Abuse,intimidation,death threats-Backlash-Former vegans

[Jamie in Chile]

I don´t know much about this, what I wrote is just my attempt (either correctly or incorrectly) to summarize someone else´s opinion the video for those that won´t watch it. If you´re really intersted in the topic, watch the video.

Perhaps you get this already Tom, but I think humans need creatine and carnitine but can produce it internally from other substances. At east I think that was what was said in the video.

 

[VeganRachel]

If you can come up with a better "THEORY" than Dr. Klaper go right ahead. I trust an honest educated doctor to have an
intelligent assessment of the situation that has become so pervasive. Does science have to prove everything? so many
people want proof that veganism is this or that, but they then will discount everything you come up with. There is a lot of
science that is manipulated to come up with a certain conclusion, for instance studies funded by meat, dairy and eggs. A lot of
stuff is also common sense. There are humans that CAN live on a carnivore diet and will say that proves it is right for humans.
But they do not tell you about their constipation, night sweats, body odor, lack of dietary minerals and glucose, and maybe even e.d.
They are feeding off the death of animal adrenaline and hormones. cheers, rachel

 

[VeganRachel]

one of the common themes you see here is "are you vegan or just plant based". and I think most "vegans' think it comes down to ethics.

Maybe not a common theme but one that I think is underlying is being a vegan advocate. ONE of the reasons I try to eat healthy and care about nutrients is that I want to be a shining example. You can't really be a shining example if you are un-healthy.

Hi, well many vegans may not say--ethics. For me it IS about ethics first, as I believe it is a selfish choice to murder
an animal to eat it--there are plenty of plants to eat. I think one reason omnivore humans get angry or uncomfy
about vegans is because we reflect directly upon their choices. They really just want vegans to go away and stop
pointing out the cruelty involved in something they LIKE and want to do--eating animals. Plant-based is a sanitized
way of saying one eats just plants. Studies show that in restaurants, dishes named "vegan" are ordered less often than
those labeled "plant-based". These names also relate to an omnivore not wanting to be different from the majority
crowd and stand out. Cheers, rachel

 

[silva]

Hi, well many vegans may not say--ethics. For me it IS about ethics first, as I believe it is a selfish choice to murder
an animal to eat it--there are plenty of plants to eat. I think one reason omnivore humans get angry or uncomfy
about vegans is because we reflect directly upon their choices. They really just want vegans to go away and stop
pointing out the cruelty involved in something they LIKE and want to do--eating animals. Plant-based is a sanitized
way of saying one eats just plants. Studies show that in restaurants, dishes named "vegan" are ordered less often than
those labeled "plant-based". These names also relate to an omnivore not wanting to be different from the majority
crowd and stand out. Cheers, rachel

Why wouldn't a vegan say ethics? That is what veganism is about--there really isn't anything else that implies about abstaining from animal products when you say vegan, other than ethics
Very many people are choosing to eat plant based for health and a developing concern for environment without any judgment on the ethics of using animals. While a vegan can eat WFPB, WFPB, or just the less strict plant based diets, do not imply vegan. Saying you're vegan only involves avoiding the use of animals, it has no implication of what you eat.
It is more profitable to commercialize plant based foods, and this is both making it easier and harder for vegans to navigate food labels. While we are used to reading ingredients, we also had certain catagories that would indicate a good chance of being a vegan food item.Now there are foods that loudly proclaim "Plant based" with dairy cheeses and animal ingredients

 

[FredVegrox]

I watch this video, which is possibly one of the ones you mean.

It seems that the theory here is that people who eat fast food including meat get lots of creatine and carnitine and so the body stops producing its own and then they go vegan and have less or no creatine and carnitine and then they feel bad because their creatine and carnitine stores have been depleted and the body has stopped produced its own. Then when they eat meat and feel better it is because they are eating creatine and carnitine.

It's worth highlighting this is a theory, not backed up by any science that I can see. (I imagine it would be difficult or expensive to run a study on this.)

That does not seem likely to me. I am not young, though I feel young at heart and I identify with my profile picture for that. I have had meat and animal products most of my life, but maybe not as overwhelmingly. I gave buying meat many years ago still, and worked on giving up other animal products when I learned about all the issues, to animals and to the world from animal agriculture, but not yet knowing anything about the healthiness of going this way, near to nine years ago. Around the start of spring in 2016 I found the Forks Over Knives way, and the healthiest way to eat, and it was revolutionary to me and then after that I could be publicly endorsing vegan living. But I never suffered poor health from change to this way even when it was later after so long with animal products.

 

[Lou]

Just saw this news article and wanted to post it somewhere.
This thread has sort of gone a different direction than I expected. and this article probably won't help.

In the interview, Grylls claimed without evidence that raw vegetables are "really not good for you" and that he believes the human body is designed to eat meat because of evolution — a claim thoroughly debunked by researchers.​

I like the author's "without evidence" clause, and also "a claim thoroughly debunked by researchers," addition. Good responsible reporting.

Former vegan Bear Grylls says he is now 'against vegetables' — and mainly eats meat

The "Man vs. Wild" star told GQ he eats primarily animal products, and claimed without evidence that raw vegetables are not good for health.

www.insider.com

 

[LoreD]

Just saw this news article and wanted to post it somewhere.
This thread has sort of gone a different direction than I expected. and this article probably won't help.

In the interview, Grylls claimed without evidence that raw vegetables are "really not good for you" and that he believes the human body is designed to eat meat because of evolution — a claim thoroughly debunked by researchers.​

I like the author's "without evidence" clause, and also "a claim thoroughly debunked by researchers," addition. Good responsible reporting.

Former vegan Bear Grylls says he is now 'against vegetables' — and mainly eats meat

The "Man vs. Wild" star told GQ he eats primarily animal products, and claimed without evidence that raw vegetables are not good for health.

www.insider.com

From what I understood from the article, he had moved from a Whole Plant Based diet to a Raw Plant Based diet. I don't think that is doable outside of the tropics.

I get tired of people getting sick on extreme diets, and then blaming vegetables.

 

[Lou]

I get tired of people getting sick on extreme diets, and then blaming vegetables.

You were just saying that in a different thread.

But like Socrates used to say. Everything in moderation.

then there is Oscar Wilde, Everything in moderation, including moderation.

 

[LoreD]

You were just saying that in a different thread.

But like Socrates used to say. Everything in moderation.

then there is Oscar Wilde, Everything in moderation, including moderation.

The Only Raw diet is fairly extreme.

 

[Graeme M]

A couple of observations. First, I think many vegans are far too fanatical/obsessive about the idea. For them, veganism IS a club and they are rules enforcers. I have seen plenty of very nasty commentary on social media from vegans aimed at non or former vegans. There are groups of former vegans who absolutely hate vegans and blame veganism for all manner of self-identified problems such as getting sick on vegan diets etc. The Ethical Omnivores movement is an example. One of their leading lights is Lana Salant who is pathologically dismissive of vegans and veganism. In private conversation she has told me of her absolute opposition to veganism. Their FB group is full of rabid anti-vegans many of whom claim to be former vegans.

Secondly, veganism runs into trouble for its often extreme approach to everyday problems as exemplified by activists doing things that tend to annoy others. Disruptive activism *might* work, but I am doubtful. The general attitude is that vegans are nuts at best and deeply anti-social at worst. That certainly means many new vegans are under great strain trying to keep true to what they think they should think and do. Especially from family and friends.

And lastly, as I've said before, I don't think plant only diets are the best diet for humans. Plant heavy diets yes but I have my doubts about a diet with no animal products in it. Of course, people who want to be pure vegans will try to eat plant only diets and for many that will work, especially if they are careful to research what's needed and keep an eye on things. But there are reasons some very large percentage of new vegans eventually give up. Health and concerns over food are one of those reasons.

This is why I believe that a return to focusing on the ethics of human/animal relations rather than a slavish obsession with what one eats might bear more fruit in regard to broader societal acceptance. Right now, as far a I can tell, veganism isn't really affecting the broader perspective. Veganism remains a fringe concept heavily criticised by most. And that criticism is often very very fierce. Focusing on the ethics, encouraging strategies for making a difference and acting on one's moral attitudes, supporting people in finding ways to use less animal-based products and so on, all of these are admirable. Belting people around the ear because they ate a slice of cake or tucked into a steak once is rubbish, as I see it.

Vegans and veganism should embrace everyone, even those who are eating and using animals "ethically". Because once someone cares a bit, it is an easier sell to get them to care more.

 

[Sax]

Secondly, veganism runs into trouble for its often extreme approach to everyday problems as exemplified by activists doing things that tend to annoy others. Disruptive activism *might* work, but I am doubtful. The general attitude is that vegans are nuts at best and deeply anti-social at worst.

I'm having trouble thinking of a successful justice movement against culturally entrenched repression that didn't involve disruption or annoying people. I'd flip your statement and say non-disruptive activism *might* work but I'm doubtful.

I forget which vegan activist said it but it's stuck with me: you can't change social norms while conforming to those norms.

 

[Sax]

Here's the speech that quote was from, where she argues making vegans look bad isn't necessarily a bad thing.

 

[Graeme M]

I'm having trouble thinking of a successful justice movement against culturally entrenched repression that didn't involve disruption or annoying people. I'd flip your statement and say non-disruptive activism *might* work but I'm doubtful.

I remain doubtful. Other justice movements have one significant difference from the animal justice movement. That is the animals. In the end, social justice movements for humans eventually led to recognition that we are one species and that fairness can be seen to be important to successful human societies. But other species don't share that membership, and while animal rights theorists aim to promote the idea that justice accrues to other species, so far at least that is not a universally held view. Worse, there are a range of psychological factors mitigating against human endoresment of justice for other species. At the least, the fact that animals have traditionally been important if not critical sources of food and other benefits for humans means that we hold other species to a different kind of place in the ontology of nature. So I am sceptical that ideas about justice for people naturally and fluidly translate to other species.

Put another way, disruptive protest to seek justice for human groups stands on a foundation of shared specieshood. Justice for animals founders on the same ground - other species are just that - and there are not strong reasons for presuming justice is necessary for other species.

Of course, I might be wrong. But I just don't see evidence that disruptive AR/vegan activism has made one scrap of difference to animal rights progress.

 

[Graeme M]

Here's the speech that quote was from, where she argues making vegans look bad isn't necessarily a bad thing.

Interesting speech. The related article provides a good overview:

What Does Our Movement Mean?

The Animal Rights Movement’s Most Urgent Question By Lauren Gazzola Are we a movement that means it’s ok to eat animals, or a movement that means it is not? On a rainy March afternoon in New York C…

satyamag.com

I remain sceptical that her argument is sound. But I did note her point about directing protest at ideas, not individuals.
"the protests could be seen not as yelling “at” people, but yelling near people (and near products of violence) about violence against animals, disrupting not just peoples’ shopping but also their unthinking about animals as food"

We have an activist here in Australia, Tash Peterson, who is VERY well known. She directly targets people and criticises them. She believes this to be effective. In her words, "If you're not vegan, you're an animal abuser". I have followed her for a while now and judging by media interest and commentary, she is seen as a serial pest and her ideas derided. But. She *does* get a lot of airtime. I am sceptical it helps, but maybe?

I am also a little uncertain about blurring the lines between veganism and animal rights theory and activism. Veganism is a personal stance. As far as I know, there is no duty on the part of a person to change others as a result of a personal decision about how to behave. I get that a natural consequence of realising how badly we treat animals is to want to change the world, but still... one can be a vegan without engaging in AR protests. AR protest doesn't need to demand others become vegan, nor does promoting veganism demand promoting AR.

 

[Lou]

I remain doubtful.

You forget that back when the Abolitionist and Suffage movements started both blacks and women were not considered citizens. Most people didn't think women were not human but they did not think of them as goos as men and deriving the same rights.

during the abolition of slavery, blacks were considered sub-human.

Other justice movements have one significant difference from the animal justice movement. That is the animals.

But animal rights is not asking animals to be made citizens. but to have basic rights extended to them.

In the end, social justice movements for humans eventually led to recognition that we are one species and that fairness can be seen to be important to successful human societies.

yes.

But other species don't share that membership, and while animal rights theorists aim to promote the idea that justice accrues to other species, so far at least that is not a universally held view.

It wasn't for women or blacks, not so long ago

Worse, there are a range of psychological factors mitigating against human endoresment of justice for other species.

I suppose we could look at them one by one. but I have a feeling that they are exactly the same in all the examples of man's exploitation of beings.

At the least, the fact that animals have traditionally been important if not critical sources of food and other benefits for humans means that we hold other species to a different kind of place in the ontology of nature.

Women were needed in the home. Blacks in the cotton fields, Chinese at the wharves. Animals in the cook pot.

So I am sceptical that ideas about justice for people naturally and fluidly translate to other species.

yeah, don't expect it to be either. but neither were the others.

Put another way, disruptive protest to seek justice for human groups stands on a foundation of shared specieshood. Justice for animals founders on the same ground - other species are just that - and there are not strong reasons for presuming justice is necessary for other species.

I believe that exact sentiment was held a lot of people when asked about the abolitionist movement and the suffrage movement. But you know we still have rampart racism, The ERA still hasn't been ratified. Slavery still exists hundreds of years after its been made illegal.

To paraphrase Teddy Rosevelt, just because something is difficult doesn't make it not worth doing.

Of course, I might be wrong. But I just don't see evidence that disruptive AR/vegan activism has made one scrap of difference to animal rights progress.

I can't prove you wrong. we would need two planets. one without activists and one without.
But I can provide you with a testimonial and also with a lot of circumstantial evidence.

Testimonial. I had heard of veganism. Never thought it was important till PETA got an article about the awful treatment of diary cows. onthe front page of the newspaper.

For circumstantial evidence. what do they say in the courtroom. A preponderance?
This is a list of the things PETA considers their accomplishments.
Would they have happened without PETA? Who knows?

35 Things That Aren't Happening Today Because of PETA | PETA

Here are just a few of the things you'll never see again because of PETA's work.

www.peta.org

Animal right supporters existed way before PETA. And even back then there were activists. I did some digging looking for examples of how these early activists got laws like the anti-cruelty laws of the 18th and 19th century. Instead I found these great articles. You should read at least one of them. they do a better job than I can in explain why animals need rights, too.

Animal Rights: Past and Present | Do It Green! Minnesota

Kevin Kjonnas Includes Listing of Animal Rights OrganizationsAnimal rights activist. The stereotype is of a flaky do-gooder out to grant animals the rights to drive a car, vote in an election and have…

doitgreen.org

The Animal Rights Movement: History And Facts About Animal Rights - Faunalytics

This blog explores the history of the animal rights movement, and looks at why animal rights are an important aspect of social justice.

faunalytics.org

The History of Animal Protection in the United States - Organization of American Historians

Beginning in the 1870s, animal protectionists saw the safeguarding of children and animals as equally important, as both were vulnerable creatures in need of protection. COURTESY OF THE LIBRARY OF CONGRESS. Transnational Protestant revivalism and social reform in the early nineteenth century...

www.oah.org

 

[Brian W]

After being advised by her doctor to end her vegan diet because her intestines were bleeding due to severe IBS, a number of unqualified Youtube vegans who have never themselves suffered from IBS felt it reasonable and "ethical" to make videos criticizing Megan Bowen and telling everybody what she could have and should have done. I was myself in conflict on LinkedIn with somebody who was delighted that a boar hunter was mauled to death on a hunt. I have had enough of the modern vegans, influenced by the corrupt Vegan Society and ignorant of the history of the word "vegan" and how it always used to be understood constantly chanting the same old nonsense about veganism has to be for the animals. The vegan community is so idealistic, it has lost touch with reality and refuses to accept that real people often have real problems with a vegan diet and that their own personal incredulity means nothing, and it is as toxic as hell! That is why I refuse to identify as a vegan these days. I don't want to be associated with this nonsense.

 

[Sax]

Put another way, disruptive protest to seek justice for human groups stands on a foundation of shared specieshood. Justice for animals founders on the same ground - other species are just that - and there are not strong reasons for presuming justice is necessary for other species.

Justice isn't about necessity, it's about fairness. The fact that we treat them so differently because they are different species is exactly what the animal rights movement is trying to address.

Of course, I might be wrong. But I just don't see evidence that disruptive AR/vegan activism has made one scrap of difference to animal rights progress.

I don't think anyone sitting on the sidelines should criticize or second guess those who dedicate their lives and put their freedom at risk to end animal exploitation. Either support them or get involved in the way you think is best or just don't talk....their task is hard enough already.

 

[Graeme M]

explain why animals need rights, too

But I am not arguing about whether animals need rights. I am suggesting that disruptive protest is not effective in encouraging either veganism or animal rights. My main grounds for thinking so are that animals are not people and that humans are psychologically not disposed to endorse either position more generally.

I don't think referring back to other human social justice accounts helps; as I said above, I doubt claims for justice for humans translate into claims for justice for animals. I suggest that when we don't grant justice for other humans, it is because we tend to deny them the attributes of full humanity. We either dehumanise them (deny them actual membership of the human species, perhaps as injustice to blacks and Jews was defended) or we infrahumanise them (claim that while human, they are necessarily an inferior kind of human (everyday racism perhaps, or maybe the case against equality for women and gay people).

The point here is that it is membership of the human species that confers fairness and justice. This is an empirical argument too - we can show that blacks, Jews, gays, women etc are in fact complete humans. The very idea that we dehumanise outgroups to exclude them from notions of fairness illustrates exactly this - to not be human is to not attract the necessity for justice and fairness.

Because humans are generally indisposed to endorse non-human species as deserving of fairness and justice, I don't think that disruptive protest will change things very much. You don't make someone do something they don't want to do by yelling at them.

 

[Graeme M]

Justice isn't about necessity, it's about fairness. The fact that we treat them so differently because they are different species is exactly what the animal rights movement is trying to address.

And I am suggesting that it is the fact they are not of our species that causes their unfair treatment. Humans do NOT want to treat other species fairly and all the disruptive protest in the world will not change that. It's a rational argument to say they should be treted fairly, but by and large humans are not rational. We are evolutionarily disposed to dislike other animals.

I don't think anyone sitting on the sidelines should criticize or second guess those who dedicate their lives and put their freedom at risk to end animal exploitation. Either support them or get involved in the way you think is best or just don't talk....their task is hard enough already.

I believe that in a discussion about the issue, I am within my rights to offer an opinion and to criticise strategy. However, you will not find me obstructing those campaigning for justice for other species.

 

[vegan89]

Since Natalie Portman said she had to give up veganism to get baked goods for pregnancy cravings...I'd just like to say I've had some extremely delicious vegan baked goods before from a company called Kind Crumbs.

I think this is their website (but not sure... I just buy their stuff when I see it on the shelf at a store near me):

Product Information

*Kind Crumbs does not have a storefront and cannot accommodate walk-in business, as much as we love to see you! Please visit one of these area businesses to find our products. For special...

www.kindcrumbs.com

Not all of their stuff is vegan so be sure to check the ingredients list, but they have a lot of vegan options, and a lot of options that are both vegan and gluten-free.. which is pretty unusual. (And even more unusual is that SOME of these vegan & gluten free treats taste just as good or better than baked goods with animal products imo).

I remember having one of their vegan carrot cupcakes I put in a bowl with a generous helping of vegan vanilla ice cream (I think it was the cashew-based type from So Delicious brand or something), and thinking the experience was just pure bliss.

Also having their gluten-free vegan cinnamon rolls and vanilla glazed donuts with some fresh cups of coffee straight from my percolator was a blast...

Abuse, intimidation, death threats: the vicious backlash facing former vegans

Going vegan has never been more popular – but some people who try it and then decide to reintroduce animal products face shocking treatment

www.theguardian.com

I found the content of this article upsetting (to say the least). However it is both well written, well researched, and appears to be unbiased. All things that I have come to expect from the Guardian. Also I think we can lean into the unbiased attribute a bit because in the past the Guardian has been clearly pro-animal rights. (1)

Although some of the examples might be outliers, I don't think they are that unusual. I've seen the shaming aspect myself in media reporting.

One thing that Other people tend to do is lump vegans all in a group. But as we all know (all too well), that vegans come in all shapes and sizes. Still it disappoints me that Some Vegans are so insensitive (or nutty).

The knee jerk response is that these "former vegans" ought to shut up and keep their head down. But they didn't know they were going to quit veganism when they started promoting it. In fact, some vegans think is a responsibility for All vegans do do some promotion. And of course promoting veganism while not being vegan is hypocritical

I actually didn't know about any of these people reported in the article. but then I'm not on FaceBook, Instagram and Twitter.

However I do remember the story about Natalie Portman, one of my favorite vegan celebrities. She has been shopping in a mall with her children while she was pregnant. She went by one of those cookie stores and couldn't resist getting a cookie. Of course someone saw it and reported it. The public outcry was disproportionate. You'd think she bit the head off a chicken. (2)

1. The Guardian view on animal welfare: keep it up | Editorial

2. Pregnant Natalie Portman Abandons Veganism, Surrenders to Cookie and Cake Cravings

In my personal experience, I remember feeling better when I initially became a vegetarian. And I felt even better when I adopted a (mostly) whole food plant-based (VEGAN) diet.

There are healthy vegan diets and unhealthy vegan diets. I mean, I could have vanilla glazed donuts and coffee for breakfast tomorrow and it could be "vegan" if the donuts don't have eggs in them. But obviously that isn't healthy. On the other hand... I think my typical oatmeal & soymilk with frozen mixed berries & loose leaf green tea breakfast is probably orders of magnitude healthier than the typical eggs & bacon breakfast most people would eat. And my oatmeal breakfast is definitely vegan...

The problem with many of these stories about people saying "well I started eating animal products and then I felt better afterward" is that many of these stories probably involve the placebo effect. And for every story you show me of a person saying their health improved after adding in animal products, I could probably find 10 similar stories involving people saying their health improved when they adopted some form of vegan diet.

Because of the placebo effect problem, I would suggest a more scientific approach to nutrition instead of listening to testimonials from celebrities:

NutritionFacts.org | The Latest in Nutrition Related Research

The latest in nutrition related research delivered in easy to understand video segments brought to you by Michael Greger M.D. FACLM

nutritionfacts.org