Vegan message board for support on vegan related issues and questions.
Topics include philosophy, activism, effective altruism, plant-based nutrition, and diet advice/discussion whether high carb, low carb (eco atkins/vegan keto) or anything in between.
Meat eater vs. Vegan debate welcome, but please keep it within debate topics.
Dsalles wrote: ↑Thu Dec 28, 2017 4:29 am
I object to descriptions of domestic abusers as suffering from psychological problems. The real problem is he hated his wife for leaving him and took it out on her and his children.
You can object all you want, but it is still highly likely that he was/is struggling with psychological and emotion conflicts. None of this would negate or excuse his acts. It would certainly explain them, however. It is also possible that his mental health was just fine, and that he "snapped" sometime shortly after uploading the Christmas song with his son. For now, we do not have sufficient evidence to declare what caused him to commit homicide. Though it likely wasn't his vegan diet.
Dsalles wrote: ↑Thu Dec 28, 2017 4:29 am
Abusive, homicidal men come in all shapes and creeds addictions and stages of mental illness. My father was a pescetarian Buddhist and it did not stop him from brutalising my mother.
I'm sorry to hear, but did his Buddhist philosophy cause his abusive behavior? If not, why is it important to mention that irrelevant factor?
Dsalles wrote: ↑Thu Dec 28, 2017 4:29 am
I think the Vegan ethic needs to specifically condemn domestic violence and all violence against women and children. The homicide rate for women being killed by male partners and former partners is staggering, especially in North and South America, as is the rate of emergency room visits.
Again, the fact that Anthony Milan Ross killed his family is atrocious, but this is irrelevant to veganism. If anything, vegan ethics CONDEMN this behavior by default. While I have no problem speaking out against domestic violence, it will not be in the name of veganism.
Lay Vegan wrote:I'm sorry to hear, but did his Buddhist philosophy cause his abusive behavior? If not, why is it important to mention that irrelevant factor?
I believe her point was that, despite being a pescatarian Buddhist, her father still did terrible things... just like how the father in this story, despite being vegan, still did terrible things. She is saying that there are abusive people in every group, even in groups that are supposed to be against violence... Which is a valid point.
Again, the fact that Anthony Milan Ross killed his family is atrocious, but this is irrelevant to veganism. If anything, vegan ethics CONDEMN this behavior by default. While I have no problem speaking out against domestic violence, it will not be in the name of veganism.
How do vegan ethics condemn this behavior by default?
Lay Vegan wrote:I'm sorry to hear, but did his Buddhist philosophy cause his abusive behavior? If not, why is it important to mention that irrelevant factor?
I believe her point was that, despite being a pescatarian Buddhist, her father still did terrible things... just like how the father in this story, despite being vegan, still did terrible things. She is saying that there are abusive people in every group, even in groups that are supposed to be against violence... Which is a valid point.
Again, the fact that Anthony Milan Ross killed his family is atrocious, but this is irrelevant to veganism. If anything, vegan ethics CONDEMN this behavior by default. While I have no problem speaking out against domestic violence, it will not be in the name of veganism.
How do vegan ethics condemn this behavior by default?
If we value not harming animals unnecessarily that includes humans. That's why I like anti-speciesism because it makes clear the parallels with anti-sexism, anti-abelism, etc. Not to say that they may not require vastly different tactics. Vegan, freegan, zero-waste lifestyles as descriptions of the corollary actions still being useful.
Lay Vegan wrote:I'm sorry to hear, but did his Buddhist philosophy cause his abusive behavior? If not, why is it important to mention that irrelevant factor?
I believe her point was that, despite being a pescatarian Buddhist, her father still did terrible things... just like how the father in this story, despite being vegan, still did terrible things. She is saying that there are abusive people in every group, even in groups that are supposed to be against violence... Which is a valid point.
Again, the fact that Anthony Milan Ross killed his family is atrocious, but this is irrelevant to veganism. If anything, vegan ethics CONDEMN this behavior by default. While I have no problem speaking out against domestic violence, it will not be in the name of veganism.
How do vegan ethics condemn this behavior by default?
If we value not harming animals unnecessarily that includes humans. That's why I like anti-speciesism because it makes clear the parallels with anti-sexism, anti-abelism, etc. Not to say that they may not require vastly different tactics. Vegan, freegan, zero-waste lifestyles as descriptions of the corollary actions still being useful.
While I would like it if that were the case, I disagree. I think veganism is about non-human animals. I rarely see vegans talk about human rights when talking about veganism, except to advocate for animal rights, which I think shows that the goal of veganism is to promote animal rights specifically.
Lay Vegan wrote: ↑Thu Dec 28, 2017 2:41 pm
If anything, vegan ethics CONDEMN this behavior by default. While I have no problem speaking out against domestic violence, it will not be in the name of veganism.
EquALLity wrote:
While I would like it if that were the case, I disagree. I think veganism is about non-human animals. I rarely see vegans talk about human rights when talking about veganism, except to advocate for animal rights, which I think shows that the goal of veganism is to promote animal rights specifically.
I think Lay's point was that it would be a very bizarre ethical system indeed that arrived at animal welfare/rights but not human. And that technically unnecessary harm to humans could fit in the vegan society definition. Whilst agreeing that they would require different approaches.
Lay Vegan wrote: ↑Thu Dec 28, 2017 2:41 pm
If anything, vegan ethics CONDEMN this behavior by default. While I have no problem speaking out against domestic violence, it will not be in the name of veganism.
EquALLity wrote:
While I would like it if that were the case, I disagree. I think veganism is about non-human animals. I rarely see vegans talk about human rights when talking about veganism, except to advocate for animal rights, which I think shows that the goal of veganism is to promote animal rights specifically.
I think Lay's point was that it would be a very bizarre ethical system indeed that arrived at animal welfare/rights but not human. And that technically unnecessary harm to humans could fit in the vegan society definition. Whilst agreeing that they would require different approaches.
I think they were saying that human rights are apart of veganism... Although it would be bizarre, I don't agree with the point, because like I explained, I believe veganism is specifically about non-human animals. I don't think that the people writing the vegan society definition were thinking of humans when they wrote "animals".
Usually when people say "animals", they are referring to non-human animals. Vegans often say, "Why is it ok to abuse animals, but not people?" etc., which obviously would only make sense if they were excluding humans from "animals".
EquALLity wrote:
I think he was saying that human rights are apart of veganism... Although it would be bizarre, I don't agree with the point, because like I explained, I believe veganism is specifically about non-human animals. I don't think that the people writing the vegan society definition were thinking of humans when they wrote "animals".
. . .
Usually when people say "animals", they are referring to non-human animals. Vegans often say, "Why is it ok to abuse animals, but not people?" etc., which obviously would only make sense if they were excluding humans from "animals".
Okay doke, the main tension of the discussion is whether mental health or sexism had a bigger part to play. Think there's probably overlap between you and Lay on them needing to be advocated for from different camps to veganism. Maybe me, Lay and Dsalles just see merit in emphasizing the good that vegans usually hold for animal ethics crossing over with humans like supporting worker rights.
EquALLity wrote:
I think he was saying that human rights are apart of veganism... Although it would be bizarre, I don't agree with the point, because like I explained, I believe veganism is specifically about non-human animals. I don't think that the people writing the vegan society definition were thinking of humans when they wrote "animals".
. . .
Usually when people say "animals", they are referring to non-human animals. Vegans often say, "Why is it ok to abuse animals, but not people?" etc., which obviously would only make sense if they were excluding humans from "animals".
Okay doke, the main tension of the discussion is whether mental health or sexism had a bigger part to play. Think there's probably overlap between you and Lay on them needing to be advocated for from different camps to veganism. Maybe me, Lay and Dsalles just see merit in emphasizing the good that vegans usually hold for animal ethics crossing over with humans like supporting worker rights.
To clarify, I am not saying that veganism caused this because veganism doesn't support human rights... What I am saying, in response to someone seeming to have suggested the contrary, is that I don't believe veganism addresses human rights, just like Black Lives Matter doesn't address sexism.
To respond to that, I think there's a difference between opinions that many vegans have regarding human rights and what veganism itself says about human rights. Just because many vegans support human rights doesn't mean that veganism itself is about human rights.
Veganism doesn't necessarily adress human rights, but it requires a lot of mental gymnastics for a vegan to be cruel to other humans or to not include humans under the umbrella of "animal exploitation" (ie that vegan would have to be speciesist in the opposite direction) imo. It's not impossible, just like Myanmar has taught us that buddhists can become genocidal even when it's pretty much against all their core tenets.
Still, there seems to be some correlation between veganism/vegetarianism and mental illness - https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3466124/
But that's not saying much. Only some subset of mental illness is associated with an increased risk for violence.