The Best Vegan Approach
At the Seed Experience last Sunday a friend (running a vegan nutrition booth) wondered if there was a name for vegans who approached and promoted veganism through health, environmental, and ethical angles. Well, I don’t think there is. But there should be. Like, maybe, “vegan.”
Under the broad umbrella of vegan education there are arguments worth having and arguments worth turning into flotsam. Or is it jetsam? Either way, the “best approach” argument should be jettisoned. We need to be a movement motivated by inclusion. We need to be equally amenable to philosophers as nutritionists, ecologists and vegan food cart owners. Come one; come all. Just come—or become—vegan.
Vegans are hardly above petty identity politics. It’s natural, I suppose, to favor the approach that you as an individual happen to advocate. But let’s avoid comparisons. It’s not about you or me. Our collective mission goes beyond the species.Yet we take the wind out of our own sails with this sort of needless favoritism. After all, these three approaches (and there are of course others) are stronger when bundled together than when separated.
By themselves, these justifications for veganism have weak spots. The ethical approach suffers from the fact that people are rarely motivated by ethics when there’s no obvious self-interest in it; the health argument suffers from the fact that it’s perfectly possible to be an optimally healthy omnivore; and the ecological argument suffers from the fact that the sustainable food movement has made a strong and far more appealing case for rotational grazing as integral to agriculture (which isn’t to say they’re right).
Together, these rationales provide a cohesive and impressively convincing case for choosing to become vegan. Not only do they enhance the chances of more people living their lives to minimize animal exploitation, but they also enhance the chances that people of all creeds, educational levels, income brackets, ethnicities, and races will feel more comfortable entering the fold. Pure ethical veganism, I can assure you, intimidates many potential converts. Health benefits–not so much.
A final benefit of expanding the circle of vegan justifications is that it places veganism at the center of issues that we normally do not spend much time debating: obesity, sexism, homophobia, global warming, agricultural habits—to name just a few. When we confine ourselves to a single approach, we confine the scope of our message. And while that make some of us feel empowered, it harms the animals we want to liberate from the deepest structures of oppression.
Your first paragraph had me laughing out loud! This is a subject that’s been on the forefront of my mind lately, too. No matter which ideological point we come from, it is important, I think, to examine and explore all the angles for maximum advocacy. And we must also realize that, as more and more people become vegan, for whatever reason, vegans will necessarily become more diverse in all sorts of ways. We must be inclusive, rather than exclusive, as long as the animals are benefitted.
As to the ecological argument – one point that I’ve made in several forums but never gotten an response to is that it is possible to have rotational grazing, which would benefit the animals, crops and land – but the animals do not have to be killed. After all, they poop for their whole lives! Is there something I’m missing?
I think we need to ask ourselves if nonhumans have benefited by the dependence we’ve imposed on them, and our designation of them as objects of property.
“Rotational grazing” is a subject which really deserves its own post.
Allan Savory (is this who we’re talking about?) has attracted a lot of attention, but his ideas on rotational grazing are basically a bit flaky. Even if I had to come up with the best grazing system, I’m not sure it would be “Holistic Management,” which (as I recall) actually calls for increasing the intensity of grazing. There are important criticisms, not coming from vegans, which I haven’t seen addressed.
The more general question of whether some sort of rotational grazing system (perhaps not Savory’s), which does not involve eating animal products, would be possible and beneficial, raises a whole host of technical and social issues. What’s worse, there are several (completely different) ways of making the case, so it’s hard to answer quickly.
One possible case is that fossil fuels are history, electric tractors (powered with renewables and batteries) require too much technology and rare minerals, and we need to go back to animals for farm labor, mules for example. Also, at what level of human population are we talking? Are we going back to pre-industrial levels, like half a billion or so? So it’s a fascinating but complex topic.
The best approach is an “ecumenical” approach.
The good reasons for being vegan tend to fall in one of three categories: nutrition, ecology, and ethics. To be successful, we need to appeal to a variety of different people and on a variety of different levels, both in terms of style and substance. Compare (just within the “nutrition” sector) “Vegan Cupcakes take over the World” with NutritionFacts.org.
Again a very good post, I found myself recently comparing all vegan movements to political parties and then religions, all of them exclusive. For aspiring vegans, it is not appealing, and you are right, we need them all, and you are right again, they must address all education levels, I for one would feel less stupid when told I am ignorant in words I do not understand
I know I’ve said a similar thing here before, but I want to point out that the “three approaches” idea isn’t necessarily on-point. That was an idea postulated by Erik Marcus (I think? Tell me if I’m wrong but it was a vegan writer within the last 15 yrs.) It’s just an idea, one framework among many. And I find it to be wrong. I think veganism and environmentalism are the same thing and you can’t be an ethical vegan or an ethical environmentalist without embracing both. As for health aspects… I advocate knowing enough about vegan health to be healthy and an effective advocate, but I tend to stray away from health arguments unless I think that’s going to be the only way to get through to somebody. The truth is there’s no such thing as optimal health because we all have bodies, get sick, and die, and some meat-eaters are actually quite healthy, and some vegans not so much. So it’s sticky ground.
Carolyn,
I am so pleased to find out about your blog!
FYI, I was the one who proposed this “three approaches” framework, in my 1983 book “A Vegetarian Sourcebook: The Nutrition, Ecology, and Ethics of a Natural Foods Diet,” and various talks I gave at that time. At the time (1970′s – 1980′s) I found different “numbers” of reasons being given by various people. Seven reasons, twelve reasons, “101 Reasons,” etc. But they all boil down to three basic approaches. Dudley Giehl’s book Many others have picked it up since then.
These “three approaches” are intended as a stance for the movement (or a way to understand the vegetarianism / veganism), not a stance for an individual or even any organization.
There are many ethical vegans who are completely clueless about the environment (most of them, probably), and out of ignorance may even act “unethically” — let’s just say: in ways that I personally would not act, for ethical reasons. I don’t want to throw them out of the movement (and couldn’t anyway). We need them!
The health reasons are a bit murkier, there are long-lived meat-eaters; but I think it is clear that the fewer animal products you get, the better. Good thing, too, as it would be much harder to convince people to do something that’s NOT healthy.
This movement is really huge, ideologically speaking, and it is out of our hands. We have come light years in the past 30 years. The key problematic area is the environmental issue. Environmentalism has been short-changed by most vegans and activists. You are right to focus on this point. But we can fix that.
Sincerely,
Keith
I meant to say (previous post) that Dudley Giehl’s book “Vegetarianism” describes very well vegetarian (vegan) thinking in the 1970′s. No “three approaches” here; it was more like a dozen.
Hi Keith! Thanks for your thoughts. I think my main concern is that separating the discourse of the ethics around animal rights and environmentalism (a discourse that’s been strategically taken on by many orgs) is ultimately harmful to the movement because animals’ individual rights, species rights, and the whole ecology of the planet are deeply intertwined.
I agree that we can’t toss aside those who are vegan for a certain reason, that often it’s results and not motivations that matter… and that the movement is huge and not containable, which is a beautiful thing… ultimately I will be excited about someone being vegan, period!
However, I think there are ways in which both the environmentalist and vegan movements are divided that are deeply harmful to both, and that the discourse needs to start getting more complicated on all sides. Seems like we are probably in agreement. I don’t want to overwhelm or rush people, but the earth and all its creatures are burning up real fast
Wait maybe that should have been a frowny emoticon
Anyways, thanks so much for your work and your thoughts!
p.s. Thanks for the book rec; I do like the idea of there being a million approaches to veganism. (I suppose my main points here are that if we claim “ethics” in the name of animal rights, those aren’t real ethics if they exclude the environment, which comprised of animals, among other things.) I think the spiritual approach is another important one, and it’s also a huge personal reason for my veganism. Would love to hear folks’ ideas about approaches that go beyond the popular “three prongs”.
I think that, as opposed to what you say Keith, the 3 approaches DOES allow you to “target” (ie: approach) an individual with a reasonable expectation of success today because of the contemporary multiple crisis consistently in the popular media concerning health and diet (obesity, GMO, listeria outbreaks, antibiotics in meat, healthcare costs, etc), and environmental anxieties (climate change, oil drilling, fracking, gas prices, plastic, etc). This is a different setting then it was 25 years ago. The word “Vegan” is now common.
You can approach someone with breast cancer and have them adapt a Vegan diet, yes, because they are facing cancer. You can approach an environmentalist and … you get my point. This is happening now. And, in the end, as James says, it is the animals who will benefit no matter what the humans’ incentives are.
Right. I should have said, the three approaches is not NECESSARILY intended as a target approach for an individual or organization. Vegetarian Resource Group, for example, still has “Health / Ecology / Ethics” on the cover of every issue of “Vegetarian Journal.” Other groups will focus exclusively on factory farms, chickens, or whatever.
The answer is simple. “It’s Cool to be a Vegan!”
I think you can be an ethical vegan without being an environmentalist. You after all can live on Twinkies. However, you can’t be an ethical environmentalist without being a vegan, because methane is methane and nitrous oxide is nitrous oxide whether it comes out of a cow on a factory farm or out of a rotationally grazed cow. And that’s only one reason. You still need to feed that rotationally grazed cow grain or grass grown on land other that on which he grazes, unless you have the luxury of owning lots of land, which most of us don’t. You still need to give that animal hundreds (actually thousands) of times more water than plants to produce the same amount of protein (quinoa). Even if you’re rotationally grazing your animals as a future food source, you’re still indirectly condoning larger scale agriculture for the masses, and therefore not really making a dent in environmental and species devastation. Most people globally want to eat what the wealthiest in the world eat…meat, particularly when an American company loads it up with fat, slime and salt.
The solution: The wealthiest folks (and by that I mean those who have the luxury of eating sustainable, organic, humanely raised animals) need to give up meat totally in order to send the right message rather than “building closed communities” of humanely raised environmentally sustainable and righteously produced animal products. The farmers might be physically healthier, and feel virtuous because the “crops” are organic and humane and because they’re exercising more on the farm,, and the consumers may feel virtuous because they’re buying meat that came from happy animals, but none of them are taking into consideration the well being of the hungry, the poor, or those who are subjected to environmental racism, who have their land taken for seafood/land animal farms, or whose rights are violated in factory farm operations everywhere…human and non-human. Rainforests and mangrove forests are still being destroyed while the farmer rotates his animals. The concept of sustainable farming is elitist. It’s all about “me” without thought as to how the practice affects everyone else on the planet. So even sustainable farming of animals is unethical. Sustainable farming is actually a very selfish movement. It is not cool at all to be an elitist. Historically, it never has been. It is not cool at all to be part of that movement.
Now, on the other hand, ethical veganism is cool, really cool. And, it’s getting more and more cool. Look at all the celebs becoming vegan. As ethical vegans, we can in fact help reduce world hunger and help people globally enjoy better health, breath better air, and drink cleaner water. By being vegan we certainly help protect the rights of all who live and work in the animal agriculture industry, as well as those who are unfortunate enough to live nearby.
As unpalatable as it might be for many of us, I think we have to meet the sustainable and health people (I’m a health person too) at the table and we need to start peppering our discussions with ethical questions that arise from their choices, not by criticizing them but by complementing their efforts, yet, at the same time also pointing out how even those “thoughtful” “sustainable” “compassionate” and “healthy” choices still adversely affect the poor, the hungry and the disenfranchised of the world. And even though their choices are well thought out and make sense in so many ways(although I’m not sure if they really do), those choices continue to cause unimaginable suffering to beings, human and non-human everywhere, so we have to ask, are they really good choices. No one wants their ideas and beliefs belittle. Those in the sustainable food movement think of themselves as more caring about the earth and the creatures that those who still eat cheap mass produced meat. They think of themselves as ethical, intelligent, and caring people. And they are. But ask them about what their choices do to help end obesity, world hunger, human rights abuses, animal cruelty, or rainforest and mangrove devastation. Ask them what they think about that and really press them for answers. I’m not sure that those are questions that can answer. Let’s appeal to the better side of them with our better side. Let’s not be smug and assaulting, but rather firm and knowledgeable about our beliefs and our arguing points. Let’s help already thoughtful people expand that compassion to all of those who want to be just like them but who can only do that by continuing to buy cheap meat. Many environmentalists or health enthusiasts have no idea about how their choices affect world hunger and human rights. Most know about the animal cruelty. We have a great opportunity to complement, educate, and enlist people from all angles into the vegan lifestyle for ethical reasons that go way beyond the animals with the animals benefiting the most.
It’s really cool to be vegan. I think that’s the message we should be promoting. It’s really cool to be a vegan. It’s better to be a leader than a follower too, and most people like thinking of themselves as leaders. Better become vegan soon if you want to be a leader. It’s just cool to be a vegan. Particularly a healthy, ethical one. It’s really that simple!
Absolutely. Other social movements for “simple living” in the ancient world started to gain traction when they started to appeal to the upper class.
There is a complementary message to this, also, which is, “it takes courage to be different.”
Yours is a really cool response to a really cool post, Kathryn.
Thank you for sharing the “how”: admiring instead of belittling a person’s current efforts at expressing compassion; asking questions in a way that gets the person to examine the interrelatedness of the issues; being “firm and knowledgeable” instead of “smug and assaulting.”
And I like your line, Keith: “it takes courage to be different.”
Which brings to mind a few of my favorite quotes on courage:
“Even if my philosophy does not extend to discovering anything new, it does nevertheless possess the courage to regard as questionable what has long been thought true.” ~ Georg Christoph Lichtenberg (1742-1799) German scientist, satirist, aphorist
“Courage is not simply one of the virtues, but the form of every virtue at the testing point.” ~ C. S. Lewis (1898-1963) English novelist and essayist
“To go against the dominant thinking of your friends, of most of the people you see every day, is perhaps the most difficult act of heroism you can have.” ~ Theodore H. White (1915-1986) American political writer
It’s cool to be a vegan — that’s for sure, Kathryn
I too think the “humane/sustainable” movement is elitist and selfish; and these consumers should certainly be informed of the link between meat consumption and world hunger. Personally, I don’t think they’re any more ethical or compassionate than consumers who buy cheap meat — but elitists can afford a label that makes them feel good, a dishonest label, that is.
I agree we shouldn’t be smug or assaulting, and perhaps you’ll agree we must also be clear that “humane farming” is a myth. I usually direct people to http://www.humanemyth.org
We might suggest they read James article, “The Myth of Sustainable Meat”: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/13/opinion/the-myth-of-sustainable-meat.html?_r=1
And “Free-Range Pasture Systems Not a Viable Solution” by Harold Brown, a former cow farmer, who first became a vegetarian for health reasons:
http://news.change.org/stories/free-range-pasture-systems-not-a-viable-solution
Pragmatically, it seems to me that the case for veganism should be made for all the reasons identified in this post and comments. But my affection for humanity – not all that glowing anyway – dims a bit when the environmental reason is raised alone or above all the others. It’s a reminder that probably some of the neighbors of Auschwitz objected only to the air pollution from the smoke stacks.
I think that’s a very apt comparison.
I agree Charlie that this goes way beyond environmental reasons. Your analogy to the Auschwitz is chilling, but true that “probably some of the neighbors objected only to the smoke”. Some may have been bothered by more than the smoke, but didn’t want to risk being seen as different for obvious reasons. Some of those people were probably ethical folks who just lacked courage. This is where the courage that Keith mentions comes into play. We vegans do have the courage to be different, and we need to use that courage to propel others into objecting to more than the smoke. We need to help others feel that courage in their hearts too. There’s a lot at stake.
I just watched this short video tonight and think some will appreciate it. I think it’s “charging”.
Phillip Wollen at the St James Ethics and Wheeler Centre Debate
Incredible! Thank you for sharing this, Kathryn.
I was familiar with one of Wollen’s quotes (“A robin redbreast in a cage puts all heaven in a rage”) but had no idea his repertoire was so extensive and memorable: http://www.all-creatures.org/quotes/wollen_philip.html
Nor did I realize that he’s an ex-banker! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philip_Wollen
If you’re up for watching the whole debate (almost 2 hours): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mNED7GJLY7I
The sentence “A robin redbreast in a cage puts all heaven in a rage” is in a poem by William Blake (“Auguries of Innocence”).
Thanks, Keith. I’ll let all-creatures.org know, so they can remove the quote from their Wollen page.
In fact, CreatureQuotes.com DOES attribute that quote to Blake (Chapter 8, page 9).
Somewhere in the back of my mind, though, I have an impression that some current-day AR advocate slightly revised the Blake verse. Does anyone recall a modern take-off of those lines? Or is that just my imagination?
P.S. CQ.com features the Wollen quote “In my judgment, the vivisector is to medicine what the pornographer is to art”–though Wollen spells “judgement” the British way.
CQ, are you certain it’s CQ.com? That site is called “CQ Roll Call” (at least on my screen) and appears to be a an organization of lobbyists. “Wollen” in the search field there returns “No Results.”
Oh, dear, my attempt at shorthand backfired! Earlier in my comment, I referenced CreatureQuotes.com … try that!
When Creature Quotes was compiled in 2009-2010, I don’t think Wollen was in Wikipedia. Had he been, he would’ve been cited in CQ.com (that’s shorthand!) as being an Australian philanthropist and he would’ve been put in the chapter with 1950 births …
Lobbyists? Wonder how they got the name CQ Roll Call. Thanks for the tip, Charlie.
I just watched the whole debate. I wasn’t particularly impressed with the woman on the affirmative side with Peter Singer and Phillip Wollen. Being a foodie arguing for Vegetarian fare, she listed a menu that was full of dairy and cheese and was called on it. The opposing side’s arguments were “interesting”, but often ridiculous (in my opinion), including rotational grazing would prevent these species of “farmed animals” from going extinct! Worth watching, in part to hear Peter Singer, Phillip Wollen and the crazy kinds of justifications the opposition used. I won’t tell you how the audience voted, but I’ll sleep better tonight knowing.
Agree on all points, kathryn.
Wasn’t Wollen’s 2-minute wrap-up marvelous? Even more gripping than his longer argument ….
As to carolyn’s point about borrowing quotes, I can only say I hope he reads your comment and takes iti to heart. Maybe he figures everyone in the audience knows it’s a line from Arundhati Roy? I didn’t. Perhaps that’s how the “robin redbreast” quote ended up in all-creatures.org (the website founder is going to remove it ).
This is incredible speech, however “I believe another world is possible, on a quiet night I can hear her breathing” is an uncredited Arundhati Roy quote. Just want to throw that out there. He’s got a couple other uncredited (plagarized?) quotes in there too. Overall a pretty fantastic speech though.
I hope others watch the Wollen speech as it is so powerful. I didn’t know he was an ex banker either.
There are plenty of very wealthy executives (like Steve Wynn) or ex-executives (like Clinton) who are vegans now, and although many become vegans for health rather than ethical reasons, the fact that they’ve become vegans helps bring others to to make the change. Each one helps to take the “fringe” out of the movement. Everyone wants health, happiness and peace, so we definitely don’t want to project a feeling of being unhealthy, grumpy, and argumentative. It’s just cool to be vegan and we have to live that image.
Thanks for sending the whole 2 hour debate. Can’t wait to hear the opposing side. Their faces during Wollen’s speech said a lot.
I’ve been vegan for 11 years now ( after a 5-day vegetarian transition period) & can honestly say I’ve influenced no one. I’m one of those vegan success stories. I’m 6′ & went from 330# to 200# in 11 months & have kept it off for 10 years so far, while every fat person I knew when I was fat has gotten much, much fatter. I call myself The Anti-Inspiration. People who hated me for being a fat slob, now hate me for being vegan. One interesting insight I’ve had is that fat slobs despise other fat slobs A LOT more than normal-weight people do. Every normal-weight person over 50 (as I am) I know, stays fit by watching what they eat & bicycling and/or jogging. Another amusing insight is that meat-eaters tend to think of vegans/vegetarians as ignorant over-sensitive wimps, not realizing a vegan has to develop a hide the thickness of a rhino’s to function in this meat & dairy-crazed society! It’s the thin-skinned omnivores who can’t stand to know how their meat, dairy & eggs get to the grocery store…
Yes, it’s as if they’re projecting their own weakness on vegans/vegetarians who have really more courage than they do. Maybe you have influenced people
I’ve been vegan for a decade myself. I was always healthy and exercised. I did not become vegan for health reasons, although I know it can be healthy. I did it because I was an animal lover and just couldn’t rationalize eating a live, thinking being, able to feel pain and pleasure, any longer. It was not in parallel with how I lived my life. My story is similar to thousands.
But for a long time, I wasn’t vegan but lived among them. My SIL, who I was close with, was vegan and a strong advocate for the animals. She was also obsessed with conversion. So much so that she did not think of others feelings or the impressions she made. She was caustic, self-righteous and unbecoming. Don’t get me wrong, I always loved her, but it was difficult at times. She was adamant that she was doing the right thing and blazed forward. She made many vegan friends and they advocated together in their lovely vegan world, exclaiming that they made each other better. But she lost friends. Good people who cared about her and enjoyed her company over the years. But they weren’t vegan. One day when we were chatting, I mentioned something about how long I had been vegan. And I realized something important, but never told her. I realized if I would have become vegan sooner had I not known her. Imagine that? The person in my life that I knew who was the greatest advocate for animals was the reason I became vegan later? Yes, that’s right.
I tell this story to remind everyone that we are role models, whether we like it or not. No one wants to join the cool club if the members are caustic and critical. In fact, the cool clubs are usually short-lived, trendy places filled with people and celebrities looking for the next trend. I didn’t want to hang with them then and I really don’t want to now. I actually dread when I hear of a new celebrity-turned-vegan because who knows why they did it. For the next movie promotion…to drop 20 quick pounds? And who turned vegan just because their favorite celebrity did? Well the next month that favorite celebrity is driving drunk or at a pig roast. Then what? You are correct, it is easy to be vegan, if you do it for the right reasons, which are only for you to decide. Then it’s cool.
Yes, that’s my definition of “cool” too, Emma. And that’s the impression I had of Kathryn’s meaning. Not “cool” as in trendy among celebrities, dieters, and faddists, but “cool” as in caring, compassionate, courageous, courteous, classy, correct — and above all, kind.
I can understand you reacting negatively to your SIL’s attitude. Most of my family still eats meat and I don’t love them any less for it, or preach to them about how wrong they are; but if we happen to be talking about our food choices, I have to be honest enough to say I don’t respect theirs.
Kim, the first thing I’d do is lose those friends because they don’t seem to like you if you’re fat OR thin. Most of those folks will be dead because of their diets long before you will be so, get some new friends who will still be alive 30 or 40 years from now. I too am over 50 (60, actually) and I too had friends and family really go after me for becoming a vegan. I lost 30 pounds (a few friends were jealous), my cholesterol dropped from 266 to 131 where it has remained, and my osteopenia was reversed. I biked 192 miles for a fundraiser, and I hadn’t ridden a bike in 30 years. I know that a few of my friends were jealous of my new found energy and focus. I’ve lost a lot of “friends” along the way, but have met so many new people who think like I do. None of my old friends want to go out to dinner with me anymore. They’re uncomfortable ordering meat in front of me even though I don’t comment. And the truth is, I don’t want to see all that flesh on the table anyway. You’re absolutely right that meat-eaters think that vegans are over-sensitive wimps. What’s wrong with being sensitive I ask them. Is it better to be tolerant of unimaginable cruelty to have an egg, cheese or a strip of bacon just because it tastes good or it’s convenient? I’m sure you know all the comebacks. And you are also right that a vegan has to have a very tough skin to function in a meat driven world where people are selfish, insensitive, ignorant, and afraid to actually learn where their food comes from. They are wimps. Get some new friends. Are there any vegan groups near where you live? Or a sanctuary where you can volunteer? Any local animal rights groups? I know it’s not always easy to find people who think this way, but they’re out there and they’re often looking for like minded people too. Get rid of those thin-skinned omnivore friends if they don’t respect your choices. Don’t call yourself “the anti-inspiration”. You’ve inspired more people than you know…and I’ll bet that those “friends” would give anything to lose the weight and be healthier. It’s very cool what you’ve done. It takes courage to take such a stand and I suspect that people respect you much more than you realize.
Just read, from the Institute for Humane Education’s Marsha Rakestraw, 10 Tips for Talking with Loved Ones about Global Issues: http://humaneeducation.org/sections/view/news_june2012#10tips
Kim, I have found meetup.com to be a wonderful place to start. I have made terrific friends and we go to each others homes to made great meals. I’ve met some nice friends and learned some tips and tricks along the way. It helps to be around like-minded people to reaffirm your believes.
I lost some friends, too. I had a group of women that I played soccer with. We did some road races and went to the gym together. I like to say we were hyper-fit and a bit obsessive. I actually gained some weight when I became vegan. They began to gossip about me and my feelings were so hurt. These people were my friends and all I knew. But veganism changed me on the inside, which was what I cared about and that amazed me. I honestly still struggle with the loss of our friendship and probably always will, but sometimes it’s the harsh reality. I began to volunteer different places, slow down on my obsessive workout routine and became happier than I had ever been. My mind is in the right place and I have new friends now. Please try meetup. You’ll be glad you did.
That’s my definition of cool too.
Kim, I hope you know my comment was a bit tongue in cheek. Clearly, the good friends will still with you. But with some it may just be time to make new ones. I agree with Emma that Meet-ups are another great way to meet people.
And remember that vegan “friends” can sometimes be mean and insensitive too, which is unfortunate because we really need each others support.
If you have any church affiliation, that’s another other place to meet people with the same interests. There are animal rights groups for almost all denominations. If you Google Jewish vegetarian assoc, Unitarian Universalist (that’s actually ufeta.org), Catholic, Christian, Episcopalian vegetarians, etc you’ll find groups near you. All of those religions have vegetarian/AR/vegan groups.
Kathryn – thanks for letting people know about animal advocacy groups that are affiliated with religions and denominations. The Unitarian Universalist group is uuam.org . (It was formerly ufeta.org, but that domain name is used by another organization now.)
I agree 100%. I just sent the humanemyth site to someone yesterday and they lit into me that the site is all propaganda!
Recently, on another site uuam.org there was a discussion about Bill McKibben sustaining the sustainable myth and virtually never mentioning meat production and animal agriculture (factory or free range) as being a contributor to global warming and resource depletion. I know that James has commented on McKibben’s views and his conveniently neglecting to talk about the real inconvenient truth…..flesh production. I don’t understand why he draws a line in the sand when it comes to discussing meat.
Thank you for the Harold Brown reference. I’ll pass it on. I’ve used the other two often but appreciate your posting them because they’re great resources.
Once again, I’m glad we agree, Kathryn, and you’re welcome for the Harold Brown reference. As for anyone who claims the humanemyth site is propaganda, well, I guess some people can look at the truth and yet believe what they want to believe.
I just want to say thank you for the responses & support. I don’t want to give the impression I’m a strident over-bearing vegan. When me & my wife went vegan in 2001 we decided to try it for a month & didn’t tell anyone. Within a week my untreated clinical depression lifted. The first time I mentioned it to anyone was when a guy at work said I looked ‘different’. I proudly told him I lost 30#. When he asked how I said I had ‘gone vegan’. BIG MISTAKE. Up to then I really had no idea how much vegans were hated, especially by ‘persons of size’ (I’m trying to be politically correct here). Co-workers I hardly knew & never told about my being vegan, felt compelled to tell me what they thought about PETA (!) &/or that God says we can eat meat (I’m an atheist so that doesn’t really hold a lot of water with me…) One guy told me he could lose just as much weight on Atkins. I still remember him telling me stories of running all over town to find ‘carb-free’ bread (!). He lost about 30# before gaining it all back & then some.