I think the big bird is right, mostly, but it can be both. You can treat it as a diet and a philosophy. Many words have more than one meaning and context matters, but in most day to day normal conversations the average person is probably going to interpret it as a dietary thing. You can always explain further that to you, personally, it is also a philosophy, but that doesn’t really exclude the dietary aspect. Of course, if you act like this :::gestures upward::: they won’t care because they’ll just think you’re an asshole.
Fair enough, I get it. Been there with far too many topics.
It just made me think of an old South Park episode where the boys try to redefine the word “fag” to refer to obnoxious motorcyclists instead of gays. So they start using it that way, but the adults around them think they are homophobic, and its confusing all around. The boys know that to them its an insult to obnoxious people, but its misinterpreted because everyone else thinks it means something else. When they finally get to explain themselves fully the gays in town rally with the boys to officially change the meaning of “fag” and I laughed my ass off.
You shouldn’t get shouted down over semantics, but it still needs to be acknowledged to have a dialogue and educate people. Unfortunately I agree, many people just aren’t open to learning, so uh yeah. That sucks.
What’s rude about saying a third party might respond to behavior a certain way? They didn’t say that they were an asshole, they said an audience would interpret their own “Okay meatsplainer” attitude as rude.
I mean, ok? Did someone hurt you recently?
I think the big bird is right, mostly, but it can be both. You can treat it as a diet and a philosophy. Many words have more than one meaning and context matters, but in most day to day normal conversations the average person is probably going to interpret it as a dietary thing. You can always explain further that to you, personally, it is also a philosophy, but that doesn’t really exclude the dietary aspect. Of course, if you act like this :::gestures upward::: they won’t care because they’ll just think you’re an asshole.
Yes, yes they did. The issue is that non-vegans would rather tell us what they think veganism is, than learn what it actually is.
Fair enough, I get it. Been there with far too many topics.
It just made me think of an old South Park episode where the boys try to redefine the word “fag” to refer to obnoxious motorcyclists instead of gays. So they start using it that way, but the adults around them think they are homophobic, and its confusing all around. The boys know that to them its an insult to obnoxious people, but its misinterpreted because everyone else thinks it means something else. When they finally get to explain themselves fully the gays in town rally with the boys to officially change the meaning of “fag” and I laughed my ass off.
You shouldn’t get shouted down over semantics, but it still needs to be acknowledged to have a dialogue and educate people. Unfortunately I agree, many people just aren’t open to learning, so uh yeah. That sucks.
Plant-based is the diet and vegan is the philosophy that excludes animal products for ethical reasons.
Here you’re coming with the rude language. You have no right to talk to them like that.
What? What are you referring to?
Reread their last sentence.
What’s rude about saying a third party might respond to behavior a certain way? They didn’t say that they were an asshole, they said an audience would interpret their own “Okay meatsplainer” attitude as rude.