People first veganism, Because the Revolutions here and you know that it's right.

Abolitionist Claptrap and Drivel

I just read a “theory” by none other than the guru of ‘non-human abolitionism’ Gary L Francione, and it made me want to vomit, well not vomit in a visceral sense, but more importantly in a pschoyanalytical sense.

Here is the incoherent, nonsensical, most of the time, say nothing, time wasting, so called “theory” that made me want to puke with disgust, read it at your own peril, but please be forewarned and bring your own paper bag.

Is it me? or does this segment from his 1st paragraph leave you with a sense of, well, dread? “However, the theory rests on a fundamental premise that animals have moral value, a position for which I make rational arguments as well, but which cannot ultimately be “proved” any more than we can “prove” matters of human rights” If this isn’t drivel, then ‘drivel’ needs an overhaul. ‘If’ his position of cannot ultimately be “proved” is to be accepted as ‘truth’ then where does it leave his contention that ‘animals have a moral value’, wait!, don’t answer that, I want to answer it for you, after you get your nose out of the paper bag (which you may want to renew by now,) it’s an exercise in saying, that there is no moral value in a sentient animals life, because it can’t be proven. Where does that leave the ‘animal?’, well, unfortunately, D-E-A-D, DEAD!!

If you still have a stomach for it, then read on. I’ll try to make this easy on you, Francione says this in his 2nd paragraph, and I’d like you to ‘not read it’ because he says absolutely nothing in it. Here goes nothing! “All moral arguments must contain a moral premise (most arguments have more than one such premise) that cannot be proved and that must be accepted in order to reason within the particular moral system or framework. In fact, the same is true of math, which relies on axioms and postulates that cannot be proved and have to be accepted in order to reason within the system, and science, which assumes the fundamentals of whatever scientific paradigm is extent at a particular historical point” There, that wasn’t so traumatic, was it? after all, you didn’t read it, right? oh and if you did read it, well, so what?, would you have gained some kind of enlightenment if you had?, I think not, so strike it from memory and pretend it doesn’t exist, because, umm, it is void of ‘any’ practical or applicable value to your decision as to whether non-human animals have moral worth or not. Strike two, for sentient beings.

Next we have a form of defeatism as the ‘guillotine’ that removed the head of the ‘moral worth’ of sentient beings, and I quote (Bold lettering by me). “For me, certain moral propositions (such as that the infliction of pain, suffering, and death on any sentient being is, at least as a prima facie matter, morally wrong) are true in the same way that I regard any other proposition as true. And that proposition itself is a function of other views I have about nonviolence. But a rational person who had different views about moral realism could reject my views” OK, so, does that mean if I have a different set of moral values or criteria, that I am morally justified in abusing non-humans, yep, that’s what the guru and professor just said, so go ahead and savour that filet mignon that was butchered from the sentient but expendable sentient non-human, Francione said it’s oky doky! Strike 3 and your OUT! DEAD!

Finally the professor strikes the death knell for all reason to discontinue the abuse of non-human animals.

“Rationality is about the suitability of means to ends. When we say that a person is irrational, we generally mean s/he is choosing means that are inappropriate for an end. But there is no monolithic concept of rationality that allows us to declare that particular ends are inherently irrational. Engaging in conduct that will bring about the end of the world is irrational if you do not see the extinction of life as a desirable end. But for those who think extinction is valuable, or do not care about future generations, destructive behavior may be rational.

Rationality is also about the coherence of beliefs. If I believe that if animals are sentient then we ought not to consume them and that animals are sentient, it is irrational for me to conclude that I ought to consume them.

Claims about rationality (and irrationality) are normative claims that, like moral claims, require justification. Therefore, the notion that we can get to animal rights through “science” or rationality, and that we do not need unprovable moral or normative notions, is simply false. Rationality cannot tell us what ends we should pursue or what fundamental beliefs are worth having. Those are normative matters and, like the axioms of math or the fundamentals of a scientific paradigm, cannot be proved outside the particular system.”

Here’s my main concern with more of his apologetic and equivocationistic language from the above quoted paragraph, […]and that we do not need unprovable moral or normative notions, is simply false.” So he wants to give you yet again an unprovable set of morals that give you once again the invitation to dine on your morally bankrupted prime rib, thank you professor of ‘animal abolition’ because you’ve done a ‘bang up’ job of handing the heart of sentient animals on a plate for ‘anyone’ with a different point of view to season and consume with your professorial blessing.

I don’t think I can make this any clearer, but with friends like “professor” Francione,



‘The Abolitionist Approach, in a Nutshell’, is Untenable.

It may seem obvious to the reader of this post (you) that ethical veganism (which I am personally at some level at odds with too) and abolitionism relative to non-human rights should be in perfect symbiosis/harmony with one another,  well Au contraire, Mon ami it is not so.

The ‘Abolitionist’ ‘Bill of Rights’ in a ‘Nutshell’ as proposed by the self appointed (is that true? or was he appointed by popular consensus) guru Gary L, Francione Professor, Rutgers University is not only untenable as an ideal but is also vacuous in the real world. The purpose of this essay is to examine Francione’s nutshell within the nutshell. Here it is, the nutshell, “The goal is to abolish animal use, not to regulate treatment. The means to the goal? Go vegan and educate others about veganism”. I don’t know about you, (but I am looking forward to vigorous employment of your gray matter in defending his position, and also but extremely unlikely that he’ll defend his position personally) but I don’t believe for even a (what is shorter than a moment?) moment that abolition of the ‘use’ of non-human animals will ever see the light of day.

Let’s see, what are abolitionists asking for? (I’m just going to name a few & in no particular order) and I’d like for you to get into the spirit of  ‘things’ and play along with me in a devil’s advocate kinda way, fun right? here we go!

1) Ask McDonalds,  Burger King , Wendy’s,  KFC,  Dominoes,  Walmart, Restaurant Depot,  et al to stop serving ‘billions of billions’ and to tell their patrons and shareholders it ain’t nice to (how was it put in that nutshell? oh yeah) […]use[…] animals. Take a deep breath, let the enormity of that take hold on your psyche and let’s move on shall we, before the smoke in your frontal lobe becomes a little too noxious.

2) Ask the fishing industry, every livestock farmer, every hunter, every CAFO operation, to end it’s […]use[…] of animals and grow vegetables employing veganic principles, e.g. no manure, no farmed bees, no ? come on guys, don’t let me do all the dirty work, fill in some blanks already!

3) Ask all public hospitals, private clinics, governmental oversight agencies such as the FDA, EPA , USDA, to abandon all their offices, step outside, remove their leather shoes, throw down their hotdogs and proclaim abolitionism as their G*D, yikes! does that mean we have to go homoeopathic!!, sorry that doesn’t ‘cut the mustard’ either, as non-human animals are also […]used[…] in homeopathic treatment of illnesses such as venom or whole bees diluted in alcohol (do a little google, no that’s not a new dance craze) OK moving onward.

4) Ask the police and rescuers at times of catastrophes such as earthquakes to stop using cadaver dogs to solve murders or to sniff out victims buried but still alive under all the rubble, the armed forces to stop using anything that was procured from a non-human animal, such as leather boots (hmmm recurring theme there) also to stop using any weapons that were created  (this is where I need your help) using non-human animals as a medium, also here’s the fun part! what happens if aliens land on earth and are brandishing some kind of instrument of destruction that was obtained from non-human ‘whatevers’ (let your imagination run rampant, go ahead it’ll be fun & doesn’t cost much), should we tell them Gary L, Francione Professor, Rutgers University says ‘Go Vegan!

I hope you have a sense of humour, if not, go get one! because I have been itching to use this analogy and now I get to do just that! do you remember that scene in the movie ‘The professional’, the part where Stansfield (Gary Oldman, the bad cop) standing outside of the apartment building that  Leon (Jean Reno, the hit man) is holed up in with Mathilda (Natalie Portman, the girl) tells one of his underlings (fun word huh!) get everyone, and the underling says what do you mean everyone, and the bad cop says ev’ryyyyyone!!!!!!! well look at it this way, it’s exactly what Gary L, Francione Professor, Rutgers University is saying,  Get ev’ryyyyyone!!!!!!! to Go Vegan! and I think he means everyone in the universe, parallel included!

So you see, it’s no small request, you know Go Vegan! I mean if we all decided to knock on one door (you know, for the sake of expediency)  at a time in our respective neighbourhoods and asked to chat with the decision makers of the household about the ethics of abolitionism, just how do you think that would go down, I’m envisioning that you may have a non-human animal, namely ‘rover’ chasing you down the street while you try to hang on to your tofutti cuties, if you know what I mean lol!

The whole purpose of asking people to go vegan (at least in my opinion) is because until you ask, they may not consider doing so of their own volition, and not because you expect them to, but because you want to present the facts of a meat centric society that is bringing disease, ecological bankruptcy, and moral destitution to the masses (yes I just said “moral destitution” we can discuss that too if you’d like).

So did I say untenable or vacuous, because what I meant to say was it’s incredibly naive, a waste of energy and resources, extremely unlikely and to take that a little further (well more than a little) downright impossible, can I be any clearer? I mean as much as I would want the whole universe to Go Vegan! it’s just not ‘in the cards’, so I’d rather reach out to those that have a ‘listening ear’ for veg*nism and not set my expectations on converting ev’ryyyyone!!!!!!!

btw Go Vegan!, actually please do something, doesn’t have to be vegan, unless that’s what you want.

Primitivism vs Veganism vs Realism

The clock will never dial back to primitivism (one where we have a hunter or two in every family or compound of families with several hunters) it’ll lead right back to where we are now (history already bears this out)

It’s not as though everyone on the planet is going to have a paradigm shift in thinking ‘en masse’ and say we’re destroying the planet environmentally so let’s all be farmers and hunters and destructure our cities. Sustainability and ecological survival has to go hand in hand with technological and scientific advancement in addition to curtailing the growth of the human population and we have to bring water to regions where there is none.

In addition to the above, veganism needs a broader baseline in order to ‘attract’ more followers/adherents/people, for example making it less restrictive when it comes to using commodities like bone char filtered sugar or isinglass/egg white fined guinness etc or the recognition of different levels of veg*n not being viable to the vegan police

The vegan police have to recognise that the whole of mankind will never all be vegan (Realism) and learn to live with and not alienate non-vegans by making veganism unattainable. (this particular point is paramount if vegans want numerical growth)

If sustainability and the preservation of our environment is the endgame then veganism has got to be more inclusive not exclusive. What I’m proposing is something akin to vegetarianism. e.g. ‘pescevegan’ ‘ovovegan’ ‘ecovegan’ ‘dietaryvegan’ etc.

So instead of berating someone for where they draw the line, we should be welcoming them into the ‘vegan’ club, why? because there is political strength in numbers.

Yes No Maybe?

The Vegan Grey Zone

My view is that if they’re not sentient it’s not unethical, (and no that doesn’t include a human that’s comotose, remember, this is a humans first approach to veganism)

There are studies that show some insects being eaten alive by other insects while they themselves are continuing to eat something else, to me that suggests non sentience.

As you already know there are varying degrees of self awareness/intelligence with just about any genus and it’s no different with bivalvia.

For the sake of my own checks & balances I have read a lot of info about bivalves and have come to the conclusion (at least to my satisfaction) that generally bivalves are not sentient. I think most of what they do is similar to plants, which is to react to stimuli without consciousness.

So vegans don’t eat insects or bivalvia but I don’t care if they do, As I have previously mentioned, using leather or wool or eating rescue eggs from ethically responsible sources is another grey area for vegans. Why do I say ‘grey area’ it’s because the vegan police are waiting to swoop down on any ‘vegan’ daring to entertain even the slightest thought of perhaps wearing a feather in their hair that they may have found while walkng in the woods, or eating a food item that was prepared with sugar that may have been processed using bone char or an egg that came from a hen rescued from certain death.

I would still view them as vegan because I think spiritually speaking veganism is about not abusing sentient beings and not about the taxa of the day.

One thing I’d like ecoethical veganism to be about is to be about ‘willing to change’ as the world changes, to be informed of the latest technological/scientific advances & discoveries and to be able to implement that into our ecoethical lives without being chained to a dogmatic set of antiquainted ideals that ultimately do no good, for us the planet or the animals.

So I say if you want to drink that guiness that may or may not have been fined with egg whites or isinglass, or eat the damn cake with bone char processed sugar, then go for it! be an ecoethical vegan, unchain your ethics and most of all be ‘present’ in your choices, not in in your ties to dogmatic automatonic actions!

Yes, no, maybe?, talk to me…


Veg*n Curious

Have you ever said I’m going to start my diet next week, or I’ll start excercising right after new year, or I’ll quit smoking after I finish this pack of cigerettes or I want to start volunteering to help at the hospice, or perhaps you can think of some other promise that you’ve made to do something just as soon as you get a couple of ‘things’ out of the way.

One promise I made to myself was to learn to play guitar and after about a year I bought a used acoustic guitar and learned to play one song (so far) I’m now planning on learning a second song and I think it’s going to be something Jethro Tull’ish. The reason I’m talking about this is because I think we all have the best of intentions to do something with ourselves that would challenge who we are at the moment, to make ourselves better or to help someone else that may need assistance.

I’d like to encourage you to take that step just as soon as you’re done reading this article. If you’re reading this, chances are you already have a clue about the topic of discussion, of course it’s going to be an admonition of veg*nism and what I’d like to start out by saying is don’t set yourself up for failure, don’t set the bar so high that it appears insurmountable. Start out by taking baby steps like having one meal a day that has no meat on your plate. Breakfast is an easy meal to veg*nise.

For instance you could buy some delicious almond milk and have it ready for tomorrow morning along with your favourite cereal, don’t stress about whether the cereal has some ingredients in it that may or may not be veg*n, you can always deal with that sometime later.

One of the best ways to guarantee that you continue successfully applying your newfound conviction is to surround yourself with some failsafe foods. Next time you’re out at the supermarket instead of reaching for the chicken breast why not try some seitan (wheat meat) which has just as much protein but is sans the cholesterol. Better yet google health food stores in your area and do a little shopping there too, or if that’s too expensive of an option see if you can find a more progressive supermarket. Instead of buying frozen pizza with pepperoni buy one that is advertised as veg*n. Buy some fruit yes! fruit, if it’s sitting around your house maybe you’ll pick it up, peel it, cut it up and eat that instead of a piece of cheese.

The point I’m trying to make is that your best chance of success will be to start right away with your next meal. For those of you that don’t know where to begin here’s a little shopping list that you can try to follow so that there are less chances of slip ups when you’re feeling in the mood for a snack.

Nuts: Pistachios-Walnuts-Almonds-cashews-Peanut or Almond butter
Beans: Baked beans-Black beans (there are spicy/cajuny ones that are awesome at Trader Joes or Wholefoods etc, you can even put them in a wrap)-Chick peas/Garbanzo beans (you can munch on em right out of the can)
Fruit: Strawberries-Blueberries-raspberriesBlackberries-Apples-Pears-Bananas
Tofu: ‘Twin Oaks’ brand from ‘Wholefoods’ especially the herbed one is great, just open up the package cut a couple of slices, it’s delish!
you can also make up a plate of veggies to go with it like grape tomatoes, carrots, cucumber, peppers etc, just add whatever veggie you like to the plate.
Hummus: Trader Joes is the best one I’ve found, the mediterranean one is vegan!
Butter for your toast: Earth Balance is vegan
Pizza: There are frozen pizzas that are veg*n in just about every supermarket.
Sausages: The ‘Field Roast’ brand is my fave but you can also check out the ‘Tofurky brand too’ ok so you’d have to fry this up a bit but it doesn’t take more than a few minutes and you could make a sandwich with them!.
Ice cream: The ‘So Delicious’ brand by ‘Turtle Mountain’ is sooooo delishious!! & veg*n!

ok there’s a few snacks to be getting on with, I hope it’s been helpful even though I didn’t put any work into giving you a ‘formal’ list I think you can see that with just a little bit of planning you can set yourself up for success. If you would like any further help on any of the products I’ve mentioned or for any other products that you are looking for an alternative for then please ask me I’m sure I can help you find what you need.

Good Luck!

Progressive Veganism

Some vegans just don’t get it, they just don’t get that the very reason that veganism was borne from vegetarianism was to protect NHAs from human exploitation and abuse. The literal definition of vegan isn’t as important as the spirit it imparts which is to reduce/eliminate animal exploitation.

If veganism doesn’t grow/evolve with time and technology and become current then it will eventually become irrelevent. As a vegan the next time you meet an omnivore that shows an interest in the vegan ideal why don’t you try explaining to them that vegans don’t eat honey but do eat farmed bee polinated fruits and vegetables. Maybe vegans could make sense of not eating sugar that was filtered by bone char but find it ok to eat vegetables grown in manure.

All too often it isn’t very fruitful talking about the definition of vegan which in some instances isn’t ethical and invites DOA discussions and do what has done, which is to look at veganism in a more progressive way although some vegans in general may disagree about the term progressive (it’s something we did independently of each other, great minds think alike) I like the term veganish (a term Carpe Vegan is proposing the use of) it leaves room for error, for some personal interpretation while providing a framework upon which to work from.

I came up with a different term and did exactly what Donald Watson did, (something I mentioned in a previous post) I took the term vegan, reconfigured and redefined it, he did this with ‘vegetarian’ so now I’m calling myself an ecoethicalvegan. No it’s not a portmanteau or contraction like ‘vegan’ I chose to add vegan at the end, my etymologically manipulated version is just as valid as the one conjured up by Donald Watson & Elsie Shrigley.

We, ‘veganism’ and communities like have some similarities and some differences and are going to have to ‘deal’ with each other because the CarpeVegan ideal is an undercurrent within the vegan community and that of other conscientious consumers that will become a growing force in the coming years.

Veganism as an ethic not to abuse/use nonhuman animals is laudable, however for the vast population of mankind it will never be a choice they take up.

That leaves NHAs at a massive disadvantage & it’s time for vegans and others to form organisations that go beyond the narrow confines of veganism. We need organisations that stand up for animal rights and that also seeks not to be as stringent & dare I say dogmatic with it’s definition so that it becomes available to more people. By way of an example is the aforementioned issue of bone char (and there are certainly other issues).

Avoiding sugar that was filtered through bone char can just seem to be another layer of minutiae that the general public most likely will never quite be comfortable with alongside a number of other ‘things’ & it can make veganism seem unattainable & out of reach in general which extrapolates into NHAs suffering for even longer.

I’m not advocating for veganism to redifine itself, what I’m saying is we need a different organised movement, similar to veganism but one that has a different, more expanded baseline.

Anyway (not sure if I’m supposed to start a paragraph with that word but what the hey) I’ve been squawking enough for now and if anyone reads this and it makes them dig a little deeper then that’s the most I can ask for….later 🙂

Inequality of Species

Everything that breathes is not equal in every sense. I’m obviously not talking about our physiology because there is a variety of animals that just can’t be compared to each other e.g. birds, land animals, fish, spiders etc.

I personally feel mankind is capable of conducting themselves in a manner that is ethical, moral, egalitarian, sort of along the lines of ‘the golden rule’ or Immanuel Kants Categorical Imperative, whereas nonhuman animals aren’t capable of doing so.

Nonhuman animals may have fun, nurse their young, be afraid etc, even at times helping humans without being prompted. Humans on the other hand do this because they have the ability to think a situation through, collaborate with humans with different skillsets, form alliances and act upon them because they see a moral worth in their efforts. This ability does set us apart at some level from nonhuman animals.

That doesn’t mean that we have the right to treat animals as inferior, it actually puts the onus on us to extend rights to them that even other nonhuman animals can’t do. Using ‘species egalitarianism’ as a platform/framework we can and do have the power to extend a degree of personhood to them in order to protect them from other humans that choose to abuse them, They simply don’t have the ability to do this themselves.

So yes we are all equal in some form/way, that is the right to live life free from harm from others, however mans ability to reflect and act upon moral actions has to have some worth assigned to it & I feel this sets us apart from nonhuman animals.

We may all be breathing the same life giving forces that this planet has to offer but there is in my belief a hierarchy that has yet to be precisely, spiritually, metaphysically & taxonimically defined.

I drafted this comment (not verbatim) to a fellow blogger at

Please feel free to go there if you wish for his take on this subject.

More to the story….This is a further reflection upon the concept of  the ‘Inequality of Species’

Right to life within a political liberarism framework is obviously concerned with the moment of conception and that of a human female’s decision to end or not end the life force within her.

It’s not relative to NHAs. The right to life for NHAs is one where an entirely different species (Humans) have the right to end the life of  another species (NHAs) life/lives.

I for one have talked about and mulled over those very questions for several years with several people and after much deliberation and discourse have reached a place in my heart where I feel action was needed rather than deliberation alone.

What I mean by that is that I can continue to talk and think about these serious matters but NHAs depend on us here and now so my decision not to view them as a commodity is one where I can talk about the subject of the  “golden rule.” or even in the context of “do not do unto others what you would not have them do unto you.”  which for me translates into ‘do no harm’ as opposed to do nothing until I finish reflecting on the question of a moral order.

So to be pragmatic I want to and do take action. While I believe humans in many incomparable ways are different and in some ways superior to NHAs I also believe the reverse to be true. However NHAs can’t think ….“do not do unto others what you would not have them do unto you.”… so they can’t take action upon that philosohy but I can and feel it is incumbent upon me to do so because I do have the presence of mind as a human to do so.

How do you feel about this subject, are we all equal, something along the lines of

“A Rat Is A Pig Is A Dog Is A Boy” Ingrid Newkirk …

I don’t believe this to be true, how about you?

The Ghost of Veganism

Once upon a time there was a vegan, his name was Veganam (reverse the last 3 letters) his girlfriends name was Vegana. They were both devout veganists and practised their rituals daily, a typical day went something like this.

(fr)Propolis dans la ruche (en)Propolis in bee...

Image via Wikipedia

Veganam woke up and after brushing his teeth with propolis free toothpaste he’d pop the button on his percolator to brew their morning freetrade coffee and chucked in a couple of slices of L-cysteine free bagels into the toaster, he mumbles to himself ‘phew got through the first 5 minutes without any slipups!…Vegana is towing the line too! she runs her shower, steps in & says, awesome my water treatment plant doesn’t filter our water with bone char! woohoo! I’m so glad we bought our house in this municipality, I wouldn’t want to be awash in cow torture!

As Veganam & Vegana step into their leatherfree, hybrid, no animal print (you never know who may think it’s real) 450 mile per pint, subs as an oven (cooks scrambled Tofu while driving, with a side of notdogs) (VUV) vegan utility vehicle they discuss the evenings getogether for dinner with their omni friends ( yes vegans are allowed to socialise with the unclean)

What should we bring says Vegana, Veganam responds with, well you know we could bring some vegan treats like tofubrownies or tofuicecream or tofutoffees or tofutticutties or tofutofu or tofunko or tofooey or tofullovit or tofufuto or tofusofu or tofuyoutu or tofumeto or tofuthemto or tofunofu or tofuyuckto, yay says Vegana, we are so neato 🙂

As the months go by Vegana & Veganam stick to their lifestyle religiously reading, emailing, checking that they have eliminated all forms of animal cruelty from their lives. However, they finally had to move from their charming little cottage because they discovered their oil fired furnace wasn’t vegan on account of it being a fossil fuel so they moved into a rescue cow dung burning

Fresh cow dung

Image via Wikipedia

teepee, sold their VUV, (some parts were made from rubber a derivative of oil) They had to stop eating soy because some companies displace animals indigenous to the Brazilion rainforest, they also switched to eating only fallen fruit because they didn’t want to eat anything pollinated by farmed bees.

By this time Veganam & Vegana slowly but surely became thinner and thinner (heck if all you lived off was fallen fruit and even then you had to wait until the bugs were done with it, wouldn’t you be thin too!)
finally both the Vs got so thin they disappeared into thin air and became ghosts!!!seriously, this is a true story!

ghost riding1

Image by anvancy via Flickr

The moral of the story is that there is no such thing as a ‘perfect vegan’ All vegans will fall short of that unattainable nirvanic state of veganism which they continue to aspire to until veganism is no more.

So the moral of the moral is, veganism, if it wants to survive in any form at all, and wants to continue to be a voice for sentient nonhuman animals in this millenia has to adapt to the 21st century by expanding it’s definition of cruelty free consumerism to include animal based products that are procured ethically and with respect to nonhumans.

It can be done, let’s have a dialogue about it, let’s try to make a positive impact on our world.

Paradign Shift

I have been a vegan for a little over 3 years, relatively speaking, that is not a long time. However in terms of time mentally, spiritually and psychoanalytically that I’ve spent being vegan, it seems like decades to me.

Recently I have been re-thinking my veganism because it’s what I do, I give myself mental checks and balances in order to make sure I’m not stuck in a rut, I do this in all areas of my life.

I started thinking about recycling and how it is reflected through my being vegan. I had to replace a belt I needed and found myself at a thrift store looking at the belts and picked up a belt that looked terrific only to find it was leather. My first instinct was…bummer! can’t have it, it’s not vegan.

This is when I had a revolutionary, kinda like a paradigm shift in my veganess , I asked myself if it really was unvegan to own/purchase a recycled leather belt, and as one thought rolled into another I went down that oft mentioned slippery slope that vegans tend to opine when talking shop with other vegans on the interwebs (funny word, thought I would throw it in to break up the gloomy nature of my diatribe)

For anyone that stumbles across my blog….well Hi!! feel free to drop by anytime and as I expand on my new revolutionary vegan me, slam me, commend me, argue with me, educate me, but most of all, remember that animals are animals and so are we.

How about you, use or don’t use thriftstore leather?

Is veganism as dead as a doormouse

This is a general response to some of the
comments about the growth/non growth of veganism.

There obviously are a lot more vegan food options now compared to 10 years ago so there’s no debate/argument against that.

However I personally think the negative response to veganism per se is something (your experience will perhaps be different from mine) like 50/50. I meet people from time to time that I have to tell that I’m vegan and half the time it’s not a good response yet other times it’s ok.

In RL I’m very casual with my veganism, I definitely am from the school of thought that says just lead by example unless you want to come across as self righteous.

I don’t see veganism growing exponentially, I think it will keep growing albeit very slowly but I also feel that we end up with a lot of collateral loss because it’s a big cultural change for most people that have meat centric societal ties.

My view is that in order for veganism to grow at a faster rate it has to change with technology and has to be more tolerant, e.g. how we view products that have been exposed to animal products like bone char, or are service animals off limits, or vegans working in zoos, or if a vegan chooses to eat eggs/milk that are sourced from what they deem ethical sources.

Flaming wars proliferate the discussion on vegan forums faster than a speeding bullet/superman as soon as some of theses subjects are brought up, and at some point if veganism doesn’t allow for some or more of these issues to change it will stagnate and people will look elsewhere for something that fit’s them/their lives.

I think this is already the case to some extent because I see other ‘vegan’ oriented sites that are currently doing just that.

What do you think, will veganism last in it’s current form or will it be replaced sometime in the future because of it’s dogmatic tone.

I’d luv to hear what ya’ll think.