NEWS: The Mischievous Vegan: It’s Difficult Being A Vegan Warrior

CULTURE: The Mischievous Vegan: It’s Difficult Being A Vegan Warrior

By Malloreigh

I admit that my vegan newswire articles have been a struggle for me to write lately. I’ve been avoiding the comments altogether, and I’ve aborted a few attempts at articles. Why? I just find the backlash difficult.

Recently we had a discussion in the SG Vegans group about how difficult it can be to be a “vegan warrior” in a world of people who don’t want to hear about it. Some people who responded to the topic try their best to frame their dietary choices in least ethical way, because they find that calling it a “moral choice” gets bad reactions. Others choose to avoid talking about their veganism entirely.





[Malloreigh in Mod Club]

The thing that gets my goat is why we feel we have to avoid talking about our choices at all. It really bothers me that the reactions we get to our lifestyle choices are bad enough to change the way we talk about them. When asked about our diets, shouldn’t we be free to tell people why we’ve chosen them? But people consider it intrusive, judgmental preaching when we do.

Sure, I could go around telling people I’m vegan because I’m healthier this way. Often enough, that is what I do, because I’m not in the mood for an argument or a lecture every time someone finds out I’m vegan. But to tell you the truth – I’m vegan because I don’t want to support a system that treats animals like commodities. I’m vegan because every living being deserves a right to a dignified life. I’m vegan because our food system is environmentally destructive and we are alienated from our food. I don’t think it’s right and I don’t want to support it.

More than that, though, I honestly feel that the world would be a better place if more people thought about where their food comes from. That doesn’t necessarily mean being vegan, but it does mean being a conscious consumer, and eventually, dietary changes follow conscious consumption. Maybe I have too much faith in the inherent goodness of people, but I don’t like to think anyone could look into where most of their food comes from and be able to justify it to themselves in any honest way.

I won’t read the comments to this blog post because it is too painful for me to deal with the arguments, the refutations, the apathy, the defensiveness. I am passionate about changing our food systems to be less cruel and more sustainable, and I am dedicated to consuming food in a way that is supportive of that dream. It is difficult to see so much apathy and opposition.

While you’re here, why don’t you make this salad dressing?

ORANGE-CARDAMOM SALAD DRESSING

• 1 small mandarin orange or clementine, peeled and sectioned


• 1 tablespoon vinegar – I used orange muscat champagne vinegar


• 1 tablespoon olive oil


• Pinch nutmeg


• Pinch cardamom


• Pinch salt


• 1 tablespoon sesame seeds

Puree and serve over salad.

Keep in mind that being able to be a "conscientious consumer" usually means being privileged money-wise. In most places, it's just downright EXPENSIVE to make sure that all your purchasing choices are moral and do not harm animals or people in some way. There are food deserts in many areas where, unless a person can afford to travel miles away from where they live, they have to take what they can get from the food offered to them, and most of that food probably isn't cruelty-free. The same goes for many other types of consumption. Too often I see people argue that people should just stop buying food that isn't cruelty-free and clothes/items that aren't made by disenfranchised people, but it takes money to be able to do that. This means that people are being judged for not making choices with their money that they literally CANNOT make.

I also think it's unfortunate that you'll refuse to read the comments here, as an interesting discussion should be had. I think if you're being allowed to be a regular contributor to the News section, publicly stating that your reaction to anyone disagreeing with you will be to ignore them completely disqualifies you from the job.

Have you ever thought that maybe everyone is tired of hearing about everyone else's dietary choices and issues?

Maybe we should all just shut the fuck up and everyone would be happy.

It would be for many people. For example, in my city there are areas where people are lucky to find produce at all, and if they do it's either 1. of very poor quality 2. expensive. If they want to get produce for their proteins and carbs, they'd have to travel across the city to other neighborhoods to get them (usually at more expensive grocery stores), which has a cost for travel as well as a time cost. Imagine if you're working two jobs just to make it already: you won't have time to go across the city to go get some fruits and veg.

It may be perfectly affordable...if you're lucky enough to be at least middle-class. For the working poor or those in even more poverty, there are roadblocks after roadblocks that make veganism a much more expensive and harder to manage option for them.

The issue isn't just that she's criticized in her articles, unfortunately. It's that many vegans are criticized any time veganism even comes up in conversation. Some areas are more vegan-friendly than others, definitely, but even a vegan living here in Portland, OR like myself, or Brooklyn, NY like Hunter, gets obnoxious comments &questions.

Seriously, questions can be as silly as "But if you don't want to kill things, what about the broccoli you just slaughtered?" or as genuine (&repetitive) as "Where do you get your protein?" ORRR as obnoxious as going on for ten minutes about how magical bacon is.

We get it -- You're not vegan! We hear these things all the time...Most of us try to be understanding, because we know not everyone is trying to be a jerk about it, probably even the majority! It's tiring for someone like me or Mal, though, who tries to answer every question with the assumption that the other person is actually interested (&not trying to be a smartass). Giving people the benefit of the doubt takes more work in this case! Gets old when you realize that the other person is trying to be a turd &get a rise out of you. That's when I politely-yet-sassily say, "As much fun as it is being made into a joke, I don't think I want to continue this discussion any longer."

I haven't read there being as much "activism" in her articles so far...There've been a couple of mentions about her reasons for choosing veganism, of course, but no graphic descriptions of slaughterhouse &dairy industry practices, no trying to shame people into choosing veganism...The assumption in writing these articles, &correct me if I'm wrong, Mal, (&if you do choose to read the comments), is that the reader already has some slight interest in veganism. Maybe they're already vegan, or maybe they're considering vegetarianism, maybe they have a friend they want to bake some vegan cookies for, or there's always the possibility that people are just curious for curiosity's sake! In any case, I think Mal is hoping that people are at least a *little* interested in the "why" &not just the "yum".

If Mal really WERE a "vegan brat" she would have written these articles with the assumption that it'd be mainly grumpy people with no interest in veganism &nothing better to do than complain on the internet would be reading them. Or that people who really do have an interest in veganism might be reading, but will ONLY be sold if five sentences can convince them. It seems that there are quite a few of these folks leaving comments, possibly even the majority of them, so can you see why someone might be frustrated?

I really don't think the answer is to NOT read them, either, but I'm guessing/hoping she said that to get people thinking about the weird shit they spew out on the internet in response to things they disagree with. Instead, it seems, there's more of the same name-calling, nitpicking at her word choice, &reading between lines that aren't there to find where she's telling us all how horrible we are unless we go vegan right now...Makes me sad, honestly.

Actually, yeah, SG staff asked that the columns be written. (&Last I knew, no one in charge is vegan themselves, so no need to worry about some big vegan SG-conspiracy! ) &If, once the columns were written, SG didn't like their content, or felt them too preachy or self-righteous, etc, I don't think they'd approve them for publication on the NewsWire. Mal is representing the site, &the last thing they need is some asshole telling other people they're wrong. If you've interpretted any of her posts as such, I think you're misreading.

Thing is, Mal is one or the least "evangelical" vegans there is...She herself has said that these days, she'd rather NOT talk about the reasons behind veganism in many scenarios, because of real-life commentary similar to what's been left at the end of her articles. What she brings up in this post is, "WHY do vegans feel like they can't be open &honest when they're ASKED about their choices, &what can we do to make this better?"

There's plenty on the NewsWire, &even more out there on the rest of the internet, that doesn't interest me in any way. &things that I disagree with. &hell, even things that offend me. But griping about a band or religious movement I think is dumb on message boards is a waste of my time. I'd rather skim past &not allow myself the opportunity to get myself all riled up. (&yes, I do realize that I'm essentially doing just that right now. Malloreigh is my friend, &I actually asked her to write an article addressing the "I disagree with you, so I'm going to try poking holes in your ethics" attitude that so many vegans deal with. Best believe I'll read the comments, haha!) If I'm truly passionate about something, I'll seek out a more impactful way to make a difference, like donating to an organization that advocates for sexually abused children in lieu of spamming kiddy-porn message boards with "SICKOS!" Weird example, but you get what I'm saying, right?

You guys are right, articles about veganism do get people talking, which, if the discussion is intelligent &comes from open minds, could absolutely lead to further research &possibly some lifestyle changes. But so many of these comments aren't helpful in that way, unfortunately...They aren't coming from people who want to know more. Mal is addressing the kinds of comments that are attacking the subject, not discussing it. You're not going to convince her to give up on her veganism, &if you don't want to be convinced that veganism is a valid dietary &lifestyle choice, that's okay. No need to call names or get defensive!

Just think for a second, though: It's not politically correct to make fun of someone's choice of religion, yet it's totally acceptable to tear down people's food choices? It's just mean! This goes both ways -- non-vegans criticizing vegans &vice-versa. Vegans who slap hamburgers out of peoples' hands &yell at them for being bad people makes us all look bad...&That certainly ain't changin' anyones mind! If someone asks a question of me, they'll get an honest, informed answer, &I typically go out of my way to not come off as condescending or preachy. That's the best I can do.

Bottom line: There's just absolutely no reason we can't respect eachothers' opinions...differing or not. I really don't see a blog intended for an audience interested in veganism (even if only interested in a very small way) as being disrespectful or preachy, though.

Cockzombie said:
p.s. things like this don't help your cause.

SPOILERS! (Click to view)

You're absolutely right about PETA not helping veganism's case a lot of the time. It's not Malloreigh's cause, though, &she doesn't work for PETA.

Believe me, manymany veg folks agree that PETA's advertising is pretty stupid &sometimes downright offensive, even to vegans. But that's probably the reason Mal hasn't been showing you PETA ads! Hehe.

Yes, there are a lot of comments like that, but what about the point that veganism simply isn't possible for everyone? I don't take issue with most of the tone of Mal's post or what she said, but I do find her statement that if people knew where their food came from they'd no longer be able to be "good people" and justify not being conscientious consumers inflammatory. In a lot of cases, you could tell people in detail where their food/clothing/other products come from and tell them that it might be unethical for many reasons...but that doesn't mean they have the privilege of being able to change how they spend their money.

Of course it does. Food deserts a very real issue. Meaning people do not have access to truly healthy vegan options. What are those people supposed to do?

On top of that, there is a time investment involved. Frozen foods and meats that cook quickly take less time for someone very busy, who may be working several jobs, than making a vegan meal might make. Or they might not even have the time to LEARN to make those meals. Or they might be on a program like WIC where only a limited selection of foods are covered by that program. Even with my food stamps, I have to carefully consider what I buy each time I grocery store, and sometimes that means that while I might want to eat healthy, that week I can choose between 4 healthy meals or 20 packets of ramen.

Let me ask you something: do you think you are privileged? Because unless you deny that some people are more privileged than others, I don't understand how you can't see that being vegan might be very difficult if not impossible for some people for financial issues, time constraints, health concerns and many other issues.

And let's take this whole "conscientious consumer" idea further. Let's say I live in a food desert or am a poor person or both, but I somehow manage to work it out with my money and time that I can eat a vegan diet and make sure that nothing I eat involves any sort of cruelty to animals. Well, then what about what I wear? What I wash my clothes with? The furniture I sit on? Any sort of plastics, oils, corn, paper products? The medical industry in any way shape or form? All of these could involve cruelty in some way: harm to the environment, terrible ethics, products made in sweatshops, products made from companies that donate to horrible organizations. The list goes on and on. The fact is that being a truly conscientious consumer would require a hugely significant time investment for research, and would probably cost quite a bit to "vote with your money" in that way.

Which is not to say that we should give up and just buy anything we choose because we can't know for sure whether it involved some sort of harm to people, animals or the environment. We can certainly try to reduce our harm.

We can try and live as cruelty-free as we can. But expecting people to live up to the cruelty-free standards that YOU can afford is unfair and unrealistic. It also speaks to a lot of privilege to look down your nose at people and insist that if they just KNEW what goes into what they consume, they'd somehow magically be able to change their consumption habits.