got fixed by a chiropodist, weirdly enough.*

Not hard to see how a little less honesty and a lot more greed in such a case could be a good money maker.

* - Yes, this is technically testimonial "evidence", but only in that I didn't really have anything incurable.  I just happened to mention the numbness and intermittent burning to the chirpodist at the time. Tension in a tendon causing a nerve to be stretched, or something like that.


----------



## Rivendelboy (Oct 22, 2019)

Mastering Diabetes...sounds like a course in NLP ffs

you want a cure? Low carb will sort that out. If only the NHS would wake the fuck up instead of promoting this 5 a day rubbish.


----------



## 8ball (Oct 22, 2019)

Rivendelboy said:


> Mastering Diabetes...sounds like a course in NLP ffs
> 
> you want a cure? Low carb will sort that out. If only the NHS would wake the fuck up instead of promoting this 5 a day rubbish.



I just saw the bit about tea - maybe that’s what fixed me.  Though I still think it was really the chiropodist...


----------



## gentlegreen (Oct 22, 2019)

Rivendelboy said:


> Mastering Diabetes...sounds like a course in NLP ffs
> 
> you want a cure? Low carb will sort that out. If only the NHS would wake the fuck up instead of promoting this 5 a day rubbish.



The Newcastle study fixed type 2 by *caloric restriction and weight loss *- your choice if you want to eat small amounts of fat versus larger amounts of carbs.

veggies are bad now ?
"5 a day" ? One time I bothered to check I was on about 20 ...


----------



## existentialist (Oct 22, 2019)

.


----------



## gentlegreen (Oct 22, 2019)

8ball said:


> I just saw the bit about tea - maybe that’s what fixed me.  Though I still think it was really the chiropodist...


I'm guessing even that might not be her actual name, but I thought it better to mask her identity.
The reason I felt obliged to post it elsewhere is because on "mastering diabetes", comments are filtered to favour sycophants.
The site is heavily plugged in "Vegan Diabetics".
Personally I have so far failed to get my questions about my own condition answered ANYWHERE.


----------



## Rivendelboy (Oct 22, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


> The Newcastle study fixed type 2 by *caloric restriction and weight loss *- your choice if you want to eat small amounts of fat versus larger amounts of carbs.
> 
> veggies are bad now ?
> "5 a day" ? One time I bothered to check I was on about 20 ...



weight loss is a by product of a low carb diet. No real need to restrict calories (within reason). 

I didn't say veggies were bad. I said 5 a day is rubbish. It's a silly marketing tool. It's essentially vapid and unscientific. What you need are nutrients


----------



## gentlegreen (Oct 22, 2019)

Rivendelboy said:


> weight loss is a by product of a low carb diet. No real need to restrict calories (within reason).
> 
> I didn't say veggies were bad. I said 5 a day is rubbish. It's a silly marketing tool. It's essentially vapid and unscientific. What you need are nutrients


so fat doesn't make you heavier ?
 sounds just as bonkers as the "carbs don't make you fat" loons.

And "nutrients" is exactly my focus - and actually the MD people too - they're simply in weird denial that their patients are actually eating fewer calories.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Oct 22, 2019)

Actually, fat is necessary in your diet. Just not so much saturated fat.


----------



## SheilaNaGig (Oct 22, 2019)

Lupa said:


> Actually, fat is necessary in your diet. Just not so much saturated fat.



Unfortunately, it’s not that simple. Current thinking is that saturated fats are not necessarily bad for us.

Saturated Fat: Good or Bad?

ETA I’m not arguing against veganism here. Just wanting to point out that we still don’t have any definitive clarity on this issue.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Oct 23, 2019)

SheilaNaGig said:


> Unfortunately, it’s not that simple. Current thinking is that saturated fats are not necessarily bad for us.
> 
> Saturated Fat: Good or Bad?
> 
> ETA I’m not arguing against veganism here. Just wanting to point out that we still don’t have any definitive clarity on this issue.




I'm definitely eating more butter.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Oct 23, 2019)

Losing weight is calories out being more than calories in and talking about restricting one food group as the only way is bollocks. Sure it works for some people, won't work for others, stop being weird about food. Also carbs are fucking ace.


----------



## Poot (Oct 23, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Losing weight is calories out being more than calories in and talking about restricting one food group as the only way is bollocks. Sure it works for some people, won't work for others, stop being weird about food. Also carbs are fucking ace.


Innit. Depends how much exercise you do. I couldn't live without carbs.


----------



## 8ball (Oct 23, 2019)

Poot said:


> Innit. Depends how much exercise you do. I couldn't live without carbs.






			
				Every Personal Trainer Ever said:
			
		

> You can’t out-exercise a bad diet.



You get sick pretty quickly without *any* carbs, so no arguments re: the second part.


----------



## Poot (Oct 23, 2019)

That's kind of true but if you're mad keen on exercise you tailor your diet to that, and that includes shit loads of carbs sometimes.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Oct 23, 2019)

Poot said:


> I couldn't live without carbs.



I just wouldn't want to. Life is too short


----------



## 8ball (Oct 23, 2019)

Poot said:


> That's kind of true but if you're mad keen on exercise you tailor your diet to that, and that includes shit loads of carbs sometimes.



Sometimes.  Definitely for most endurance athletes.  When you need to use heaps of calories and also carry your food with you, you need to go low-weight:energy-dense.  Ever see those Arctic explorer types chewing on bars of butter as they go?

Carbs are also a mainstay of most “comfort foods”.  Which is part of why I end up eating way too much. 

Also, the reason most personal trainers say what they do is because the bulk of their clientele *aren’t* mad keen on exercise. 

But it holds true for most people with fairly sedentary Western lifestyles.


----------



## gentlegreen (Oct 23, 2019)

I realised recently that normal weight people who don't exercise might need to consciously pay attention to their protein intake because they don't eat so much food ...for myself, on top of a moderately active job, I burn 700kcals a day on the bike ... as it happens that's roughly the size of my caloric deficit judging by my rate of weight loss - but I already replaced rice in my evening meal with beans.


----------



## Rivendelboy (Oct 23, 2019)

8ball said:


> You get sick pretty quickly without *any* carbs, so no arguments re: the second part.


That's false. Carbs are completely non essential, is just that eating zero is not easy


----------



## Poot (Oct 23, 2019)

Rivendelboy said:


> That's false. Carbs are completely non essential, is just that eating zero is not easy


They are essential if you exercise.


----------



## gentlegreen (Oct 23, 2019)

Rivendelboy said:


> That's false. Carbs are completely non essential,


If you're marooned in the Arctic and all you have is blubber to eat, it might keep you alive, but you owe it to the people you share bathroom facilities with to eat normal food - and to yourself to allow a little joy into your diet.

Apparently athletes sometimes go low carb to optimise their fat metabolism for intermediate energy supply, but no way does Chris Froome fuel up on lard for a race.

One brilliant thing about carbs is how incredibly cheap they are.
Most successful cultures get the bulk of their calories from carbs (mostly grain).


----------



## SheilaNaGig (Oct 23, 2019)

Lupa said:


> I'm definitely eating more butter.



Butter is a really good source of butyric acid, which is a very good thing.


ETA
It looks very much like butyric acid is helpful for diabetics. And if auto-immune conditions are gut related or gut biome related (they often are) the butyric acid seems to be helpful there too.


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Oct 23, 2019)

SheilaNaGig said:


> Unfortunately, it’s not that simple. Current thinking is that saturated fats are not necessarily bad for us.
> 
> Saturated Fat: Good or Bad?
> 
> ETA I’m not arguing against veganism here. Just wanting to point out that we still don’t have any definitive clarity on this issue.



It's true that there isn't an absolute consensus on the link between saturated fat and cardiovascular disease (there rarely is in nutrition science) but there is still quite a lot of evidence suggesting a link. Furthermore there have been no studies to my knowledge that have claimed that swapping out saturated fat for unsaturated fat _increases_ the risk in heart disease. In light of this, it makes sense to err on the side of caution and to aim to consume fat from unsaturated sources rather than saturated sources, other things being equal.


----------



## 8ball (Oct 23, 2019)

Rivendelboy said:


> That's false. Carbs are completely non essential, is just that eating zero is not easy



I'm now wondering whether you know what carbs are. 

I looked up a few ZERO carb diets.  None of them are zero carb - I shouldn't have been surprised.


----------



## gentlegreen (Oct 23, 2019)

8ball said:


> I'm now wondering whether you know what carbs are.


He's gone down the keto rabbithole - one obscure paper that has fuelled a multimillion dollar diet industry for people who like eating lard and think "soy" turns men into social workers.


----------



## 8ball (Oct 23, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


> He's gone down the keto rabbithole - one obscure paper that has fuelled a multimillion dollar diet industry for people who like eating lard and think "soy" turns men into social workers.



To be clear, I was talking about *absolute* zero carbs.  Every "zero carb" thing I can find basically means severely restricted carbs.  Even then, you're basically kicking your body into a state which is really meant for no-food emergencies. So not good imo, but better than attempting absolute exclusion of carbs, which in reality is near impossible with anything resembling "food".

ps - I've read a few things suggesting lard isn't all that bad


----------



## SheilaNaGig (Oct 23, 2019)

Jeff Robinson said:


> It's true that there isn't an absolute consensus on the link between saturated fat and cardiovascular disease (there rarely is in nutrition science) but there is still quite a lot of evidence suggesting a link. Furthermore there have been no studies to my knowledge that have claimed that swapping out saturated fat for unsaturated fat _increases_ the risk in heart disease. In light of this, it makes sense to err on the side of caution and to aim to consume fat from unsaturated sources rather than saturated sources, other things being equal.



Did you look at the link?

It outlines some of the complexities of LDL and HDL and subsets of these, and how they interact and mitigate and ameliorate physiological loading. 

Whether or not any of this is specifically/definitively good/bad for CVD is so complicated as to be verging on opinion.

But we're starting to unpick some if the detail about how saturated fats behave in the body. That link gives some lay-person level information about some of the findings. And it looks like "bad" fats help us to process "good" fats.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Oct 23, 2019)

Rivendelboy said:


> That's false. Carbs are completely non essential, is just that eating zero is not easy



Oh gods not this shit again.


----------



## gentlegreen (Oct 23, 2019)

8ball said:


> To be clear, I was talking about *absolute* zero carbs.  Every "zero carb" thing I can find basically means severely restricted carbs.  Even then, you're basically kicking your body into a state which is really meant for no-food emergencies. So not good imo, but better than attempting absolute exclusion of carbs, which in reality is near impossible with anything resembling "food".
> 
> ps - I've read a few things suggesting lard isn't all that bad


Eating so _*few*_ carbs that the body is forced to power itself on weird fat metabolites rather than converting stored fat into carbs - which I assume requires freely-available blood glucose to power the process.
These loons pour coconut oil in their coffee - which is a hanging offence in itself.


----------



## 8ball (Oct 23, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


> These loons pour coconut oil in their coffee - which is a hanging offence in itself.



Doesn't it just float on the top?


----------



## Rivendelboy (Oct 23, 2019)

8ball said:


> I'm now wondering whether you know what carbs are.
> 
> I looked up a few ZERO carb diets.  None of them are zero carb - I shouldn't have been surprised.


I've no idea what you've looked up, why is that relevant?


----------



## Rivendelboy (Oct 23, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


> If you're marooned in the Arctic and all you have is blubber to eat, it might keep you alive, but you owe it to the people you share bathroom facilities with to eat normal food - and to yourself to allow a little joy into your diet.
> 
> Apparently athletes sometimes go low carb to optimise their fat metabolism for intermediate energy supply, but no way does Chris Froome fuel up on lard for a race.
> 
> ...


I haven't and don't advocate people eat zero carbs, I simply said that the claim people need carbs is false. They don't. If you find the idea of a low/zero carb joyless then don't eat one. Simple enough


----------



## Rivendelboy (Oct 23, 2019)

8ball said:


> I'm now wondering whether you know what carbs are.
> 
> I looked up a few ZERO carb diets.  None of them are zero carb - I shouldn't have been surprised.


That's just your own incredulity speaking about something you don't understand nor want to. That's on you. If you want to show evidence that carbs are essential then go for it


----------



## Rivendelboy (Oct 23, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


> He's gone down the keto rabbithole - one obscure paper that has fuelled a multimillion dollar diet industry for people who like eating lard and think "soy" turns men into social workers.


What paper is that?

If you'd paid attention instead of bloviating you'd know that I'd said many times that I think people who mock those who eat soy are wrong to do so. By all means continue parading your dishonesty



gentlegreen said:


> Eating so _*few*_ carbs that the body is forced to power itself on weird fat metabolites rather than converting stored fat into carbs - which I assume requires freely-available blood glucose to power the process.
> These loons pour coconut oil in their coffee - which is a hanging offence in itself.



Some do, some don't. It isn't required. I don't even drink coffee. 

You just don't understand what you're talking about and the more you try the stupider you look. What are 'weird fat metabolites'? What on earth are you whining about? How does the body convert stored fat into carbs? You don't need carbs you daft twat


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Oct 23, 2019)

SheilaNaGig said:


> Butter is a really good source of butyric acid, which is a very good thing.
> 
> 
> ETA
> It looks very much like butyric acid is helpful for diabetics. And if auto-immune conditions are gut related or gut biome related (they often are) the butyric acid seems to be helpful there too.



I'm glad to read that this is the case. I don't get on so well with alternatives like nut based or soy based.


----------



## gentlegreen (Oct 23, 2019)

Urban will be much more pleasant with him on ignore.
Isn't he due for another banning yet ?


----------



## Rivendelboy (Oct 23, 2019)

Oh fucking cry more you ignorant cunt


gentlegreen said:


> Urban will be much more pleasant with him on ignore.
> Isn't he due for another banning yet ?


----------



## 8ball (Oct 23, 2019)

Rivendelboy said:


> That's just your own incredulity speaking about something you don't understand nor want to. That's on you. If you want to show evidence that carbs are essential then go for it



Go on, give me an example of one day's worth of food with no carbs.  Whatever food you like.

At this stage I'm not sure you even know what that word means, despite your blustering.


----------



## Poot (Oct 23, 2019)

Anytime now probably.


----------



## Rivendelboy (Oct 23, 2019)

8ball said:


> Go on, give me an example of one day's worth of food with no carbs.  Whatever food you like.


Why? As I've repeatedly told you, I don't advocate it.

Try this if you're genuinely interested (you aren't): No-Carb Diet: Benefits, Downsides, and Foods List

found in three seconds of making an effort


----------



## 8ball (Oct 23, 2019)

Rivendelboy said:


> Why? As I've repeatedly told you, I don't advocate it.
> 
> Try this if you're genuinely interested (you aren't): No-Carb Diet: Benefits, Downsides, and Foods List
> 
> found in three seconds of making an effort



Found in three seconds of no effort by a moron.  
Now, taking it slowly, look at that food list.

How many have no carbs in?


----------



## gentlegreen (Oct 23, 2019)

Ketogenic diet - Wikipedia
Ketosis - Wikipedia



> *Adverse effects*
> The most common side effects of ketosis include headache, fatigue, dizziness, insomnia, difficulty in exercise tolerance, and constipation, and nausea especially in the first days and weeks after starting a ketogenic diet.[26] Breath may develop a sweet, fruity flavor due to production of acetone that is exhaled due to its high volatility.[6]
> 
> Most adverse effects of long-term ketosis reported are in children due to its longstanding acceptance as a treatment for pediatric epilepsy. These include compromised bone health, stunted growth, hyperlipidemia, and kidney stones.[28]



It doesn't fill me with enthusiasm ...


----------



## SpookyFrank (Oct 23, 2019)

8ball said:


> Go on, give me an example of one day's worth of food with no carbs.  Whatever food you like.
> 
> At this stage I'm not sure you even know what that word means, despite your blustering.



I already explained to his prior incarnation I'm not doing it again.


----------



## ElizabethofYork (Oct 23, 2019)

Rivendelboy said:


> Why? As I've repeatedly told you, I don't advocate it.
> 
> Try this if you're genuinely interested (you aren't): No-Carb Diet: Benefits, Downsides, and Foods List
> 
> found in three seconds of making an effort



That's a very low carb diet.  It's NOT no carb.

*"How to follow a no-carb diet*

Some online sources recommend keeping your net carb intake to 20–50 grams per day on a no-carb diet, but there are no specific macronutrient ranges or any set protocol.

Simply put, when you follow a no-carb diet, you avoid all high-carb foods."


----------



## 8ball (Oct 23, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


> It doesn't fill me with enthusiasm ...



Useful for a limited range of health problems.  Comes with its own range of health problems.
Even so, such diets are not "zero carb" (though they are very low).


----------



## Rivendelboy (Oct 23, 2019)

8ball said:


> Found in three seconds of no effort by a moron.
> Now, taking it slowly, look at that food list.
> 
> How many have no carbs in?


Again why are you asking me this?


----------



## Rivendelboy (Oct 23, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


> Ketogenic diet - Wikipedia
> Ketosis - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> ...


Those symptoms, which are not experienced by everyone (i didnt), are due to the body adjusting from a diet high in carbs to one low. They can be mitigated very easily if you'd bothered to read something other than wiki. 

But again if you don't want to eat keto..._don't_


----------



## Rivendelboy (Oct 23, 2019)

8ball said:


> Useful for a limited range of health problems.  Comes with its own range of health problems.
> Even so, such diets are not "zero carb" (though they are very low).


Please list those health problems


----------



## 8ball (Oct 23, 2019)

Rivendelboy said:


> Again why are you asking me this?



Because I said I had looked up some zero carb diets, and they are not zero carb, and you claimed I didn't know what I was talking about.
So I asked about the foods on a list you provided yourself.  Which ones have absolutely zero carbs?

It seems you have already had this conversation with SpookyFrank anyway - he knows a bit about biology if memory serves.


----------



## 8ball (Oct 23, 2019)

Rivendelboy said:


> Please list those health problems



Some are listed just a few posts up, ffs!!

Ok, for starters - compromised short term memory.


----------



## Rivendelboy (Oct 23, 2019)

8ball said:


> Because I said I had looked up some zero carb diets, and they are not zero carb, and you claimed I didn't know what I was talking about.
> So I asked about the foods on a list you provided yourself.  Which ones have absolutely zero carbs?
> 
> It seems you have already had this conversation with SpookyFrank anyway - he knows a bit about biology if memory serves.



I don't care what you have or haven't looked up since it has nothing to do with any position I hold. The claim was that carbs are essential.


----------



## Rivendelboy (Oct 23, 2019)

8ball said:


> Some are listed just a few posts up, ffs!!
> 
> Ok, for starters - compromised short term memory.


I already addressed those, just a few posts up.

A cursory reading on keto would have explained to you the adaptation process which, again, doesn't affect everyone and is only mentioned for the sake of full disclosure. If you were referring to something else then explain it


----------



## 8ball (Oct 23, 2019)

Rivendelboy said:


> I don't care what you have or haven't looked up since it has nothing to do with any position I hold. The claim was that carbs are essential.



Personally, I contested that with no carbs at all you would get sick pretty quickly. 
In the sense of side effects of your body being in a particular state, rather than the classic 'deficiency disease' (scurvy, rickets etc.).

I'd be interested in any decently detailed evidence involving someone's experience of a diet with zero carbs for an extended period.

As opposed to ones like this where the writer is still eating a lot of carbs, just cutting out bread, pasta and the usual stuff.  And then got kinda sick, but that's by the by.


* - going with the mathematical definition of the term


----------



## Rivendelboy (Oct 23, 2019)

8ball said:


> Personally, I contested that with no carbs at all you would get sick pretty quickly.
> In the sense of side effects of your body being in a particular state, rather than the classic 'deficiency disease' (scurvy, rickets etc.).
> 
> I'd be interested in any decently detailed evidence involving someone's experience of a diet with zero carbs for an extended period.
> ...


The most famous ones I'm aware of are Dr Shawn Baker and Amber o Hearn. If you're genuinely interested you can check them out. They are at the forefront of promoting it.


----------



## 8ball (Oct 23, 2019)

Rivendelboy said:


> The most famous ones I'm aware of are Dr Shawn Baker and Amber o Hearn. If you're genuinely interested you can check them out. They are at the forefront of promoting it.



Both of these people eat carbs, and promote diets with carbs in.
If you have any details at all of them trying to go totally carb-free, a link would be appreciated.

This might help.


----------



## Rivendelboy (Oct 23, 2019)

8ball said:


> Both of these people eat carbs, and promote diets with carbs in.
> If you have any details at all of them trying to go totally carb-free, a link would be appreciated.
> 
> This might help.


then i can't help you in your ridiculous gotcha attempt that doesn't address any of the claims this pertains to.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Oct 23, 2019)

Rivendelboy said:


> That's false. Carbs are completely non essential, is just that eating zero is not easy


Christ. Completely non essential says an internet loon with brittle bones and kidney stones. Fucks sake.


----------



## 8ball (Oct 23, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Christ. Completely non essential says an internet loon with brittle bones and kidney stones. Fucks sake.



You are shitting me, surely.

But anyway, small sample size.  I'm mostly interested in whether anyone has ever gone without ANY carbs for a fairly long time (6 months plus).  Referring to biochemical pathways only gets you so far.

The line between "essential" and "strongly advised" is kind of fuzzy, I'm mostly curious to see whether someone has seriously tried.


----------



## Rivendelboy (Oct 23, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Christ. Completely non essential says an internet loon with brittle bones and kidney stones. Fucks sake.


This is ridiculous, why would I have either of those things? Where Have I said I don't eat carbs? You're beyond stupid and clearly illiterate


----------



## Proper Tidy (Oct 23, 2019)

Rivendelboy said:


> This is ridiculous, why would I have either of those things?







Rivendelboy said:


> Carbs are completely non essential





Dickhead


----------



## Rivendelboy (Oct 23, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Dickhead


Cunt


----------



## Rivendelboy (Oct 23, 2019)

8ball said:


> You are shitting me, surely.
> 
> But anyway, small sample size.  I'm mostly interested in whether anyone has ever gone without ANY carbs for a fairly long time (6 months plus).  Referring to biochemical pathways only gets you so far.
> 
> The line between "essential" and "strongly advised" is kind of fuzzy, I'm mostly curious to see whether someone has seriously tried.


Go and do some research then. It's of no interest to me at all


----------



## Poot (Oct 23, 2019)

Rivendelboy said:


> Go and do some research then. It's of no interest to me at all


Yeah it sounded like you had no interest in it. That's why you didnt post about it at all.


----------



## 8ball (Oct 23, 2019)

Poot said:


> Yeah it sounded like you had no interest in it. That's why you didnt post about it at all.



Weirdsville.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Oct 23, 2019)

Please do not feed the trolls (carbs).


----------



## 8ball (Oct 23, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> Please do not feed the trolls (carbs).



Maybe the trolls just need some more carbs.


----------



## andysays (Oct 24, 2019)

Rivendelboy said:


> Please list those health problems


Causes you to be a serial banned returner on Urban and post a whole load of incoherent and nonsensical shit, at least in your case.


----------



## Orang Utan (Oct 25, 2019)

Good article here:
Why do people hate vegans?


----------



## 8ball (Oct 25, 2019)

Orang Utan said:


> Good article here:
> Why do people hate vegans?



It turns out vegan really is the new black.


----------



## Rivendelboy (Oct 25, 2019)

Orang Utan said:


> Good article here:
> Why do people hate vegans?


because their preaching is based on poor evidence and oftentimes hypocritical.

No one should be punched because of their diet though.

Unfortunately toxic masculinity has been conflated with diet. Hence the popularity of arseholes like Joe Rogan and professional conman Petersen and his disgstuing scumbag of a daughter. She's his manager, she claims she eats a beef only diet (which isn't =/=carnivore diet) and so he started promoting it. I don't for one second believe that's what they eat. She's a professional con artist. 

However that doesn't alter the evidence: animal nutrition is superior


----------



## 8ball (Oct 25, 2019)

Rivendelboy said:


> No one should be punched because of their diet though.



Pineapple on pizza.


----------



## 8ball (Oct 25, 2019)

Rivendelboy said:


> Unfortunately toxic masculinity has been conflated with diet. Hence the popularity of arseholes like Joe Rogan and professional conman Petersen and his disgstuing scumbag of a daughter. She's his manager, she claims she eats a beef only diet (which isn't =/=carnivore diet) and so he started promoting it. I don't for one second believe that's what they eat. She's a professional con artist.



Minor point of order
When you recover after having both your ankles replaced due to something diagnosed as rheumatoid arthritis, I can see how you'd get enthusiastic about the thing that caused the apparent change (though in reality I think it is nothing more than an extreme elimination diet).  This assumes the previous is true of course, I'd think it easy enough to find out whether Peterson's daughter was ever really ill.

Also, her father's review of the diet, ie. "I wouldn't wish it on anybody" could be interpreted as less than glowing.

A familial sensitivity to something common in a lot of American foodstuffs seems likely.

The weird toxic masculinity vs. veganism thing is undeniable - I'm just not sure it applies to that particular example.


----------



## Orang Utan (Oct 25, 2019)

Rivendelboy said:


> However that doesn't alter the evidence: animal nutrition is superior


But that's a meaningless statement


----------



## Proper Tidy (Oct 25, 2019)

8ball said:


> Pineapple on pizza.


Also cannibals


----------



## 8ball (Oct 25, 2019)

Orang Utan said:


> But that's a meaningless statement



It's certainly a statement that needs unpacking.


----------



## Rivendelboy (Oct 25, 2019)

8ball said:


> It's certainly a statement that needs unpacking.


complete proteins, better bioavailability, better sources of nutrients. Liver for example is very strong.


----------



## Orang Utan (Oct 25, 2019)

Rivendelboy said:


> complete proteins, better bioavailability, better sources of nutrients. Liver for example is very strong.


Vitamin C and others might be a problem


----------



## Poot (Oct 25, 2019)

Superior to what?


----------



## gentlegreen (Oct 25, 2019)

Orang Utan said:


> Vitamin C and others might be a problem


The meatheads counter that by suggesting they _*need *_less vitamin C ...
Of course the loss of the ability to synthesise it came from a time when mammals like us ate loads more fruit and green things ...

Can you eat too much liver? - Google Search


----------



## Rivendelboy (Oct 25, 2019)

Orang Utan said:


> Vitamin C and others might be a problem


Doens't appear to be. But then I don't advocate eating only meat. The zero carb/carnivore crowd argue that the lack of carbs means less vitamin c is required because of some shared pathway. That's the simplistic answer, I have no idea if it's true because it's not relevant to me. I don't know of any advocate of that diet who suffers a deficiency. If there are they are not coming forward so who knows.


----------



## 8ball (Oct 25, 2019)

Rivendelboy said:


> complete proteins, better bioavailability, better sources of nutrients. Liver for example is very strong.



That's of pretty limited usefulness unless you want to live on a severely restricted range of food.
The "complete protein" thing is especially iffy.


----------



## Rivendelboy (Oct 25, 2019)

8ball said:


> That's of pretty limited usefulness unless you want to live on a severely restricted range of food.
> The "complete protein" thing is especially iffy.


who is living on a severely restricted range of food?


----------



## Rivendelboy (Oct 25, 2019)

8ball said:


> That's of pretty limited usefulness unless you want to live on a severely restricted range of food.
> The "complete protein" thing is especially iffy.


It refers to the amino acid content


----------



## 8ball (Oct 25, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


> The meatheads counter that by suggesting they _*need *_less vitamin C ...
> Of course the loss of the ability to synthesise it came from a time when mammals like us ate loads more fruit and green things ...
> 
> Can you eat too much liver? - Google Search



Yes, I *think* it happened not that long after we diverged from the mammal branch that later diverged into cats and dogs.
"We" moved away from a carnivorous diet, and the mutation that broke our GLO gene became fixed <as in broken in the entire population> during a population bottleneck.

Quite tiresome that our bodies still do every part of the vitamin C synthesis process, except for the borked last step.


----------



## 8ball (Oct 25, 2019)

Rivendelboy said:


> It refers to the amino acid content



I know.  Biochem and genetics background.

The only "sort of issue" is that grains are low in one of the essential amino acids, and legumes are low in a different one (I'm going to test myself without Google and say grains are low in valine <might be lysine> and legumes are low in methionine - could be the wrong way round).  Some other veggie things like broccoli and hemp seed are good all-rounders. Broccoli is generally amazing in lots of ways - almost completely replaces the benefits of dairy just by itself.

But anyway, it's a really big part of the reason why almost every cuisine in the world has had dishes combining grains (including rice) and legumes.  Unless you are lifting a *lot* of weights, that combining of foods basically solves the issue.

edit: wasn't valine - was lysine - almost there. no references to cysteine will be accepted cos that's just methionine for people who like eggy farts


----------



## campanula (Oct 25, 2019)

Rivendelboy said:


> because their preaching is based on poor evidence and oftentimes hypocritical.



So what? It is fucking amazing to me, that such a furor is caused by people's eating choices. There is plenty to criticise in everyone's diet - absolutely none of us are truly ethical and all of us are enmeshed in far nastier and more damaging dietary 'choices' because the global food industry is brutal, unhealthy and wildly exploitative.  If we so much as eat a biscuit or buy an orange, we are shitting all over some oppressed labourer and greedily ignoring the deforestation caused by our western diets - veganism is just another fad - no worse than any of the other decadent food choices which we claim as some sort of right. Until we literally eat nothing out of season, only grown locally without massive industrial land wreckage, involving no cruelty or injustice to man or beasts, there are none of us in any position to lecture or moan about anyone else,here in the privileged (and utterly unfair and unsustainable) world of supermarket domination and cheap food. I will guarantee it - there is no-one here eating a diet which  allows them to occupy some moral high ground. Moreover, while food banks are increasing even here, (along with malnutrition - rickets ffs) in the globally developed north, it is repugnant to me to hear whining foodies of any stripe.


----------



## gentlegreen (Oct 25, 2019)

Personally I will continue to moan at privileged westerners who advocate living on almost nothing but grass-fed beef - for all the obvious reasons.


----------



## 8ball (Oct 25, 2019)

campanula said:


> So what? It is fucking amazing to me, that such a furor is caused by people's eating choices.



It's mostly not eating choices as such that puts people's noses out of joint in my experience (I had Facebook advertising a course in Edinburgh where I could be trained as a vegan preacher the other night - just amused me, but that's a small example the kind of Joey Carbstrongy stuff that makes people go 'oh ffs').  Happy to forward deets to anyone interested in the course.  They didn't come back on whether they would pay my train fare...

Then again the general 'philosophy' element that comes with veganism a lot of the time is sometimes also very relevant in my view.  I was reading about the history of veganism the other night and about how early concerns were very tied up with the mass industrialisation of food production which comes with an assortment of issues, and not entirely from an animal agriculture issue either.  Exactly the stuff you bring up in your post.

Basically, I have mixed feelings about the cultural elements of veganism.


----------



## Rivendelboy (Oct 25, 2019)

campanula said:


> So what? It is fucking amazing to me, that such a furor is caused by people's eating choices. There is plenty to criticise in everyone's diet - absolutely none of us are truly ethical and all of us are enmeshed in far nastier and more damaging dietary 'choices' because the global food industry is brutal, unhealthy and wildly exploitative.  If we so much as eat a biscuit or buy an orange, we are shitting all over some oppressed labourer and greedily ignoring the deforestation caused by our western diets - veganism is just another fad - no worse than any of the other decadent food choices which we claim as some sort of right. Until we literally eat nothing out of season, only grown locally without massive industrial land wreckage, involving no cruelty or injustice to man or beasts, there are none of us in any position to lecture or moan about anyone else,here in the privileged (and utterly unfair and unsustainable) world of supermarket domination and cheap food. I will guarantee it - there is no-one here eating a diet which  allows them to occupy some moral high ground. Moreover, while food banks are increasing even here, (along with malnutrition - rickets ffs) in the globally developed north, it is repugnant to me to hear whining foodies of any stripe.



If you're flying around the world like Earthling Ed preaching that cows will end civilisation through methane pollution then "so what" is a very pertinent question. 

If you're arguing what people should eat then you need to back it up when trying to influence public policy, liket he EAT Lancet report


----------



## Proper Tidy (Oct 25, 2019)

Rivendelboy said:


> complete proteins, better bioavailability, better sources of nutrients. Liver for example is very strong.


Wish you'd just get it done with and shag a cow and leave us be m8


----------



## Teaboy (Oct 25, 2019)

Why do people still interact with this waste of space cunt?


----------



## The39thStep (Oct 26, 2019)

anyone had these? Do they taste like the proper thing?


----------



## gentlegreen (Oct 26, 2019)

I saw a thing in a French paper earlier about a vegan chap who was mortified when he found the fake ham pizza he'd eaten wasn't ...

I swear I can taste the revolting things myself now - over 40 years since I last tasted them - yuck


----------



## T & P (Oct 26, 2019)

The39thStep said:


> anyone had these? Do they taste like the proper thing?


 No. But no.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Oct 26, 2019)

Presumably those vegan scratchings are just loads of salt and fat and probably taste pretty much like the pork version


----------



## gentlegreen (Oct 26, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Presumably those vegan scratchings are just loads of salt and fat and probably taste pretty much like the pork version


I vaguely remember from decades back there was a vegan product that was basically fake dripping ...


----------



## The39thStep (Oct 26, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Presumably those vegan scratchings are just loads of salt and fat and probably taste pretty much like the pork version



"Made with flash fried soya and seasoned with a unique spice mix". Presumably no hairs though


----------



## Monkeygrinder's Organ (Oct 26, 2019)

As long as they taste initially delicious but then increasingly wrong as you eat more then I'm in.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Oct 26, 2019)

When I was 13 we went to spain on holiday and my brother bought some shit fishing rod, a little one with a fixed plastic reel and line already attached for about £3, and we tried fishing off the near end of this pier thing using cheese, no bites after an hour. We went to shop for some european crisps because they are always better and my brother bought spanish pork scratchings by mistake, they were big lumpy things with hairs on, tasted rank. So we stuck one on as bait, chucked line in, sea by us went mental for a few seconds and my brother nearly got dragged in before shit rod went off never to be seen again. Anyway fish love pork scratchings


----------



## Proper Tidy (Oct 26, 2019)

Anyway in a pub I will always go scampi fries


----------



## campanula (Oct 26, 2019)

It's ironic that despite having almost unlimited choices, the general population are eating less healthily than they did back in the days of the 'National Loaf' and government orange juice. I think the motivations for choosing meat-free diets are entirely laudable...although not a choice I have made, it wouldn't be that awful if circumstances dictated a meat-free existence (although obviously, much depends on how these circumstances come into being). Veganism, as a choice, only impacted my life when my daughter announced she was going down that path. I admit I worried about my grand-daughter's diet since  my daughter was keen on the ethical aspects and it was popular in her social circle...but I know she didn't have any sort of committment to  the actual nutritional changes, especially for a milk,cheese and chicken loving 8 year old. Anyway, turned out to be expensive and hard work so she has gone back to being a not terribly good vegetarian. We can all live with that.
I think the sensible thing is to basically eat locally, seasonally and simply and be glad we have enough of it.


----------



## Artaxerxes (Oct 26, 2019)

campanula said:


> It's ironic that despite having almost unlimited choices, the general population are eating less healthily than they did back in the days of the 'National Loaf' and government orange juice. I think the motivations for choosing meat-free diets are entirely laudable...although not a choice I have made, it wouldn't be that awful if circumstances dictated a meat-free existence (although obviously, much depends on how these circumstances come into being). Veganism, as a choice, only impacted my life when my daughter announced she was going down that path. I admit I worried about my grand-daughter's diet since  my daughter was keen on the ethical aspects and it was popular in her social circle...but I know she didn't have any sort of committment to  the actual nutritional changes, especially for a milk,cheese and chicken loving 8 year old. Anyway, turned out to be expensive and hard work so she has gone back to being a not terribly good vegetarian. We can all live with that.
> I think the sensible thing is to basically eat locally, seasonally and simply and be glad we have enough of it.



The unlimited choice tends to actually surprisingly limited. Lots of processed crap full of sugar and salt.


----------



## UnderAnOpenSky (Oct 26, 2019)

Artaxerxes said:


> The unlimited choice tends to actually surprisingly limited. Lots of processed crap full of sugar and salt.



Yes, no and maybe. 

We've access to so many things in regular super markets if you don't mind cooking it.


----------



## campanula (Oct 26, 2019)

UnderAnOpenSky said:


> We've access to so many things in regular super markets if you don't mind cooking it.



Gods yes - I had never seen a courgette or an aubergine until I left home. The most wildly exotic foodstuff I could think of (as a child|) was pomegranate. You can stroll down the aisles and buy buckwheat and gram flour, wild rice, a million different cheeses (it was Cheddar, Cheshire and Kraft slices when I was a kid).


----------



## farmerbarleymow (Oct 26, 2019)

An interesting long read about the reactions vegans can cause (according to the article anyway).  One the things it argues is how veganism can be perceived the threaten peoples' identity and way of life. 

Why do people hate vegans?


----------



## Saul Goodman (Oct 27, 2019)

farmerbarleymow said:


> An interesting long read about the reactions vegans can cause (according to the article anyway).  One the things it argues is how veganism can be perceived the threaten peoples' identity and way of life.
> 
> Why do people hate vegans?


People don't generally hate vegans. They just hate the preachy fucks.


----------



## krtek a houby (Oct 27, 2019)

Have to say, out of all the vegans and vegetarians I've actually met, none of them are preachy. I did hear someone say last night that they didn't deserve to live, mind


----------



## gentlegreen (Oct 27, 2019)

I no longer consider myself vegan - or even vegetarian, but it's how I eat most of the time - i.e. I rely on my vegan nutrition being correct.

I adopted a vegan diet in the early 80s - initially for moral reasons, but also partly because I really didn't know how to eat, and the food I was being introduced to was yummy and interesting, and environmentally-conscious, and it soon meant I was eating more healthily than most people - something I always took for granted - and for which I am massively grateful all these years later - though I never actually did enough research in those pre-internet days.

Nearly 40 years later as I wrestle my way back to full health after over-indulging sufficiently over the past 15 to develop an actual quantifiable health issue - and thinking up some sort of diet plan for the next phase of my life, I find myself wondering if something hasn't gone awry.

Of course there have always been vegans who go in the opposite direction - starving for the cause, plus the dozens of people on social media with obvious eating disorders plugging raw-foodism, but I've recently fallen-out with people for questioning their raving about being able to get vegan fast food so easily.


----------



## Rivendelboy (Oct 27, 2019)

The39thStep said:


> "Made with flash fried soya and seasoned with a unique spice mix". Presumably no hairs though


The best part


----------



## Rivendelboy (Oct 27, 2019)

krtek a houby said:


> Have to say, out of all the vegans and vegetarians I've actually met, none of them are preachy. I did hear someone say last night that they didn't deserve to live, mind


I don't doubt there are vegans who aren't preachy. But i've not met any which is a shame because common ground could help campaign against what both 'sides' agree: end abusive industrial farming. 

People that say vegans don't deserve to live are just fucking idiots.


----------



## Poot (Oct 27, 2019)

Rivendelboy said:


> I don't doubt there are vegans who aren't preachy. But i've not met any which is a shame because common ground could help campaign against what both 'sides' agree: end abusive industrial farming.
> 
> People that say vegans don't deserve to live are just fucking idiots.



You're doing that us and them thing again. Even though you put quote marks around 'sides' doesn't alter that.


----------



## krtek a houby (Oct 27, 2019)

Rivendelboy said:


> I don't doubt there are vegans who aren't preachy. But i've not met any which is a shame because common ground could help campaign against what both 'sides' agree: end abusive industrial farming.
> 
> People that say vegans don't deserve to live are just fucking idiots.



It was one of those moments where it was said as a joke, but one of those jokes where you have the suspicion that they half mean it.


----------



## 8ball (Oct 27, 2019)

krtek a houby said:


> It was one of those moments where it was said as a joke, but one of those jokes where you have the suspicion that they half mean it.



Other groups that don’t deserve to live going by recent offline conversations:  cyclists, traffic wardens, people who frequent nail bars, anti-vaxxers, anyone who has had anything whatsoever to do with trying to organise Brexit, XR (new entrant but currently in the top spot), and a particular department at my work.

Organised lynch mobs have yet to emerge, funnily enough.


----------



## 8ball (Oct 27, 2019)

Poot said:


> You're doing that us and them thing again. Even though you put quote marks around 'sides' doesn't alter that.



I think talking about ‘sides’ is fair enough, just not if you try to lump *everyone* into the set.

For example, I think it would be valid to put, say, Joey Carbstrong and his fans on the opposite side to the guy who follows him around chewing on a dead pig’s head.

I also think it would be valid to take both of these people (and their fans), and place them on one a side together, with sane people on the other one.


----------



## existentialist (Oct 27, 2019)

Rivendelboy said:


> I don't doubt there are vegans who aren't preachy. But i've not met any which is a shame because common ground could help campaign against what both 'sides' agree: end abusive industrial farming.
> 
> People that say vegans don't deserve to live are just fucking idiots.


The problem is that the preachy ones tend to stick in our minds more. I know a few people who lead vegan lifestyles (for various reasons), but who don't make any particular point of mentioning it. And I know some who do consider it their mission to spread understanding, but who manage to do so without being hectoring or intolerant. And I know some vegans who are cunts about it. They're in the minority, but they are definitely the ones who make themselves most noticeable (and memorable ).

And, actually, as a vegetarian, one of the things that really tits me off is the assumption, because I'm veggie (and need to identify as such sometimes) that I am somehow trying to "convert" others. Because I couldn't really give that much of a damn what other people eat, mostly.


----------



## grit (Oct 28, 2019)

UnderAnOpenSky said:


> Yes, no and maybe.
> 
> We've access to so many things in regular super markets if you don't mind cooking it.



precisely, there is plenty of choice just a severe lack of education around nutrition and cooking well.


----------



## 8ball (Oct 28, 2019)

grit said:


> precisely, there is plenty of choice just a severe lack of education around nutrition and cooking well.



Is there really this lack of education, though?  There is certainly no lack of information (though the information is very 'noisy').
Where do you think this is most lacking (let's say your resources for making a change are limited so it has to be something simple)?


----------



## Saul Goodman (Oct 28, 2019)

8ball said:


> Is there really this lack of education, though?  There is certainly no lack of information (though the information is very 'noisy').
> Where do you think this is most lacking (let's say your resources for making a change are limited so it has to be something simple)?


I think the problem is that too many people would rather be instagramming photos of their pie and chips to their friends than learning how to cook.


----------



## 8ball (Oct 28, 2019)

Saul Goodman said:


> I think the problem is that too many people would rather be instagramming photos of their pie and chips to their friends than learning how to cook.



So long as it's a real pie and not a casserole with the little pastry hat, I have few qualms with that.


----------



## Saul Goodman (Oct 28, 2019)

8ball said:


> So long as it's a real pie and not a casserole with the little pastet hat, I have few qualms with that.


It was a vegan steak pie.


----------



## Rivendelboy (Oct 28, 2019)

8ball said:


> Is there really this lack of education, though?  There is certainly no lack of information (though the information is very 'noisy').
> Where do you think this is most lacking (let's say your resources for making a change are limited so it has to be something simple)?


there's certainly a lack of quality information and an insistence on outdated wisdom


----------



## 8ball (Oct 28, 2019)

Saul Goodman said:


> It was a vegan steak pie.



But was it a REAL vegan steak pie?


----------



## 8ball (Oct 28, 2019)

Rivendelboy said:


> there's certainly a lack of quality information and an insistence on outdated wisdom



If you type "how to learn to cook" into Google, there seem to be some quite decent results near the top of the 579,000,000 results returned.


----------



## Saul Goodman (Oct 28, 2019)

8ball said:


> If you type "how to learn to cook" into Google, there seem to be some quite decent results near the top of the 579,000,000 results returned.


That's fine if you want to learn how to cook but people don't want to learn how to cook. I'm sure there are plenty of people who fondly recall that cooking is something their grandmother used to do.


----------



## 8ball (Oct 28, 2019)

Saul Goodman said:


> That's fine if you want to learn how to cook but people don't want to learn how to cook. I'm sure there are plenty of people who fondly recall that cooking is something their grandmother used to do.



Indeed.  Got to wonder how much of that is ‘lack of education’ and how much relates to other influences.


----------



## Rivendelboy (Oct 28, 2019)

8ball said:


> If you type "how to learn to cook" into Google, there seem to be some quite decent results near the top of the 579,000,000 results returned.



I was referring to nutrition, not just how to cook food


----------



## Saul Goodman (Oct 28, 2019)

8ball said:


> Indeed.  Got to wonder how much of that is ‘lack of education’ and how much relates to other influences.


It's lack of education insofar as they're too busy tweeting and instagramming to spend a few minutes educating themselves on how to cook. Too many people would prefer to throw a tray of processed shite into the microwave than miss this week's thrilling episode of Love Island.


----------



## farmerbarleymow (Oct 28, 2019)

existentialist said:


> And, actually, as a vegetarian, one of the things that really tits me off is the assumption, because I'm veggie (and need to identify as such sometimes) that I am somehow trying to "convert" others. Because I couldn't really give that much of a damn what other people eat, mostly.


Sounds similar to gay people accused of 'shoving it down peoples' throats' by being open about being gay.  Basic intolerance of difference.


----------



## gentlegreen (Oct 28, 2019)

What is this "cooking" of which you speak ?


----------



## 8ball (Oct 28, 2019)

Rivendelboy said:


> I was referring to nutrition, not just how to cook food



That’s easier to find than the cooking bit, surely?


----------



## Proper Tidy (Oct 28, 2019)

If it's not judging people for what they eat it's getting judgey over how they prepare it. Going to get half a dozen rustler QPs on way home out of spite now


----------



## 8ball (Oct 28, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> If it's not judging people for what they eat it's getting judgey over how they prepare it. Going to get half a dozen rustler QPs on way home out of spite now



If it’s not that it’s judging people for judging people for their lack of cooking skills.  Or their lack of inclination to cook.

  Whoever “they” are.


----------



## UnderAnOpenSky (Oct 28, 2019)

8ball said:


> That’s easier to find than the cooking bit, surely?



Well you'll find something I'm sure. In amungst the weirdos who sell clean eating, keto, Paleo and what ever else is doing the rounds this week.


----------



## 8ball (Oct 28, 2019)

UnderAnOpenSky said:


> Well you'll find something I'm sure. In amungst the weirdos who sell clean eating, keto, Paleo and what ever else is doing the rounds this week.



Yeah, the issue is the amount of crap information, not the availability of information as such.

Personally, I'd tweak the average of the 'standard' advice and nudge it to a bit more pulses and nuts (more protein in general really), and a warning away from refined carbs except on special occasions.  That's just my opinion, obv.


----------



## Rivendelboy (Oct 28, 2019)

8ball said:


> That’s easier to find than the cooking bit, surely?




Proper nutrition advice isn't given out easily at all. There are still ideas that are out of date people cling to and the likes of the NHS peddle, still


----------



## Rivendelboy (Oct 28, 2019)

UnderAnOpenSky said:


> Well you'll find something I'm sure. In amungst the weirdos who sell clean eating, keto, Paleo and what ever else is doing the rounds this week.


Such bullshit


----------



## Rivendelboy (Oct 28, 2019)

8ball said:


> Yeah, the issue is the amount of crap information, not the availability of information as such.
> 
> Personally, I'd tweak the average of the 'standard' advice and nudge it to a bit more pulses and nuts (more protein in general really), and a warning away from refined carbs except on special occasions.  That's just my opinion, obv.


why would special occasions make refined carbs ok?


----------



## 8ball (Oct 28, 2019)

Rivendelboy said:


> Such bullshit



Indeed.  Heaps of it obscuring any useful messages.


----------



## UnderAnOpenSky (Oct 28, 2019)

Rivendelboy said:


> Such bullshit



And here comes one of them. If a diet is only fit for a privagled westener because of cost and that actually the earth couldn't support everyone switching to it, then that's the bullshit as far as I'm concerned.


----------



## Rivendelboy (Oct 28, 2019)

8ball said:


> Indeed.  Heaps of it obscuring any useful messages.


I asked you a question, can you answer it?


----------



## 8ball (Oct 28, 2019)

Rivendelboy said:


> I asked you a question, can you answer it?



Sorry, I thought it was some kind of satire.


----------



## UnderAnOpenSky (Oct 28, 2019)

I also think all these zealots seem to miss that humans are incredibly adaptable. I mean we've managed to colonise almost every ecological nich going and survive.


----------



## 8ball (Oct 28, 2019)

UnderAnOpenSky said:


> I also think all these zealots seem to miss that humans are incredibly adaptable. I mean we've managed to colonise almost every ecological nich going and survive.



I, for instance, live in an undersea volcanic vent, and subsist entirely on methane and hydrogen sulphide.


----------



## Rivendelboy (Oct 28, 2019)

8ball said:


> Sorry, I thought it was some kind of satire.


So you can't. Just say so then


----------



## gentlegreen (Oct 28, 2019)

UnderAnOpenSky said:


> survive.


but not necessarily flourish.


----------



## UnderAnOpenSky (Oct 28, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


> but not necessarily flourish.



Yeah. But probably not be keto or vegan either.


----------



## 8ball (Oct 28, 2019)

Rivendelboy said:


> So you can't. Just say so then



You have some weird addiction to having your arse handed to you, don't you? 
What do you actually get from it?


----------



## Orang Utan (Oct 28, 2019)

Rivendelboy said:


> why would special occasions make refined carbs ok?


Cos you're not eating them all the time?


----------



## 8ball (Oct 28, 2019)

Orang Utan said:


> Cos you're not eating them all the time?



You're no fun.


----------



## Rivendelboy (Oct 28, 2019)

Orang Utan said:


> Cos you're not eating them all the time?


refined carbs remain a problem regardless. That you don't understand why is really why you ought not be talking


----------



## Poot (Oct 28, 2019)

Come on everyone, surely you have better things to do than engage?


----------



## UnderAnOpenSky (Oct 28, 2019)

Rivendelboy said:


> refined carbs remain a problem regardless. That you don't understand why is really why you ought not be talking



How would you feed 7.7 billion people?


----------



## gentlegreen (Oct 28, 2019)

I suppose it depends what sort of physique you need / want.
For myself I aspire to dancer / cyclist / swimmer / kayaker / diver ...
I know people who are far more muscle-bound than I would ever remotely want to be - though I suspect it's way more about resistance training than necking protein shakes.
As I think I mentioned upthread, if you do a fair bit of aerobic exercise needing calories to fuel it, you probably don't need to focus much on protein-density, but I've made a change recently from grain to beans


----------



## 8ball (Oct 28, 2019)

UnderAnOpenSky said:


> How would you feed 7.7 billion people?



I wouldn't, but I believe Jesus could sort it with 1.8 million loaves and 720,000 fish

(miracles lose something once the numbers get really big)


----------



## UnderAnOpenSky (Oct 28, 2019)

8ball said:


> I wouldn't, but I believe Jesus could sort it with 1.8 million loaves and 720,000 fish



Refined carbs.


----------



## 8ball (Oct 28, 2019)

Rivendelboy said:


> refined carbs remain a problem regardless. That you don't understand why is really why you ought not be talking



Alcohol is also a problem, but it's not generally down to people who just overindulge a bit on Christmas Day.


----------



## 8ball (Oct 28, 2019)

UnderAnOpenSky said:


> Refined carbs.



Maybe they're different once Jesus has done his thing. 
Jesus wouldn't give people diabetes.


----------



## existentialist (Oct 28, 2019)

Rivendelboy said:


> why would special occasions make refined carbs ok?


Well, for one, "special" tends to indicate that it won't be routine.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Oct 28, 2019)

Refined carbs are the best food group, 100%


----------



## 8ball (Oct 28, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Refined carbs are the best food group, 100%



I really need to eat a lot less of them.


----------



## CNT36 (Oct 29, 2019)

8ball said:


> I, for instance, live in an undersea volcanic vent, and subsist entirely on methane and hydrogen sulphide.


It shows.


----------



## 8ball (Oct 30, 2019)

CNT36 said:


> It shows.



I only need to *look* at a hydrogen sulphide deposit and I put on five pounds.


----------



## Poot (Oct 30, 2019)

8ball's diet is much better than the paleo diet because it's even older. Goes back to when all this were a giant ball of gas and rocks and shit. 

But I think even he would agree that a casserole with a little pastry hat is not a pie.


----------



## gentlegreen (Nov 2, 2019)

Sign of the times.
A male colleague remarks on the visibility of the 12 kg I've lost and   younger male one says "so you've gone keto then ? " 
Perhaps it means I'm seen as a proper manly man ... 
I was quick to assure him that my diet is based around Brussels sprouts and beans .. (wish they'd actually been soy so I could have said so).
I will make it a minor challenge to find out if he's the third Peterson fanboi in the team - so far there's a 50yo one who thankfully isn't a Tory,  the first guy in this post is 40 and a rather unpleasantly screwed-up one (had to agree never to discuss politics at work) and this new guy is early 20s.....


----------



## not-bono-ever (Nov 13, 2019)

for some reason my boy sent this to me. Not sure where to put it, so here you go


----------



## UnderAnOpenSky (Nov 13, 2019)

not-bono-ever said:


> for some reason my boy sent this to me. Not sure where to put it, so here you go




Their food looks good tbf...


----------



## Artaxerxes (Nov 14, 2019)

not-bono-ever said:


> for some reason my boy sent this to me. Not sure where to put it, so here you go




Kill kids, imprison peoppe, not animals.

Do the right thing and go vegan today.


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Nov 14, 2019)

Artaxerxes said:


> Kill kids, imprison peoppe, not animals.
> 
> Do the right thing and go vegan today.



It’s a horrific appropriation of veganism in my opinion. Veganism was a movement founded by anti-war peace activists. The person who coined the term - Donald Watson - described the idea motivating it as opposition to the exploitation of all sentient life. The official vegan society definition states that it’s about avoiding exploitation and cruelty to animals. For me it’s always been about opposition to violence against the innocent. 

Humans are animals too. Humans are sentient beings too. To describe an army of occupation who bomb and terrorise civilians as ‘the most vegan army in the world’ is a perversion of the idea.


----------



## hash tag (Nov 26, 2019)

A woman cooks bacon in her vegan daughters home! I would have shown her the door TBF and I eat meat.

Vegan woman slams 'disrespectful' mum for frying bacon while staying in her home


----------



## Saul Goodman (Nov 26, 2019)

hash tag said:


> A woman cooks bacon in her vegan daughters home! I would have shown her the door TBF and I eat meat.
> 
> Vegan woman slams 'disrespectful' mum for frying bacon while staying in her home


I don't think she should have kicked her daughter out of her own home. A simple "fuck off" would suffice.

It sounds like a bullshit story, made up to rattle a few cages.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Nov 26, 2019)

hash tag said:


> A woman cooks bacon in her vegan daughters home! I would have shown her the door TBF and I eat meat.
> 
> Vegan woman slams 'disrespectful' mum for frying bacon while staying in her home




Ah now...
Has to be a wind up surely?


----------



## existentialist (Nov 26, 2019)

hash tag said:


> A woman cooks bacon in her vegan daughters home! I would have shown her the door TBF and I eat meat.
> 
> Vegan woman slams 'disrespectful' mum for frying bacon while staying in her home


Even as a vegetarian, I'd be pretty royally pissed off if someone showed me this kind of disrespect. Maybe it's somewhat ironic to admit, but if someone _asked_, I'd almost certainly not say "no", but it's pretty high-handed to do it without even the pretence of seeking permission.

Oh, and you don't "discover" someone's been frying bacon - the olfactory evidence is there for a good couple of hours afterwards. Not having to be around that smell is one of the little pleasures of having moved into a 100% vegetarian household


----------



## hash tag (Nov 26, 2019)

It's not just the smell though; it's all that meat in your pans and on your plates as well


----------



## Poot (Nov 26, 2019)

hash tag said:


> A woman cooks bacon in her vegan daughters home! I would have shown her the door TBF and I eat meat.
> 
> Vegan woman slams 'disrespectful' mum for frying bacon while staying in her home


It happened in Australia. Or maybe it didn't. Maybe it didn't happen at all. If there isn't a comment section fully angry shouty meat eaters, did it happen at all? Who knows.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Nov 26, 2019)

existentialist said:


> Even as a vegetarian, I'd be pretty royally pissed off if someone showed me this kind of disrespect. Maybe it's somewhat ironic to admit, but if someone _asked_, I'd almost certainly not say "no", but it's pretty high-handed to do it without even the pretence of seeking permission.
> 
> Oh, and you don't "discover" someone's been frying bacon - the olfactory evidence is there for a good couple of hours afterwards. Not having to be around that smell is one of the little pleasures of having moved into a 100% vegetarian household



If your mum was staying with you and happened not to be vegan and you had no meat no eggs no cheese nothing but your own food....would you stop her buying her own food and cooking it? 

I wouldnt. I'd feel she shouldnt have to ask my permission to cook her own meal. 

I guess everyone is different.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Nov 26, 2019)

hash tag said:


> It's not just the smell though; it's all that meat in your pans and on your plates as well



Wouldnt that all be eaten by the mum and then washed off pans and plates? 

Should her mum not eat what she wants because she is visiting?


----------



## existentialist (Nov 26, 2019)

hash tag said:


> It's not just the smell though; it's all that meat in your pans and on your plates as well


Well, TBF, the pans and plates can be washed; the smell is harder to get rid of.



Lupa said:


> If your mum was staying with you and happened not to be vegan and you had no meat no eggs no cheese nothing but your own food....would you stop her buying her own food and cooking it?
> 
> I wouldnt. I'd feel she shouldnt have to ask my permission to cook her own meal.
> 
> I guess everyone is different.


If my mother was staying in my home, then absolutely I'd expect her to do me the courtesy of respecting my dietary choices, especially since she deliberately and maliciously made quite a point of not doing so when I was a child (so, yeah, there's history ).

Actually, the problem would never arise, because I'd never have her to stay.

But it did arise when I was married, and I was in no position to complain or criticise. And there were certain food cooking smells which I really did find repulsive, not from any ideological basis, but simply because they were repellent. Fish was bad, and cheap'n'nasty bacon - oddly (or perhaps not), decent locally-produced bacon didn't seem to have the same effect on my nostrils (and appetite). I did get acclimatised to it, and I really, really notice it now when I encounter it, having got used to a house that doesn't smell of cooking meat ever. I've surprised myself slightly by becoming (quietly) quite militantly vegetarian - I think I'd have a real problem living with a meat eater again now.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Nov 26, 2019)

existentialist said:


> Well, TBF, the pans and plates can be washed; the smell is harder to get rid of.
> 
> 
> If my mother was staying in my home, then absolutely I'd expect her to do me the courtesy of respecting my dietary choices, especially since she deliberately and maliciously made quite a point of not doing so when I was a child (so, yeah, there's history ).
> ...




I see. 
I wouldnt have any issue with a vegan or vegetarian... but I would not be able to be with someone who told me not to eat food I enjoy... like cheese and eggs and meat. I'd find that hard going tbh.


----------



## 8ball (Nov 26, 2019)

hash tag said:


> A woman cooks bacon in her vegan daughters home!



Vegans are allowed to _smell_ bacon, though, aren't they?


----------



## existentialist (Nov 26, 2019)

Lupa said:


> I see.
> I wouldnt have any issue with a vegan or vegetarian... but I would not be able to be with someone who told me not to eat food I enjoy... like cheese and eggs and meat. I'd find that hard going tbh.


Then I am afraid that it must be all over between us


----------



## Detroit City (Nov 26, 2019)

I have never dated a girl who was vegetarian/vegan


----------



## Teaboy (Nov 26, 2019)

8ball said:


> Vegans are allowed to _smell_ bacon, though, aren't they?



My sister has been veg from an early age and most of the time vegan.  She doesn't have any great ethical issues around animal cruelty but she really struggles with everything around the cooking of meat.  The smell of cooking bacon to her is repulsive, its burning flesh.  Its just the way it is for some people.


----------



## existentialist (Nov 26, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> My sister has been veg from an early age and most of the time vegan.  She doesn't have any great ethical issues around animal cruelty but she really struggles with everything around the cooking of meat.  The smell of cooking bacon to her is repulsive, its burning flesh.  Its just the way it is for some people.


I don't find the smell of all meats cooking repulsive, but oily fish and bacon are definitely the worst offenders. Come to think of it, mince searing is pretty fucking disgusting to me, too. I don't _want_ to impose my dietary preferences on other people, but if I find the smell of those things cooking intolerable, then it isn't really a choice.

Actually, the worst ever is probably kidneys (don't those who eat them find that a house stinking of piss is a bit off-putting? ), and kippers.


----------



## existentialist (Nov 26, 2019)

Detroit City said:


> I have never dated a girl who was vegetarian/vegan


Neither have I


----------



## 8ball (Nov 26, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> My sister has been veg from an early age and most of the time vegan.  She doesn't have any great ethical issues around animal cruelty but she really struggles with everything around the cooking of meat.  The smell of cooking bacon to her is repulsive, its burning flesh.  Its just the way it is for some people.



When I eat rice I hear the screams of the paddy fields.
I just deal with it stoically.


----------



## Teaboy (Nov 26, 2019)

8ball said:


> When I eat rice I hear the screams of the paddy fields.
> I just deal with it stoically.



Given the exploitation of the workers in a lot of that industry you may be closer to the truth than you meant to be.


----------



## Orang Utan (Nov 26, 2019)

Lupa said:


> If your mum was staying with you and happened not to be vegan and you had no meat no eggs no cheese nothing but your own food....would you stop her buying her own food and cooking it?
> 
> I wouldnt. I'd feel she shouldnt have to ask my permission to cook her own meal.
> 
> I guess everyone is different.


Meat eaters can eat vegan food though, but not the other way round.


----------



## 8ball (Nov 26, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> Given the exploitation of the workers in a lot of that industry you may be closer to the truth than you meant to be.



Humans don't count, silly.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Nov 26, 2019)

existentialist said:


> Then I am afraid that it must be all over between us




Lol
..


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Nov 26, 2019)

Orang Utan said:


> Meat eaters can eat vegan food though, but not the other way round.



Yes but....its not always as nice as steak and chips or cheese parcels or bacon and cabbage. 
Maybe 2 kitchens are needed.


----------



## Orang Utan (Nov 26, 2019)

Lupa said:


> Yes but....its not always as nice as steak and chips or cheese parcels or bacon and cabbage.
> Maybe 2 kitchens are needed.


It depends on the food, if you're visiting, you don't need to eat meat while you're there. It would be good to have a healthier weekend. Even non-vegans should be eating vegetarian dishes a few days a week. You can't eat meat every day.


----------



## 8ball (Nov 26, 2019)

Orang Utan said:


> It depends on the food, if you're visiting, you don't need to eat meat while you're there. It would be good to have a healthier weekend. Even non-vegans should be eating vegetarian dishes a few days a week. You can't eat meat every day.



I find your use of 'vegan food' and 'vegetarian dishes' quite amusing.


----------



## Orang Utan (Nov 26, 2019)

8ball said:


> I find your use of 'vegan food' and 'vegetarian dishes' quite amusing.


Separate things of course


----------



## 8ball (Nov 26, 2019)

Orang Utan said:


> Separate things of course



Can be the same thing.


----------



## Orang Utan (Nov 26, 2019)

8ball said:


> Can be the same thing.


Aye  not sure why that needed pointing out


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Nov 26, 2019)

Orang Utan said:


> It depends on the food, if you're visiting, you don't need to eat meat while you're there. It would be good to have a healthier weekend. Even non-vegans should be eating vegetarian dishes a few days a week. You can't eat meat every day.



Yes but....it's surely their choice too? 
If a vegan visited me I would do my best to have vegan food for them as they are my guest.  I kind of would think that would be reciprocated if I visited them later.


----------



## Teaboy (Nov 26, 2019)

Orang Utan said:


> It depends on the food, if you're visiting, you don't need to eat meat while you're there. It would be good to have a healthier weekend. Even non-vegans should be eating vegetarian dishes a few days a week. You can't eat meat every day.



I think one of the problems is that traditional British food is pretty unimaginative (to put it politely).  So much is based around the concept of meat, potato and veg.  As a result veg isn't really elevated to something in its own right like it is with so many great cuisines round the world.


----------



## Orang Utan (Nov 26, 2019)

Lupa said:


> Yes but....it's surely their choice too?
> If a vegan visited me I would do my best to have vegan food for them as they are my guest.  I kind of would think that would be reciprocated if I visited them later.


. That's nuts.


----------



## Orang Utan (Nov 26, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> I think one of the problems is that traditional British food is pretty unimaginative (to put it politely).  So much is based around the concept of meat, potato and veg.  As a result veg isn't really elevated to something in its own right like it is with so many great cuisines round the world.


Exactly, meat eaters need to widen their palates a little bit


----------



## 8ball (Nov 26, 2019)

Orang Utan said:


> Aye



Also can be just filed under 'food'.
It's possibly the way I eat these days but I sometimes find I've had an unintentionally vegan day or whatever but it usually doesn't occur to me.
Though most of the time there will be a cup of tea at some point, so the cow's milk makes it non-vegan.

That said, I don't think my Dad would ever eat a full meal that didn't include meat.


----------



## Teaboy (Nov 26, 2019)

Lupa said:


> Yes but....it's surely their choice too?
> If a vegan visited me I would do my best to have vegan food for them as they are my guest.  I kind of would think that would be reciprocated if I visited them later.



Seems a bit strange.  Would you not back them to cook you a meal you really enjoyed regardless of the presence of meat?


----------



## existentialist (Nov 26, 2019)

Lupa said:


> Yes but....it's surely their choice too?
> If a vegan visited me I would do my best to have vegan food for them as they are my guest.  I kind of would think that would be reciprocated if I visited them later.


But vegan food isn't likely to be repulsive to you - meat could well be repulsive, even in the cooking of it, to a vegan/vegetarian.


----------



## JimW (Nov 26, 2019)

I don't cook meat but will put a bit in if I'm e.g. making noodles for me and the daughter and there's some cold cuts about or the like. Only vegan in the family, not bothered about sharing utensils, I trust my washing up and I'm not vegan for purity reasons.


----------



## Spymaster (Nov 26, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> As a result veg isn't really elevated to something in its own right like it is with so many great cuisines round the world.


You think? I can't think of any cuisines other than Indian in which vegatarian dishes are spectacularly abundant or revered.


----------



## 8ball (Nov 26, 2019)

existentialist said:


> But vegan food isn't likely to be repulsive to you...



Unless its that vegan "cheese".


----------



## 8ball (Nov 26, 2019)

Spymaster said:


> You think? I can't think of any cuisines other than Indian in which vegatarian dishes are spectacularly abundant or revered.



Ethiopian?

edit: or Lebanese?


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Nov 26, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> Seems a bit strange.  Would you not back them to cook you a meal you really enjoyed regardless of the presence of meat?



Sure. I'm very easy to please goid wise. But I would feel a bit weird if someone said I couldnt have cheese just cos I was their guest... say if I had my own with me..


----------



## Teaboy (Nov 26, 2019)

JimW said:


> I don't cook meat but will put a bit in if I'm e.g. making noodles for me and the daughter and there's some cold cuts about or the like. Only vegan in the family, not bothered about sharing utensils, I trust my washing up and I'm not vegan for purity reasons.



This is sort of where I'm at with my veg lifestyle.  I used to eat meat so not bothered if it turns up randomly and won't make a scene but would rather avoid and take steps to.  I do know however know its not the same for everyone and some people really struggle with it so seems polite to understand that.


----------



## JimW (Nov 26, 2019)

Spymaster said:


> You think? I can't think of any cuisines other than Indian in which vegatarian dishes are spectacularly abundant or revered.


There's a style of Chinese Buddhist cooking based on the old temple banquets given for fancy lay visitors but it's even more faking meat dishes than Linda Mccartney!


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Nov 26, 2019)

existentialist said:


> But vegan food isn't likely to be repulsive to you - meat could well be repulsive, even in the cooking of it, to a vegan/vegetarian.



Yes I get that buy they dont have to eat it...


----------



## Spymaster (Nov 26, 2019)

8ball said:


> Ethiopian?


Is it particularly known for it's veggie stuff then? I've only ever had Ethiopian meat dishes


----------



## Orang Utan (Nov 26, 2019)

8ball said:


> Ethiopian?


Also a lot of Middle Eastern food. In fact anywhere that's not Europe or North America.


----------



## JimW (Nov 26, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> This is sort of where I'm at with my veg lifestyle.  I used to eat meat so not bothered if it turns up randomly and won't make a scene but would rather avoid and take steps to.  I do know however know its not the same for everyone and some people really struggle with it so seems polite to understand that.


Yeah, I think after getting on for thirty years of vegan eating I'm comfortable one sniff of bacon grease won't do for me. Remembered I'll also heat meaty leftovers for others if required too. Standards have slipped


----------



## Orang Utan (Nov 26, 2019)

Spymaster said:


> Is it particularly known for it's veggie stuff then? I've only ever had Ethiopian meat dishes


East African cuisine has loads of lovely lentil dishes


----------



## Orang Utan (Nov 26, 2019)

Lupa said:


> Yes I get that buy they dont have to eat it...


But they would if served it if they were a guest at a vegan/vegetarian household. It would not be on to demand meat/cheese/eggs etc


----------



## 8ball (Nov 26, 2019)

Spymaster said:


> Is it particularly known for it's veggie stuff then? I've only ever had Ethiopian meat dishes



I'd say more than half of the dishes I've tried are vegetarian.


----------



## The39thStep (Nov 26, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> I think one of the problems is that traditional British food is pretty unimaginative (to put it politely).  So much is based around the concept of meat, potato and veg.  As a result veg isn't really elevated to something in its own right like it is with so many great cuisines round the world.


Depends on what you think traditional British food is .


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Nov 26, 2019)

Orang Utan said:


> Exactly, meat eaters need to widen their palates a little bit



Meat eaters eat more than meat you know. Like vegetablea and legumes and everything really. 
If I'm going for a meal at a restaurant with friends and one of my friends is vegan, I would feel really not ok if I was told that everyone at the table had to eat a vegan meal...because the vegan friend might not like the smell....but I very much doubt my vegan pals would expect me to do so ... or any of their friends who are not vegan.


----------



## JimW (Nov 26, 2019)

Orang Utan said:


> Also a lot of Middle Eastern food. In fact anywhere that's not Europe or North America.


I can always get a good meal at the Syrian and Palestinian restaurants in town but I think I'm mostly sticking side dishes together - suits me more than fine but maybe not their cuisine as such iyswim


----------



## Spymaster (Nov 26, 2019)

Orang Utan said:


> East African cuisine has loads of lovely lentil dishes


Sure, and there are some decent vegetarian dishes from many countries but with the exception of India I'm struggling to think of any national cuisine that fits Teaboy's suggestion.


----------



## The39thStep (Nov 26, 2019)

Orang Utan said:


> But they would if served it if they were a guest at a vegan/vegetarian household. It would not be on to demand meat/cheese/eggs etc


How do vegetarian or vegan chefs cope with employment ?


----------



## Poot (Nov 26, 2019)

I wouldn't be fussed if someone used my kitchen to cook meat (though I'm not thrilled about the smell) but an expectation that I will cook meat for guests always makes me grumpy. It did happen when we were on holiday in a caravan with my inlaws and the sensation of flipping meat on a grill reminded me of trying to get roadkill off the tarmac.


----------



## Teaboy (Nov 26, 2019)

Spymaster said:


> You think? I can't think of any cuisines other than Indian in which vegatarian dishes are spectacularly abundant or revered.



Eh?  The mezes of the eastern med have loads of veg only dishes where the vegetables are treated with love.  Northern Africa the same.  if you've ever had Italian banqueting food you'll know that many of the courses will be vegetable only dishes.  What about the middle East?  

I'm not saying these are predominately vegetarian cultures but they are cuisines that have fantastic vegetarian dishes not because of a veg or vegan thing (though sometimes it is) its just because the dish doesn't need meat.  Its just that in the UK (and Northern and Eastern Europe in general tbf) veg is so often something that is added to a dish as an afterthought rather than the dish being about the veg.  I think more meat eaters would eat more vege dishes if they knew how to make great veg only food, you only have to see the success of the vege street food vendors throughout London.


----------



## Orang Utan (Nov 26, 2019)

Lupa said:


> Meat eaters eat more than meat you know. Like vegetablea and legumes and everything really.
> If I'm going for a meal at a restaurant with friends and one of my friends is vegan, I would feel really not ok if I was told that everyone at the table had to eat a vegan meal...because the vegan friend might not like the smell....but I very much doubt my vegan pals would expect me to do so ... or any of their friends who are not vegan.


Wasn't talking about eating out, but if you were a guest at their house and they had made the food?
Though my Hare Krsna uncle once took me out to an expensive sushi restaurant and said we wouldn't be able to order sashimi. I was initially put out (though of course I didn't show it), but the food was so amazing, it was all good in the end


----------



## 8ball (Nov 26, 2019)

Orang Utan said:


> Also a lot of Middle Eastern food. In fact anywhere that's not Europe or North America.



Middle Eastern, I'd agree, but there are heaps of places round the world that are very meat-heavy.  Especially in colder regions.


----------



## Orang Utan (Nov 26, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> Eh?  The mezes of the eastern med have loads of veg only dishes where the vegetables are treated with love.  Northern Africa the same.  if you've ever had Italian banqueting food you'll know that many of the courses will be vegetable only dishes.  What about the middle East?
> 
> I'm not saying these are predominately vegetarian cultures but they are cuisines that have fantastic vegetarian dishes not because of a veg or vegan thing (though sometimes it is) its just because the dish doesn't need meat.  Its just that in the UK (and Northern and Eastern Europe in general tbf) veg is so often something that is added to a dish as an afterthought rather than the dish being about the veg.  I think more meat eaters would eat more vege dishes if they knew how to make great veg only food, you only have to see the success of the vege street food vendors throughout London.


Aye meat is expensive and goes off quickly, so of course there are a lot of veggie dishes all round the world.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Nov 26, 2019)

Orang Utan said:


> Wasn't talking about eating out, but if you were a guest at their house and they had made the food?
> Though my Hare Krsna uncle once took me out to an expensive sushi restaurant and said we wouldn't be able to order sashimi. I was initially put out (though of course I didn't show it), but the food was so amazing, it was all good in the end



Well...if I'm a guest at someone's house I eat whatever they offer me.


----------



## Orang Utan (Nov 26, 2019)

8ball said:


> Middle Eastern, I'd agree, but there are heaps of places round the world that are very meat-heavy.  Especially in colder regions.


Yes, Europe and North America


----------



## 8ball (Nov 26, 2019)

Orang Utan said:


> Yes, Europe and North America



Maybe this will help.


----------



## Spymaster (Nov 26, 2019)

8ball said:


> I'd say more than half of the dishes I've tried are vegetarian.


That's just what you're ordering though. I just took a quick look at the first 3 Ethiopian restaurant menus that came up on Tripadvisor and all have substantial meat sections.


----------



## Teaboy (Nov 26, 2019)

Lupa said:


> Sure. I'm very easy to please goid wise. But I would feel a bit weird if someone said I couldnt have cheese just cos I was their guest... say if I had my own with me..



Yes it would be.  Though it would be strange to turn up to a dinner party with a pocket full of cheese.  _Hi host, I don't like your food so I've brought my own..._


----------



## Poot (Nov 26, 2019)

Lupa said:


> Meat eaters eat more than meat you know. Like vegetablea and legumes and everything really.
> If I'm going for a meal at a restaurant with friends and one of my friends is vegan, I would feel really not ok if I was told that everyone at the table had to eat a vegan meal...because the vegan friend might not like the smell....but I very much doubt my vegan pals would expect me to do so ... or any of their friends who are not vegan.


I had dinner with a couple of colleagues recently and both ordered steak. One said, 'I'm terribly sorry. Do you mind if I order the steak?' before he ordered. Well. I nearly fell off my chair. Of course I don't mind at all but how lovely to be asked! It's never, ever happened before, nor would I expect it to but how polite!


----------



## Orang Utan (Nov 26, 2019)

The39thStep said:


> How do vegetarian or vegan chefs cope with employment ?


I dunno. Ask one. I'm sure there some who cook it professionally but don't eat it.


----------



## JimW (Nov 26, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> Eh?  The mezes of the eastern med have loads of veg only dishes where the vegetables are treated with love.  Northern Africa the same.  if you've ever had Italian banqueting food you'll know that many of the courses will be vegetable only dishes.  What about the middle East?
> 
> I'm not saying these are predominately vegetarian cultures but they are cuisines that have fantastic vegetarian dishes not because of a veg or vegan thing (though sometimes it is) its just because the dish doesn't need meat.  Its just that in the UK (and Northern and Eastern Europe in general tbf) veg is so often something that is added to a dish as an afterthought rather than the dish being about the veg.  I think more meat eaters would eat more vege dishes if they knew how to make great veg only food, you only have to see the success of the vege street food vendors throughout London.


Yes, that's true here too, there's all sorts of street food and trad dishes that have no meat so you can get a very good meal even right out in the sticks.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Nov 26, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> Yes it would be.  Though it would be strange to turn up to a dinner party with a pocket full of cheese.  _Hi host, I don't like your food so I've brought my own..._



I used always have cheese and crackers in the car...just in case


----------



## Orang Utan (Nov 26, 2019)

Spymaster said:


> Sure, and there are some decent vegetarian dishes from many countries but with the exception of India I'm struggling to think of any national cuisine that fits Teaboy's suggestion.


Lebanese, Eritrean are just two


----------



## Orang Utan (Nov 26, 2019)

Lupa said:


> I used always have cheese and crackers in the car...just in case


Jesus christ


----------



## JimW (Nov 26, 2019)

Lupa said:


> I used always have cheese and crackers in the car...just in case


Doesn't that clog up the fuel filter?


----------



## Teaboy (Nov 26, 2019)

The39thStep said:


> Depends on what you think traditional British food is .



Yes, fair point its not very good language.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Nov 26, 2019)

Orang Utan said:


> Jesus christ



What's wrong with what I said?
I have always some food in my car in case of emergencies.
Sometimes it's also a bar of chocolate and pack of figrolls.


----------



## 8ball (Nov 26, 2019)

Spymaster said:


> That's just what you're ordering though. I just took a quick look at the first 3 Ethiopian restaurant menus that came up on Tripadvisor and all have substantial meat sections.



Not sure what your point is - you'll also see substantial meat sections in most Lebanese restaurants.
The difference with some cuisines is that imo they're not a 'second fiddle' to the meat dishes.


----------



## 8ball (Nov 26, 2019)

Orang Utan said:


> Lebanese, Eritrean are just two



Oi!


----------



## 8ball (Nov 26, 2019)

Orang Utan said:


> I dunno. Ask one. I'm sure there some who cook it professionally but don't eat it.



Veggies, but I very much doubt very many committed vegans.


----------



## Orang Utan (Nov 26, 2019)

Lupa said:


> What's wrong with what I said?
> I have always some food in my car in case of emergencies.
> Sometimes it's also a bar of chocolate and pack of figrolls.


It's funny that's all. The idea of keeping cheese in your car in case a vegan invites you to dinner


----------



## Orang Utan (Nov 26, 2019)

Should be kept in the fridge anyways


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Nov 26, 2019)

Orang Utan said:


> It's funny that's all. The idea of keeping cheese in your car in case a vegan invites you to dinner



No...I just have it in the car for emergencies....not specifically for a vegan invitation to dinner..lol


----------



## 8ball (Nov 26, 2019)

Lupa said:


> No...I just have it in the car for emergencies....not specifically for a vegan invitation to dinner..lol



You diabetic or something?
Mate of mine has a stupid fast metabolism and carries food everywhere.


----------



## Teaboy (Nov 26, 2019)

Lupa said:


> No...I just have it in the car for emergencies....not specifically for a vegan invitation to dinner..lol



Is there a medical condition which necessitates this or just squirrel ancestry?


----------



## Orang Utan (Nov 26, 2019)

Lupa said:


> No...I just have it in the car for emergencies....not specifically for a vegan invitation to dinner..lol


What constitutes a cheese emergency? I mean, I love cheese, but I've never jonesed for it so much I've had to keep it handy. I can always wait till I get home


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Nov 26, 2019)

Orang Utan said:


> Should be kept in the fridge anyways



Not necessarily


----------



## Spymaster (Nov 26, 2019)

8ball said:


> You diabetic or something?
> Mate of mine has a stupid fast metabolism and carries food everywhere.


Doesn't everyone have food in the car? Standard equipment in my glovebox is a packet of cashews and a bag of wine gums.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Nov 26, 2019)

Orang Utan said:


> What constitutes a cheese emergency? I mean, I love cheese, but I've never jonesed for it so much I've had to keep it handy. I can always wait till I get home



Well say the car breaks down 2 hours from home. And I'm in the middle of nowhere. And I'm waiting for the AA. It's nice to be able to tuck into a cracker with cheese.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Nov 26, 2019)

8ball said:


> You diabetic or something?
> Mate of mine has a stupid fast metabolism and carries food everywhere.



Well...I need to eat regularly.


----------



## 8ball (Nov 26, 2019)

Spymaster said:


> Doesn't everyone have food in the car? Standard equipment in my glovebox is a packet of cashews and a bag of wine gums.



I have a bottle of water and a fleece, and that's more prepared than most people I know.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Nov 26, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> Is there a medical condition which necessitates this or just squirrel ancestry?



Yes and yes


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Nov 26, 2019)

8ball said:


> I have a bottle of water and a fleece, and that's more prepared than most people I know.



I have a mini medical kit, a food box, water, and a blanket and wellies.


----------



## The39thStep (Nov 26, 2019)

Orang Utan said:


> I dunno. Ask one. I'm sure there some who cook it professionally but don't eat it.


I've known several cooks who are vegetarian whose jobs include cooking meat and fish.


----------



## 8ball (Nov 26, 2019)

Lupa said:


> I have a mini medical kit, a food box, water, and a blanket and wellies.



I'm good for a couple of weeks without food, but a medical kit could be an idea.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Nov 26, 2019)

8ball said:


> I'm good for a couple of weeks without food, but a medical kit could be an idea.


And water?


----------



## 8ball (Nov 26, 2019)

Lupa said:


> And water?



Yeah, said water above.  Usually more than one bottle. 

I don't tend to drive many places that are many miles from busy roads or civilisation tbf.


----------



## Teaboy (Nov 26, 2019)

Spymaster said:


> Doesn't everyone have food in the car? Standard equipment in my glovebox is a packet of cashews and a bag of wine gums.



Circular tin of travel sweets next to the driving gloves?


----------



## Orang Utan (Nov 26, 2019)

The39thStep said:


> I've known several cooks who are vegetarian whose jobs include cooking meat and fish.


i take my hat off to Muslims who work in restaurants during ramadan


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Nov 26, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> Circular tin of travel sweets



Oh they were always nice.


----------



## existentialist (Nov 26, 2019)

Spymaster said:


> Doesn't everyone have food in the car? Standard equipment in my glovebox is a packet of cashews and a bag of wine gums.


I have some Werther Originals in the door pocket that have solidified into a solid lump, if that counts?


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Nov 26, 2019)

I found some melted emerald sweets in the little storage compartment between the two front seats. They had stuck to a charger.


----------



## Spymaster (Nov 26, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> Circular tin of travel sweets next to the driving gloves?


Those ones with powder on them.


----------



## Spymaster (Nov 26, 2019)

existentialist said:


> I have some Werther Originals in the door pocket ...


I'd keep that quiet if I were you.


----------



## The39thStep (Nov 26, 2019)

Southern Erope :When told my Portuguese friends that a friend of mine was coming over who doesn't eat fish or meat and were there any popular vegetarian dishes or a good vegetarian resuarant they looked at me in a puzzled manner and asked if she was ill or had an allergy.


----------



## The39thStep (Nov 26, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> Circular tin of travel sweets next to the driving gloves?


My mum and dad always had barley sugar sweets in their cars


----------



## 8ball (Nov 26, 2019)

The39thStep said:


> Southern Erope :When told my Portuguese friends that a friend of mine was coming over who doesn't eat fish or meat and were there any popular vegetarian dishes or a good vegetarian resuarant they looked at me in a puzzled manner and asked if she was ill or had an allergy.



Portugal is well known for not being easy for veggies.


----------



## Orang Utan (Nov 26, 2019)

Spymaster said:


> Those ones with powder on them.


those tins are ideal for keeping weed in


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Nov 26, 2019)

The39thStep said:


> My mum and dad always had barley sugar sweets in their cars



Friend of mine was driving one day sucking a barley sugar sweet and it slipped back into her throat. She started to choke. It scared the shit out of her.


----------



## Teaboy (Nov 26, 2019)

The39thStep said:


> Southern Erope :When told my Portuguese friends that a friend of mine was coming over who doesn't eat fish or meat and were there any popular vegetarian dishes or a good vegetarian resuarant they looked at me in a puzzled manner and asked if she was ill or had an allergy.



Back in 1999 I spent 3 months in Argentina with a vege who just couldn't eat meat.  That was a challenging time.


----------



## existentialist (Nov 26, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> Back in 1999 I spent 3 months in Argentina with a vege who just couldn't eat meat.  That was a challenging time.


I'll tell you what's more challenging than that...

...*being* the veggie who can't eat meat 

France is a complete nightmare - you're just a wrong'un.
Germany, they think there's something the matter with you.
Belgium...well, sausage isn't _actually_ meat. Anything further East gets you blank incomprehension.


----------



## Orang Utan (Nov 26, 2019)

the worst is feeding a veggie who doesn't like veg


----------



## The39thStep (Nov 26, 2019)

8ball said:


> Portugal is well known for not being easy for veggies.


There are stacks of veggie/vegan places in the cities  but not in the countryside . Locally they  do a few dishes a nice veg and bean soup ,tomato rice ,and ive seen vegetarian fejoda but thats about it oh and salads.


----------



## kebabking (Nov 26, 2019)

existentialist said:


> I'll tell you what's more challenging than that...
> 
> ...*being* the veggie who can't eat meat



nah, the veggie is only hungry for 3 months, the travel companion has to listen to the endless whining for 3 months...


----------



## The39thStep (Nov 26, 2019)

Ive been round to vegetarian people house to eat loads of times ,depends on how good a cook they are tbh.


----------



## existentialist (Nov 26, 2019)

The39thStep said:


> Ive been round to vegetarian people house to eat loads of times ,depends on how good a cook they are tbh.


TBF, I'm pretty competent. Needs must, and all that


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Nov 26, 2019)

Orang Utan said:


> the worst is feeding a veggie who doesn't like veg



That must be very challenging. What is left? Legumes? Tofu?


----------



## Orang Utan (Nov 26, 2019)

Lupa said:


> That must be very challenging. What is left? Legumes? Tofu?


pizza


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Nov 26, 2019)

Orang Utan said:


> pizza



Ah..that's ok.


----------



## Orang Utan (Nov 26, 2019)

Lupa said:


> Ah..that's ok.


fucking boring though. one friend of mine lived on frozen margarita pizzas and nowt else for a while before they met someone who made them eat other things


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Nov 26, 2019)

Orang Utan said:


> fucking boring though. one friend of mine lived on frozen margarita pizzas and nowt else for a while before they met someone who made them eat other things



It sucks alright.


----------



## The39thStep (Nov 26, 2019)

Orang Utan said:


> fucking boring though. one friend of mine lived on frozen margarita pizzas and nowt else for a while before they met someone who made them eat other things


healthy diet


----------



## 8ball (Nov 26, 2019)

Orang Utan said:


> pizza



A mate of mine just ate chip butties til he got ill.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Nov 26, 2019)

Orang Utan said:


> the worst is feeding a veggie who doesn't like veg


Had an ex like this years ago. Mainly ate chips and beans. Assume she's dead now


----------



## philosophical (Nov 26, 2019)

I am a vegetarian, and it kind of pains me to say that if somebody says to me if you eat that bacon sandwich then Lord Buckethead will oust Boris Johnson in his constituency in the forthcoming election, I still wouldn't eat that sandwich.


----------



## existentialist (Nov 26, 2019)

Lupa said:


> That must be very challenging. What is left? Legumes? Tofu?


Death.


----------



## Artaxerxes (Nov 26, 2019)

Orang Utan said:


> the worst is feeding a veggie who doesn't like veg



Jesus Christ yes.


----------



## T & P (Nov 26, 2019)

I find catering for veggies a piece of cake (no pun intended). Vegan food I find more challenging, certainly when meaning to offer a full meal including dessert.

Luckily the vegan friends who have come to dinner are a bit flexible and happy to overlook minor vegan infractions, such as certain brands of beer not being strictly vegan, or some food products because they have been prepared in factories where non vegan food is also present in the same area.


----------



## T & P (Nov 26, 2019)

Going back to the bacongate story reported upthread, I suspect there was pre-existing beef  between mother and daughter, because if it was a first infraction kicking her out seems a wholly OTT reaction. However  I don’t blame the daughter for being royally angry if she had previously made her feelings known though. Certainly for cooking and eating bacon, which ticks many boxes from the killing of a highly intelligent mammal to perfuming the house with a distinctive and potent smell. As well the fact that there plenty of tasty breakfast alternatives available anyone who’s not a dickhead should be able to cope without eating the offending food for a few days.

Having said that, given that I despise the taste of all alternative milks I’ve tried, if I went to stay with a vegan relative and they tried to ban me from bringing a pint of milk with me to put a wee bit in my morning tea or coffee, I’d see it as a cunt’s trick, moral convictions or not.


----------



## Reno (Nov 27, 2019)

When vegans get on their high horse about being 100% purist about their diet, it can always be pointed out that many animals get killed in the production of the plant based food they eat. There is no such thing as a diet where no animals die, unless you become completely self sufficient. Veganism may be the way of eating that is the least damaging to animal life but millions of animals which live off plants and crops used for commercial food consumption have to be killed for those plants and crops to flourish.


----------



## 8ball (Nov 27, 2019)

existentialist said:


> Death.



With tofu as a close second


----------



## Proper Tidy (Nov 27, 2019)

Reno said:


> There is no such thing as a diet where no animals die, unless you become completely self sufficient.



What does this mean, some sort of one person human centipede thing


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Nov 27, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> What does this mean, some sort of one person human centipede thing


 Living on a prayer....maybe


----------



## 8ball (Nov 27, 2019)

Lupa said:


> Living on a prayer....maybe



We’re half way there.


----------



## Reno (Nov 27, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> What does this mean, some sort of one person human centipede thing


It means that if you plant crops in a non-commercial manner, for just your own consumption then you could possibly do without purposeful and accidental killing of rodents, insects, birds etc who get to those plants. Intensive farming of plants and crops kills millions of animals, so the idea of a 100% ethical diet is an illusion. That is unless you were to opt out, growing all the vegan food you consume yourself and buy nothing that has been commercially farmed.

The response to not being able to use a pan in which meat has been fried is part of the illusion of a 100% ethical way of eating, when that battle has already been lost. Of course I would respect that a vegan does not want the smell of fried meat in their home, but the idea that this pan can’t be used again after it’s been thoroughly washed strikes me as silly.


----------



## andysays (Nov 27, 2019)

Reno said:


> It means that if you plant crops in a non-commercial manner, for just your own consumption then you could possibly do without purposeful and accidental killing of rodents, insects, birds etc who get to those plants. Intensive farming of plants and crops kills millions of animals, so the idea of a 100% ethical diet is an illusion. That is unless you were to opt out, growing all the vegan food you consume yourself and buy nothing that has been commercially farmed.
> 
> The response to not being able to use a pan in which meat has been fried is part of the illusion of a 100% ethical way of eating, when that battle has already been lost. Of course I would respect that a vegan does not want the smell of fried meat in their home, but the idea that this pan can’t be used again after it’s been thoroughly washed strikes me as silly.


As a (meat-eating) allotment vegetable grower, I'm not even sure about this. Even growing organically on a small scale involves causing a certain amount of animal deaths.

I don't have any issues with that, but it's naive to think that a plant based diet is entirely without negative consequences for animal life


----------



## Reno (Nov 27, 2019)

andysays said:


> As a (meat-eating) allotment vegetable grower, I'm not even sure about this. Even growing organically on a small scale involves causing a certain amount of animal deaths.
> 
> I don't have any issues with that, but it's naive to think that a plant based diet is entirely without negative consequences for animal life


It was only meant as hypothetical. It’s in response to vegans who complain about their cooking utensils being used for meat in shared houses etc., which is also maintaining an illusion of a 100% ethical life in regard to animals. If you can disinfect medical equipment to use repeatedly on different patients, then you can wash cooking utensils to get rid of meat contamination. I totally respect being a vegan to limit damage to animal life as much as possible, but when vegans declare themselves as totally without culpability, then they are either naive or manipulative.


----------



## AnnaKarpik (Nov 27, 2019)

andysays said:


> As a (meat-eating) allotment vegetable grower, I'm not even sure about this. Even growing organically on a small scale involves causing a certain amount of animal deaths.
> 
> I don't have any issues with that, but it's naive to think that a plant based diet is entirely without negative consequences for animal life



Even digging or hoeing causes casualties; (slow-worm) (giant actual worm, biggest I ever saw).


----------



## existentialist (Nov 27, 2019)

Reno said:


> It was only meant as hypothetical. It’s in response to vegans who complain about their cooking utensils being used for meat in shared houses etc., which is also maintaining an illusion of a 100% ethical life in regard to animals. If you can disinfect medical equipment to use repeatedly on different patients, then you can wash cooking utensils to get rid of meat contamination. I totally respect being a vegan to limit damage to animal life as much as possible, but when vegans declare themselves as totally without culpability, then they are either naive or manipulative.


Ah, but, as any homeopath kno, the *memory *of the meaty molecules will forever remain in the pan. 

(Though I must confess to re-washing pans, unconvinced that the initial wash had successfully eliminated all traces, having "enjoyed" an unexpectedly fishy vegetarian sausage once or twice  )


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 27, 2019)

existentialist said:


> Ah, but, as any homeopath kno, the *memory *of the meaty molecules will forever remain in the pan.
> 
> (Though I must confess to re-washing pans, unconvinced that the initial wash had successfully eliminated all traces, having "enjoyed" an unexpectedly fishy vegetarian sausage once or twice  )


I remember stew-ew-ew-ew-ew!


----------



## Proper Tidy (Nov 27, 2019)

existentialist said:


> having "enjoyed" an unexpectedly fishy vegetarian sausage once or twice  )



You can get fish sausages?

Anyway fwiw I wouldn't cook meat in a vegetarian or vegan's house cos it would quite clearly be rude and inconsiderate. If a bacon butty is that important to you then go find a caff or a bakery or something


----------



## 8ball (Nov 27, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> You can get fish sausages?



Mmm... sturgeon sausage...


----------



## 8ball (Nov 27, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Anyway fwiw I wouldn't cook meat in a vegetarian or vegan's house cos it would quite clearly be rude and inconsiderate. If a bacon butty is that important to you then go find a caff or a bakery or something



Yeah, bit like cracking open a can in the house of a recovering alcoholic.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Nov 27, 2019)

I have no idea if sturgeon sausage is a thing or a joke


----------



## 8ball (Nov 27, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> I have no idea if sturgeon sausage is a thing or a joke



Imagine something like a smoky chorizo-ish thing, but made with sturgeon.
There's also a fermented version which I'm not keen on.


----------



## existentialist (Nov 28, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> You can get fish sausages?
> 
> Anyway fwiw I wouldn't cook meat in a vegetarian or vegan's house cos it would quite clearly be rude and inconsiderate. If a bacon butty is that important to you then go find a caff or a bakery or something


No, the improperly washed pan had previously been used for fish, causing my fishless vegetarian (clue in name) sausage to taste of fish...


----------



## Proper Tidy (Nov 28, 2019)

existentialist said:


> No, the improperly washed pan had previously been used for fish, causing my fishless vegetarian (clue in name) sausage to taste of fish...


Ah makes sense, I thought some sort of sausage mix up


----------



## UnderAnOpenSky (Nov 28, 2019)

Lupa said:


> That must be very challenging. What is left? Legumes? Tofu?



Quorn products


----------



## UnderAnOpenSky (Nov 28, 2019)

Theoreticaly if a guest shit in your pans and cleaned it well afterwards would that be OK?


----------



## Humberto (Nov 28, 2019)

Pickmans model Pickman's model


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 28, 2019)

Humberto said:


> Pickmans model Pickman's model


You're seeing double perhaps. Or there's an echo in here.


----------



## nyxx (Nov 28, 2019)

Many years ago I had my own kitchen (for the first time); my brother and his wife needed to come to stay to sort out some official stuff (they wouldn’t have come to visit me socially, we weren’t that kind of family). It took me a little while to actually clock that the whole thing made me unhappy when they cooked meat in my kitchen... I assumed it was them trying to be unobtrusive and sort themselves out for food, rather than expect me to cook, but it was weird to have my kitchen smell of meat. didn’t like it one bit, felt wrong on some level I didn’t know was there until it happened. They were very gracious and pleased to have a space to stay & generally the visit went well. I think I asked them not to cook meat again, in a way which was honest but not dramatic or anything ... such a thing has never happened since.

But yeah basically, it can happen for sure, my family did it unthinkingly and there was no long term aggro about it, but absolutely not up for it. Makes my stomach turn and having finally got my own place after years of chaotic living situations, I’ll keep my kitchen at home meat free thank you. I’d be astonished if anyone was to disrespect that at this stage.


----------



## nyxx (Nov 28, 2019)

Basically, if you need to eat flesh that badly that you think it’d be ok to prepare and cook it in my house, you just wouldn’t be coming to my house. end of story.


----------



## farmerbarleymow (Nov 28, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> You can get fish sausages?


Don't recommend searching for that.  Chitlings are probably bad enough...

ps - fishfinger will know being the expert in all things fishy.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Nov 28, 2019)

UnderAnOpenSky said:


> Theoreticaly if a guest shit in your pans and cleaned it well afterwards would that be OK?



Ask Spymaster, his pans double up as po’s on a regular basis


----------



## andysays (Nov 28, 2019)

UnderAnOpenSky said:


> Theoreticaly if a guest shit in your pans and cleaned it well afterwards would that be OK?


Not even Spymaster would do that...

...would he?


----------



## AnnaKarpik (Nov 28, 2019)

Actually I'm cooking a chicken at Christmas for my visiting family, or more precisely, procuring one for them to cook, giving them sausage rolls on Xmas Eve too, because we always did when they were small. This is only possible because the cooker has two ovens; I will report back if Xmas is destroyed because of meat smell! We live next door to a caff, opposite a pub, barbeque loving neighbours the other side so I think we'll manage.


----------



## Sprocket. (Nov 28, 2019)

UnderAnOpenSky said:


> Quorn products



A mate at work told us he went home and asked his wife ‘what’s for tea’?
‘Chilli’ she told him, he saw an empty Quorn mince bag in the pedal bin. 
‘I’m not eating that shit’ said matey,
‘You’ve been eating that shit for eighteen months’ said his Mrs.


----------



## Spymaster (Nov 28, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Ask Spymaster, his pans double up as po’s on a regular basis





andysays said:


> Not even Spymaster would do that...
> 
> ...would he?



Nah. Weeing in saucepans is perfectly acceptable like having a slash in the sink or the shower. Everyone does it. You wouldn’t dump in one though. That’d just be rude.


----------



## existentialist (Nov 28, 2019)

Sprocket. said:


> A mate at work told us he went home and asked his wife ‘what’s for tea’?
> ‘Chilli’ she told him, he saw an empty Quorn mince bag in the pedal bin.
> ‘I’m not eating that shit’ said matey,
> ‘You’ve been eating that shit for eighteen months’ said his Mrs.


I'm not a big fan of fake meat, but this did make me wonder what I'd think if I thought I'd been eating Quorn mince for 18 months, and then discovered I had been given meat mince. Safe to say, I'd be pretty fucking incandescent - mostly because of the breach of trust.

So I think your mate would be entitled to be pissed off (if he was). If a partner did that to me, I think I'd be seriously wondering about the state of the relationship.

History: one of my mum's tricks was to secrete meat-based material into meals, ask me if I'd enjoyed it, and then triumphantly inform me it'd been made with ham stock/whatever. So I'm likely to be oversensitive to that kind of thing...and I am still heartily suspicious of any soup that is on offer


----------



## UnderAnOpenSky (Nov 28, 2019)

Sprocket. said:


> A mate at work told us he went home and asked his wife ‘what’s for tea’?
> ‘Chilli’ she told him, he saw an empty Quorn mince bag in the pedal bin.
> ‘I’m not eating that shit’ said matey,
> ‘You’ve been eating that shit for eighteen months’ said his Mrs.



Clearly no taste buds. I cook both and can the difference, texture is so different.


----------



## Sprocket. (Nov 28, 2019)

UnderAnOpenSky said:


> Clearly no taste buds. I cook both and can the difference, texture is so different.



I thought the same, quorn mince is nothing like the texture of beef mince.


----------



## souljacker (Nov 28, 2019)

Sprocket. said:


> I thought the same, quorn mince is nothing like the texture of beef mince.



Or the flavour. You just won't get the meaty flavour with quorn IMO.


----------



## andysays (Nov 28, 2019)

Spymaster said:


> Nah. Weeing in saucepans is perfectly acceptable like having a slash in the sink or the shower. Everyone does it. You wouldn’t dump in one though. That’d just be rude.


It's OK to shit in a pan if you're a vegan though, everyone knows their shit doesn't smell


----------



## 8ball (Nov 28, 2019)

existentialist said:


> I'm not a big fan of fake meat, but this did make me wonder what I'd think if I thought I'd been eating Quorn mince for 18 months, and then discovered I had been given meat mince. Safe to say, I'd be pretty fucking incandescent - mostly because of the breach of trust.
> 
> So I think your mate would be entitled to be pissed off (if he was). If a partner did that to me, I think I'd be seriously wondering about the state of the relationship.
> 
> History: one of my mum's tricks was to secrete meat-based material into meals, ask me if I'd enjoyed it, and then triumphantly inform me it'd been made with ham stock/whatever. So I'm likely to be oversensitive to that kind of thing...and I am still heartily suspicious of any soup that is on offer



This way round, I wouldn't be bothered if I hadn't noticed.
Though I would notice.  I find you can go up to around 50% Quorn mince in a chilli before anyone is likely to detect any difference.


----------



## existentialist (Nov 28, 2019)

8ball said:


> This way round, I wouldn't be bothered if I hadn't noticed.
> Though I would notice.  I find you can go up to around 50% Quorn mince in a chilli before anyone is likely to detect any difference.


I don't much care for Quorn anyway, so it's a bit of a moot issue from my point of view 

When I make chilli, I don't use any meat substitute, and people quite often come back for more


----------



## 8ball (Nov 28, 2019)

existentialist said:


> I don't much care for Quorn anyway, so it's a bit of a moot issue from my point of view
> When I make chilli, I don't use any meat substitute, and people quite often come back for more



I use puy lentils when not using meat at all, it's *kind of* a meat substitute in terms of its role in the dish.


----------



## Idaho (Nov 28, 2019)

existentialist said:


> I don't much care for Quorn anyway, so it's a bit of a moot issue from my point of view
> 
> When I make chilli, I don't use any meat substitute, and people quite often come back for more


I also make an excellent veg chilli and don't like Quorn. Grilling the peppers until blackened is one of the secrets. Dark chocolate is the other.


----------



## 8ball (Nov 28, 2019)

Idaho said:


> I also make an excellent veg chilli and don't like Quorn. Grilling the peppers until blackened is one of the secrets. Dark chocolate is the other.



The right amount of dark chocolate is good in a chilli regardless of whether meat is involved.


----------



## IC3D (Nov 28, 2019)

Quarn isn't vegan it has egg innit


----------



## 8ball (Nov 28, 2019)

IC3D said:


> Quarn isn't vegan it has egg innit



Some products are vegan, some have egg in.
Since we're talking about chilli - I think you're right about the mince.


----------



## IC3D (Nov 28, 2019)

They just started some vegan ones  but not mince


----------



## UnderAnOpenSky (Nov 28, 2019)

8ball said:


> Some products are vegan, some have egg in.
> Since we're talking about chilli - I think you're right about the mince.



I heard an interview recently saying they are trying to move the entire range over, but without changing the texture of the products to much which makes sense seeing as vegan food is a growing market.


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Nov 28, 2019)

souljacker said:


> Or the flavour. You just won't get the meaty flavour with quorn IMO.



It's not the flavour; cow mince has no flavour, or at least no remotely pleasant flavour. I remember cooking it in my pre-vegan days and just thinking how disgusting it smelled cooking on the stove. It was only after adding all the herbs, spices and vegetables to mask the smell that it started to smell okay. The problem with quorn - if you want the cow mince taste - is the texture. Linda Mccartney Vegemince was a lot better, sadly it's off the market now, but tesco does a pretty good one too.


----------



## souljacker (Nov 28, 2019)

Jeff Robinson said:


> It's not the flavour; cow mince has no flavour, or at least no remotely pleasant flavour.



I'd disagree with that. Also, you usually add beef stock which is obviously a no-no for vegans.


----------



## Spymaster (Nov 28, 2019)

souljacker said:


> I'd disagree with that.


Probably because it's arrant nonsense.


----------



## UnderAnOpenSky (Nov 28, 2019)

Jeff Robinson said:


> It's not the flavour; cow mince has no flavour, or at least no remotely pleasant flavour. I remember cooking it in my pre-vegan days and just thinking how disgusting it smelled cooking on the stove. It was only after adding all the herbs, spices and vegetables to mask the smell that it started to smell okay. The problem with quorn - if you want the cow mince taste - is the texture. Linda Mccartney Vegemince was a lot better, sadly it's off the market now, but tesco does a pretty good one too.



Obviously each to your own but just as an example burgers are pretty dam popular and good ones are made with just this and a touch or salt and maybe pepper.


----------



## Idaho (Nov 28, 2019)

Jeff Robinson said:


> It's not the flavour; cow mince has no flavour, or at least no remotely pleasant flavour. I remember cooking it in my pre-vegan days and just thinking how disgusting it smelled cooking on the stove. It was only after adding all the herbs, spices and vegetables to mask the smell that it started to smell okay. The problem with quorn - if you want the cow mince taste - is the texture. Linda Mccartney Vegemince was a lot better, sadly it's off the market now, but tesco does a pretty good one too.


Meat has a great flavour, but it does need hearty seasoning. Beef mince with no salt is pretty bad.


----------



## Poot (Nov 28, 2019)

I don't understand quorn mince. If anything, quorn is like chicken, and no one uses chicken mince.


----------



## Spymaster (Nov 28, 2019)

Poot said:


> ... no one uses chicken mince.


 You've not made chicken burgers? 

It's also quite common in Jewish cookery.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Nov 28, 2019)

I can't noticeably taste the difference between quorn chilli and beef chilli but then I can't taste much difference between beef mince and lamb mince once everything else has been lobbed in so assume my taste buds are fucked. Went to a veggie couples barbecue a couple of years ago and had burgers he'd made from quorn mince and they didn't taste right. Or nice.


----------



## 8ball (Nov 28, 2019)

Spymaster said:


> You've not made chicken burgers?



I haven't.
Unless you count sneakily making off with a chicken breast in a bun.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Nov 28, 2019)

Chicken burgers are shit imo


----------



## Spymaster (Nov 28, 2019)

8ball said:


> I haven't.


You should.


----------



## 8ball (Nov 28, 2019)

Spymaster said:


> You should.



Of the chicken burger recipes that first jump out of Google at me, none are using chicken mince.

edit - the fifth one is tbf


----------



## Spymaster (Nov 28, 2019)

8ball said:


> Of the chicken burger recipes that first jump out of Google at me, none are using chicken mince.
> 
> edit - the fifth one is tbf


It's not uncommon. Mainstream supermarkets sell it.


----------



## Poot (Nov 28, 2019)

Spymaster said:


> You've not made chicken burgers?
> 
> It's also quite common in Jewish cookery.


But people make bolognaise and chilli out of it?


----------



## 8ball (Nov 28, 2019)

Spymaster said:


> It's not uncommon. Mainstream supermarkets sell it.



They also sell turkey twizzlers and no one makes those at home.


----------



## Spymaster (Nov 28, 2019)

Poot said:


> But people make bolognaise and chilli out of it?


No. Bolognaise and chilli are traditionally beef dishes.


----------



## Orang Utan (Nov 28, 2019)

Spymaster said:


> No. Bolognaise and chilli are traditionally beef dishes.


Traditional bolognese often had veal and pork in, not beef


----------



## 8ball (Nov 28, 2019)

Orang Utan said:


> Traditional bolognese often had veal and pork in, not beef



Cow and pig.  A bit of fatty pork with either beef or veal.
So still generally involving cow.


----------



## Poot (Nov 28, 2019)

Spymaster said:


> No. Bolognaise and chilli are traditionally beef dishes.


That's my point! Why would you use quorn? Wrong 'uns.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Nov 28, 2019)

A lot of people I know make chilli with turkey mince. I say people, I mean dickheads.


----------



## Orang Utan (Nov 28, 2019)

Poot said:


> That's my point! Why would you use quorn? Wrong 'uns.


Veggies would use it


----------



## Spymaster (Nov 28, 2019)

Orang Utan said:


> Veggies would use it


That's what she meant by wrong 'uns.


----------



## andysays (Nov 28, 2019)

Orang Utan said:


> Veggies would use it


But then it isn't bolognese or ragu, which definitely includes meat, and despite what you say above, it traditionally includes 


> different types of minced or finely chopped beef, often alongside small amounts of fatty pork


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 28, 2019)

Poot said:


> But people make bolognaise and chilli out of it?


Greebo and I did, and it tasted great. Like anything, you have to season in a complimentary manner, and use good quality ingredients. Oh, and full-fat mince, not the fat-reduced stuff.


----------



## Poot (Nov 28, 2019)

Spymaster said:


> That's what she meant by wrong 'uns.




I'll start again.

I am veggie but I have no interest in making chilli or bolognaise out of something that tastes like chicken (ie quorn). I just don't like the flavour. I was joking when I said that people were wrong 'uns. I am sure that some meat eaters and some veggies enjoy it. I, however, do not.


----------



## 8ball (Nov 28, 2019)

Poot said:


> I am veggie but I have no interest in making chilli or bolognaise out of something that tastes like chicken (ie quorn).



The quorn mince I had didn't taste like chicken.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 28, 2019)

Spymaster said:


> No. Bolognaise and chilli are traditionally beef dishes.


Both traditionally pork, because pigs are easier for peasants to manage and feed, than cows. Tex-Mex chilli recipes tend to be beef or a mix of pork and beef, but most Mex recipes are finely-diced or minced pork. I gave a Hungarian Chilli-loving neighbour some pork chilli I made (we swap meals occasionally), and she couldn't work out why it tasted familiar but different. 3 things: Mexican unsweetened bitter cooking chocolate (courtesy of Noor cash and carry); finely-chopped shoulder pork, cooked slow, and dried tomatillos chopped in with the tomatoes, to sour things up a little.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 28, 2019)

8ball said:


> Cow and pig.  A bit of fatty pork with either beef or veal.
> So still generally involving cow.



Beef only became the main meat used, when beef production cheapened enough for it to become an "everyday" ingredient. In the US, that was in the '30s, in Europe, it was the '50s.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 28, 2019)

8ball said:


> The quorn mince I had didn't taste like chicken.



Snake tastes like chicken, so does alligator tail. Sadly, often chicken doesn't taste like chicken, anymore.


----------



## 8ball (Nov 28, 2019)

ViolentPanda said:


> Snake tastes like chicken, so does alligator tail. Sadly, often chicken doesn't taste like chicken, anymore.



I've had alligator and it was nothing like chicken.  Not sure which bit though - was a long time ago.
I'll take your word re: snake.


----------



## 8ball (Nov 28, 2019)

ViolentPanda said:


> Mexican unsweetened bitter cooking chocolate (courtesy of Noor cash and carry)....



Mexican bitter cooking chocolate?
Had never heard of it, but it sounds intriguing.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 28, 2019)

8ball said:


> Mexican bitter cooking chocolate?
> Had never heard of it, but it sounds intriguing.



There's a lot of it around, if you look. I use "Diana chocolate de Mesa Sin Azucar" for drinking chocolate (either Euro or Mex style), and "Luker" for cooking savoury stuff. Noor in Brixton stocks them because of the large Iberian and central and south American populations in Lambeth.


----------



## IC3D (Nov 28, 2019)

Where is it coming from that Quorn mince tastes like chicken?

IME it tastes of nothing. 

Carmaliesd onions in red wine,  garlic,  herbs, tomato's, decent mushrooms make the flavour.

Last I had beef mince 30 odd years ago it tasted of nothing either IIRC or was rancid


----------



## Poot (Nov 28, 2019)

IC3D said:


> Where is it coming from that Quorn mince tastes like chicken?
> 
> IME it tastes of nothing.
> 
> ...


Quorn chunks taste like chicken to me. You use them like chicken in, say, a curry. So why anyone thinks that Quorn mince should taste like beef is a mystery to me. I don't have a problem with Quorn chunks, I quite like them, but I don't like Quorn mince.


----------



## Orang Utan (Nov 28, 2019)

Quorn tastes like a mould found in chemical waste bins


----------



## 8ball (Nov 28, 2019)

Orang Utan said:


> Quorn tastes like a mould found in chemical waste bins



That's unfair.
It's much more closely related to the fungus that causes toenail infections.


----------



## Orang Utan (Nov 28, 2019)

8ball said:


> That's unfair.
> It's much more closely related to the fungus that causes toenail infections.


woosh <----  watch out for the flying joke


----------



## IC3D (Nov 28, 2019)

Orang Utan said:


> Quorn tastes like a mould found in chemical waste bins


If that is what you eat my follow up question about choosing mince or steak in a restaurant is pointless.


----------



## Orang Utan (Nov 28, 2019)

IC3D said:


> If that is what you eat my follow up question about choosing mince or steak in a restaurant is pointless.





Orang Utan said:


> woosh <----  watch out for the flying joke


----------



## IC3D (Nov 28, 2019)

Poot said:


> Quorn chunks taste like chicken to me. You use them like chicken in, say, a curry. So why anyone thinks that Quorn mince should taste like beef is a mystery to me. I don't have a problem with Quorn chunks, I quite like them, but I don't like Quorn mince.


Chicken is another bland meat that renders virtually no flavour in its self. 
I'd say Quorn chunks resemble the texture of chicken.
I don't like them but the mince I don't mind in a lasagne


----------



## Saunders (Nov 28, 2019)

souljacker said:


> I'd disagree with that. Also, you usually add beef stock which is obviously a no-no for vegans.


It does seem a bit nuts if you have to add beef flavour to make your beef mince taste of beef.
I agree with Jeff Robinson that it's more about the texture. There used to be a thing (maybe still is) called TVP which was dried Soya mince, that you had to soak in water. It actually had a proper bitey texture. Tasted rank though.


----------



## 8ball (Nov 28, 2019)

IC3D said:


> Chicken is another bland meat that renders virtually no flavour in its self.



Sounds like you’ve just never had really good chicken.


----------



## souljacker (Nov 28, 2019)

Saunders said:


> It does seem a bit nuts if you have to add beef flavour to make your beef mince taste of beef.



i was just pointing out that the deep meaty flavour in a good chilli comes from the mince as well as the stock. And of course the stock is basically meat juice. So I wouldn't expect a vegan to go anywhere near it.

Either way, I don't really want to derail the thread on this point. It's not really important.


----------



## IC3D (Nov 28, 2019)

Orang Utan said:


> [/QUOTE





8ball said:


> Sounds like you’ve just never had really good chicken.


Not so I've missed tbh


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Dec 6, 2019)

The good townsfolk of Melton Mowbray reacting with fear and loathing to the thought that a vegan pie might have appeared in Morrisons.


----------



## 8ball (Dec 6, 2019)

Guy who sits next to me at work lives in Melton - will show him this when he's back at his desk... 

The guy from the pie shop in Melton was unconcerned, saying it's not a pork pie so no biggie, and is likely just a marketing ploy.

He is certainly correct on the first count and I expect he also correct on the second.


----------



## Spymaster (Dec 6, 2019)

Jeff Robinson said:


> The good townsfolk of Melton Mowbray reacting with fear and loathing to the thought that a vegan pie might have appeared in Morrisons.


So nothing to do with any comment made by the people of Melton themselves and everything to do with Morrison’s making that decision for them.


----------



## Poot (Dec 6, 2019)

I expect there are vegans in melton mowbray too.


----------



## 8ball (Dec 6, 2019)

Spymaster said:


> So nothing to do with any comment made by the people of Melton themselves and everything to do with Morrison’s making that decision for them.



The only comment I saw was that the pie shop guy thought it was silly that people wanting the vegan pie would have to go to Customer Services.
Colleague from Melton agrees this is marketing silliness.

Maybe there was some whingeing on a local Facebook group or something that was picked up on.


----------



## Spymaster (Dec 6, 2019)

Poot said:


> I expect there are vegans in melton mowbray too.


And I reckon both of them might like to try the pie.


----------



## 8ball (Dec 6, 2019)

Poot said:


> I expect there are vegans in melton mowbray too.



They get chased away with pitchforks.


----------



## MickiQ (Dec 6, 2019)

If you go in and ask for a No Pork Pie, they'll tell you to wait till no-one's looking then sneak you round the back to buy one, throw a blanket over your head so your neighbours won't recognise you.


----------



## Poot (Dec 6, 2019)

In fairness i want one now.


----------



## 8ball (Dec 6, 2019)

Poot said:


> In fairness i want one now.



I tried a "Vork" pie.
If it's like that you'll only try it once.

Tbf the pastry was excellent, but that only amplified the disappointment at the contents.


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Dec 6, 2019)

Poot said:


> I expect there are vegans in melton mowbray too.



One of my favourite vegan cafes is there! Last year a vegan pie won the best pie at a contest hosted by the Melton Mowbray Pork Pie Association and there were no riots afaia. It is a Tory stronghold though so I guess some of the townsfolk might have been upset!


----------



## hash tag (Jan 1, 2020)

I was behind a middle aged woman, who looked clever enough to know better, in a queue who said she wouldn't have a hot chocolate as it had milk in it and she was vegetarian  Maybe I've missed something somewhere


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Jan 1, 2020)

hash tag said:


> I was behind a middle aged woman, who looked clever enough to know better, in a queue who said she wouldn't have a hot chocolate as it had milk in it and she was vegetarian  Maybe I've missed something somewhere



She was obvs making shit up to avoid having a hot chocolate...

Eta forgot to say ..she also is clearly clueless as to vegetarianism vs veganism. So she probably isnt either.


----------



## hash tag (Jan 1, 2020)

I suspect trying to be trendy but simply stupid.


----------



## William of Walworth (Jan 2, 2020)

A lot of recent talk (previous page especially) of Quorn, TVP and such like. 

I just consider any "imitation meat" products (eg most Linda McCartney meals, and all sorts of others) as things I don't and won't touch. 

I'm just a veggie, not vegan, so my consistency levels are close to zero and I don't care, but I'm just not interested in meat at all -- either real meat or imitation!

It's always puzzled me, the above. But I suppose having always been vegetarian (brought up as one from birth, unusual at my age) has a lot to do with it.


----------



## 8ball (Jan 2, 2020)

hash tag said:


> I suspect trying to be trendy but simply stupid.



Unless she was one of the pedantic veggie old guard (vegetarians did not originally allow milk or eggs, hence the lacto and ovo prefixes that were in use for a time).


----------



## Artaxerxes (Jan 3, 2020)

William of Walworth said:


> A lot of recent talk (previous page especially) of Quorn, TVP and such like.
> 
> I just consider any "imitation meat" products (eg most Linda McCartney meals, and all sorts of others) as things I don't and won't touch.
> 
> ...



The wife is the same, she doesn't like the blood and flesh aspect of meat so finds trying to mimic it just as disgusting.


----------



## William of Walworth (Jan 3, 2020)

@Artaxerses : I think your missus and me must be much in the minority of veggies and vegans ..... so many go for the imitation stuff!


----------



## William of Walworth (Jan 3, 2020)

Artaxerxes said:


> The wife is the same, she doesn't like the blood and flesh aspect of meat so finds trying to mimic it just as disgusting.



I think your missus and me must be *much* in the minority of veggies and vegans ..... so many go for the imitation stuff!


----------



## T & P (Jan 4, 2020)

I usually have no issue whatsoever with vegan products using descriptions traditionally associated with meat products (veggie burger, vegan sausage roll, etc...), but the other day I heard on the radio an ad for one of the food/ sandwich high street chains, can't remember which one, advertising their new "vegan tuna" wrap.

Fuck off to fucking hell you fucking fucks


----------



## existentialist (Jan 4, 2020)

William of Walworth said:


> I think your missus and me must be *much* in the minority of veggies and vegans ..... so many go for the imitation stuff!


Checking in as another fake meat despiser...


----------



## Poot (Jan 4, 2020)

existentialist said:


> Checking in as another fake meat despiser...


Me also except for the following thought process that occurs every 5pm:

Hmm. They WILL insist on wanting something for dinner. Potatoes. Yep. Veggies. Yep. But what about protein?

_rummages in freezer_

Ah! Linda McCartney Extra Meatylicious guaranteed to bleed deliciously veiny fake steaks. Yep. That'll do. 

I expect they'll want to eat again tomorrow. _sigh_ Better replace these at the supermarket tomorrow.


----------



## Reno (Jan 4, 2020)

William of Walworth said:


> A lot of recent talk (previous page especially) of Quorn, TVP and such like.
> 
> I just consider any "imitation meat" products (eg most Linda McCartney meals, and all sorts of others) as things I don't and won't touch.
> 
> ...


I‘ll never understand why people are puzzled by this. Some are vegetarians because among other things they genuinely don’t like the taste of meat, but many don’t eat meat for purely ethical reasons even though they love the taste. The only problem with fake meat products is that they taste crap. As soon as someone comes up with a convincing version of “fake meat” I’ll never eat real meat again.


----------



## existentialist (Jan 4, 2020)

Poot said:


> Me also except for the following thought process that occurs every 5pm:
> 
> Hmm. They WILL insist on wanting something for dinner. Potatoes. Yep. Veggies. Yep. But what about protein?
> 
> ...


Yes, admittedly, I am not having to square the circle of being a vegetarian who has to provide for non-vegetarian tastes, so my stand on this is utterly self-indulgent...


----------



## T & P (Jan 5, 2020)

Unless it's being discussed elsewhere, I'm surprised this fairly significant news regarding veganism has not been posted yet...









						Ethical veganism is philosophical belief, tribunal rules
					

Ethical vegan Jordi Casamitjana is "extremely happy" with a tribunal's ruling his belief is protected in law.



					www.bbc.co.uk
				




Still few details about the actual sacking and no ruling yet either, but I wonder what the legal implications of this ruling will be. I guess it means vegan employees will enjoy some protection if they refuse, for instance, to handle meat products as part of their job?


----------



## William of Walworth (Jan 5, 2020)

I've been following that man's case for a little while.

Right now, I'd need more time to digest the judgement --  but given the details of what Mr Casamitjana believes, this case could be pretty damned  significant .....


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Jan 5, 2020)

Just had a vegan breakfast panini at work - beans, mushrooms, vegan sausage and vegan cheese.

Not bad overal, the sasuage was surprisingly decent, but my god the "cheese". No.


----------



## UnderAnOpenSky (Jan 6, 2020)

KFC admits selling chicken instead of vegan burger to vegetarians
					

One woman says she was left physically sick after returning to the restaurant for the first time in years



					www.walesonline.co.uk


----------



## Yossarian (Jan 6, 2020)

Aren't most pies "No Pork" pies, or does Melton Mowbray have a law you can't sell an apple pie or a spinach pie unless you put some pig parts in there?


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 6, 2020)

Yossarian said:


> Aren't most pies "No Pork" pies, or does Melton Mowbray have a law you can't sell an apple pie or a spinach pie unless you put some pig parts in there?



It's always silly this kicking off about vegan stuff being confused with its meat counterpart anyway. If that was actually happening then it would be a massive fail on the part of the vegan food producer, they obviously actively want consumers to spot the difference


----------



## 8ball (Jan 6, 2020)

Proper Tidy said:


> It's always silly this kicking off about vegan stuff being confused with its meat counterpart anyway. If that was actually happening then it would be a massive fail on the part of the vegan food producer, they obviously actively want consumers to spot the difference



You certainly would with those 'Vork' pies, or people would be calling the Food Standards people.


----------



## 8ball (Jan 6, 2020)

UnderAnOpenSky said:


> KFC admits selling chicken instead of vegan burger to vegetarians
> 
> 
> One woman says she was left physically sick after returning to the restaurant for the first time in years
> ...






			
				WalesOnline said:
			
		

> KFC has admitted selling chicken to vegetarians who wanted to try out the new vegan burger, saying: *"Hands up – this isn’t great."*



I'm guessing this wasn't run past the PR guys at Head Office.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 6, 2020)

8ball said:


> I tried a "Vork" pie.
> If it's like that you'll only try it once.
> 
> Tbf the pastry was excellent, but that only amplified the disappointment at the contents.



They do several kinds. Some are really good, but they don't benefit from being sold as veggie pork pies.


----------



## 8ball (Jan 6, 2020)

SpookyFrank said:


> They do several kinds. Some are really good, but they don't benefit from being sold as veggie pork pies.



This was neither pork-like, nor was it good, though given the excellent pastry, maybe I just didn't like the filling with this one.


----------



## existentialist (Jan 6, 2020)

8ball said:


> I'm guessing this wasn't run past the PR guys at Head Office.


I think KFC have quite a reputation for upfront, no-bullshit PR...and arguably having made a cockup like this, about the best think they could do is to make a clean breast of it. It really pisses me off when companies fuck up, and then get all legally-advised and not-admitting-liability about it all...


----------



## gosub (Jan 6, 2020)

Sacked vegan brings landmark discrimination case  .  Court did decide Veganism was akin to a religon, (can't disagree).  Block on BBC news seemed to think this was a significant deal, but not sure how much opt out religious freedom actually gets you these days


----------



## 8ball (Jan 6, 2020)

gosub said:


> Sacked vegan brings landmark discrimination case  .  Court did decide Veganism was akin to a religon, (can't disagree).  Block on BBC news seemed to think this was a significant deal, but not sure how much opt out religious freedom actually gets you these days



Well, a "philosophical belief".  
Having judges rule on what is and isn't a philosophical belief makes fuck all sense, clearly.

The employers in this case were not contesting this point anyway - the article kind of implies he has won his dispute with the employer.


----------



## Spymaster (Jan 6, 2020)

8ball said:


> Well, a "philosophical belief".
> Having judges rule on what is and isn't a philosophical belief makes fuck all sense, clearly.
> 
> The employers in this case were not contesting this point anyway - the article kind of implies he has won his dispute with the employer.


I thought the same the other day. Has he taken action against his former employers here or not?

The notion that LACS would fire someone for being a vegan is laughable. Half of them are probably vegans.


----------



## 8ball (Jan 6, 2020)

Spymaster said:


> The notion that LACS would fire someone for being a vegan is laughable. Half of them are probably vegans.



I think the plan is to get this first bit through, then try a "the veganism made me do it" in the gross misconduct appeal case later on.  It's not been made massively clear what he did.  Reports have said he was dismissed "after" raising concerns about some of the LACS' investments.

"After", as opposed to "because of".


----------



## existentialist (Jan 6, 2020)

Spymaster said:


> I thought the same the other day. Has he taken action against his former employers here or not?
> 
> The notion that LACS would fire someone for being a vegan is laughable. Half of them are probably vegans.


I know nothing about the specifics of this case, so what I'm going to say might be perceievd as a bit unfair...but I've come across these single-issue campaigning types before, and they are a complete pain in the arse to deal with. I wouldn't be at all surprised if what Mr Casamitjana was trying to do was simply up the ante - whatever his employer did, it would undoubtedly not have been enough. He's obviously very much a campaigning vegan, and good luck to him there...but I do wonder whether what happened was that he got his hobby mixed up with his day job, and began to try and impose his values on his employer's operation. And then, of course, when they told him to wind his neck it, it's all clutching of pearls and "bbbbut you're only doing this to me because I'm VEGAN!".

Whatever, there are clearly rather more undercurrents to this tale than anyone's letting on about.


----------



## 8ball (Jan 6, 2020)

Is this distinction between "dietary" and "ethical" vegan a fairly new thing?

The wording/formulation rather than the concept, I mean.
The article makes it look like this is standard and understood terminology used as common parlance.


----------



## Spymaster (Jan 6, 2020)

I thought veganism_ was_ an ethical position.


----------



## 8ball (Jan 6, 2020)

Spymaster said:


> I thought veganism_ was_ an ethical position.



It depends.  A mate of mine doesn't do it because he loves animals.  He just fucking hates plants.


----------



## Artaxerxes (Jan 6, 2020)

Spymaster said:


> I thought veganism_ was_ an ethical position.




As with any niche choice once it becomes mainstream it quickly devolves into layers.

You’ve got the meat eaters who eat the off vegan thing as it’s billed as healthy, the ones who go vegan for climates sake, then you’ve got the ones who do it because it’s trendy.

Some ethical overtones but mostly not.

Then you’ve got full level meat is murder types.


----------



## Saul Goodman (Jan 6, 2020)

Artaxerxes said:


> As with any niche choice once it becomes mainstream it quickly devolves into layers.
> 
> You’ve got the meat eaters who eat the off vegan thing as it’s billed as healthy, the ones who go vegan for climates sake, then you’ve got the ones who do it because it’s trendy.
> 
> ...


And then you've got this fucking loon, who won't use public transport in case a fly runs into the windscreen of the bus.


----------



## MickiQ (Jan 6, 2020)

Spymaster said:


> I thought veganism_ was_ an ethical position.


Is it hell if someone doesn't want to eat meat then I am totally OK with them making that decision but it's a lifestyle choice not some kind of moral one.


----------



## 8ball (Jan 6, 2020)

Artaxerxes said:


> As with any niche choice once it becomes mainstream it quickly devolves into layers.



Trying to think of comparisons...

Yoga... check!
Emo... check!
Craft beer.. check!
Pilates... not sure...


----------



## 8ball (Jan 6, 2020)

MickiQ said:


> Is it hell if someone doesn't want to eat meat then I am totally OK with them making that decision but it's a lifestyle choice not some kind of moral one.



Moral choices can be made for wrongheaded reasons (if that's where you're going with this).

edit: not that I personally think it is wrongheaded to avoid eating animals if you feel it is wrong to kill them for food - that seems like a pretty straightforward bit of reasoning

edit2:  kudos for the point-blank refusal to prostrate yourself before veg*n virtue, though


----------



## Spymaster (Jan 6, 2020)

MickiQ said:


> Is it hell if someone doesn't want to eat meat then I am totally OK with them making that decision but it's a lifestyle choice not some kind of moral one.


Veganism isn't about not eating meat though.

Surely the difference between vegetarianism and veganism is from an ethical rather than dietary standpoint.


----------



## Artaxerxes (Jan 6, 2020)

8ball said:


> Trying to think of comparisons...
> 
> Yoga... check!
> Emo... check!
> ...



Trying to find a fantasy series to get into is very hard these days because it’s all ‘dark fantasy’, ‘urban fantasy’, ‘hard fantasy’


I just want to read about wizards n stuff guys, bonus points if it’s good.


----------



## editor (Jan 6, 2020)

MickiQ said:


> Is it hell if someone doesn't want to eat meat then I am totally OK with them making that decision but it's a lifestyle choice not some kind of moral one.


Is it really? Thanks for your insight.


----------



## MickiQ (Jan 6, 2020)

Spymaster said:


> Veganism isn't about not eating meat though.
> 
> Surely the difference between vegetarianism and veganism is from an ethical rather than dietary standpoint.


Fair point I probably mean vegetarianism rather than veganism but ethical veganism is as illogical as belief in sky fairies. He doesn't use the bus in case it hits a fly? Has he given up on modern medicines then? Does he bath only in cold water?
Ethics is a purely man made set of rules that we have invented in order for us to live together in larger numbers than is natural.
Trying to extend it to other animals is a logical fallacy that soon becomes unmanageable


----------



## 8ball (Jan 6, 2020)

MickiQ said:


> Fair point I probably mean vegetarianism rather than veganism but ethical veganism is as illogical as belief in sky fairies. He doesn't use the bus in case it hits a fly? Has he given up on modern medicines then? Does he bath only in cold water?
> Ethics is a purely man made set of rules that we have invented in order for us to live together in larger numbers than is natural.
> Trying to extend it to other animals is a logical fallacy that soon becomes unmanageable



I take it you have a newsletter.


----------



## William of Walworth (Jan 6, 2020)

Good discussion. Will get back to it when I've time,  but it may be worth looking at Saturday's Guardian report of the case (which has a few more details, I think, than the BBC version had)


----------



## The Toilet (Jan 7, 2020)

I'm too stupid to formulate a decent pro/against opinion on vegans and veganism but why is it now such a big thing?  Why is it the topic of the month?  

My postman says Veganism is this year's Je Suis Charlie bucket challenge.


----------



## BigTom (Jan 7, 2020)

The Toilet said:


> I'm too stupid to formulate a decent pro/against opinion on vegans and veganism but why is it now such a big thing?  Why is it the topic of the month?
> 
> My postman says Veganism is this year's Je Suis Charlie bucket challenge.



1) climate change issue is bringing a lot of people towards veganism who don't care about animal rights. Everyone I know who is now reducing meat consumption or removing it entirely is doing so for primarily environmental reasons, not health or animal rights reasons. This I think is responsible for the appearance of the "flexitarian" category and drives the longer term growth of vegetarianism/veganism.
2) Veganuary is bigger each year, it's been going for a few years but that's why this month in particular
3) Lots of big, mainstream, high street, fast food places bringing in vegan/plant based foods to replace meats. Very much away from the hippy-organic-raw food-vegan stereotype, and those companies are marketing their products _hard_


----------



## BigTom (Jan 7, 2020)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> Just had a vegan breakfast panini at work - beans, mushrooms, vegan sausage and vegan cheese.
> 
> Not bad overal, the sasuage was surprisingly decent, but my god the "cheese". No.



cashew based vegan cheeses, which claim to be vegan cheddar cheese are ime utterly disgusting and need to be condemned to be fed only to tories in the gulags come the revolution. However, I was very surprised trying some coconut based cheese (violife brand) which is very, very much like a gouda/edam type cheese. I have some "halloumi" to try when I can be bothered to get round to actually frying it (thought it was going to be a feta type cheese as just described as mediterranian style cheese)



existentialist said:


> I know nothing about the specifics of this case, so what I'm going to say might be perceievd as a bit unfair...but I've come across these single-issue campaigning types before, and they are a complete pain in the arse to deal with. I wouldn't be at all surprised if what Mr Casamitjana was trying to do was simply up the ante - whatever his employer did, it would undoubtedly not have been enough. He's obviously very much a campaigning vegan, and good luck to him there...but I do wonder whether what happened was that he got his hobby mixed up with his day job, and began to try and impose his values on his employer's operation. And then, of course, when they told him to wind his neck it, it's all clutching of pearls and "bbbbut you're only doing this to me because I'm VEGAN!".
> 
> Whatever, there are clearly rather more undercurrents to this tale than anyone's letting on about.



not disagreeing but I think it's understandable for someone to object to the League of Cruel Sports having investments in organisations that do animal testing, it's not really in line with the organisation's values, rather than an individual seeking to impose their own values on an organisation.



MickiQ said:


> Fair point I probably mean vegetarianism rather than veganism but ethical veganism is as illogical as belief in sky fairies. He doesn't use the bus in case it hits a fly? Has he given up on modern medicines then? Does he bath only in cold water?
> Ethics is a purely man made set of rules that we have invented in order for us to live together in larger numbers than is natural.
> Trying to extend it to other animals is a logical fallacy that soon becomes unmanageable



I don't really want to defend this guy but your argument here fails because he will use the bus if it's over an hour's journey (iirc the time correctly). Any shorter than that, he's happy to walk and avoid the deaths he sees the bus travel causing. It's about avoidable deaths and what someone sees as reasonable to do in their own life. That he cannot avoid killing any living creatures ever is not a reason to not avoid those he sees as reasonable to avoid.

Honestly I feel like what you've said here, I could say that the logical outcome of what you are saying is that we should seek to cause pain and death to animals where ever we feel like it. It's basically sadistic. And that would be as much of a strawman of your position as the one you've created here for ethical veganism.


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Jan 7, 2020)

BigTom said:


> 1) climate change issue is bringing a lot of people towards veganism who don't care about animal rights. Everyone I know who is now reducing meat consumption or removing it entirely is doing so for primarily environmental reasons, not health or animal rights reasons. This I think is responsible for the appearance of the "flexitarian" category and drives the longer term growth of vegetarianism/veganism.
> 2) Veganuary is bigger each year, it's been going for a few years but that's why this month in particular
> 3) Lots of big, mainstream, high street, fast food places bringing in vegan/plant based foods to replace meats. Very much away from the hippy-organic-raw food-vegan stereotype, and those companies are marketing their products _hard_



This ex-slaughterhouse worker makes a pretty good case for veganism:



> Whether they eat meat or not, most people in the UK have never been inside an abattoir - and for good reason. They are filthy, dirty places. There's animal faeces on the floor, you see and smell the guts, and the walls are covered in blood.
> 
> And the smell... It hits you like a wall when you first enter, and then hangs thick in the air around you. The odour of dying animals surrounds you like a vapour...
> 
> ...











						Confessions of a slaughterhouse worker
					

A former abattoir worker describes her job and the effect it had on her mental health.



					www.bbc.co.uk
				




Basically, a world without slaughterhouses would be a much better world.


----------



## 8ball (Jan 7, 2020)

The Toilet said:


> I'm too stupid to formulate a decent pro/against opinion on vegans and veganism but why is it now such a big thing?  Why is it the topic of the month?



People are bored with Brexit.


----------



## krtek a houby (Jan 7, 2020)

The Toilet said:


> I'm too stupid to formulate a decent pro/against opinion on vegans and veganism but why is it now such a big thing?  Why is it the topic of the month?
> 
> My postman says Veganism is this year's Je Suis Charlie bucket challenge.



no s/he doesn't


----------



## andysays (Jan 7, 2020)

8ball said:


> It depends.  A mate of mine doesn't do it because he loves animals.  He just fucking hates plants.


Say what you like about hating plants, dude, at least it's an ethos...


----------



## T & P (Feb 18, 2020)

I'm (of course) completely supportive of veggie and vegan foods becoming commonplace and all restaurants and workplaces offering a good range of such options, but to me this feels like a cunt's trick...



> *How would you feel if your expenses were declined because your meal contained meat?*
> 
> That's the situation at property developers Igloo Regeneration, where all corporate entertaining, workshop catering and even staff expenses must now be vegetarian if staff wish to be reimbursed.












						No putting meat on expenses, says property firm
					

Developers Igloo Regeneration has gone vegetarian to cut its environmental impact.



					www.bbc.co.uk


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 18, 2020)

T & P said:


> I'm (of course) completely supportive of veggie and vegan foods becoming commonplace and all restaurants and catering places offering a good range of such options, but to me this feels like a cunt's trick...
> 
> 
> 
> ...


i think that's barely going to dent a property developers' environmental footprint


----------



## Saul Goodman (Feb 18, 2020)

Pickman's model said:


> i think that's barely going to dent a property developers' cuntprint


FFY.

I do hope one of their employees sues them for discrimination.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 18, 2020)

Saul Goodman said:


> FFY.
> 
> I do hope one of their employees sues them for discrimination.


i hope all their buildings subside.


----------



## Saul Goodman (Feb 18, 2020)

Pickman's model said:


> i hope all their buildings subside.


I hope the boss' next shit is a hedgehog.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 18, 2020)

Saul Goodman said:


> I hope the boss' next shit is a hedgehog.




(((hedgehog)))


----------



## Proper Tidy (Feb 18, 2020)

She says in that piece that she had to bring the company along, it couldn't be imposed. Funny, I'd call the business refusing to pay legitimate employee expenses for sustenance because they don't like the choice pretty imposing really. If they can do this, what's to stop employers imposing their view of what they deem healthy - oh you had chips, fuck off then, pay for your own tea out of your own pocket when you were 100 miles from home at 8pm during a twelve hour working day.

Mind you, not the first. The hippy capitalist dick who owns forest green rovers did the same. He's a right bellend too.


----------



## ddraig (Feb 18, 2020)

Proper Tidy said:


> She says in that piece that she had to bring the company along, it couldn't be imposed. Funny, I'd call the business refusing to pay legitimate employee expenses for sustenance because they don't like the choice pretty imposing really. If they can do this, what's to stop employers imposing their view of what they deem healthy - oh you had chips, fuck off then, pay for your own tea out of your own pocket when you were 100 miles from home at 8pm during a twelve hour working day.
> 
> Mind you, not the first. The hippy capitalist dick who owns forest green rovers did the same. He's a right bellend too.


players got healthier didn't they?


----------



## Saul Goodman (Feb 18, 2020)

ddraig said:


> players got healthier didn't they?


Offset by a sudden and intolerable surge of self-righteousness.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Feb 18, 2020)

ddraig said:


> players got healthier didn't they?



Dunno tbh, wouldn't surprise me if they did though. It's not the eating plant based food that bothers me. It's the employer enforcing something which infringes on the employees lives and autonomy for no good reason, or no good reason in the context of the employer > employee relationship. Bosses shouldn't be telling the people they employ what they can or can't eat. Its a cunts trick.


----------



## BristolEcho (Feb 18, 2020)

Proper Tidy said:


> Dunno tbh, wouldn't surprise me if they did though. It's not the eating plant based food that bothers me. It's the employer enforcing something which infringes on the employees lives and autonomy for no good reason, or no good reason in the context of the employer > employee relationship. Bosses shouldn't be telling the people they employ what they can or can't eat. Its a cunts trick.



At FGR isn't it only meals that they provided? Players could it anything while away from the club and not on duty. 

I agree with what you are saying though.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Feb 18, 2020)

BristolEcho said:


> At FGR isn't it only meals that they provided? Players could it anything while away from the club and not on duty.
> 
> I agree with what you are saying though.



Yeah I think so. Tbh I was being a bit of a dick bringing FGR into it, I just have an intense dislike for that fella


----------



## T & P (Feb 18, 2020)

If it was really about the environment they should have banned


Proper Tidy said:


> She says in that piece that she had to bring the company along, it couldn't be imposed. Funny, I'd call the business refusing to pay legitimate employee expenses for sustenance because they don't like the choice pretty imposing really. If they can do this, what's to stop employers imposing their view of what they deem healthy - oh you had chips, fuck off then, pay for your own tea out of your own pocket when you were 100 miles from home at 8pm during a twelve hour working day.
> 
> Mind you, not the first. The hippy capitalist dick who owns forest green rovers did the same. He's a right bellend too.



The story is somewhat unclear but it did seem to suggest it was majorly approved but there were ‘a few dissidents’. So not everyone was on board, initially at the very least, and it’s not difficult to imagine a situation whereby an employee doesn’t agree with a measure but eventually goes along with it because the boss is lobbying hard for it and at the end of the day you don’t want to risk antagonising your employer.

There’s something fundamentally wrong about this. Apart from the fact that the environmental angle is highly subjective (poultry is not nearly as environmentally significant as red meat but is banned- yet cow milk cheese or eggs are allowed), unless the rule had been stipulated in the employment contract I cannot see how one can suddenly legally stop certain food expenses based on dietary choices when none had previously existed.


----------



## existentialist (Feb 19, 2020)

T & P said:


> I'm (of course) completely supportive of veggie and vegan foods becoming commonplace and all restaurants and workplaces offering a good range of such options, but to me this feels like a cunt's trick...
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Cunt's trick. It can only possibly create negativity and a backlash.


----------



## Saul Goodman (Mar 2, 2020)

*Vegan sends email request asking neighbours to cook meat with windows shut*
"Please close your windows when cooking meat!!" the email begins.

"As a vegan runner, it's always hard for me this time of year when the weather starts warming up and folks start opening their windows."



Fuck off, you daft cunt!


----------



## existentialist (Mar 2, 2020)

Saul Goodman said:


> *Vegan sends email request asking neighbours to cook meat with windows shut*
> "Please close your windows when cooking meat!!" the email begins.
> 
> "As a vegan runner, it's always hard for me this time of year when the weather starts warming up and folks start opening their windows."
> ...



The quote may be genuine, but @bestofnextdoor clearly isn't the account the original alleged tweet was posted from, and I note that it was tagged to SXSW, which is a US-based comedy festival, so I'm not 100% convinced...

ETA: Interestingly, a Google of choice phrases in the alleged tweet reveal nothing except retweets, eg from the bestofnextdoor account. I am increasingly suspicious...


----------



## Marty1 (Mar 2, 2020)

Saul Goodman said:


> *Vegan sends email request asking neighbours to cook meat with windows shut*
> "Please close your windows when cooking meat!!" the email begins.
> 
> "As a vegan runner, it's always hard for me this time of year when the weather starts warming up and folks start opening their windows."
> ...




Will nobody think of the #plantbased neighbours suffering?!



Surely it’s a windup?


----------



## editor (Mar 2, 2020)

existentialist said:


> The quote may be genuine, but @bestofnextdoor clearly isn't the account the original alleged tweet was posted from, and I note that it was tagged to SXSW, which is a US-based comedy festival, so I'm not 100% convinced...


It's bollocks of course. That's why no one has actually managed to cite an actual source for this, and can only refer to an 'email apparently sent by a vegan jogger.'
Still, it looks like there's more than enough people ready to hoover up this nonsense.


----------



## existentialist (Mar 2, 2020)

Marty1 said:


> Will nobody think of the #plantbased neighbours suffering?!
> 
> 
> 
> Surely it’s a windup?


I think we have an expert opinion here...


----------



## Saul Goodman (Mar 2, 2020)

existentialist said:


> The quote may be genuine, but @bestofnextdoor clearly isn't the account the original alleged tweet was posted from, and I note that it was tagged to SXSW, which is a US-based comedy festival, so I'm not 100% convinced...


I've no idea. It came up in my news feed, so I did a search and it's all over the netz. But it is funny


----------



## Saul Goodman (Mar 2, 2020)

editor said:


> It's bollocks of course. That's why no one has actually managed to cite an actual source for this, and can only refer to an 'email apparently sent by a vegan jogger.'
> Still, it looks like there's more than enough people ready to hoover up this nonsense.


Like hoovering up post-brexit airport queue nonsense?


----------



## existentialist (Mar 2, 2020)

Saul Goodman said:


> I've no idea. It came up in my news feed, so I did a search and it's all over the netz. But it is funny


It is - sort of - funny, but increasingly implausible.

I'm not averse to poking fun at Precious Veganism, but I prefer to use remotely credible sources,  if only to avoid looking like I'm only interested in tweaking vegan noses.


----------



## Saul Goodman (Mar 2, 2020)

existentialist said:


> It is - sort of - funny, but increasingly implausible.
> 
> I'm not averse to poking fun at Precious Veganism, but I prefer to use remotely credible sources,  if only to avoid looking like I'm only interested in tweaking vegan noses.


I'm fairness, I've no idea of the source, or its validity... I'm merely reporting the news.


----------



## Marty1 (Mar 2, 2020)

existentialist said:


> It is - sort of - funny, but increasingly implausible.
> 
> I'm not averse to poking fun at Precious Veganism, but I prefer to use *remotely credible sources*,  if only to avoid looking like I'm only interested in tweaking vegan noses.



Readers digest?


----------



## Marty1 (Mar 2, 2020)

Saul Goodman said:


> I'm fairness, I've no idea of the source, or its validity... I'm merely reporting the news.



Ah, so you work for the BBC?


----------



## Saul Goodman (Mar 2, 2020)

Marty1 said:


> Readers digest?


Readers digest.
Reader's digest.
Readers' digest.
Readers, digest.

Gotta love English grammar.


----------



## existentialist (Mar 2, 2020)

Marty1 said:


> Readers digest?


Given your own choice of sources, I can see why you might think of that as a "remotely credible source", yes.


----------



## Saul Goodman (Apr 7, 2020)

*Vegans abuse farmer delivering dairy during coronavirus crisis*
A farmer and his pregnant wife are devastated after being abused online by vegans for delivering dairy products to the elderly and vulnerable self-isolating during the coronavirus pandemic. 








						Vegans abuse farmer delivering dairy during coronavirus crisis - Farmers Weekly
					

A farmer and his pregnant wife are devastated after being abused online by vegans for delivering dairy products to the elderly and vulnerable




					www.fwi.co.uk
				




Disgusting.


----------



## ddraig (Apr 7, 2020)

awww farmers weekly, such an unbiased source! and not just a WIFE but a PREGNANT WIFE! 

But fine for them and other dairy farmers to keep the cows almost constantly pregnant after they've been raped and their babies torn away screaming

And obviously not as DISGUSTING as a bit of online abuse 
desperate industry in desperate times


----------



## Poot (Apr 7, 2020)

I like the way he made vague reference to the comments but never said what they actually were. And they were definitely made by vegans, but he seems unwilling to say who they were or how he knew they were vegans. Still, I'm sure the criminal investigation will get to the bottom of it. What's that? There isn't one? Oh. Bit of a non story, then.


----------

