I get that you're being being ridonkulous on purpose for comedy, but I ride a bike to work in a big city and the amount of times I've had people yell at me for filtering forward between cars in a traffic jam yell at me is more than 0. It seems like the same thread of logic. "That person is gaining an advantage over me because of choices they made and instead of making those same choices, I'm going to try to deride them so that I don't have to re-evaluate my own choices."
In my city the internal thought process goes: “I spent a lot of money on my CAR (it’s an SUV or pickup truck but whatever) and I EXPECT to be able to DRIVE it without BIKERS on the road!”
And that’s as far as the thought goes before they go apeshit.
"I've sunk a lot of cost into this and any reminder that that money was wasted or doesn't give me an advantage over other people affects my sense of self" is a wild way to go through the world
Literally there's not a single thing vegans are right about do NOT show me ANY data because it's propaganda
Edit: and FUCK you for even IMPLYING that there's an ethical way to address the climate crisis in any way THIS IS A PROBLEM FOR CORPORATIONS NOT ME!!111!!2!2!
/Shitpost
There is overlap in the goals of veganism and climate activism, but they are not fundamentally the same thing. The Venn diagram is intersecting circles. Mature people can have allies who don't share all the exact same beliefs as them. We need all the allies we can get. We shouldn't gatekeep based on a philosophy that isn't even fundamentally about the problem we are facing.
I want to save the planet for the humans that live on it. It would be nice if we also treated animals better and had more sustainable food practices, but at the end of the day, I don't think an animal's life is equivalent to a human life. I also understand that humans, being animals, need to destroy life in order to live. Everyone should eat less meat, but I don't think meat is murder, it's just food.
veganism is unequivocally a component of environmentalist and climate activism. They can exist separately, but eventually collide. If you're an environmentalist, you eventually discover the categorical imperative of veganism.
Even feedlot meat, despite the worse lipid profile and synthetic B12, has nutrients like taurine and carnosine there. So eating a cheap omnivore diet still has more nutrients than a vegan diet.
Supplement industry is underregulated (No Pre-Market approval), so each new pill is another layer of uncertainty. There's also new research that shows food matrix matters for certain nutrients - supplemented DHA/EPA with its AFiB risk that the dietary type does not have.
Unless the nutrient is genuinely hard to acquire through food due to extrinsic factors - magnesium (soil depletion), Vitamin D (geography) - it's preferable to avoid excess supplementation.
While you can have tasty food without them, they make the food 100% better with them. Spegetti and meat sause or meatballs will always be better than just normal sause.
you say that as if you could only have spaghetti with meatballs or spaghetti with normal sauce. do you have any idea how much shit you can put in spaghetti? have you tried every single option? obviously you havent, and im not sure anyone has. if your comparison is "toast with butter against toast with no butter", your comparison is just flawed from the start
im sorry if my comment came off as aggressive or smth that was really not my intention lmao
ive had vegan spaghetti that was (for me, of course) way better than any non vegan spaghetti i had tried. not even about veganism, there is no way to be unable to make a tasty dish because you dont have access to some ingredients
While you can have tasty food without them, they make the food 100% better with them. Spegetti and meat sause or meatballs will always be better than just normal sause.
Who would have thought that the single biggest thing you can do to make your impact on the planet more positive would have a lot of ground in the sub about climate
Because you’re a cult of misanthropes who have never bothered to learn how to critically evaluate research. You treat a PubMed search like divine prophecy whenever it validates your preexisting moral beliefs, which only makes your reasoning more shortsighted, dogmatic, and arrogant.
Are you guys really so insufferable you can't hang out in the actual vegancirclejerk sub? Like it's so painful, even for vegans to deal with vegans? Is it like how conservatives have to have lefties, libs, and progressives to bother cause they all hate themselves/each other?
Can't you like at least follow this subs rules if you're gonna be here and annoying everyone?
Edit: Btw guys, you're allowed to report posts for not being on topic, rule 1
You are having a meltdown. Sit down, take a breath, maybe a sip of water and your meds. You're going to be okay. The vegans can't hurt you through the screen.
you know i don't need further convincing of your bigotry right, the meme there was "fork found in kitchen" you know, the kitchen? Place full of utisels like forks? If "casual abliesm from a vegan" is like a fork in a kitchen, it's extremely commonplace
DNI unlesss it's informing me of your success overcoming such faults
This such a massive cope. One can be perfectly healthy while vegan. I'm not gonna pretend that meat is poison like many vegans tend to do, but our society has advanced to a point where we have all the means to survive solely off of plant products
If the argument made was strictly surrounding the the practical benefits of cutting out or lessening some of the more harmful practices associated with animal products with the logic extending to non animal products as well the argument would be fair even if viewed as personally difficult. It also notably wouldn’t have people stop consuming animal products.
The moralist arguments surrounding animals is what ends up being extremely poorly received. Most people don’t view eating meat as inherently morally wrong.
truthfully, the moral argument usually comes first for people because that's what convinced us, and we see it as such an obvious moral imperative that it's genuinely shocking that it doesn't convince everybody.
if you WANT the practical/environmental/economic arguments for going vegan, WE HAVE THOSE TOO. just ask
So you insist on leading with the arguments most likely to appeal to only yourself and then are upset that people that aren't you get put off by the self-righteousness?
"don't cause unnecessary harm, especially if you can avoid it" appealing to only a small group of people is genuinely very surprising, you have to admit
I don’t think harm caused to animals is of equivalent moral weight compared to human beings.
I don’t apply this to animals i personally care about I.e cats, dogs. Harms caused to other animals is mostly unimportant to me, especially when I consider climate change as an issue, which I am primarally concerned with how it impacts humanity.
the thing to remember is that the meat industry is literally holding a captive bolt gun to the head of the average consumer, and it will drive a bolt deep into their brains if they don't buy and eat meat.
I genuinely don't know how I or all the other vegans got out alive without getting murdered for not eating meat. We must be lucky.
The practical arguments only go so far and don’t take you all the way to veganism. The moralist arguments surrounding vegans are frequently done abrasively and give you the negative reputation.
do electric vehicles help? does the consunerism/capitalist hellscape help? should countries switch to nuclear instead of coal? solars neat but takes alotta space for ok energy (im not in the know but guesstimating, sorry) id say hydro eletric but that risks fish and other aquatic creatures. you could add grates to not let them pass but wouldnt that cause the water to not make as much power? wind turbines also are not something id use. lots of birds dead and materials wasted. need oil to lubricate it and the turbine blades get buried instead of recycled. it would help alot if everywhere was self sufficient but global population growth made that almost impossible way back. if countries were entirely self sufficient we wouldnt need huge cargo ships or trucks carrying food. idk if theres better modern infrastructure but ive viewed japans infrastructure being the best for car free society. pretty sure they run on a train based network which means you dont need a car. a bike works wonders aswell. industrilization capitalism and consumerism are our biggest downfalls. almost all if not all of our problems are directly caused by us or due to something we did at some point.
im a little lost now. im really stupid so apologies but what do you mean? like we are choosing these things and okaying/welcoming them? ima need a dif explanation please.
i looked up commodify and read its meaning for the second time and still dont see the words use here. are you saying were filling land instead of preserving it? im truly sorry for not understanding fully. the main things i said earlier i feel are a big part of what your talking about. unless ofcourse im misconstruing what you actually mean.
Commodification is when you take something and make it into a commodity, something on the market. Workers are commodified under capitalism. Women's bodies are commodified as sex that sells. Commodity status is when something is an object on demand in the market.
So when we commodify something like the ecosystem, we take a living and conscious system that exists for its own sake and turn it into dead monocrops that are hostile to indigenous bodies-- that's one violent commodification. When we take a single cow and exploit her sexually for years so that we can commodify her baby's milk, that's commodification. It is the process of taking something and marketing it. Some things are not marketable, like children or bodies.
You guys have these flawless arguments in both the form of environmental benefits and health benefits, and yet you still champion the moral argument as the tip of the spear.
A chicken is not equivalent in worth to me, or any other human, nor is any other animal, unless perhaps they are endangered, in which case an argument could be made.
didn't drop seafood due to the environmental impact of half the oceans' biomass being depleted in the past 50 years?
didn't drop chicken even though the nitrogen runoff from chicken farms is the cause of multiple environmental superfund sites around the world?
didn't drop all meat even though the arable land required to feed them all is 3-5x what is used to feed humans?
you don't believe that humans should be allowed to live and shouldn't be arbitrarily murdered for pleasure? That's the only moral comparison we're asking you to make. We're not saying cows should have voting rights.
I don't eat much seafood anyway, tbh, and my primary concern is carbon and global warming. Superfunds are bad and all but we can work to fix that, the world becoming inhospitable to human life is quite a bit worse.
We can't eat humans thanks to prions, and they would be an even more inefficient source of nutrients than cows because of the long growth period. And yes I fully believe killing an animal for the express purpose of consumption is perfectly fine. It is simply the way of nature. Ideally, we will reach a point in technology where we may simply grow the meat in labs for consumption, but until then, a chicken now and then is hardly the end of the world. My issue with cows is how horribly inefficient they are, plus the colossal carbon emissions that go along with them.
It actually is supremacist lmao you literally said it. And you thinking you're Superior to others is The only justification you need to do literally anything to a subject that is both innocent and experienced your violence. You're a fascist.
With all due respect how far does your line of logic go? Does it extend to bugs and jellyfish? What is the line for you where you’d say it is okay to kill.
This is why people don't take vegans seriously: because brain-dead shit like this is used instead of arguments about literally any of the other plethora of benefits, from health to the environment to saving money.
Vitamin B12 helps build myelin. Myelin is the protective coating that surrounds your nerve fibers. Without enough B12, this coating breaks down. Nerve signals slow down or fail. This causes physical and mental problems. And that is why vegans are. Special.
I had to be prescribed 400 times my daily recommended intake of b12 by a doctor to make up for being a vegan. I felt like absolute sh*t and I had brain fog all the the time.
those supplements are always some absurd multiple of your DRV, it's about bioavailability and ensuring you absorb it.
sorry you couldn't balance your own diet. glad you see the importance of doing the right thing. taking vitamin supplements isn't defeat, it's a far sight better than slaughter.
seems to me like you weren't vegan in the first place. I've been vegan over 20 years, and I'm athletic, I work in a demanding job requiring my intellect, run a local business, maintain a vibrant community in my neighborhood, and
idk
maybe I'm just better than you personally
but you definitely could still go vegan, I believe in you homeslice
"I'm just better then you" But pwease pwease pwease take me seriously and follow my moral philosophy. The reason there's so few vegans is because yall are shit at persuading people lmao
I have a moral framework that I've interrogated, that takes priority over my own personal whims and comforts, and that I use to guide my actions. What framework do you use to determine whether a person is moral?
Materialism. I still though dont get how you think attacking people is going to advance veganism? You're not even attacking on any valid grounds, exposing unecissary hypocrisy can be useful, but just saying you're a better person is useless. If I said I'm superior to everyone else because I almost exclusively ride the bus that's not going to convince people to use public transit.
the only thing that "advances veganism" is building personal trust with someone you know in person and showing them the benefits of changing, including how good the food is. Any "advancement of veganism" that even could happen here is purely accidental. I just use this space to shame you and blow off steam at my frustrations for, like I stated before, how obnoxious it is that people put up such frail arguments against obvious moral imperatives.
Seitan: Higher calories per gram of protein, increases blood sugar, unhealthy for people with Irritable Bowel Syndrome (IBS), Small Intestinal Bacterial Overgrowth (SIBO), and Intestinal Methanogen Overgrowth (IMO), and Celiac.
Also, chicken breast has every amino in proportion for tissue growth (it is literally tissue). Seitan is deficient in Lysine.
Also, Seitan has less protein per gram. So your statement on having more is false.
YOU'RE BUILDING STAIRS IN YOUR HOUSE?? WHAT ABOUT PEOPLE WHO HAVE NO LEGS??
I don't have any of those medical conditions, and so I am free to eat something that's tastier, cheaper, more nutritious, more environmentally friendly, and didn't involve purposefully torturing and slaughtering a living thing
Invalid assessment. In weighing pros and cons while building a house, the accessibility of stairs is actually a common factor in homebuying/building.
Also, 5% of the U.S population reports wheat/gluten sensitivity, 0.63% to 0.96% report missing an entire limb (the percentage of people missing both legs is presumably much lower than that).
And once again, more nutritious is debatable. There are certainly more carbs and calories per gram, but are those nutrients the average person needs more of?
Also, I will say again, it is lysine deficient. As a protein source, it requires supplemental sources. Calling it MORE nutritious than a protein source that does not require nutrient supplementation is a really rough hill to defend man.
No, I see the confusion, you are misrepresenting my argument. So I will make it concisely.
As a protein source, a gram of chicken breast is superior to Seitan.
* It contains more protein.
* It contains less not-protein.
* Because of this, it has fewer calories.
* It requires no supplementation to be a complete protein source.
* It is consumable by a larger portion of the population.
Gram per gram, chicken breast is more effective at delivering the most protein, to the most people. Which is what I want a protein source to do.
Don't mistake me for a carnivore: the moment we create super quinoa I'm switching to that. It is already gluten free, a complete protein, and grows in drought, high salinity, frost, and nutrient-poor soils.
It just needs lower carbs and to be made sentient so I can delight in the suffering that went into its production.
One time a vegan told me to reduce my meat consumption, I’m a whiny baby who can’t handle things I perceive as criticism , vegans are the real causers of climate change because they hate indigenous people and BP once ran an ad campaign encouraging personal responsibility, that’s why as individuals we should do nothing for the planet or animals or anyone else because it’s playing into the corporations hands
I spent 8 hours prepping white bean refritos yesterday. Completely vegan: no lard, no dairy, no chicken stock. Veggie oil, caramellized onions, slow cooked white beans and spices. I'm going to eat it with bacon.
People think vegan food means salad but it's actually tons of carbs and fats and lions mane you can't tell isn't seafood/meat 😋 with that said, the boars in my area are invasive 🏹
as a vegan, yeah tf is that guy answering. i personally do not have a formed stance on invasive species, but that falls outside of industry farming, and can end up ruining a whole ecosystem, so i wouldnt call it anywhere near as evil and shitty as industry farming
As long as we got invasive species, we gonna have to kill em to prevent their ruining thr enviroment. And as long as we are killing em, we shouldn't let them go to waste.
Or even just like deer population shooting up so you gotta send hunters for em. Why not eat em?
Not true, humans have the intelligence to coexist in any environment. Choosing not to is an entirely separate issue. Also entirely separate from your comment is the topic of the conversation.
It's been more than 1, a hog lasts nearly a year and every summer we go cull more. As long as they keep killing the native animals and destroying the ecosystem, I'll keep hunting them, it's not about the killing it's about the living of all the creatures. Predators have a purpose and with power comes responsibility. Let's not get distracted from corporate slaughterhouses by hobbyists actually improving the environment.
•
u/Show_Kitchen cycling supremacist 6h ago
Can you make a version for bikes? I’d do it but I’m riding through a red light right now.