Who is this freak?

Vegans and non-vegans alike are welcome.
Post an intro here first to have your account authenticated by a mod, then you'll be able to post anywhere.
Even if you're here to lurk, please drop a short intro post here to let us know you're not a spammer so you aren't accidentally deleted.

Forum rules
Please read the full Forum Rules
Post Reply
User avatar
Brother AJ
Newbie
Posts: 1
Joined: Sun Mar 11, 2018 12:07 pm
Religion: None (Atheist)
Diet: Vegan

Who is this freak?

Post by Brother AJ » Sun Mar 11, 2018 9:45 pm

Oh hai! Adam here. A vegan right in the heart of "cowtown" known as Fort Worth, TX. Here's a little bit of info about me:

I am an atheist, aspiring anti-capitalist, social justice/intersectional advocate, anti-speciesist, and an abolitionist vegan, but don't be afraid! Okay, you can be a little afraid. I generally don't believe in judging others, but that's not to suggest I tolerate jerks, and I do enjoy some lively debate from time to time.

Full disclosure: I have clinical depression. No, this doesn't mean I'm sad all the time. I also suffer from generalized anxiety disorder and ADHD. I don't let my illnesses define me, but they are a part of me.

My interests include gaming, surfing the web for fun and interesting content, breaking down and analyzing story-telling tropes, so-bad-they're-good-films, sci-fi, fantasy, horror, animation, anime, comic book characters (in just about all mediums, but I'm not a big comic reader surprisingly), comedy, live music, singing, rocking out with the speakers blaring, engaging and immersive TV shows, unforgettable films and novels, nonhuman animals, learning about and being out in nature, acting, and activism.

I'm married to my beautiful wife, Claire, and we have 5 beautiful rescued fur-babies including two chihuahua mixes (Solomon or "Solly" and Ava) and 3 cats (Lucy, Leroy, and Oliver).

As a vegan existing within multiple minorities, it gets a little lonely. I'm here because I want to meet, chat, and debate with other like minded people. Hope to speak to you all soon!

User avatar
brimstoneSalad
neither stone nor salad
Posts: 8906
Joined: Wed May 28, 2014 9:20 am
Religion: None (Atheist)
Diet: Vegan

Post by brimstoneSalad » Mon Mar 12, 2018 12:25 am

Welcome Adam, most of us as anti-speciesist and atheists, but otherwise you're probably the odd one out.

Have you read this recent faunalytics article?
https://faunalytics.org/intersectional-advocacy-tends-to-bring-in-less-money/

User avatar
PsYcHo
Master of the Forum
Posts: 1124
Joined: Tue Jan 26, 2016 10:24 pm
Religion: None (Atheist)
Diet: Pescetarian

Post by PsYcHo » Mon Mar 12, 2018 12:35 am

Brother AJ wrote:
Sun Mar 11, 2018 9:45 pm
I am an atheist, aspiring anti-capitalist, social justice/intersectional advocate, anti-speciesist, and an abolitionist vegan

My interests include gaming, surfing the web for fun and interesting content, breaking down and analyzing story-telling tropes, so-bad-they're-good-films, sci-fi, fantasy, horror, animation, anime, comic book characters (in just about all mediums, but I'm not a big comic reader surprisingly), comedy, live music, singing, rocking out with the speakers blaring, engaging and immersive TV shows, unforgettable films and novels, nonhuman animals, learning about and being out in nature, acting, and activism.

I'm married to my beautiful wife, Claire, and we have 5 beautiful rescued fur-babies including two chihuahua mixes (Solomon or "Solly" and Ava) and 3 cats (Lucy, Leroy, and Oliver).
Well you certainly sound like an interesting person, AJ! I usually use the first part of a person's handle, but I can't refer to anyone as "brother", even if we're related. Hulk Hogan ruined that for me, and I'm assuming many others. (at least the one's old enough to get the reference) ;)

You seem like a person who can have some lively debates; I share many of your interest, but I'm certainly not anti-capitalist. (also not totally an-cap, but closeish) Maybe if you make a thread on the subject we can have a friendly debate. :D

Welcome aboard!
Alcohol may have been a factor.

Taxation is theft.

User avatar
Red
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 2533
Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2014 8:59 pm
Location: White House

Post by Red » Mon Mar 12, 2018 12:38 am

Hey AJ!
A few questions.
Why are you anti capitalist?
What prompted you to go vegan?
Is your wife vegan?
VOTE

Red For President
--------------------------
Blue For Vice President

2056
My Democratic Republic: https://discord.gg/ejHz43n

okhowaboutnow
Newbie
Posts: 3
Joined: Fri Aug 10, 2018 1:03 pm
Religion: None (Atheist)
Diet: Vegan

Post by okhowaboutnow » Fri Aug 10, 2018 2:16 pm

brimstoneSalad wrote:
Mon Mar 12, 2018 12:25 am
Welcome Adam, most of us as anti-speciesist and atheists, but otherwise you're probably the odd one out.

Have you read this recent faunalytics article?
https://faunalytics.org/intersectional-advocacy-tends-to-bring-in-less-money/

Hi, I am also new here, and also (like Adam, it seems) very much enjoying the discoveries offered by an intersectional understanding of social justice issues stemming from my veganism. In fact, I joined the group here because I failed to understand the anti-intersectionality argument, and I was curious to find this odd welcome near the top of the list in my search for "intersectional"... It seems to imply that after reading the article one might realize the flaws of intersectional thinking and intersectional activism. I just read the article and discovered no such thing. The conclusion seems to be that if you are a big organization trying to get $100,000 grants from other large organizations, you might try to be careful about what "side" issues you take a stand on organizationally -- IF what matters most is getting the $100,000 grant. Otherwise, the article seems to be suggesting the obvious: that minimal intersectional awareness for a single-issue group would be a "positive development," and that at the grassroots level it could actually be a boon. In my personal experience, intersectional awareness and understanding has been enriching and invigorating, in the sense that as I read and think and open my eyes from my deepening vegan perspective, I can see how it IS the same mindset that leads one to put animals in one place and women in another and disabled people in another...

If this discussion group really is full of people who think that promoting intersectional awareness is an "odd" perspective for me to have (because it is flawed in some way), I am very curious to understand why. If it is only for practical and pragmatic reasons such as that large organizations *may* decide to keep quiet about sister causes in order to secure support from x y or z, I think I understand that (but I am not working for a large organization). That is not a philosophical position, though, it is a political one, and frankly I believe it is open for criticism too, though I am sympathetic and haven't made up my mind about that...

Is it the case that most of the people here are making decisions for large activist organizations, and that is why it is odd?

I look forward to discussions, if any ensue from this comment, and please be patient with me, sometimes it may take me days between replies, but I will do my best to return and reply before too long...

Cheers!
Mike

User avatar
Jebus
Master of the Forum
Posts: 1807
Joined: Fri Oct 03, 2014 2:08 pm
Religion: None (Atheist)
Diet: Vegan

Post by Jebus » Sat Aug 11, 2018 8:16 am

Great introduction. Welcome.
How to become vegan in 4.5 hours:
1.Watch Forks over Knives (Health)
2.Watch Cowspiracy (Environment)
3. Watch Earthlings (Ethics)
Congratulations, unless you are a complete idiot you are now a vegan.

User avatar
brimstoneSalad
neither stone nor salad
Posts: 8906
Joined: Wed May 28, 2014 9:20 am
Religion: None (Atheist)
Diet: Vegan

Post by brimstoneSalad » Sat Aug 11, 2018 1:40 pm

okhowaboutnow wrote:
Fri Aug 10, 2018 2:16 pm
It seems to imply that after reading the article one might realize the flaws of intersectional thinking and intersectional activism.
It's more advocating a take of "intersectionality lite" in which we try to avoid impeding other social movements, whether due to sympathy or just bad optics. There's a serious problem with opposing single issue activism in intersectional circles, and it's harmful. It's kind of like the vegans who shun vegetarians and other reducetarians because they're not there yet, but could be important allies. We need to be more diplomatic.

It's an issue if we're alienating people from veganism by advancing other ideas along side of it that will put people off. Of course, that's very dependent on the audience and the ideas themselves.

If you're at a feminist conference and you're advocating vegan feminism, maybe that'll work for you. If you're just out on the street among average people, though, that's probably not going to be very effective and may put off a few people who don't identify with some modern feminism. Maybe men will even think it's not for them by misunderstanding the message, for example.

Feminism isn't that unpopular, though. It's a lot worse if you're arguing something like radical anarchism/anti-capitalism and veganism... which is more or less like advocating Flat-Earthism side by side with veganism. See this thread: viewtopic.php?t=1829

Imagine an idea you don't agree with, and imagine hearing it advocated side by side with something you've never hear of before.
Are you going to be inclined to look more into that new thing and have positive feelings for it? Or are you going to view it more negatively despite knowing nothing about it?
Guilt by association IS a fallacy, but it's also human nature. We have to be mindful of pairing veganism with more controversial beliefs because of the way people will perceive it.
okhowaboutnow wrote:
Fri Aug 10, 2018 2:16 pm
The conclusion seems to be that if you are a big organization trying to get $100,000 grants from other large organizations, you might try to be careful about what "side" issues you take a stand on organizationally -- IF what matters most is getting the $100,000 grant.
It applies to one on one activism for ANY ask too. IF what matters is getting people to change then you always need to bear in mind your audience/how they may be receiving your message. Whatever else you package your message with with can affect that reception.
okhowaboutnow wrote:
Fri Aug 10, 2018 2:16 pm
In my personal experience, intersectional awareness and understanding has been enriching and invigorating, in the sense that as I read and think and open my eyes from my deepening vegan perspective, I can see how it IS the same mindset that leads one to put animals in one place and women in another and disabled people in another...
There are certainly at least seeming parallels in some mindsets, but whether we talk about those in our activism is a question of how people will receive or agree with that information.

There's also a lot more baggage to intersectionality than that, if you get into it deeper: e.g. where it derived from (and still has ties to) critical race theory. I'm not sure if you know anything about the origins, but it's pretty toxic. There's a lot of this stuff: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C9SiRNibD14
There's also a lot of racism in the sense that black people are regarded to not be capable of functioning as equals in "white society" or understanding "white science" due to fundamental racial/biological facts rather than inheriting socioeconomic disadvantage and having to grapple with external forces of irrational racism. It's not something I think needs to be tied to veganism. To the extent that intersectionality is carrying that baggage I think it needs to die, not be promoted by compassionate people by mistake.

Now you can use certain ideas from intersectionality and throw out critical race theory, but I think we need to be aware of what we're taking about there, and that it's really just being diplomatic and aware of people's situations which is nothing new. I think it can be quite confusing to call that intersectionality when intersectionality "proper" has a lot of additional social and political baggage that goes beyond the toolkit of simple multivariate analysis and diplomacy/meeting people where they are and understanding their situations.

okhowaboutnow
Newbie
Posts: 3
Joined: Fri Aug 10, 2018 1:03 pm
Religion: None (Atheist)
Diet: Vegan

Post by okhowaboutnow » Mon Aug 13, 2018 12:14 pm

Great to hear a response to my inquiries so soon!
Instead of trying to follow every thread of the conversation at once, I'm going to pursue what strikes me most.
brimstoneSalad wrote:
Sat Aug 11, 2018 1:40 pm
There's also a lot more baggage to intersectionality than that, if you get into it deeper: e.g. where it derived from (and still has ties to) critical race theory. I'm not sure if you know anything about the origins, but it's pretty toxic. There's a lot of this stuff: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C9SiRNibD14
So, a couple things. This young woman is, I think, not a strong introduction to critical race theory. If you grab someone who is advancing a very extreme position and say, look isn't this dangerous, avoid any theorists who may have given her the germ for this wild extrapolation, that is not a very honest tactic. Your phrasing even suggests that this young woman's position IS fundamental to the ideas of CRT. It is not. But as far as the position advanced is concerned, I'm enough of a believer in science that I am not worried about her tearing it down, lol. On the other hand, it is true that in the name of science some (in retrospect) essentially racist theories have been promoted and even held up as holding up, such as craniometry, cephalometry, whathaveyou. So, if she wants to take the results of "western science" and try to throw them out the window, and instead try to prove how a witch doctor really is able to call down a lightning strike on someone miles away, she should be allowed to try. God knows a lot of equally ridiculous things have been done in the evolution of science. She of course would need to convince skeptics, and so the fundamentals like falsifiability and repeatability are on their way. Anyway, all that to say, I wish her luck she's gonna need it :)
brimstoneSalad wrote:
Sat Aug 11, 2018 1:40 pm
There's also a lot of racism in the sense that black people are regarded to not be capable of functioning as equals in "white society" or understanding "white science" due to fundamental racial/biological facts rather than inheriting socioeconomic disadvantage and having to grapple with external forces of irrational racism. It's not something I think needs to be tied to veganism. To the extent that intersectionality is carrying that baggage I think it needs to die, not be promoted by compassionate people by mistake.
You lost me. Who says black people are not capable of functioning as equals in white society due to racial/biological facts? The second part is what I understand CRT to be saying: that they are kept from being able to function as equals in white society because of socioeconomic forces that are imposed through systems of law and practice that hold them down in a multiplicity of ways. Now if you disagree that we live in a "white society" or in other words that systemic racism is real, please come out and say that directly. If that is the real "baggage" you don't want veganism to be tied to, so be it, but I think you are mistaken. (Caveat: that doesn't mean you need to bring up systemic racism every single time you talk about slaughterhouses -- but whoever said that? That is not the point. I'm guessing you feel it is, but that is taking intersectionality too literally, in my opinion. Or in other words, IF I am right about your leaning, you enjoy tearing apart the extreme positions while ignoring the more profound and subtle set of ideas that are still critiquing you...)

So, IF that is the baggage you don't want to be tied to, and it's because you don't believe systemic racism is a problem, then that is another conversation, and a big one.

But if that is baggage because it feels like a big pill to swallow for your would-be converts to veganism, I have two responses.

First, it is possible to understand deep connections in mindset between the forces that lead to racism, speciesism, sexism, ableism, etc and not need your novice to comprehend it all all at once. In fact, it doesn't matter if he or she never understand it (though if intersectionality is describing a true phenomenon, in time they likely MIGHT understand as a matter of their expanding compassion to others...)

Second, as someone who is experiencing within himself the connections provided by an intersectional approach and by intersectional thinkers, I strongly believe that the people you are most likely to convert are the people who are deeply attached to these other causes. So, for example, I spend less time trying to convince my father-in-law of veganism, and more time speaking to the people I know who are already aligned with other social justice movements. They are much more open to change, and can see the connections, even if they are still slow to make the pretty big step toward veganism.

So I respect your valuing of diplomacy but if, like Unnatural Vegan, you believe that you may need to partner with racists in order to promote the vegan cause, I say, show me this ethical vegan racist! (Is it you?)(That's a sincere question I would have for her actually.) But if you or her are saying we need to try to advance veganism within a systemically racist society, then the answer is, obviously, that goes without saying (from my perspective).

We need to work within the system we find ourselves in, and not all of us can be everything or advance every cause with equal energy. That doesn't mean that intellectually we cannot understand the ways in which all these systems of oppression are part of a united mindset of abuse of power (of staking a claim on another body and trying to put it in its place for the sake of enhancing our freedom), and to work toward a future in which these abuses are less prevalent.

I guess the question I would want to ask is: why are you a vegan?

User avatar
brimstoneSalad
neither stone nor salad
Posts: 8906
Joined: Wed May 28, 2014 9:20 am
Religion: None (Atheist)
Diet: Vegan

Post by brimstoneSalad » Mon Aug 13, 2018 2:55 pm

okhowaboutnow wrote:
Mon Aug 13, 2018 12:14 pm
But as far as the position advanced is concerned, I'm enough of a believer in science that I am not worried about her tearing it down, lol.
I'm not worried about science, more that these notions could lead marginalized people AWAY from pursuing science in favor of pursuing voodoo etc. as their cultural "sciences", which is harmful to them. If only white people get legitimate science and other races are saddled with superstition instead and reject actual science as "colonized" then that will only reinforce white dominance/income disparity/etc.

The same applies to other things derived from critical race theory, like promotion of ebonics based on the idea that language is somehow genetic and black people just can't keep up trying to use white language. That would be fine, except that a language barrier would only worsen the cultural divide (rich white employers aren't going to hire or pay workers as much when they can't communicate with them).
okhowaboutnow wrote:
Mon Aug 13, 2018 12:14 pm
So, if she wants to take the results of "western science" and try to throw them out the window, and instead try to prove how a witch doctor really is able to call down a lightning strike on someone miles away, she should be allowed to try.
I'm not saying she shouldn't be allowed to, but it's unethical for her to waste her time on it when she could be doing something productive instead, and worse to drag other students into the endeavor.
There are certain attitudes that create ACTUAL inferiority, and rejecting science is one of them. Thankfully, it's not genetic and we can oppose these concepts that are helping to KEEP marginalized people marginalized by sabotaging the potential for upward mobility that education offers.
okhowaboutnow wrote:
Mon Aug 13, 2018 12:14 pm
You lost me. Who says black people are not capable of functioning as equals in white society due to racial/biological facts?
Ethnonationalists and critical race theorists, who essentially believe the same things.
okhowaboutnow wrote:
Mon Aug 13, 2018 12:14 pm
The second part is what I understand CRT to be saying: that they are kept from being able to function as equals in white society because of socioeconomic forces that are imposed through systems of law and practice that hold them down in a multiplicity of ways.
That is not my understanding. I understand they recognize that, but it's not limited to that. They oppose colorblindness etc. on that basis that the WAY in which white society operates, even if white and black children start out with equal opportunity in a colorblind world, marginalizes blacks because the nature of white society rewards white ways of thinking. White language, white science, white economics, etc.
okhowaboutnow wrote:
Mon Aug 13, 2018 12:14 pm
Now if you disagree that we live in a "white society" or in other words that systemic racism is real, please come out and say that directly.
Depends on how you define it; of course we have a lot of inherited racism. A lot of society is NOT color blind yet, individuals and business owners contribute personal racism that has a systemic effect. Black children start on unequal footing due to disparate school funding because of the way districting works, poorer neighborhoods, lead exposure, etc.

This isn't where critical race theory claims end, though.

But let's say we manage to throw out all of that extra baggage and stick to the systemic issues that are recognized by the mainstream:
okhowaboutnow wrote:
Mon Aug 13, 2018 12:14 pm
First, it is possible to understand deep connections in mindset between the forces that lead to racism, speciesism, sexism, ableism, etc and not need your novice to comprehend it all all at once. In fact, it doesn't matter if he or she never understand it (though if intersectionality is describing a true phenomenon, in time they likely MIGHT understand as a matter of their expanding compassion to others...)
Then in what way is that intersectional activism?
okhowaboutnow wrote:
Mon Aug 13, 2018 12:14 pm
Second, as someone who is experiencing within himself the connections provided by an intersectional approach and by intersectional thinkers, I strongly believe that the people you are most likely to convert are the people who are deeply attached to these other causes.
That's possible, and if I'm advocating to a feminist I might mention the parallels, but that doesn't make my activism intersectional, it makes it context aware and effective.

I agree you'll generally have more luck with liberals as well, but that's just a matter of being smart about using your time.

I don't see how any of that is intersectional.
okhowaboutnow wrote:
Mon Aug 13, 2018 12:14 pm
So I respect your valuing of diplomacy but if, like Unnatural Vegan, you believe that you may need to partner with racists in order to promote the vegan cause, I say, show me this ethical vegan racist! (Is it you?)(That's a sincere question I would have for her actually.)
I think overt racism is harmful to the vegan movement. It's not because I'm intersectional, but because racism just isn't popular. Vegan Nazis create associations with veganism and Nazism; Nazism is harmful to any cause it associates with.

Please see this article for more details:

wiki/index.php/Racism_in_Veganism

You might have to ask @NonZeroSum about UV, he knows her videos better than I do. She has opposed Nazis in the past IIRC, but I'm sure he can link or drop some relevant quotes.

I can say if we were advocating veganism a couple hundred years ago, I would not push against racism in the vegan movement because virtually everybody was racist, and that would be counter productive.
Does that mean I'm indifferent to racism? Absolutely not, I find it disgusting. But I want to do the most good, and mixing causes isn't the way to do that. I might also participate in anti-racism stuff, but mixing the two only makes each cause more difficult to advocate for and find allies.

I just don't think a vague sense of "These are all bad things stemming from some vague shared notion of abuse" qualifies as intersectionality. That's kind of along the lines of Christians saying "Well you believe in love, right? God is love, so you're a Christian too!"

Any movement or ideology needs to have a definition both coherent and unique enough to distinguish it meaningfully from what it isn't. Claiming retroactive encapsulation of everything else seems to defeat the point of a movement.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests