Unpopular Opinions Society

[mlp]

So if you have ordered a meal at a restaurant and it ends up having egg on it, do you return it (and hope that someone in the kitchen will eat it), or eat it yourself?

I very rarely eat out, and it hasn't been an issue for me, since I'm very specific when I do. I have gotten food with meat in it a couple of times going through a drive through, and have taken it home, where it has become part of the dog's dinner.

I've also known people who have dumpster-dived food and will eat it. I suppose they could leave it out for the birds or squirrels or something, but I don't know how well that would work.

Oh, there's a whole lot of critters in addition to squirrels and birds living around you, whether or not you realize it.

Ethically, I have no problem with people eating food that would otherwise be discarded or which has already been discarded. I just take issue with your assertion that it's more ethical to eat it - I think it's pretty much a wash, ethically. But if the food contains meat, then I don't think you can call yourself a vegetarian, regardless of the ethics.

Unless the coat with a fur-trimmed hood is the only coat that works for you. Sure, perhaps there's someone after you that would have bought it, and instead will head out and buy a new fur-trimmed hood, but I don't think that's likely. They'll either find another coat that works for them (but not you), go without, or buy a used coat later.

I suppose you could keep returning to the thrift store until you find something you want, but the environmental cost of transportation has to be considered. You could also buy a veg*n new coat, but that has its own impact on the environment (and thus animal lives).

Coats are a bad example overall, since veg*n coats tend to be plentiful. (One possible exception - people hunting for extremely cold weather gear used may have a problem avoiding down). Belts are a better example - most thrift stores I've been in have a lot of leather belts, and few if any veg*n belts that could be used in a more formal setting (this is for men, women may be different). So what's better for animals? Buying a new veg*n belt, or buying one of the plentiful used leather belts?

The coat with the fur trimmed collar is an actual real life example I encountered recently. It was the one coat at Goodwill that fit me, was warm enough, had a hood, and just overall suited my needs. I was hoping the trim was fake, but when I checked, it was real fur. I figured that ethically it wouldn't make a difference, but I just couldn't stomach the thought of wearing a dead animal, and the construction was such that the trim couldn't easily be removed. So I left it there and wore layers until I found another coat on a subsequent visit to Goodwill. This one doesn't have a hood, which is a drawback, but otherwise is sufficiently warm.

Again, I wouldn't have considered it ethically wrong to buy the first coat (it was my squeamishness that stopped me), but neither do I agree with your original assertion about it being ethically better to buy that coat.

And no, I don't make trips to town to shop at Goodwill. I plan my trips to town to cover multiple errands, and when I have time, I stop at Goodwill on my way home - it's right on the loop of the various stops I have to make when I do go to town.

As for belts, I stopped wearing them many years ago - I very rarely could find a non-leather belt I liked, and they're basically ornamental - no need for one if one's clothes fit appropriately.

 

[das_nut]

The coat with the fur trimmed collar is an actual real life example I encountered recently. It was the one coat at Goodwill that fit me, was warm enough, had a hood, and just overall suited my needs. I was hoping the trim was fake, but when I checked, it was real fur. I figured that ethically it wouldn't make a difference, but I just couldn't stomach the thought of wearing a dead animal, and the construction was such that the trim couldn't easily be removed.

Wait a second - if you could remove the trim, it would be ethical to wear it? I don't understand - either way, the fur was used. If you remove it and send it to a landfill, does it help animals?

Again, I wouldn't have considered it ethically wrong to buy the first coat (it was my squeamishness that stopped me), but neither do I agree with your original assertion about it being ethically better to buy that coat.

If the choice was between buying a used coat and a new coat, it would be more ethical, IMO, since the manufacture of a new coat will be more harmful to animals.

As for belts, I stopped wearing them many years ago - I very rarely could find a non-leather belt I liked, and they're basically ornamental - no need for one if one's clothes fit appropriately.

Depends on a person's build.

For belts, it's not that big of a deal - once you get one, they last for a long time (at least for me).

Trying to find used non-leather dress shoes is like finding a unicorn. They may exist, but I've never seen one.

 

[mlp]

Wait a second - if you could remove the trim, it would be ethical to wear it? I don't understand - either way, the fur was used. If you remove it and send it to a landfill, does it help animals?

I think I was pretty clear in stating I didn't see an ethical problem with buying it, but that I couldn't stomach the thought of wearing a dead animal.

Trying to find used non-leather dress shoes is like finding a unicorn. They may exist, but I've never seen one.

Shoes and purses are the two items of apparel/accessories that I won't buy used, regardless of the ethics. But they last me a very long time.

 

[das_nut]

I think I was pretty clear in stating I didn't see an ethical problem with buying it, but that I couldn't stomach the thought of wearing a dead animal.

Ah, okay. Totally understandable.

Shoes and purses are the two items of apparel/accessories that I won't buy used, regardless of the ethics. But they last me a very long time.

If I could, I'd rather buy a pair of high-quality leather shoes used than a veg*n version new. Leather lasts longer than the veg*n substitutes, in my experience, and I could resole the shoes a few times, thus avoiding the environmental impact of manufacturing new shoes. Bonus points if I could find the used leather shoes with bad soles - odds are that another person won't resole the shoes, thus I keep something out of the landfill for a lot longer.

But I understand the "ick" factor - I refuse to buy used underwear or socks. I think most people do. Which is bad from a vegan and environmentalist perspective - a new pair of cotton underwear has a lot of environmental issues with it. And I realize that odds are most used underwear and socks will meet the fate that other unwanted used clothing ends up with - either recycled into padding, or sent to Africa. But I can't get over the "ick" factor.

 

[das_nut]

By the way, here's an interesting article on what happens to used clothing.

 

[mlp]

And, on top of that, our used clothing has killed off much of the small textile production in Africa.

 

[Blobbenstein]

I think there is nothing wrong with deciding what goes into our bodies. I don't see why a veg*n should have to pay for an omnie culture. If someone ends up with some egg on their plate at a restaurant, that is because other people think it is ok to exploit chickens for food. Why should a vegan have to just suck it up( so to say)?

 

[das_nut]

The article mentions that. Cheap clothing has a high cost. This is especially sad for women, since so many of their clothing tends to be made with an eye that they'd be disposed of before they wear out, so the durability is a lot lower.

I go out of the way to make everything I have last. I wash my clothes only when they are dirty. And I hang them up to air-dry. If I had the ability, I'd get one of those newer front-loading washers to reduce the wear on my clothing.

I also tend to be very kind to my shoes (several of which are leather (used)). I think I'm the only guy under 50 that will wear overshoes when the weather is bad.

 

[das_nut]

I'll add that ethical veg*nism, if defined as eliminating all animal products and animal suffering/deaths is a fool's game.

It's not possible. There's enough animal products and enough animal deaths in many things that avoiding them is impossible.

It's all about reducing and eliminating animal suffering and exploitation. Sure, perhaps that vegan item you bought at the grocery store was checked out by a non-vegan clerk, whose salary you helped pay will allow him to buy a hamburger. But you have to roll with the punches. Sure, you're new tires may not be vegan. Sure, the tapwater you drink may not be vegan. The vaccines you take may not be vegan. And the food you eat is probably not vegan, even if you tried (just google for the allowed amount of insect "parts" in food such as flours and jams).

But veg*nism isn't about making impossible standards. It's all about reducing animal suffering. That means doing what you can. It isn't some ivory tower ideal. Don't eat meat or (for vegans) dairy products. Don't support industries which are based on the deaths or suffering of animals. But realize that you aren't perfect, and this isn't a perfect world. You'll end up killing animal somehow. You're going to draw a line somewhere and say certain classes of animals aren't worth protecting (I have no qualms about killing single-celled animals, nor am I going to let a tick or mosquito suck blood from me in the interest of "veganism"). You'll have to draw a line at collateral damage. Yes, the truck that delivered your vegan product may have hit a squirrel or deer somewhere. But you can't prevent that.

Understand why you're a veg*n, and understand the world has shades of grey, and your veg*nism will be more successful.

Everyone who cares and thinks will have to come to their own moral code. Develop yours and follow it!

 

[mlp]

Cheap clothing has a high cost. This is especially sad for women, since so many of their clothing tends to be made with an eye that they'd be disposed of before they wear out, so the durability is a lot lower.

Oh, definitely. One can buy a much better quality item of men's clothing for less money than a similar item of women's clothing. Add to that the fact that women's clothing sizes are all over the board.

I've been buying men's jeans for a number of years now - I know the size and don't even have to try them on to know they'll fit. With women's jeans, I always had to try them on, and the size I needed would vary from manufacturer to manufacturer.

I also tend to buy men's sweaters and shirts.

 

[RabbitLuvr]

I just replaced the window treatments in my bedroom yesterday. The old curtains (that came with the house) had two layers, one of which was heavy 100% silk. I'm trying to think of a way I could use them to make something useful. The fabric is nice, just not for my windows.

I'm pretty sure there are some vegans who would criticize me for that, but I didn't select the silk curtains to begin with and I hate to just throw them away.

 

[Moll Flanders]

I also tend to buy men's sweaters and shirts.

I buy men's clothes too for when I'm out in cold weather dog walking or for t-shirts to wear in bed. They do seem more hard wearing than women's clothes.

 

[thefadedone]

I always send food back if it contains meat or dairy. If someone gives me food containing meat or dairy I give it to my omni family or donate it if they don't want it.

 

[ledboots]

I buy men's clothes too for when I'm out in cold weather dog walking or for t-shirts to wear in bed. They do seem more hard wearing than women's clothes.

I steal my husband's softest T shirts to sleep in.

 

[sequoia]

Buying animal products (and using them) may be fine for veg*ns, depending on the circumstances. (Think used clothing, or even new vaccines.)

Eating food that's non-veg*n, if the alternative is that the food would go to waste, is fine for veg*ns.

Ethical veg*nism is about reducing and eliminating animal harm. That is usually consistent with not using or consuming animal products, but in some circumstances, such as the above, the exceptions are more ethical than foregoing animal products.

You're not a vegan if you consume animal products. Saying that something will go to waste because a human doesn't consume it is utter ********. By your logic, it is perfectly ok to eat the very non-vegan Chinese takeout that is about to turn bad that is sitting in my fridge.

 

[das_nut]

You're not a vegan if you consume animal products. Saying that something will go to waste because a human doesn't consume it is utter ********. By your logic, it is perfectly ok to eat the very non-vegan Chinese takeout that is about to turn bad that is sitting in my fridge.

Well I've ratcheted the unpopular opinions up to 11, haven't I?

If you can realistically find someone else (an omni) to eat the non-vegan food in your fridge, then that's more ethical, since that food will displace other food they could eat.

But if you cannot realistically find someone, how is it more ethical to throw out or compost that food, then go out and buy "vegan" food, the same food which has probably indirectly or directly lead to the deaths of animals (through displacement of land for raising food, pesticides, deaths in harvesting, and deaths in transportation)? Does such a choice reduce the amount of animals that suffer? No.

I would say not. I would say it would be more "vegan" to eat the food in the fridge instead of letting it spoil. But I define veganism as living your life in such a way to reduce and eliminate animal suffering to a degree that is practical.

If you define veganism as not consuming or using animal products, then it is not vegan. Then again, considering the amount of animals that are in food and other products, I don't think being vegan is possible for the vast majority of people. Raise your hand if you've been in a vehicle with tires. Guess what, its likely your using an animal product for transportation.

I guess we could go running around and tell people that they can't use most tires on their transportation. I suppose someone may have made a list of vegan tires (assuming you trust the manufacturer, and assuming the manufacturer even knows all the ingredients in the product he buys) but then we run into the issue of the concrete under those tires not possibly being vegan and yegads, at this point I hope you realize how absurd it is to define veganism strictly as avoiding all animal products.

So I prefer to define veganism as attempting to reduce and eliminate animal suffering. Sure, this means I'm aware of the animal products used around me. I will attempt to minimize them to all extents that is practical. But I will understand that buying new "vegan" things instead of using used non-vegan things is often more harmful to animals.

Here's another example: Odds are the place you are living in isn't vegan. Just start with the thing you probably see the most of - the walls. The outermost layer is most likely painted, and that paint is frequently not vegan. So tell me, would it be more "vegan" to strip the paint off the walls and find some vegan paint to replace it? Or do you admit that this world is imperfect, realize that replacing perfectly good painted walls with different paint purchased new is wasteful and harmful to the environment (and to animals) and live with the paint you see?

Of course, you may say that everyone needs a place to live. Sure, lets agree with that and give you a pass. Now, not everyone needs all those electronic devices, right? Guess what else isn't vegan? Yep, most electronic devices. Odds are the computer, tablet or cell phone you are reading this on isn't vegan. So, did you buy it? Are you responsible for the purchase of something that contains animal products? Sure. Are you not a vegan because of it? I'd say that no, that you are still a vegan, as long as you avoid animal products to the greatest practical extent. And yes, in the end, you'll still use animal products.

The world isn't black and white. Trying to force the world to be black and white is not realistic. So it's time to buckle down and admit that there are shades of gray.

 

[Blobbenstein]

Is this about some stylish non-vegan shoes you want to buy?



I thought it had be mentioned to death that the definition of veganism is to avoid animal products(or containing products) where practical. How you define 'practical' is of course open to debate, but I would think that road surfaces were not practical to avoid.

 

[mlp]

These kinds of arguments are one of the reasons why I only called myself vegan for a very short time, and never will again.

I'm just more comfortable deciding what I think is ethical for me, rather than living by a set of rules determined by others.

 

[Blobbenstein]

I suppose technically, if you were on a life raft adrift at sea, you could eat fish, and still call yourself vegan, if it weren't practical to avoid eating fish.

 

[Freesia]

I luckily have 2 shops with non leather shoes I go to and i managed to find some non leather ones at the mostly leather shop so I bought another pair of them when my original pair broke... (they lasted 2 years).

I have some nice shoes I have obtained. Got a new pair of jandals a few weeks ago and some strappy sandals.