Vegans being banned and comments being deleted from [email protected] for being fake vegans.
From my perspective, the comments were in no way insulting and just part of completely normal interaction. If this decision reflects the general opinion of the mod team, then from my perspective, the biggest vegan community on Lemmy wants to be an elitist cycle of hardcore vegans only, not allowing any slightly different opinion. Which would be very unfortunate.
PS: In contrast to the name of this community, I don’t want to insult anyone here being a ‘bastard’. I just want to post this somewhere on neutral ground. I would really appreciate an open discussion without bashing anyone.
Linking the affected users and mods: @[email protected] @[email protected] @[email protected] @[email protected] @[email protected] @[email protected] @[email protected] @[email protected] @[email protected] @[email protected]
Your resolution is weak.
The vegan Community is actually quite shit. They don’t hesitate to delete your comment just because you aren’t a vegan, even if you agree with them in certain points.
Love the user name. Ruminant revolution!
Its a fact. Also cows are much cooler than horses, because unlike them they are actually useful. Also I cows are very chill so you can cuddle with them a lot.
can cows be ridden?
They can.
I can’t read that but yeah the Vegan community here has a long history of being total assholes.
Knee-jerk reactionary vegans? In a vegan community?
You don’t say!
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
Exactly
Vegan Sub
Plants
I see what you did there :)
wow, the power tripping mods removed my comment… i guess they like irony
I removed your comment because it’s out of topic and it’s bringing up a completely other drama to spike controversy. I.e. you’re trolling.
While we’re on the topic of modding in this thread, GrammarPolice got banned, but it doesn’t look like the comment that they were banned for has been removed. Is this intentional?
If there’s a good-faith counter-aguments already on that thread and might leave the originating comment up so that their effort is not lost.
I was talking specifically about the giant ascii art with a profane curse as the only text.
But I just had a look and it seems like it was removed, but that the removal hasn’t federated to my instance properly. Dammit, I thought the recent update had fixed LW’s federation problems.
you’re insane… that was completely on topic and i wasn’t “trolling”, i was discussing
and you’re completely power tripping to remove that.You were off-topic and trolling. You were not discussing, you were bellyaching and bringing up another drama-laden topic that has been discussed to death and had multiple threads about it locked in this very comm. Now stop whinging and touch grass ffs. I just removed one of your comments. didn’t even ban you.
bellyaching
i’m talking about the overarching motivation of concern trolling vs simple power tripping, because of the vegan “modding”. my “belly” is not aching and that original discussion didn’t even involve me.
i’m not trolling, i think the dragonfucker is a perfect example of concern trolling… and i suspect a similar motivation to that is what motivated the vegan mods…. it’s a entirely topical, and you’re power tripping to just unilaterally remove that with no discussion.it’s called “comparing”, and something people often do when talking about a topic
In any case, that drama was off-topic, doesn’t seem like powertripping to remove it.
it wasn’t at all off topic, it was exactly on topic
I (a vegan) got banned from there for finding the love of cows cloying. I said we shouldn’t have to pretend cows are cute to convince others not to kill and eat them.
It really isn’t a place for even back and forth amongst friends, “no conversation - only agreement”
I think cows are adorable (in a positive manner :D) but yes, completely agree. Being a vegan shouldn’t require that you passionately love being in contact with all kinds of species. I mean - despite them playing a role in the ecosystem - who loves ticks or mosquitoes?
Ticks and mosquitoes aren’t vegan either, are they? That has nothing to do with liking them, it just suddenly occurred to me.
cloying
adjective
excessively sweet, rich, or sentimental, especially to a disgusting or sickening degreeNeat, new word.
Vegan restaurant
Adds meat to its menu
What
*Former Vegan Resturant
deleted by creator
I mean what level of vegan are you? Do you eat anything that casts a shadow?
jesus christ. i don’t think i’ve ever seen a longer sidebar as I scroll down to the modlog… not a good start…
and okay, so the mod is unhappy about a vegan restaurant turning to non-veganry to stay alive? to the point where they’re silencing all discussion of it in a positive or even ambivalent light? This seems like there’s more to it than the mod is willing to admit publicly. “the restaurant isn’t vegan” doesn’t account for “it’s a shame but I’d rather an otherwise vegan restaurant survive than not. how sad” and “it seems like there just weren’t enough vegans in town to keep it alive” being banned. it’s clear ethics policing and again, im sensing some passive-aggression and unstated resentments on the mod’s part.
PTB. vegans deserve better representation in their leaders than this i hope we can get an alternative community that can allow discussion without weird purity purges.
so true! plants are based
Lol found out here that I had been banned from the community. Ty for sharing the information :)
Regarding the matter, I understand their reaction.
I’ve been interacting with some vegan circles IRL and some are more “hardcore” (not in a negative way) than others. When you consider animal exploitation as mass slavery, mass torture and mass murder, it becomes increasingly difficult to tolerate even light deviations from the all-vegan path.This being said, I would have preferred they had a better wording for the temp ban reason than “fake vegan” by which I feel insulted and hurt.
The “all or nothing” crowd really knows how to stomp on progress, huh?
It’s like they don’t realize that by being this hostile towards any other viewpoints, they drive away people who might otherwise be interested in becoming vegan or want to learn more. All it does is harm the community in the long run, and then they wonder why there’s a stigma around vegans. That stigma then feeds into a persecution complex and that becomes a nasty vicious cycle.
Sorry but I think I disagree with that sentiment. I’d liken it to how fascists like to say that leftists annoy people away from the left; imagine thinking “well I disagree with using animals as a resource in the human endeavour but they’re just so mean/annoying/polemic that I’ll just keep doing the thing I disagree with”. It just seems childish and you should really judge a philosophy like this on its merits instead.
Is it their job to teach and convert you? Maybe they just want a space to exist in without having to work for others.
Nobody is forcing them to reply to a comment.
Plus, if they want more people to be vegan, then kinda yeah
Maybe what they want is to be left alone in peace?
I’m sure you don’t want Trump as president, it doesn’t mean you want to go around having to debate with everyone and inform them why he is bad. Sometimes you want to kick back and just say ‘Trump sucks shit’ and not have to explain yourself because you’re with likeminded company.
Are you “all or nothing” with stopping rape? Or would you be okay with some light raping happening, if the majority was anti-rape?
They clearly view this act as something as abhorrent as we would rape, so why are you surprised they don’t want to meet half way on the topic?
Dude, are you just the king of bad takes on the fediverse?
Yeah okay “anti-vegan” (what douche calls themself that), whatever you say.
⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⠟⠛⢉⢉⠉⠉⠻⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿ ⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⠟⠠⡰⣕⣗⣷⣧⣀⣅⠘⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿ ⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⠃⣠⣳⣟⣿⣿⣷⣿⡿⣜⠄⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿ ⣿⣿⣿⣿⡿⠁⠄⣳⢷⣿⣿⣿⣿⡿⣝⠖⠄⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿ ⣿⣿⣿⣿⠃⠄⢢⡹⣿⢷⣯⢿⢷⡫⣗⠍⢰⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿ ⣿⣿⣿⡏⢀⢄⠤⣁⠋⠿⣗⣟⡯⡏⢎⠁⢸⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿ ⣿⣿⣿⠄⢔⢕⣯⣿⣿⡲⡤⡄⡤⠄⡀⢠⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿ ⣿⣿⠇⠠⡳⣯⣿⣿⣾⢵⣫⢎⢎⠆⢀⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿ ⣿⣿⠄⢨⣫⣿⣿⡿⣿⣻⢎⡗⡕⡅⢸⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿ ⣿⣿⠄⢜⢾⣾⣿⣿⣟⣗⢯⡪⡳⡀⢸⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿ ⣿⣿⠄⢸⢽⣿⣷⣿⣻⡮⡧⡳⡱⡁⢸⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿ ⣿⣿⡄⢨⣻⣽⣿⣟⣿⣞⣗⡽⡸⡐⢸⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿ ⣿⣿⡇⢀⢗⣿⣿⣿⣿⡿⣞⡵⡣⣊⢸⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿ ⣿⣿⣿⡀⡣⣗⣿⣿⣿⣿⣯⡯⡺⣼⠎⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿ ⣿⣿⣿⣧⠐⡵⣻⣟⣯⣿⣷⣟⣝⢞⡿⢹⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿ ⣿⣿⣿⣿⡆⢘⡺⣽⢿⣻⣿⣗⡷⣹⢩⢃⢿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿ ⣿⣿⣿⣿⣷⠄⠪⣯⣟⣿⢯⣿⣻⣜⢎⢆⠜⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿ ⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⡆⠄⢣⣻⣽⣿⣿⣟⣾⡮⡺⡸⠸⣿⣿⣿⣿ ⣿⣿⡿⠛⠉⠁⠄⢕⡳⣽⡾⣿⢽⣯⡿⣮⢚⣅⠹⣿⣿⣿ ⡿⠋⠄⠄⠄⠄⢀⠒⠝⣞⢿⡿⣿⣽⢿⡽⣧⣳⡅⠌⠻⣿ ⠁⠄⠄⠄⠄⠄⠐⡐⠱⡱⣻⡻⣝⣮⣟⣿⣻⣟⣻⡺⣊
Suck my fat cock
Uh, because rape doesn’t keep people alive? Because rape hasn’t been a part of the human diet since before recorded history? What the fuck??
Take your bullshit whataboutism elsewhere. Holy shit, I have never seen such a bad take on the topic of veganism. I hope this is hyperbole and you don’t ACTUALLY think the two things are comparable.
Get a fucking grip, the point was to relate it to an act you hopefully find unacceptable. The point was to make you be able to understand how other people may view the subject, and why they would not tolerate that centrist shit.
Im not even a vegan and I can that’s a fucking weak argument, you can survive off of non-meat diets. It is not in any way required to survive.
why should survival be the standard? I want my entire needs hierarchy filled
No where in Maslow hierarchy is meat.
aesthetic needs
It’s full of butter though.
That’s an insane comparison to make. Compare it to murder if anything.
Why is it an insane comparison?
Cows, pigs, sheeps, etc. are raped (no consent) and sexually assaulted (against their will) for dairy, meat, wool…
Nah murder can be done for good reasons, so it wouldn’t be seen the same. It needs to be something abhorrent.
veganism has a large intersection with anti-rape sentiment.
(not in a negative way)
Debatable.
One of my best friends is a long-term vegan. He generally avoids telling people because he so strongly hates being lumped in with this crowd of asshats.
Not a lot of 100% vegan grocery stores, where do they get their food?
EDIT: It’s pretty telling that everyone is reading this as an excuse to keep murdering instead of accepting that murder is part of being alive. “Life feeds on life.” It is not pretty, it is ugly and dark. What should be taken away is a greater respect for all life and an understanding of what we’re taking when we feed on life. It should be used as a pretext to respect all life and do your best to reduce harm to all life. Whatever life you’re taking should be considered valuable and a sacrifice made. (Mass deforestation to make way for agricultural farming doesn’t just hurt trees, it hurts the animals that live in them and among them, for instance. A soybean farm doesn’t have the same ecological importance as an old growth forest, sorry.) The fact that this view is seen as a reason to kill more instead of kill less and have respect for the life you take is pathetic.
But keep ranting to me in your total misread of what I’m saying.
Just popping in to say the main reason that attitude is dumb because there is no such thing as moral absolutism.
animal exploitation as mass slavery, mass torture and mass murder
Do we consider antibiotics exploitative to penicillin? Do we cry over every breath we take in which our immune system automatically murders billions of bacteria?
Just because plants don’t have faces like ours and don’t look like us and don’t scream when we kill them killing plants is fine somehow. They’re all alive, you’re still killing life, and in our great inhuman lack-of-wisdom we’ve decided that if it doesn’t have a brain and consciousness like ours, then it most not have consciousness and thus it’s okay to murder and exploit them.
Just call me the fucking Lorax. Who speaks for the trees, dude?
Anyway, no such thing as moral absolutism and these people will continue to climb higher and higher on their holier-than-thou-mountain only to become caricatures of a real person.
deleted by creator
Isn’t it pretty apparent?
If it can feel pain and suffer it shouldn’t.
Bacteria do not have the capability to feel suffering. They cannot even feel.
Plants and fungi, despite their increased complexity, do not have the capability to suffer either.
The entire point of the field of ethics and half the field of philosophy is to reduce suffering. Torture is bad because it causes suffering. Killing is bad because it causes suffering. Slavery is bad because it causes suffering. Rape is bad because it causes suffering. Abuse is bad because is causes suffering.
Veganism extends this to animals who are capable of suffering in ways identical to us humans. It also raises important questions: Would it be ethical to treat aliens the same way humanity treats non-humans? What if the aliens are sufficiently stupid, yet still capable of civilization? What if they’re smarter but live in solitude? Why exactly is it unethical to kill severely mentally disabled people? Is it just because humans view themselves as superior to every other living being in the universe?
I believe veganism is the objectively moral choice. Still, I’m not vegan for various reasons. But I don’t have any qualms with admitting my behavior is objectively wrong.
The entire point of the field of ethics and half the field of philosophy is to reduce suffering
this is just a lie. one type of ethical study, utilitarianism, is focused on that. many ethical theories don’t regard suffering at all, or only as a facet of some other concern.
I’d argue minimizing suffering is basis for all ethics, just that they are achieving it in different ways.
Deontological ethics in a vacuum cause more suffering than utilitarianism. Yet (most) deontological philosophies seek to achieve as much good as possible - and therefore minimizing harm. Kant’s categorical imperative is - as a layman - just a formalization of: “Do what is good for you AND others. Don’t do what is good for you but bad for others.”
And I believe if you ask an ethics board at a why something was not permitted, you will always get the result: “Causes too much harm”. This happens despite them being allowed to evaluate based on many different philosophies.
I know very little ethics systems that don’t inevitable lead to a society with less suffering if strictly followed by most. Although that might just be because society as is is objectively unethical.
So if I understand correctly, a cow can be killed with a gun to the back of the head painlessly and its death prevents hunger for an entire family for the winter so killing it is ethical. Got it.
Again, I’m not vegan nor particularly experienced in vegan arguments but there is clear suffering here:
- Imprisonment is often considered suffering and cows are not wild animals. They are rarely treated well.
- Fear is suffering. Based on the manners of the one killing the cow, it can “sense” intentions/that something is off. A designated slaughtering area for instance would cause a strong fear response.
- Restricting someone from achieving happiness and going against their wishes is suffering. We know that cows do not want to die. Killing them would violate their desires and cause suffering. This is the same (simplified) argument philosophers use to claim killing humans is bad.
- In organisms with social bonds, killing causes grieve (= suffering) for their social circle. Here’s some more information on that, I recommend a read: https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/article/animal-grief/
- Didn’t say anything about imprisoning them. They can free range all they want in this example.
- The method employed specifically prevents fear. Assume a method that doesn’t induce fear. They exist.
- This is a stretch of the definition. Discontinuation of happiness without knowledge before or after is not suffering.
- Prevent socializing completely after birth. Got it. Or, more reasonably, the grief of loss is inevitable and a small price to pay anyways to feed a family for the winter.
Edit: Also, I’m not really trying to justify eating animals. TBH I’m ironically more sympathetic to Vegans due to me being a hunter. Frankly I think meat eaters should have to participate in the harvesting of an animal you eat at least once before age of majority. That would at least confer appreciation for some of what is involved.
We know that cows do not want to die.
no, we don’t. we don’t even know if they understand personal mortality
Imprisonment is often considered suffering and cows are not wild animals. They are rarely treated well.
they’re provided, veterinary care, protection from the elements, protection from predators, drinkable water, space to graze, and opportunities to socialize. it’s not imprisonment.
all divine command theories only incidentally reduce harm, and only sometimes. and kant (like all deontologists) is not concerned with outcomes, only the correctness of the action.
From my limited knowledge, Kant was concerned with rationality first and foremost. But suffering just happens to be one of the most irrational things there is. In no world is there ever a benefit to increasing suffering because if you apply this universally you too would experience increased suffering which is irrational.
I don’t think this is a coincidence. You could create a deontological philosophy that bases everything on irrationality and it would remain consistent if viewed through the lens of itself. Irrational maxims lead to contradictions, meaning this philosophy too is irrational and contradictory - which is consistent if you seek to apply irrationality universally.
Why didn’t Kant come up with the inversion of his philosophy if it remains consistent? I’d argue because it would have lead to maximizing suffering which (mostly) nobody wants.
you don’t know what you’re talking about.
Plants and fungi, despite their increased complexity, do not have the capability to suffer either.
you can’t prove this
When talking about suffering, I am generally speaking of “pain, as processed by a nervous system”.
At least for bacteria, their structures are simple enough to be understood to a large extent by humans. We know chemical reactions cannot suffer and we know proteins cannot suffer. Due to the simple nature of bacteria, it is highly doubtful that they are capable of suffering since all “processing” occurs through varying level of chemicals and minerals.
But I cannot even prove that rocks do not suffer, therefore it is worthless to prove the absence of suffering. Rather, the ability to experience suffering must be proven.
FWIW I don’t think you need to define suffering so narrowly to make an argument for veganism or vegetarianism. You can accept that plants do feel suffering and still do it. Because the amount of plants that get killed per kilojoule of energy in beef (feeding the cows) is way more than the amount of plants killed per kilojoule of directly eating plants.
I cannot even prove that rocks do not suffer, therefore it is worthless to prove the absence of suffering
you got there eventually.
I cannot even prove that rocks do not suffer, therefore it is worthless to prove the absence of suffering
This take is a big fucking YIKES from someone who claims to care about living things.
I care about people.
When talking about suffering, I am generally speaking of “pain, as processed by a nervous system”.
if you define it in a way that specifically precludes other creatures, that seems biased. you don’t know how a single-celled organism might be able to suffer. that doesn’t mean that they can’t.
deleted by creator
Bacteria do not have the capability to feel suffering. They cannot even feel.
you can’t prove this
Plants feel pain too so it’s okay to stab babies. There’s no difference between pulling a potato out of the ground and punting a chihuahua over a fence! :)
If you disagree with that, you must be a moral absolutist.
I will not debate about whether animals, plants and bacteria suffer the same way.
This is an argument I’ve heard time and time again from the antivegan crowd and imo falls into the “at best very uninformed, more likely troll” category.I’m anti-vegan and i agree with your point.
Here I am fully ready to deep dive into some drama from a community I have zero investment in and it’s impossible to read 😩
Your instance seems to be serving you up a thumbnail of the image instead of the actual image. I recommend temporarily looking at the post from another instance, such as mine.
If I look at it from yours then it’ll be upside down.
Just flip your monitor. ez
Are you using sync? If so, It’s a sync bug. Open the post and then click the image from there.
?
Lol, I got my vegan card revoked (declared “a carnist”) and handed my first fedi ban by the “Real Vegans™” too, for daring to call out their bullshit and ableist militant gatekeeping.
Good luck to them and the toxic cesspit they’re so adamant on maintaining, the last thing anyone should be seeking is these people’s approval, especially not on being a “good” or “real” vegan, since they make it crystal clear that their top priority is and always will be their own egos. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Yeah the vegan communities are so toxic that it has turned me off of pursuing an interest into their lifestyle. I want to try out a Buddhist approach to veganism and ignore whatever the hell they’re trying to achieve.
It looks to me the mods there are fake vegans, trying to make as much damage to the cause as possible.
I’m so sorry! I’ve had that happen to me as well. It’s not only toxic but just makes me feel bad
Dang, an actual PTB!
Defining removing the comments was already borderline PTB, though one can argue that since vegans tend to insist on dealt strict policies in vegan C/s, that it is within bounds to remove comments and posts as needed to maintain their space.
But holy shit, the “you aren’t a real vegan” went right off the rails. And then bans for it. That’s not even crossing the line in this specific case, it’s kicking the line and spitting on its grave.
Mind you, sometimes it’s necessary to ban people that aren’t an actual part of the specific group a forum/community is for. It is case specific whether or not someone is power tripping.
But this case is soooo far into power tripping it’s almost a parody
Generally very radical vegans also have a right to their own community, however I also think there should be spaces for less radical veganism as well. It seems that currently there’s none of those available, or maybe the general hostility of social media against vegans makes any of their more tolerant spaces eventually close ranks to protect their sanity. Unfortunately vegan spaces are constantly brigaded by trolls so it’s understandable they have a very short fuse, and a lot of people get caught in the cross-fire.
I think the only solution here would be for a new vegan community with a focus on debate with non-vegans. However it will be tricky to find the right moderators for it who either won’t be non-vegans themselves and therefore support a flood of concern-trolls and bad faith arguments, or be vegans that won’t get immediately burnt out.
I think you go way to lean on the mods. I don’t think its anything but power tripping for a few mods to decide who gets to be a “real vegan” and who is a “fake vegan” if they don’t actually consume animal based products.
A lot of “their own community” types can keep themselves to themselves.
Dear everybody: if your posts appear to the public, the public’s gonna show up and talk to you. No popular website is your unquestioned megaphone. Be prepared to argue if you target people who disagree. That is what it means, for them to disagree.
That’s not how it works. Just because someone is letting you listen in doesn’t mean you deserve a platform in their spaces
Spamming propaganda and erasing all criticism isn’t “letting” you do anything. It’s shouting in your ear and slapping you for backsass.
When the enforced opinions of a space are all that space is about… that’s a circlejerk. It’s nothing like a knitting community with a ‘no racism’ policy, despite identical mechanisms. It exists solely to push an agenda. They don’t want federation. They demand a docile audience.
You have to admit it’s kind of funny that Lemmy’s clearest example of this is militant vegans.
Nobody is forcing you to go into the spaces where they’re “spamming propaganda”. Nobody forces you to subscribe to those comms and nothing is preventing your from blocking them altogether. You still don’t deserve a platform in those comms.
Well I didn’t invite it and yet here it is in my feed. They didn’t put it there for gentle outreach. It’s all posts by [thing]lover@[thing].org, in the [thing]ism@[thing].org community, to exclusively talk about [thing] by promoting exactly one opinion about [thing]. Spam spam spam spam and absolutely no eggs.
If you’re going to /all, you’re going to see posts in all comms. Still is not a permissions or invite to a platform in every comm without respecting their rules. You’re being deliberately obtuse.
Maybe if everyone who wanders into a public-facing hot-take factory goes away scorned, that place is not compatible with being public-facing.
Surely the central point of this community is acknowledging that moderators can fuck up. Sometimes, having a very public forum in the first place is fucking up. The freedom-of-association to say ‘well they’re allowed to set the rules’ doesn’t fix how some rules will cause problems. Some rules are a misery engine. For freshly-slapped users, for burned-out moderators, or for everyone involved.
If your community federates all over the place, you’re going to get users of all stripes. They didn’t sneak in. You did in fact invite everyone. That’s not carte blanche for all behavior - but if the behavior you exclude seems reasonable to nearly everyone else, you’re gonna have a bad time. Maybe the space itself should opt out.
Maybe it shouldn’t be on every individual user to identify the broken stairs.
So, last time people were mad that vegans were mean to them this community got created:
https://lemmy.world/c/plantbased
Edit: I should finish my coffee before posting, the only post there literally points to this more active com lol: https://lemmy.world/c/[email protected]
See: https://lemmy.world/post/23634881
We all know r/vegan exists and is a cesspit of carnists, but there doesn’t seem to be an actual demand for a ‘plant based’ space. I’m not sure why people would post about something they are kind of meh and not committed to?
If people are interested in just the food, there are communities for that:
I really don’t think the rules there are onerous. Just don’t talk about abusing animals and don’t be a jerk to the other posters and you’re good?
Hey, I didn’t make plantbased to be a less committed version to veganism. I made it because from reddit to lemmy every vegan community I’ve encountered has power tripping toxic mods and I wanted to provide an alternative space.
I’m fully committed to my veganism. But I also wanted people who aren’t to be able to discuss it without being attacked.
After I wrote this I see you’re writing from a vegan instance. I have less experience with there versus vegan communities around here.
The hardcore/toxic crowd do nothing except alienate and turn people against the cause and make people think being vegan means being surrounded by assholes.
It’s people like you that welcome everyone into the discussion that inspire more people to try it out; you’re bringing about the real change.
That’s so extremely nice of you to say :)
Lol, every vegan I know which includes a chunk of my own family went vegan because of militant vegans.
I see lots of carnists with no intention of going vegan talk about how militant vegans are bad but I have never actually met someone who is vegan and stays vegan that found wishy washy people motivating or inspiring.
You can be committed and firm on your issue without being a raging asshole about it at the same time. Most of the vegan communities I’ve come across don’t even talk about being vegan, it’s just finding more ways to shit on non vegans.
I’m not even a vegetarian but I am slowly trending y’all’s direction. Finding good recipes or product recommendations is key to getting my family to come along with me.
I appreciate being, if not welcomed, at least quietly tolerated!
vegantheoryclub has both a home cooking (beware the rules re recipes), and a recipes community. There is also a discord linked with lots of pinned and extremely yummy recipes.
You are absolutely welcome to have a look, and you will not run into moderation issues unless you promote carnism. For example: wow that looks great, I’m going to have it with lamb" is as welcome as pissing in someone’s face, but asking for recommendations, tips, or suggestions is completely fine.
I’ll take a look, thanks.
I view that as a net positive :) trying to force people to change in one moment will never succeed.
You’re more than welcome! I view it as a space to learn and explore, not to be judged by what level vegan you are lol
The only thing I’ve moderated recently is people pushing meat in the community or being rude.
pushing meat
Tee hee
I should clarify: when I refer to people who aren’t committed to veganism I am referring to the same people you are referring to when you say “people who aren’t”, i.e. the non vegans discussing veganism.
I’m apparently banned from vegan theory club. I have no idea what I could have done to them.
Lemmy world is a blocked instance on vegan theory club. @[email protected] won’t be able to see your comment.
Wow. Thats… their choice, I guess. All hail the fediverse.
They got sick of trolls invading and demanding to be debated, and lemmy.world was one of the most egregious instances. I can’t blame them, vegans deserve a place to just be without every discussion turning into a debate with non-vegans.
Fair. Nobody deserves to get brigaded for living quietly and authentically.
Nobody deserves to get brigaded for living quietly and authentically.
100%
Isn’t [email protected] less radical than [email protected] ?
Probably? I don’t know. It started with the same mod team, didn’t it?
Vegan Theory Club is more radical and different in scope. It is definitely not a place to debate veganism. I let them come to my instance after some nonsense about lemmy.world and we’re not federated with lemmy.world. Vegan Theory Club is social media for vegans specifically.
It is definitely not a place to debate veganism
What we see in this post seems to be a debate among vegans about what kinds of places are best to support. Surely that should be welcome in a place called “vegan theory”? It’s a form of “debating veganism”, just not one between vegans and omnivores.
If I understand my history correctly, Vegan Theory Club is a theory club for vegans, not a club for vegan theory specifically.
There is a discord server of the same name which is way more active for the discussion of leftist theory. Members of the instance can make communities - it’s just no one has created one specifically to talk about vegan theory.
Hamid was respond to a suggestion for communities for vegans to debate carnists which db0 correctly identified as draining.
I’m not sure what debate between vegans would be. Debating our interpretation of texts? There is a book club community that’s perfect for that.
I’m not sure what debate between vegans would be
Literally what I just said. “Is it better for one restaurant to succeed with 100% vegan food while most other restaurants entirely lack vegan options, or for every restaurant to have a couple of good vegan options?”
Your instance admin seems to have established (in the comments of this thread) a pretty clear strong opinion on that topic, but a less obnoxious community could have debates like that among themselves and create fruitful results. Which is what it seems was happening in the thread this post is about, until the mods of the LW vegan community put a stop to it.
I really don’t know why carnists have such strong opinions on vegan spaces.
There is no debating on the side of allowing a restaurant to serve meat on a vegan messaging board. Debating this is missing the point of veganism entirely and my user community understands this and is why they created an account on a small instance like Vegan Theory Club. We are of a similar mind and the club is for people to find people on the same page as them. It works, we have off lemmy resources and an active discord. Veganism isn’t a diet, it is a social justice movement to end the human exploitation of Animals, debating that serving meat is ok would get you banned on my instance as well. Personally I would have shut down a vegan restaurant before introducing meat and reopened as something else.
I don’t personally eat at non vegan restaurants ever. I almost never go to restaurants at all frankly and prefer potlucks and cooking at our homes when I hang out with my friends. https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/anonymous-prole-info-abolish-restaurants
There is no debating on the side of allowing a restaurant to serve meat on a vegan messaging board.
In an ideal world I’d love to have only vegan restaurants and everyone being vegan globally. As this is not within my power, I am looking for a way that benefits veganism the most.
I think the easier it gets to be vegan, the more people will get on board. If you get vegan options only in specialized places in big cities, that will make it hard for anyone not living close to that or being part of social cycles not 100% vegan.
If a purely vegan restaurant survives economically, I am more than happy. But if they don’t, I definitely prefer them to add a few omnivore dishes rather than closing completely and getting replaced by another steakhouse.
I don’t think having this opinion makes me any kind of bad vegan or fake vegan but I’m happy to hear your points if you think otherwise.
I think the piece of information that is being missed is that VTC is inherently anti capitalist and therefore the concept of “supporting businesses” so that they can survive doesn’t really make sense in that context. (See link Hamid posted)
Just in the context of trying to get a work group to go to lunch, finding a place that fits everyone’s diets is tough, so if a place exists that is one, and only one, diet type then big groups wont be able to go there for business events or catering. Depending on the location, that could be a huge revenue source missed.
Veganism is in its core a boycott, so that is the default take. I don’t live in a big city so I don’t go to restaurants. If you read the link I posted, I think there are a lot of problems with restaurants that go beyond veganism and they are offensive to me as an anarchist. I strongly dislike businesses, business owners and I like to do things for myself. To that end the more I lean on a life of compromise the less I feel is being done. By organizing pot lucks, friends dinners, participating in my local Food Not Bombs and promoting home cooking I am building an alternative to the carnist structures in our world that is more meaningful than making an individual decision to go to a carnist business and give them money that they then invest in more carnist businesses. This is also why I don’t really like buying products labeled “vegan” from meat companies or buying impossible burgers from Burger King, we aren’t convincing them to switch, we are participating in horizontal segmentation where they carve out two markets from one that don’t cannibalize each other. I used to have the meeting notes from an shareholder meeting at Burger King where the CEO explains this but I lost it in my international move a few years ago among all my boxes of computer stuff. https://www.investopedia.com/terms/h/horizontalmarket.asp
I think adding meat dishes to a vegan restaurant and still calling it vegan is offensive and anti-vegan. If you want to go to restaurants then I guess that is a compromise you have to make for your own reasons but I don’t think that it is vegan decision in scope. I don’t attack people online or in person for it but I don’t think you’d be a good fit for a community of radical vegans and anti capitalists. I probably wouldn’t remove your comments from a message board like he lemmy.world one which is basically a vegan news community and appeals to beginners and transitioners but I would remove it from my instance. There is no requirement to go to restaurants in this world and my life got more interesting when I stopped going to places like that.
I think the easier it gets to be vegan, the more people will get on board.
But if they are not participating in the vegan boycott, are they on board? I’ve been a vegan for a long time and understand people are at different places, that said the biggest problem is recidivism. The longer you go as a vegan making compromises the less likely that you’re going to stick with it. For me this meant that at one point I needed to actually change my life and social groups to align with what I believe instead of forcing what I believe into a world that doesn’t agree and is hostile. For me this was a good decision, I made new friends, I have new things to do and I’m far more socially active as a mid 40s vegan in my vegan world than most of my old friends and coworkers are.
Thanks for clarifying
