Death or This God-awful threak?

Roikins · Jul 8, 2010

Originally Posted by Nil

I never even thought about that. It'd be literally impossible for me to live by those parameters. I'd have to begin dressing like a Berkeley hippie to be able to fulfill them and that's just not something I'd ever be willing to do.

Which, to be honest, is why I have no issue with vegetarians, but have problems with vegans... it sort of doesn't make sense when you look back at the history of man. Leather, wools, and furs got primitive man through cold winters, and still can to this day.

samus · Jul 8, 2010

Originally Posted by Roikins

Which, to be honest, is why I have no issue with vegetarians, but have problems with vegans... it sort of doesn't make sense when you look back at the history of man. Leather, wools, and furs got primitive man through cold winters, and still can to this day.

You're right, we should only measure our actions by ancient or prehistoric standards.

Nosu3 · Jul 8, 2010

Originally Posted by Incman

So because they don't eat them it's okay to kill them? Your logic is like swiss cheese, although I don't expect you to understand, seeing as cheese is all unethical and stuffz.

As for what make humans more valuable than other animals; on a deep philosophical level, perhaps nothing. But the fact that we are developed enough to take over the world and live at the top of the food chain, we have de facto assumed the role of the most important animals on our planet.

I'm not vegan.

It doesn't mean it's okay to kill them, it's just an effect of getting food as someone had mentioned.

I think there are things that make humans most valuable, advanced cognition for the most part. When comparing it to other animals, that's one of the ways I'd determine which animal is more valuable in living.

Originally Posted by Roikins

Which, to be honest, is why I have no issue with vegetarians, but have problems with vegans... it sort of doesn't make sense when you look back at the history of man. Leather, wools, and furs got primitive man through cold winters, and still can to this day.

If our changes since primitive days don't make sense, then many modern lifestyles don't make sense.

Vintage Gent · Jul 8, 2010

"Strolling, I yammered metaphysics with Abramowitz,
a jaundice-yellow ("it's really tan")
and fly-weight pacifist,
so vegetarian,
he wore rope shoes and preferred fallen fruit."

- Robert Lowell, "Memories of West Street and Lepke"

coonky · Jul 8, 2010

Originally Posted by Incman

I know what it was in reference to. Don't you see the hypocrisy in that? What makes the field mouse that is killed any less valuable than the animals you are trying to save/not use?

One would think, based on the amount of effort vegans put in to not use any animals/animal products, that the lives of many field mice would be deserving of more than a slight shrug of the shoulders as you run them over with your tractor.

I'm certainly not arguing that there is something wrong with incidental casualties in the act of harvesting food. What I am arguing is that for a group of people claiming to value/protect/not use the lives of any animals, you guys would try a little bit harder to come up with safer harvesting methods for the animals that you claim you are not killing/using.

I'll just offer a counterexample. I'm sure you are against ****, but you aren't doing anything to actively stop ****. Does this make you for ****? No.

I'd love to discuss this further, but I gotta work. Peace, guys. I don't think I'll convince anyone, and I don't think anyone here is really interested in being convinced.

Roikins · Jul 9, 2010

Originally Posted by coonky

It can be whatever you want. We use titles such as "vegan" or "vegetarian" (or "heterosexual", "homosexual", "bisexual" for that matter) as a shorthand for describing ourselves. Of course not everyone fits perfectly into the mold. You can do/eat whatever you want.

I don't know -- seems pretty cut and dry when a guy says he's hetero and only bangs chicks, but not so when someone saying they are vegan still uses animal derived products. Which goes back to my earlier comment that maybe they need some extra labeling. I know people that classify themselves as vegetarians that won't eat any kind of meat, but will still wear and use animal derived products. These people get defensive when you ask if they're vegan, insisting they're vegetarian.

Originally Posted by samus

You're right, we should only measure our actions by ancient or prehistoric standards.

I'm not saying that. I think it's odd to completely dismiss something that is still valid and usable in the present. Every day, new technologies or techniques to do things are developed, yet there are still old technologies and methods that prevail because they still work.

Nosu3 · Jul 9, 2010

Originally Posted by Roikins

I don't know -- seems pretty cut and dry when a guy says he's hetero and only bangs chicks, but not so when someone saying they are vegan still uses animal derived products. Which goes back to my earlier comment that maybe they need some extra labeling. I know people that classify themselves as vegetarians that won't eat any kind of meat, but will still wear and use animal derived products. These people get defensive when you ask if they're vegan, insisting they're vegetarian.
I think you have it backwards Vegan: Does not consume any animal products (some may still use animal products like leather, wool, etc. there may be another name for that) Lacto-Vegetarian: Does not eat meat, but still consumes dairy Lacto-ovovegetarian: Does not eat meat, but still consumes eggs and dairy Partial-vegetarian: Does not eat meat other than chicken or fish, includes dairy and eggs Chickatarian: Chicken is the only meat that is eaten, may use dairy or eggs. The list goes on and can vary As for the first part, it may not be so cut and dry either. A number of hetero men/women have reported in studies of being involved in one or more homosexual acts.

Khayembii Communique · Jul 9, 2010

I don't see what is wrong with veganism at all. There are a ton of great vegan dishes out there, some of which I prefer over meat dishes (for example, this restaurant in town offers both a vegan tempeh reuben and a normal reuban, and out of the two I prefer the tempeh reuben hands down). Also, some of my vegan friends are among the best cooks I have met, since their diet requires them to cook often and to get very creative.

I think that veganism gets a bad rap because it is very highly associated with a certain culture that is commonly portrayed as feminine, hippy-ish, etc... I don't think that is an accurate portrayal of vegans anymore whatsoever.

Roikins · Jul 9, 2010

Originally Posted by Nosu3

I think you have it backwards

Vegan: Does not consume any animal products (some may still use animal products like leather, wool, etc. there may be another name for that)
Lacto-Vegetarian: Does not eat meat, but still consumes dairy
Lacto-ovovegetarian: Does not eat meat, but still consumes eggs and dairy
Partial-vegetarian: Does not eat meat other than chicken or fish, includes dairy and eggs
Chickatarian: Chicken is the only meat that is eaten, may use dairy or eggs.

The list goes on and can vary

As for the first part, it may not be so cut and dry either. A number of hetero men/women have reported in studies of being involved in one or more homosexual acts.

And do you know how many people I have met that have identified themselves as belonging to one of those sub-classes? None. I've only met people that call themselves vegans and vegetarians. Sounds like you guys need to start educating your own so they can better educate others. See, I actually learned something from this discussion, which is sad because I've had this conversation many times in real life. Although, the fact you yourself don't know the term for a vegan that still uses animal products sounds like the little classification system needs work.

As for hetero men involved in a **** act, then I would classify them as bi or KDubs.

acidboy · Jul 9, 2010

Originally Posted by Dragon

The issue is not really field mice or insect killed in the process. For example in your quest to protect dolphin, you may actually be contributing to the killing of more of them than any remote Japanese village. The pollution caused by the mass, commercial vegetables that you eat are not good for the environment at all. The more people become vegetarians, and the more fields necessary to grow the veggies, the more trees need to be cut, etc., etc. Just because one becomes a vegetarian, you are not necessarily "good" all of the sudden.

so true. displacement of animals and the dissipation of forests because of the need for land for cultivation is a serious matter in a lot of 3rd world countries, whose probably serving the united states' veggie market. and where the land has been farmed out, the soil won't serve any purpose eventually.

Nosu3 · Jul 9, 2010

Originally Posted by Roikins

And do you know how many people I have met that have identified themselves as belonging to one of those sub-classes? None. I've only met people that call themselves vegans and vegetarians. Sounds like you guys need to start educating your own so they can better educate others. See, I actually learned something from this discussion, which is sad because I've had this conversation many times in real life. Although, the fact you yourself don't know the term for a vegan that still uses animal products sounds like the little classification system needs work. As for hetero men involved in a **** act, then I would classify them as bi or KDubs.
It's easier and less confusing to say vegetarian than lacto-ovovegetarian, for example. Labels aren't too important, vegan/vegetarian can usually get the point across. Really it just boils down to minimizing the death and harm to animals as much as you want or are able to. I've seen vegan as defined as not consuming any animal products (no mention of wool/leather, etc) and as not consuming/using any animal products. Well, the study was heterosexual men/women, not bisexual. I think the purpose of it was to demonstrate that some heterosexuals may engage in sex acts with the same sex, even though they are not significantly attracted to that sex, rather different aspects of it... or just wanted to ********.

KitAkira · Jul 9, 2010

Originally Posted by tomgirl

there was an article in the paper today praising this chick who isn't only vegan..but RAW vegan.

Distressed vegans are for noobs, do they come in selvedge too?

awxg · Jul 9, 2010

Good read...sort of:

http://www.thebestpageintheuniverse.net/c.cgi?u=grill

bBoy JEe · Jul 9, 2010

Originally Posted by JLay87

I don't see what is wrong with veganism at all. There are a ton of great vegan dishes out there, some of which I prefer over meat dishes (for example, this restaurant in town offers both a vegan tempeh reuben and a normal reuban, and out of the two I prefer the tempeh reuben hands down). Also, some of my vegan friends are among the best cooks I have met, since their diet requires them to cook often and to get very creative.

I think that veganism gets a bad rap because it is very highly associated with a certain culture that is commonly portrayed as feminine, hippy-ish, etc... I don't think that is an accurate portrayal of vegans anymore whatsoever.

Clearly that restaurant sucks at making a Reuben. I suppose your argument could be that an excellent tempeh Reuben might be marginally better than a super ****** Reuben, but that's about all.

Dragon · Jul 9, 2010

Originally Posted by acidboy

so true. displacement of animals and the dissipation of forests because of the need for land for cultivation is a serious matter in a lot of 3rd world countries, whose probably serving the united states' veggie market. and where the land has been farmed out, the soil won't serve any purpose eventually.

Exactly. It's interesting how Nosu ignores this, and thinks that it's good for the environment if everyone stops eating beef, but not any worse for the environment if everyone becomes vegetarian.

Death or This God-awful threak?

Distinguished Member

Senior Member

Distinguished Member

Distinguished Member

Well-Known Member

Distinguished Member

Distinguished Member

Distinguished Member

Distinguished Member

Stylish Dinosaur

Distinguished Member

Wait! Wait! I gots an opinion!

Senior Member

Senior Member

Distinguished Member

FEATURED PRODUCTS

Similar threads

Featured Sponsor

Definitely full canvas only

Half canvas is fine

Really don't care

Depends on fabric

Depends on price

Forum Sponsors

Forum statistics

FOLLOW STYLEFORUM ON: