Jump to content

Vegan News


The Dryad

Recommended Posts

On 6/4/2017 at 4:04 PM, Zosia said:

Welcome! :) I agree with your statement on large "animal rights" organizations--that's one of the reasons why I'm so hesitant to back them/support them or recommend them, in addition to my disgust for some of their campaigns, not to mention many of the other things they've done. I also wouldn't put it past some of them to piece together the worst footage they could find to paint the whole industry as a bunch of sadists. I'm not a fan of animal agricultural at all, but I don't think that lying to people and manipulating them with shock tactics does anyone any good. (That's not to say that footage can't be useful, I just think that some organizations overdramatize it sometimes). I dunno, just my two cents.

The footage is the most disturbing examples of factory farming, but honestly....most of the footage looks exactly the same- even if the factory animal killers/workers don't outright beat animals, they still slit their throats until their life's blood runs out and paints the walls and the cement with it. Even if it's done "humanely", those animals still try to escape certain death, and their anxiety fills the air and they still scream. I don't see the point of showing any other type of footage, all of it is bad so why not show the worst?

Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, The Dryad said:

The footage is the most disturbing examples of factory farming, but honestly....most of the footage looks exactly the same- even if the factory animal killers/workers don't outright beat animals, they still slit their throats until their life's blood runs out and paints the walls and the cement with it. Even if it's done "humanely", those animals still try to escape certain death, and their anxiety fills the air and they still scream. I don't see the point of showing any other type of footage, all of it is bad so why not show the worst?

I get what you're saying. I don't think that I explained my point well enough in my previous post. I do think that this kind of footage is vitally important. I guess the issue that I have with some of these organizations is not so much the footage itself, but how they present it (like I mentioned before--some groups often have a habit of over-dramatizing it). What I mean by this is that they sometimes have very dramatic-sounding narrators and some kind of music playing in the background which is meant to hype up the emotions of the viewer. I don't think these are really necessary to have edited into this kind of footage of animals...and I wonder if having it incorporated makes the footage appear more ridiculous and less trustworthy to the average viewer?

 

I feel like I should give an example...um...I hope it's okay to post these videos and my comments here. (Warning: Very GRAPHIC)

Spoiler

Alright, compare the presentation of these two videos.

 

Here is a video from Mercy for Animals (undercover):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vXhz04P8up0

Notice how there is both a narrator who's voice has been altered (which in and of itself makes it sound like someone is going after this guy for doing undercover investigations; whether that is actually true or not is unknown, but it adds a sense of danger to the video) and anxiety-inducing music is playing in the background. There are multiple short clips edited together of chickens being brutalized. Notice how the narrator describes what Tyson does to these chickens and what kind of language is used. I feel like the intention with these kinds of videos is to say something along the lines of, "See? This is what happens in the industry. This is the standard. This is what you're always paying for when you buy from X company." Whether or not that is necessarily true is another point. It very well may be the case that this is what happens a large portion of the time. But...saying that it is without knowing for sure seems dishonest to me. While I know that the footage is absolutely awful, and what is being done to the animals in it is horrendous, I just...have a sneaking suspicion that this way of presenting it doesn't do us any favors, and only makes us look foolish, dishonest, and out to push an agenda by excluding any information that doesn't paint this industry and everyone who works in it as fundamentally malicious. (I feel like I'm still not explaining this well enough, but I don't know how else to word it. I hope I'm making sense.)

 

I don't know...this is just my current opinion about this particular style of presenting this information. Maybe other people's opinions would change how I see it. And, again, this is not to say that the footage itself is bad or shouldn't be used. I just think the presentation needs some work.

 

Here is the other video from a longer documentary called "À L'Abattoir" by Philippe Radault (not undercover, they allowed him to film):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VizpLk263iM

Notice how this is one continuous scene and there is no narrator or music playing. It seems more "real" to me, personally. There's no editing (as far as I can tell?); it seems like something you might see if you were to walk into a slaughterhouse. It is still fundamentally wrong what they're doing to these cattle (because they are taking their lives for unnecessary reasons), but...I wouldn't call it a horror show, per se. It's showing what would probably be considered a very "humane" (although not the most "humane") way of stunning cattle. There's no shoving or yelling, the animals aren't packed tightly in there, the line is moving slowly (hopefully that would mean the animals are more accurately stunned?), so on and so forth. There are still things that one could argue the worker could do better on...and don't get me wrong, I'm not condoning any of this at all. I still think it's gut-wrenching and morally wrong. But, I think this kind of presentation is better than the first one?

 

Which of these two videos do you think that the average person is going to take more seriously?

 

When you say that you don't see the point of showing any other footage other than the absolute worst, I think that this is a mistake that many people make, if I may be so bold to say? Maybe it does take showing some people a horror show in order to get them to change. Maybe they wouldn't react hardly at all to the second video that I posted, but they would for the first. Maybe some people do need a narrator telling them what is wrong with a certain scene. Though, I think that showing a person the "best case scenario" is also very important, because it says that even if everything is done "well" or to the "highest standards", it is still violent and bloody and gruesome and a thousand other terrible things that outweigh our petty habits and our taste buds.

 

I really hope that I don't sound like an apologist for the industry. I'm not trying to defend them, I'm only trying to find more effective ways of communicating honestly with the general public. I hope my ramblings make sense?

Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Zosia said:

I get what you're saying. I don't think that I explained my point well enough in my previous post. I do think that this kind of footage is vitally important. I guess the issue that I have with some of these organizations is not so much the footage itself, but how they present it (like I mentioned before--some groups often have a habit of over-dramatizing it). What I mean by this is that they sometimes have very dramatic-sounding narrators and some kind of music playing in the background which is meant to hype up the emotions of the viewer. I don't think these are really necessary to have edited into this kind of footage of animals...and I wonder if having it incorporated makes the footage appear more ridiculous and less trustworthy to the average viewer?

 

I feel like I should give an example...um...I hope it's okay to post these videos and my comments here. (Warning: Very GRAPHIC)

  Reveal hidden contents

Alright, compare the presentation of these two videos.

 

Here is a video from Mercy for Animals (undercover):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vXhz04P8up0

Notice how there is both a narrator who's voice has been altered (which in and of itself makes it sound like someone is going after this guy for doing undercover investigations; whether that is actually true or not is unknown, but it adds a sense of danger to the video) and anxiety-inducing music is playing in the background. There are multiple short clips edited together of chickens being brutalized. Notice how the narrator describes what Tyson does to these chickens and what kind of language is used. I feel like the intention with these kinds of videos is to say something along the lines of, "See? This is what happens in the industry. This is the standard. This is what you're always paying for when you buy from X company." Whether or not that is necessarily true is another point. It very well may be the case that this is what happens a large portion of the time. But...saying that it is without knowing for sure seems dishonest to me. While I know that the footage is absolutely awful, and what is being done to the animals in it is horrendous, I just...have a sneaking suspicion that this way of presenting it doesn't do us any favors, and only makes us look foolish, dishonest, and out to push an agenda by excluding any information that doesn't paint this industry and everyone who works in it as fundamentally malicious. (I feel like I'm still not explaining this well enough, but I don't know how else to word it. I hope I'm making sense.)

 

I don't know...this is just my current opinion about this particular style of presenting this information. Maybe other people's opinions would change how I see it. And, again, this is not to say that the footage itself is bad or shouldn't be used. I just think the presentation needs some work.

 

Here is the other video from a longer documentary called "À L'Abattoir" by Philippe Radault (not undercover, they allowed him to film):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VizpLk263iM

Notice how this is one continuous scene and there is no narrator or music playing. It seems more "real" to me, personally. There's no editing (as far as I can tell?); it seems like something you might see if you were to walk into a slaughterhouse. It is still fundamentally wrong what they're doing to these cattle (because they are taking their lives for unnecessary reasons), but...I wouldn't call it a horror show, per se. It's showing what would probably be considered a very "humane" (although not the most "humane") way of stunning cattle. There's no shoving or yelling, the animals aren't packed tightly in there, the line is moving slowly (hopefully that would mean the animals are more accurately stunned?), so on and so forth. There are still things that one could argue the worker could do better on...and don't get me wrong, I'm not condoning any of this at all. I still think it's gut-wrenching and morally wrong. But, I think this kind of presentation is better than the first one?

 

Which of these two videos do you think that the average person is going to take more seriously?

 

When you say that you don't see the point of showing any other footage other than the absolute worst, I think that this is a mistake that many people make, if I may be so bold to say? Maybe it does take showing some people a horror show in order to get them to change. Maybe they wouldn't react hardly at all to the second video that I posted, but they would for the first. Maybe some people do need a narrator telling them what is wrong with a certain scene. Though, I think that showing a person the "best case scenario" is also very important, because it says that even if everything is done "well" or to the "highest standards", it is still violent and bloody and gruesome and a thousand other terrible things that outweigh our petty habits and our taste buds.

 

I really hope that I don't sound like an apologist for the industry. I'm not trying to defend them, I'm only trying to find more effective ways of communicating honestly with the general public. I hope my ramblings make sense?

For me, it wasn't really the special effects added to the footage, but just that initial showing of footage to begin with. Honestly..I'm a bit embarrassed to admit it, but I also think it could be seen as normal- I didn't associate "animals" with meat- let me explain, I knew I was eating an animal, I guess, but idk...I didn't think about the murder or life or even that it was flesh? I always ate something that was processed to like less like a living thing-in-itself ,meat chopped into bite sized cubes, slices, nuggets, "steak", so I never really saw an animal- me seeing that footage sparked a sense of realization in me. That's why I appreciate the shock value of it. I don't think most people who will see it will go vegetarian or vegan- but it will start a thought process of some kind, and that's another thing I appreciate. The only thing that will make people go vegan is compassion and willingness to be selfless.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/7/2017 at 1:46 AM, The Dryad said:

For me, it wasn't really the special effects added to the footage, but just that initial showing of footage to begin with. Honestly..I'm a bit embarrassed to admit it, but I also think it could be seen as normal- I didn't associate "animals" with meat- let me explain, I knew I was eating an animal, I guess, but idk...I didn't think about the murder or life or even that it was flesh? I always ate something that was processed to like less like a living thing-in-itself ,meat chopped into bite sized cubes, slices, nuggets, "steak", so I never really saw an animal- me seeing that footage sparked a sense of realization in me. That's why I appreciate the shock value of it. I don't think most people who will see it will go vegetarian or vegan- but it will start a thought process of some kind, and that's another thing I appreciate. The only thing that will make people go vegan is compassion and willingness to be selfless.

I think that's probably how it is for a lot of people. I had a slightly different experience because I was more involved at one point in time--I have family members who raise animals for slaughter, who hunt and fish, and I've personally killed animals myself (granted, it was many years ago), which is something that I'm deeply ashamed to have done. So...I wasn't necessarily as disconnected as it seems like a lot of people are (or, maybe I was but just in a different way?). I don't really know any more what my reasoning was back then; when I try and look back and ask myself why I thought doing what I did to animals was okay, I feel like I'm hitting a brick wall.

 

Your comment reminds me of the below video (you might not personally be interested in seeing it, or you might already be familiar with the concept. I know Melanie Joy was mentioned earlier in the thread, but I thought I would post her video now because it seems relevant.)

 

(Warning: there is a graphic part in this video which she'll warn the viewer of beforehand, but if someone wants to skip over it, go to the 10:20 mark once she gives the warning.)

 

(This video is kind of on the sappy side, and it's not above criticism...and I should also say that I don't necessarily endorse everything she says in this video or how she says it, but I'm posting this for other people's consideration.)

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Zosia said:

@momokoko Please take your passive-aggressive shit elsewhere, no one here wants to hear it. If you don't like what is being said in this thread, either learn how to voice your disagreements like an adult or don't comment at all.

 

EDIT: That was a quick take-down, mods. Thanks for that. :)

 

I missed it! Oh well.. probably wasn't important anyways ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, The Dryad said:

I missed it! Oh well.. probably wasn't important anyways ;)

You want me to message you about it? It was a little shocking, but funny now that I think about it. The fact that some people get their panties so twisted in a bunch over a few vegans talking about animal rights is hilarious. (I dunno...maybe this is too mean of me to say on the forums. Oh well. :lol:)

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Zosia said:

You want me to message you about it? It was a little shocking, but funny now that I think about it. The fact that some people get their panties so twisted in a bunch over a few vegans talking about animal rights is hilarious. (I dunno...maybe this is too mean of me to say on the forums. Oh well. :lol:)

Lol, naw it's alright, thanks though (It would probably raise my blood pressure XD). I think they do that because it's....some sort of combination of superiority complex, outdated scientific knowledge, and delayed guilt. Or maybe they think we're attacking them...when we're really just trying to save animals... Hey meat-eaters! We're not here to offend you...calm down!

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, The Dryad said:

Lol, naw it's alright, thanks though (It would probably raise my blood pressure XD). I think they do that because it's....some sort of combination of superior attitude, outdated scientific knowledge, and delayed guilt. Or maybe they think we're attacking them...when we're really just trying to save animals... Hey meat-eaters! We're not here to offend you...calm down!

Aw, man...I kind of want to share it with somebody now. It was a really pretty inappropriate song that they posted...about certain things...most likely directed at me. I haven't really gotten any kind of hate online for veganism yet (up until this point). I feel like this is a badge of honor. :D

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Zosia said:

Aw, man...I kind of want to share it with somebody now. It was a really pretty inappropriate song that they posted...about certain things...most likely directed at me. I haven't really gotten any kind of hate online for veganism yet (up until this point). I feel like this is a badge of honor. :D

Lol, you can pm me about it if you want! XD I don't mind reading a little drama XD.

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, The Dryad said:

Lol, you can pm me about it if you want! XD I don't mind reading a little drama XD.

Okay, I sent it. :lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Lol, I bet everyone on here who's read anything I've posted thinks I'm half crazy.

 

So I wanted to explain my position on companion animals a bit more, and why I said, I wanted to let lose all the domesticated animals into the wild. (Technically I was talking about farm factory animals, not domesticated pets, they're quite weak and can't fend for themselves) I'm not being serious-well kinda serious, but it's more of an idealistic fantasy, than a feasible reality. Like how an environmentalist might want to stop the pollution of water or the cutting down of trees by doing some drastic like...idk chaining themselves to trees, or slandering companies, not practical, but a type of fantasy nonetheless.

 

Of course I understand that there would be environmental consequences, and the vastness of factory farm animals would be overwhelming to support for the environment- I understand that it's easier on the Earth to let these animals die via human consumption as they were birthed to...but I also feel extremely bad for it as well, even though I don't support that system, I also want it to end as soon as possible.

 

I'm actually thinking of what type of companion animal to adopt right now...or if I even want to... idk. Btw, what's you guy's opinions on vegan animals? I'm not sure how I feel about it. I know there's some gross stuff in pet food, like....other pets, factory farm castaways...etc.

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, The Dryad said:

Lol, I bet everyone on here who's read anything I've posted thinks I'm half crazy.

 

So I wanted to explain my position on companion animals a bit more, and why I said, I wanted to let lose all the domesticated animals into the wild. (Technically I was talking about farm factory animals, not domesticated pets, they're quite weak and can't fend for themselves) I'm not being serious-well kinda serious, but it's more of an idealistic fantasy, than a feasible reality. Like how an environmentalist might want to stop the pollution of water or the cutting down of trees by doing some drastic like...idk chaining themselves to trees, or slandering companies, not practical, but a type of fantasy nonetheless.

I think you've clarified this at least 2 or 3 other times in this thread--anybody who doesn't understand that you're not actually advocating we literally release billions of animals like a plague onto the environment isn't reading your comments or doesn't care about your clarifications.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, The Dryad said:

I'm actually thinking of what type of companion animal to adopt right now...or if I even want to... idk. Btw, what's you guy's opinions on vegan animals? I'm not sure how I feel about it. I know there's some gross stuff in pet food, like....other pets, factory farm castaways...etc.

Cats can't be vegan, and it's debatable if dogs can (I probably wouldn't chance it). You could maybe foster baby kittens or puppies who are young enough to need to be bottle-fed. I've heard that with motherless kittens especially, many shelters will euthanize them right after having received them because they get sick so easily in the cramped shelters and they need so much one-on-one attention that the shelter staff can't provide. You might have to do some training or take a class on how to take care of motherless kittens. I fostered one baby a couple of years ago, and my local shelter didn't have me take a class, but they did provide me with the formula. The kitten that I fostered was young enough that they needed to be bottle fed every other hour, so I had to get up in the night and heat up formula. Baby kittens also can't urinate on their own, so you have to help them with that. That might be too much work for you...maybe you're looking for an older pet. Just be prepared to feed them whatever diet that they require, whether that includes meat or not.

 

If you want some information about fostering baby kittens, here's a channel called "Kitten Lady" on YouTube that I like (the lady is also a vegan, by the way): https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC5VvB6tmC4lu_WCx7hE0PZA/videos

 

I know of some other resources regarding this topic of vegans adopting pets, but I'll have to find them later.

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Zosia said:

Cats can't be vegan, and it's debatable if dogs can (I probably wouldn't chance it). You could maybe foster baby kittens or puppies who are young enough to need to be bottle-fed. I've heard that with motherless kittens especially, many shelters with euthanize them right after having received them because they get sick so easily in the cramped shelters and they need so much one-on-one attention that the shelter staff can't provide. You might have to do some training or take a class on how to take care of motherless kittens. I fostered one baby a couple of years ago, and my local shelter didn't have me take a class, but they did provide me with the formula. The kitten that I fostered was young enough that they needed to be bottle fed every other hour, so I had to get up in the night and heat up formula. Baby kittens also can't urinate on their own, so you have to help them with that. That might be too much work for you...maybe you're looking for an older pet. Just be prepared to feed them whatever diet that they require, whether that includes meat or not.

 

If you want some information about fostering baby kittens, here's a channel called "Kitten Lady" on YouTube that I like (the lady is also a vegan, by the way): https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC5VvB6tmC4lu_WCx7hE0PZA/videos

 

I know of some other resources regarding this topic of vegans adopting pets, but I'll have to find them later.

I know dogs are omnivores by nature (technically, more biologically omnivorous than humans, but I digress), and cats a strict carnivores. I can't have a cat- my mom won't allow it, she...well it's not a phobia, more like a disgust. I know the Vegan Zombie's dog and BiteSizeVegan's dogs were vegan for a really long time, and lived fairly long, healthy, and seemingly happy lives. I'm debating on feeding a dog a vegan diet because they are true omnivores, and I'm not sure if it would be bad for them to not have meat, but I also would feel bad for supporting the killing of an animal to feed my animal as well? Like...if the dog killed something them self I would feel less guilty. (Btw....my position on eating meat in general is...make it a fair fight. No guns, no bows, if you want to kill and eat an animal- no, if you want to eat flesh and be somewhat ethical about it, you need to kill it yourself, with your teeth...and claws...I mean you're omnivorous right

8), I digress though)

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, The Dryad said:

I know dogs are omnivores by nature's (technically more biologically omnivorous than humans, but I digress), and cats a strict carnivores. I can't have a cat- my mom won't allow it, she...well it's not a phobia, more like a disgust. I know the Vegan Zombie's dog and BiteSizeVegan's dogs were vegan for a really long time, and lived fairly long, healthy, and seemingly happy lives. I'm debating on feeding a dog a vegan diet because they are true omnivores, and I'm not sure if it would be bad for them to not have meat, but I also would feel bad for supporting the killing of an animal to feed my animal as well? Like...if the dog killed something them self I would feel less guilty. (Btw....my position on eating meat in general is...make it a fair fight. No guns, no bows, if you want to kill and eat an animal- no, if you want to eat flesh and be somewhat ethical about it, you need to kill it yourself, with your teeth...and claws...I mean you're omnivorous right

8), I digress though)

Well, I'd do some really serious research on the subject before you commit yourself to an animal and consult a vet, too. If you happen to adopt a dog and start feeding it a vegan/vegetarian diet, and it doesn't do well no matter what you try, either feed it meat or give the dog to someone who is prepared to do so if you find that you can't.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Zosia said:

Well, I'd do some really serious research on the subject before you commit yourself to an animal and consult a vet, too. If you happen to adopt a dog and start feeding it a vegan/vegetarian diet, and it doesn't do well no matter what you try, either feed it meat or give the dog to someone who is prepared to do so if you find that you can't.

I'll do some research before, definitely. I'm not going to endanger a living thing's life. I'll have to look into "ethically made" dog food, because I do really want a dog...idk. It's a lot to think about.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Another side note (sorry, I think of so many random things to share. I don't know how useful people find these tidbits of info that I link, but hopefully someone gets something out of it ;)). This is just mainly for entertainment purposes as it is less serious. I was watching a movie the other night called In the Heart of the Sea, which is based on true events which inspired the writing of the story Moby Dick. It's a good action film that came out a couple of years ago. The reason why I mention it is because I noticed some things that were said in the movie that make a good point about our treatment of animals and our view of what kinds of duties we owe them. It's not intentionally a vegan or animal rights message, but I just found it interesting that they drew these kinds of parallels. And aside from that, it's just an interesting movie in and of itself.

 

For example (spoilers?), there was one scene where the first mate and the captain of the whaling ship were discussing what kind of treatment human beings owe animals. The captain said that God put animals on Earth for man to use any way he found fit; that we are on the top of Creation and because we're supposedly made in God's image, and animals are not made in God's image, that gives us the "right" to exploit them. The first mate was trying to argue against that, saying Man is full of greed and finds any kind of excuse to justify violence when we get something out of it. It was interesting to see the first mate's transformation over the course of the film. He started out being really eager to go whaling, and was doing it largely to increase his standing in the world, but by the end of the movie he became much more empathetic towards animals and couldn't bring himself to kill the whale because he didn't seem to see it just as a thing or as a means to an end, but as an individual who suffered.

 

Good film (and the movie is much better than the trailer, by the way). :D

 

Here's the trailer:

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Anthracite_Impreza

That video really got to me, I feel legitimately sick. I think that's what I needed to push me into actually doing something...

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Anthracite_Impreza said:

That video really got to me, I feel legitimately sick. I think that's what I needed to push me into actually doing something...

If you have any questions or anything, feel free to ask and I'd be happy to see what I can do to help. :)

Link to post
Share on other sites
Anthracite_Impreza
3 hours ago, Zosia said:

If you have any questions or anything, feel free to ask and I'd be happy to see what I can do to help. :)

I've been trying to cut down on meat for a while, it's just getting to me, but with living at home and being incompetent and unemployed it's hard to make significant changes. I'm going to ask to try 'fake' meats next time we go shopping though.

 

Another problem is, due to being autistic, I'm extremely 'picky' around food. I can name more foods I will eat than won't, and nowhere are vegetables on that list. I've made a little progress with fruit but it's still limited. That's pretty much the only reason I've carried on so far I think, having little I can eat.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/9/2017 at 4:31 PM, Anthracite_Impreza said:

I've been trying to cut down on meat for a while, it's just getting to me, but with living at home and being incompetent and unemployed it's hard to make significant changes. I'm going to ask to try 'fake' meats next time we go shopping though.

 

Another problem is, due to being autistic, I'm extremely 'picky' around food. I can name more foods I will eat than won't, and nowhere are vegetables on that list. I've made a little progress with fruit but it's still limited. That's pretty much the only reason I've carried on so far I think, having little I can eat.

That's totally understandable, and it's admirable that you want to cut down on meat. If you're interested in reducing your meat intake--take care of yourself, take it slow, do whatever you can when you can. And if you find that you can't cut down on meat as much as you had originally hoped for, that's okay, too. Doing your best and trying to do what you can is amazing. :)

 

If you're interested in trying some faux meats, there are a few brands that are really similar in taste and texture to the real thing. Here's a few examples:

 

The brand "Beyond Meat" (They have burgers, grilled "chicken" strips, and ground "beef".) See: http://beyondmeat.com/products

Spoiler

zvvqxi.jpg

 

2w3v03a.jpg

 

dc7uh4.jpg

 

1z5mbt3.jpg

 

The brand "Gardein" (They have "chicken" strips, "chicken" nuggets, buffalo wings, "chicken" cutlets, "chicken" patties, sweet and sour "pork" bites, burgers, ground "beef", breakfast sausage patties, "crab" cakes, "fish" fillets, stuffed holiday roasts, "turkey" cutlets, "pepperoni" pizza pockets, and breakfast pockets.) See: https://gardein.com/products/

Spoiler

fawhsp.jpg

 

120qtzt.jpg

 

1ilhnd.jpg

 

Both of those sites should have coupons on them if you're interested.

 

The two above brands are probably the most like their meat counterparts, but there are countless other brands that have bean and lentil burgers, or sausages and hotdogs that are very similar to the real thing, or faux lunch meat which is very similar to actual lunch meat.

 

I hope this helps some? Let me know if there's anything else I can do for you.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If anybody is interested, here is one of the largest and most active support forums for transitioning vegetarians and vegans:

 

http://www.veggieboards.com/forum/index.php

 

(I haven't personally referenced this site much, but it might help others if any of you have any questions or need some support.)

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Zosia said:

If anybody is interested, here is one of the largest and most active support forums for transitioning vegetarians and vegans:

 

http://www.veggieboards.com/forum/index.php

 

(I haven't personally referenced this site much, but it might help others if any of you have any questions or need some support.)

I've also heard something about "the vegan forum", or vegan forum on YouTube, I think from Liv's Healthy Life (or something like that), I've used veggieboards before though by googling stuff, and having the answer pop up in there, I don't have an account on there or anything. Vegan Amino is growing as well.

Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, The Dryad said:

Vegan Amino is growing as well.

I haven't heard of that one...is it any good?

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/7/2017 at 0:19 AM, Zosia said:
On 6/6/2017 at 10:04 PM, The Dryad said:

The footage is the most disturbing examples of factory farming, but honestly....most of the footage looks exactly the same- even if the factory animal killers/workers don't outright beat animals, they still slit their throats until their life's blood runs out and paints the walls and the cement with it. Even if it's done "humanely", those animals still try to escape certain death, and their anxiety fills the air and they still scream. I don't see the point of showing any other type of footage, all of it is bad so why not show the worst?

I get what you're saying. I don't think that I explained my point well enough in my previous post. I do think that this kind of footage is vitally important. I guess the issue that I have with some of these organizations is not so much the footage itself, but how they present it (like I mentioned before--some groups often have a habit of over-dramatizing it). What I mean by this is that they sometimes have very dramatic-sounding narrators and some kind of music playing in the background which is meant to hype up the emotions of the viewer. I don't think these are really necessary to have edited into this kind of footage of animals...and I wonder if having it incorporated makes the footage appear more ridiculous and less trustworthy to the average viewer?

 

I feel like I should give an example...um...I hope it's okay to post these videos and my comments here. (Warning: Very GRAPHIC)

  Hide contents

Alright, compare the presentation of these two videos.

 

Here is a video from Mercy for Animals (undercover):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vXhz04P8up0

Notice how there is both a narrator who's voice has been altered (which in and of itself makes it sound like someone is going after this guy for doing undercover investigations; whether that is actually true or not is unknown, but it adds a sense of danger to the video) and anxiety-inducing music is playing in the background. There are multiple short clips edited together of chickens being brutalized. Notice how the narrator describes what Tyson does to these chickens and what kind of language is used. I feel like the intention with these kinds of videos is to say something along the lines of, "See? This is what happens in the industry. This is the standard. This is what you're always paying for when you buy from X company." Whether or not that is necessarily true is another point. It very well may be the case that this is what happens a large portion of the time. But...saying that it is without knowing for sure seems dishonest to me. While I know that the footage is absolutely awful, and what is being done to the animals in it is horrendous, I just...have a sneaking suspicion that this way of presenting it doesn't do us any favors, and only makes us look foolish, dishonest, and out to push an agenda by excluding any information that doesn't paint this industry and everyone who works in it as fundamentally malicious. (I feel like I'm still not explaining this well enough, but I don't know how else to word it. I hope I'm making sense.)

 

I don't know...this is just my current opinion about this particular style of presenting this information. Maybe other people's opinions would change how I see it. And, again, this is not to say that the footage itself is bad or shouldn't be used. I just think the presentation needs some work.

 

Here is the other video from a longer documentary called "À L'Abattoir" by Philippe Radault (not undercover, they allowed him to film):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VizpLk263iM

Notice how this is one continuous scene and there is no narrator or music playing. It seems more "real" to me, personally. There's no editing (as far as I can tell?); it seems like something you might see if you were to walk into a slaughterhouse. It is still fundamentally wrong what they're doing to these cattle (because they are taking their lives for unnecessary reasons), but...I wouldn't call it a horror show, per se. It's showing what would probably be considered a very "humane" (although not the most "humane") way of stunning cattle. There's no shoving or yelling, the animals aren't packed tightly in there, the line is moving slowly (hopefully that would mean the animals are more accurately stunned?), so on and so forth. There are still things that one could argue the worker could do better on...and don't get me wrong, I'm not condoning any of this at all. I still think it's gut-wrenching and morally wrong. But, I think this kind of presentation is better than the first one?

 

Which of these two videos do you think that the average person is going to take more seriously?

 

When you say that you don't see the point of showing any other footage other than the absolute worst, I think that this is a mistake that many people make, if I may be so bold to say? Maybe it does take showing some people a horror show in order to get them to change. Maybe they wouldn't react hardly at all to the second video that I posted, but they would for the first. Maybe some people do need a narrator telling them what is wrong with a certain scene. Though, I think that showing a person the "best case scenario" is also very important, because it says that even if everything is done "well" or to the "highest standards", it is still violent and bloody and gruesome and a thousand other terrible things that outweigh our petty habits and our taste buds.

 

I really hope that I don't sound like an apologist for the industry. I'm not trying to defend them, I'm only trying to find more effective ways of communicating honestly with the general public. I hope my ramblings make sense?

I don't like the use of graphic images to promote veganism because they seem like an emotional appeal with no substance. They seem reminiscent of pro-lifers waving pictures of aborted fetuses in everyone's faces(btw, real aborted embryos/fetuses most likely look nothing like the drawings on those bill boards) Vegans have a point but purely emotional appeals have a good reason not to be trusted. 

 

Also, on the pet issue, parrots can be a good herbivorous pet if you get one you know wasn't illegally captured from the wild for the pet trade(this can be a serious problem with some species of birds) You could also get a pet rabbit, pig, turtle, or goat. I wouldn't advise you to try to feed a dog or cat a vegan diet. Seriously, dogs and cats are not the only viable pets, and certainly not the right species for you if you want to feed them vegan. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, m4rble said:

I don't like the use of graphic images to promote veganism because they seem like an emotional appeal with no substance. They seem reminiscent of pro-lifers waving pictures of aborted fetuses in everyone's faces(btw, real aborted embryos/fetuses most likely look nothing like the drawings on those bill boards) Vegans have a point but purely emotional appeals have a good reason not to be trusted.  

What do you suggest as an alternative?

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Zosia said:

What do you suggest as an alternative?

I guess the images are okay and they may work on some people or in conjunction with information or statistics, I'm just saying I don't trust purely emotional appeal without context. I also don't like looking at them so it upsets me when I see those images thrown around, but I guess that's a sort of selfish point because it's a lot worse for the animals. I would suggest using facts and pointing out that veganism is based on a philosophy they most likely already agree with. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Perissodactyla

Demographics: Vegan

  • 23px-Flag_of_Austria.svg.png Austria: In 2013 Kurier estimated that 0.5 percent of Austrians practised veganism, and in the capital, Vienna, 0.7 percent.[90]
  • 23px-Flag_of_Belgium_%28civil%29.svg.png Belgium: A 2016 iVOX online study found that out of 1000 Dutch-speaking residents of Flanders and Brussels of 18 years and over, 0.3 percent were vegan.[91]
  • 23px-Flag_of_Germany.svg.png Germany: There were an estimated 800,000 vegans in Germany as of 2013.[83]
  • 21px-Flag_of_Israel.svg.png Israel: Five percent (300,000) in Israel said they were vegan in 2014, making it the highest per capita vegan population in the world.[92] Veganism increased among Israeli Arabs.[93] The Israeli army made special provision for vegan soldiers in 2015, which included providing non-leather boots and wool-free berets.[94]
  • 23px-Flag_of_Italy.svg.png Italy: Between 0.6 and three percent of Italians were reported to be vegan as of 2015.[95]
  • 23px-Flag_of_the_Netherlands.svg.png Netherlands: In 2014 the Dutch Society for Veganism (Nederlandse Vereniging voor Veganisme) estimated there were 45,000 Dutch vegans (0.27 percent), based on their membership growth.[96]
  • 23px-Flag_of_Sweden.svg.png Sweden: Four percent said they were vegan in a 2014 Demoskop poll.[97]
  • 16px-Flag_of_Switzerland.svg.png  Switzerland: The Swiss Vegan Society (Vegane Gesellschaft Schweiz) estimated in 2016 that one percent of the population was vegan.[98]
  • 23px-Flag_of_the_United_Kingdom.svg.png United Kingdom: In the UK, where the tofu and mock-meats market was worth £786.5 million in 2012, two percent said they were vegan in a 2007 government survey.[99] A 2016 Ipsos MORI study commissioned by the Vegan Society, surveying almost 10,000 people aged 15 or over across England, Scotland and Wales, found that 1.05 percent were vegan; the Vegan Society estimates that 542,000 in the UK follow a vegan diet.[100]
  • 23px-Flag_of_the_United_States.svg.png United States: Estimates of vegans in the US vary from two percent (Gallup, 2012)[101] to 0.5 percent (Faunalytics, 2014). According to the latter, 70 percent of those who adopted a vegan diet abandoned it.[102]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Veganism#Demographics

 

Demographics: Vegetarian

Country Vegetarian diet (%) (includes vegan diet) Approx. no. of individuals Data set year Vegan diet (%) Approx. no. of individuals Source year Note
23px-Flag_of_Australia.svg.png Australia 2% - 11.2% 2,100,000 2016[2] 2010[3]       As of March 2016, 11.2% of people living in Australia agreed that "The food I eat is all, or almost all, vegetarian."
23px-Flag_of_Austria.svg.png Austria 9% 765,000 2013[4]        
22px-Flag_of_Brazil.svg.png Brazil 7.6% 15,200,000 2012[5]       Adult population
23px-Flag_of_Canada.svg.png Canada 4% 1,264,000 2003[6]        
23px-Flag_of_the_Czech_Republic.svg.png Czech Republic 1.5% 235,000 2003[7]        
23px-Flag_of_the_People%27s_Republic_of_ China 4% - 5% 54,428,000 - 68,035,000 2013[8]        
20px-Flag_of_Denmark.svg.png Denmark 4% 220,000 2011[9]        
23px-Flag_of_Finland.svg.png Finland 2% - 6% 108,000 - 329,000 2011[10] 2015[11] 0.5% 27,000 2013[12] % of vegans only an estimation
23px-Flag_of_France.svg.png France 1.5% - 2% 1,988,000 - 3,300,000 2011[13]        
23px-Flag_of_Germany.svg.png Germany 6% - 8.7% 4,786,000 - 7,000,000 2015[14] 2011[15] 1.0% 800,000 2011[15]  
23px-Flag_of_India.svg.png India 29% - 40% 360,576,000 2009[16] 2014[17][18]        
21px-Flag_of_Israel.svg.png Israel 2.6% - 13% 1,046,000 2015[19] 5% 421,000 2015[19] The numbers 13% for vegetarians and 5% for vegans are much higher than the results of polls a few years earlier. They are based on one newspaper/television poll and have not yet been confirmed by a more reliable poll.
23px-Flag_of_Italy.svg.png Italy 7.1% - 10% 4,246,000 2009[16] 2015[20] 0.6% - 2.8% 400,000 - 1,680,000 2015[20][21]  
23px-Flag_of_Japan.svg.png Japan 4.7% 5,964,300 2014[22] 2.7% 3,432,000 2014[22]  
23px-Flag_of_Latvia.svg.png Latvia 3% - 5% 60,000 - 100,000 2013[23]       estimation
23px-Flag_of_the_Netherlands.svg.png Netherlands 4.5% 738,000 2008[24]        
23px-Flag_of_New_Zealand.svg.png New Zealand 2.6% 106,000 2016[25]        
21px-Flag_of_Norway.svg.png Norway 2% 100,000 2012[26]       estimation
23px-Flag_of_Poland.svg.png Poland 3.2% 1,228,800 2013[27] 1.6% 608,000 2013[27]  
23px-Flag_of_Portugal.svg.png Portugal 1.8% 200,000 2014[28]        
23px-Flag_of_Russia.svg.png Russia 3% - 4% 4,380,000 - 5,840,000 2014[29][30]        
23px-Flag_of_Spain.svg.png Spain 0.5% - 4% 1,788,000 2007[31] 2012[32] 0.08% 36,800 2006[33] rough consumer pattern estimation
23px-Flag_of_Sweden.svg.png Sweden 10% 970,000 2014[34] 4% 390,000 2014[34]  
16px-Flag_of_Switzerland.svg.png  Switzerland 2% - 5% 375,000 2007[35]        
23px-Flag_of_the_United_Kingdom.svg.png United Kingdom 2% - 12% 1,292,000 - 7,752,000 2012[36] 2014[37] 1.05% 542,000 2016[38] % of vegans over age of 15
23px-Flag_of_the_United_States.svg.png United States 3.3% 8,000,000 2016[39] 1.5% 3,700,000   Adult population

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vegetarianism_by_country#Demographics

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Anthracite_Impreza
On 13/06/2017 at 10:48 PM, Zosia said:

That's totally understandable, and it's admirable that you want to cut down on meat. If you're interested in reducing your meat intake--take care of yourself, take it slow, do whatever you can when you can. And if you find that you can't cut down on meat as much as you had originally hoped for, that's okay, too. Doing your best and trying to do what you can is amazing. :)

 

If you're interested in trying some faux meats, there are a few brands that are really similar in taste and texture to the real thing. Here's a few examples:

 

The brand "Beyond Meat" (They have burgers, grilled "chicken" strips, and ground "beef".) See: http://beyondmeat.com/products

  Reveal hidden contents

zvvqxi.jpg

 

2w3v03a.jpg

 

dc7uh4.jpg

 

1z5mbt3.jpg

 

The brand "Gardein" (They have "chicken" strips, "chicken" nuggets, buffalo wings, "chicken" cutlets, "chicken" patties, sweet and sour "pork" bites, burgers, ground "beef", breakfast sausage patties, "crab" cakes, "fish" fillets, stuffed holiday roasts, "turkey" cutlets, "pepperoni" pizza pockets, and breakfast pockets.) See: https://gardein.com/products/

  Reveal hidden contents

fawhsp.jpg

 

120qtzt.jpg

 

1ilhnd.jpg

 

Both of those sites should have coupons on them if you're interested.

 

The two above brands are probably the most like their meat counterparts, but there are countless other brands that have bean and lentil burgers, or sausages and hotdogs that are very similar to the real thing, or faux lunch meat which is very similar to actual lunch meat.

 

I hope this helps some? Let me know if there's anything else I can do for you.

Thank you for your support, it's much appreciated :3 Thank you for the links too, but I live in England :P If you could make vegetables not be manky that would be great ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...