Philosophical Vegan Forum

So OKC suddenly quit allowing users to filter by dietary preference, thus rendering it more or less useless for me. You can search by Interest: Veganism, but that yields any profile mentioning the word. So lots of "Don't bother messaging me if you're vegan, real men eat steak" types.

Anybody had luck elsewhere? The veg*n-specific dating sties are so cheesy and poorly designed, to say nothing of the paywalls. A girl and I 'winked' one another but can't message unless we pay $20. I guess we could leave covert clues for one another in our profiles, but I have a feeling the people in charge have little better to do than hawkeye such hijinx and boot the offenders.

How else should I go about meeting other vegans? MeetUp potlucks are good fun, but I'm usually at least 15 years younger than everybody in attendance.

seitan_forker wrote:So OKC suddenly quit allowing users to filter by dietary preference, thus rendering it more or less useless for me. You can search by Interest: Veganism, but that yields any profile mentioning the word. So lots of "Don't bother messaging me if you're vegan, real men eat steak" types.

I know what you mean regarding "vegan" keywords. It's demoralizing to sift through idiocy like that.

First: are you sure they did?
http://www.reddit.com/r/OkCupid/comment ... et_filter/

It's kind of counter to their philosophy of being useful. But maybe their parent company commanded it just to be dicks.

Second, if so, WOW that really sucks. I'm sorry to hear that.

I've thought for a while that there should be a decent vegan matching site (or a decent matching site in general; signal to noise ratio on those is terrible). When they work well, those sites are just as useful for making friends/meeting roommates as anything else, but OK used to fit the bill due to the filtering ability.

seitan_forker wrote:Anybody had luck elsewhere? The veg*n-specific dating sties are so cheesy and poorly designed, to say nothing of the paywalls. A girl and I 'winked' one another but can't message unless we pay $20. I guess we could leave covert clues for one another in our profiles, but I have a feeling the people in charge have little better to do than hawkeye such hijinx and boot the offenders.

Sites that make people pay to network and use their services, and create these systems that tease people with matches are, in my view, evil and counter-productive. It's perfectly possible to sufficiently monetize a service like that with advertisement, and make it more useful in the process.

On principle alone, I'd advise against using anything that charges money, or supporting them in any way by providing them with profile data to fodder their search engine results.

seitan_forker wrote:How else should I go about meeting other vegans? MeetUp potlucks are good fun, but I'm usually at least 15 years younger than everybody in attendance.

The hard answer? Don't.

Make a new profile. Mention that you love animals, but don't even talk about being vegan.
Message girls who also say they love animals, but don't say anything about veganism at all.

As a rule, try to message girls who are less attractive than you are (or at most equally so, but don't overestimate yourself -- know your limit, date within it). They're more likely to reply so you won't be wasting your time.
Try to select ones who are mostly just unattractive because they're out of shape and would be more attractive if they lost weight and got in shape (you don't want to be stuck with somebody you really won't find attractive ever), but don't select one who is going to be way more attractive than you when she loses weight either or have no self esteem. Sometimes you can also find a pretty girl who doesn't know she's pretty and has no idea how to use a camera, or makeup, or just doesn't care (and so won't get as many messages). Conventionally "hot" girls get floods of messages, so you're wasting your time -- ever see "A Beautiful Mind"? Avoid them completely.

Don't talk about veganism at first. Talk about movies and things. Say you like documentaries. Link them to Earthlings at some point. Or say you like TED talks and link them to Melanie Joy's talk on Carnism. Say it's really thought provoking, or it really affected you, and ask what they think about it.
I wouldn't recommend recommending books (although you can do this), because it just takes too long.

You can mention that you try to avoid eating meat (you do try, you also happen to be incredibly successful at it, but you don't have to mention that part), probe them for interest. Calmly and sympathetically debunk their rationalizations. Like "I used to feel that way too, but then I learned...".
Try to let them figure things out on their own, and complement them a lot on how smart or compassionate they are.

If it takes very long for them to say they'd like to go vegetarian/vegan (on their own), write them off as idiots or too lazy, and move on (you don't need to say so, of course, try to leave it so they might go veg in the future -- this would be a good time to leave them with a book recommendation).
If they say it, ask them out. Say there's a vegetarian restaurant you want to try. Find one that's actually really really good based on reviews.

And Bob's your uncle.

It's really not difficult. Expect about a week or two of work depending on reply frequency -- I'd write them off if they don't say anything positive after a month at most, although I'm less patient and will usually give up after a week -- and expect something like a 30% success rate (yes, that high, I actually think it's closer to 60%). IMO, if you're getting a success rate of under 30% you're doing something wrong. Post back here and summarize some of the conversations.

According to that thread, it sounds like dietary filtering is still available on the mobile app, not on the browser site, which is where I noticed the issue.

Damn. The long game! I actually find the cause noble. It's sounds like a great way to bring more vegans into the fold. Problem is, I'm at a point where I'd like to start settling down. Now that I'm in my thirties, I want somebody who already has veganism in common with me. Even though I'd be glad I helped convert a new vegan, I'd feel like the relationship was built on manipulation out of the gate. Even if it's a worthy sort of manipulation. The "dog meat is bad - pepperoni on my pizza, please" type of 'animal lovers' worry me. I can understand being oblivious to the hypocrisy as a teenager, but I dunno how much I'd have in common with an adult that hasn't come to the realization on their own.

Buddhist girls might be a way in to put this into practice, though. Many are vegetarian already. I'm pretty sure Namaste translates to "can I have extra cheese on that?". They're usually wishy-washy about the spiritual side of things, too. And they're often fit and active, which appeals to me.

In terms of going after mousy girls lacking in confidence, I dunno how I feel about that. If I was being paid to swoop in and convert people to veganism, sure. The relationship isn't going to last if there's no physical spark, though. And then I feel like they'd abandon veganism as soon as they were lonely again. I don't have some conventional idea of attractiveness, anyway. I work hard to take care of my body, but when it comes down to it I'd just like a girl who will go running with me - preferably one with a bunch of tattoos

seitan_forker wrote:According to that thread, it sounds like dietary filtering is still available on the mobile app, not on the browser site, which is where I noticed the issue.

Well, there you go. Maybe it's just something messed up on the site. Hopefully they fix it.

seitan_forker wrote:Damn. The long game!

It's not that long. Like a couple of weeks.

seitan_forker wrote:Problem is, I'm at a point where I'd like to start settling down.

I know.

seitan_forker wrote:I can understand being oblivious to the hypocrisy as a teenager, but I dunno how much I'd have in common with an adult that hasn't come to the realization on their own.

There's not much difference between a teenager and an adult. It's very easy just to avoid the topic for another ten years.
You didn't exactly come to it on your own, but through a series of coincidences and happenstance. In another world, where those events didn't come together just so, you'd be eating meat too. It's how it happens for a lot of people, but some people just don't ever find themselves in a situation that gets them to think about it in that way to have that epiphany. Carnism is both deep rooted and invisible, it has to be exposed, and it takes a certain set of conditions to make that possible.

A person who just became vegan isn't necessarily less committed to it than somebody who has been for ten years -- look into recidivism. There are rabid carnivores out there walking around with "Vegan" tattoos who were vegan for a decade through their twenties, who threw paint on fur coats and protested fast food places. You can't tell a book by its cover, or a vegan by his or her statistics.

She may or may not be as committed as you are; you can test commitment if you really want, but it should become apparent.
You will have as much in common with a new vegan as you would with somebody who has been for years in terms of moral principle; she'd just have a little more to learn from you.

seitan_forker wrote:I'd feel like the relationship was built on manipulation out of the gate.

I... I don't quite know how to break this to you... but every relationship is built on manipulation out of the gate. We're all on good behavior, we refrain from speaking our minds and spilling our hearts (if we're socially well adjusted and more than five years old; peer censure has taught us that much). Only young children aren't manipulative.

seitan_forker wrote:Even if it's a worthy sort of manipulation. The "dog meat is bad - pepperoni on my pizza, please" type of 'animal lovers' worry me.

They're profoundly ignorant and lacking in critical thinking skills. This is not part of their DNA. This stuff can be fixed.

Have you ever met an ex-theist atheist who did a 180 on religion and learned about logic and critical thinking?

seitan_forker wrote:Buddhist girls might be a way in to put this into practice, though. Many are vegetarian already.

Most Buddhists are fake Buddhists. Kind of like Christians. That is, not vegetarian. They just ask Buddha for shit sometimes, or eat a single vegetarian meal when their grandparents are sick to bargain with Buddha to magically heal them in return for the good karma. It's disgusting, I doubt you'll have the stomach for it.

I can fix religion too, but I'm telling you it's a lot more work.

Find a smart otherwise rational atheist girl, and turn her vegan.

seitan_forker wrote:The relationship isn't going to last if there's no physical spark, though.

These things can develop over time if you work well with somebody. Attraction doesn't have to be instant, but can actually be cultured. Just make sure your personalities mesh reasonably well -- and I mean in psychological terms.

People are so incredibly bad at matching themselves up with the wrong people based on superficial attraction that arranged marriages can actually work out better (by being random, and based on pragmatic compatibility), than deliberate attempts to find love at first sight.

seitan_forker wrote:And then I feel like they'd abandon veganism as soon as they were lonely again.

I once thought so. It turns out not always to be the case. Recidivism is very high for veganism anyway, but at least anecdotally, a large number of vegans I've met were introduced to it by an ex, and I've seen cases of people going vegan to get a girl/boy and then staying that way because they came to believe in it.

Once you GO vegan, even if it's deception or manipulation on your part just to get a girl/boy to like you, something happens. The main thing driving the rationalizations that support carnism is cognitive dissonance. As soon as you're no longer engaging in the bad behavior, you no longer feel compelled to justify it, and you start actually understanding the reasons.
This is well represented in the "went vegan for health, stayed vegan for the animals" story, which is pretty common, but also true for the less readily admitted "went vegetarian for a chick, then actually realized there was something to it and went vegan on my own when I learned more" story.

seitan_forker wrote:but when it comes down to it I'd just like a girl who will go running with me - preferably one with a bunch of tattoos

Why tattoos? Is that important?
Try not to narrow your options more for things that are superficial.

Courtesy of Unnatural Vegan: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NU-xuTW ... be&t=4m25s
This is kind of what I'm talking about.

Also, she's a great example of somebody who did a major 180 on critical thinking. She's one of the most rational vegans on youtube now, and a really great advocate, and just a few years ago she was a nut bar.
People change! Hopefully for the better.

I'd venture to guess that any carnists sporting vegan-themed tattoos went through a phase in college through which they were trying to get laid. If they were so serious about it at the time that they organized and protested, it takes a level of sociopathy to turn another 180...doesn't it?

I... I don't quite know how to break this to you... but every relationship is built on manipulation out of the gate. We're all on good behavior, we refrain from speaking our minds and spilling our hearts (if we're socially well adjusted and more than five years old; peer censure has taught us that much). Only young children aren't manipulative.

Fair points. We all peacock early on in relationships. Covert veganism isn't exactly something I see myself capable of mastering, though. It's too important to me.

Have you ever met an ex-theist atheist who did a 180 on religion and learned about logic and critical thinking?

No, though I'm sure they exist. Atheists I know were either brought up without religion, or were never really committed to practicing.

Find a smart otherwise rational atheist girl, and turn her vegan.

This is a piece of the puzzle that I overlooked initially. Atheists are generally rational, critical thinkers who would theoretically be more open to veganism. Though some are just nihilistic hedonists. Lots of schlubby atheists out there.

Why tattoos? Is that important?
Try not to narrow your options more for things that are superficial.

It's not a must, I just like them. "God made you - why would you alter his creation." Thanks for the stretchmarks, G! I'll take it from here.

Courtesy of Unnatural Vegan: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NU-xuTW ... be&t=4m25s
This is kind of what I'm talking about.

Hmm...not familiar with her at all. Some salient points, though it was odd she anecdotally referenced an ex-vegan claiming vegans do no less damage than anybody else...but didn't explain further. Maybe she touched on it in an earlier video?

I definitely lean emotional, and so I'm more or less in Gary's camp. I also really like Emily (Bite Size Vegan). She's a cool-headed conduit of a similar message.

seitan_forker wrote: I definitely lean emotional, and so I'm more or less in Gary's camp. I also really like Emily (Bite Size Vegan). She's a cool-headed conduit of a similar message.

I don't know much about Bite Size, but what I do know is not good. She advocates a lot of pseudoscience, which is very likely more harmful to the vegan movement than anything else.

garethdsouza brought up some of her pseudoscience here:
https://theveganatheist.com/forum/viewt ... 966#p10489

The link I posted in that thread to her article on B-12 was one of the most irresponsible things I've ever read about veganism.

This isn't about Gary Yourofsky, but I strongly suggest you read this thread for a rational perspective:

https://theveganatheist.com/forum/viewt ... ?f=7&t=785

If your veganism is based more on emotion than reason, then naturally it will be a lot harder to convince people, since your emotions are yours alone, and you'll look like a dogmatist. It's even worse if you bring in pseudoscience and obvious factual errors like Bite Sized does (intelligent people will call that stuff, and not take you seriously).

seitan_forker wrote: I'd venture to guess that any carnists sporting vegan-themed tattoos went through a phase in college through which they were trying to get laid. If they were so serious about it at the time that they organized and protested, it takes a level of sociopathy to turn another 180...doesn't it?

You can guess at people's internal motivations all you want, but I don't believe that's very productive. From the outside, they appear identical in motivation, and there's no reason in psychology to believe they aren't (see cognitive dissonance: people's internal emotional landscapes usually adapt to match their behavior).
Though, as mentioned above on that thread on deontology -- they are all almost without exception deontological vegans. So, their reversion to carnism is probably caused by life poking holes in their flawed philosophical foundation, and wearing away the emotional reasons (which are inherently unstable).

People get jaded by life, and they'll do it without being sociopaths. It just happens. If one doesn't have a strong rational basis for one's beliefs, eventually one asks "The world is fucked, why am I even doing this?"

You don't have to be a sociopath to follow social norms, even if they are wicked. Look at slavery.

seitan_forker wrote: Fair points. We all peacock early on in relationships. Covert veganism isn't exactly something I see myself capable of mastering, though. It's too important to me.

It's just a few emails. Not like you'd meet them before they indicate an interest (I would suggest not meeting them until they do).

seitan_forker wrote: No, though I'm sure they exist. Atheists I know were either brought up without religion, or were never really committed to practicing.

That would be a good idea for you. Although Matt Dillahunty is incredibly irrational about veganism, you might want to watch some of his talks and debates about religion. He used to be a huge bible thumper, and was even studying to follow the calling into seminary I believe.

seitan_forker wrote: This is a piece of the puzzle that I overlooked initially. Atheists are generally rational, critical thinkers who would theoretically be more open to veganism. Though some are just nihilistic hedonists. Lots of schlubby atheists out there.

Thus the less than 100% success rate.

I have pretty much a 100% success rate with getting theists to go atheist if we talk long enough, but that's because it only reflects belief and not action.
I also have pretty much a 100% success rate convincing carnists that eating meat is morally wrong, comparable to pedophilia, but some of them just don't care and are happy to engage in immoral behavior.

If you find a girl who claims to love animals in her profile, however, your chances are pretty high without much time investment.

seitan_forker wrote: though it was odd she anecdotally referenced an ex-vegan claiming vegans do no less damage than anybody else...but didn't explain further. Maybe she touched on it in an earlier video?

Not sure, I'll ask her.

Vegans who drive big cars and eat processed foods high in palm oil may be doing more damage than some more environmentally minded carnists who don't eat much meat and take public transit (for example). It all comes down to the details. On average one would expect vegans to do less damage, but there is a lot of variation in vegan diets (since veganism is not any single diet) and lifestyles.

seitan_forker wrote:
Hmm...not familiar with her at all. Some salient points, though it was odd she anecdotally referenced an ex-vegan claiming vegans do no less damage than anybody else...but didn't explain further. Maybe she touched on it in an earlier video?

Hello.

I believe you're referring to my comments on vegan being the moral baseline? I disagree with this position and believe it's easily debunked. For instance, what if someone gives $100,000 to Mercy for Animals every year, but they eat a typical Western diet. They are no doubt doing way more good for animals than the average vegan, yet by "vegan is the moral baseline," they cannot be considered a good person because they are not themselves vegan.

Here are some interesting quasi-relevant articles from the vegan strategist (Tobias Leenaert):

http://veganstrategist.org/2015/05/16/b ... verything/
http://veganstrategist.org/2015/02/18/w ... -of-money/

unnatural vegan wrote:

seitan_forker wrote:
Hmm...not familiar with her at all. Some salient points, though it was odd she anecdotally referenced an ex-vegan claiming vegans do no less damage than anybody else...but didn't explain further. Maybe she touched on it in an earlier video?

Hello.

I believe you're referring to my comments on vegan being the moral baseline? I disagree with this position and believe it's easily debunked. For instance, what if someone gives $100,000 to Mercy for Animals every year, but they eat a typical Western diet. They are no doubt doing way more good for animals than the average vegan, yet by "vegan is the moral baseline," they cannot be considered a good person because they are not themselves vegan.

Here are some interesting quasi-relevant articles from the vegan strategist (Tobias Leenaert):

http://veganstrategist.org/2015/05/16/b ... verything/
http://veganstrategist.org/2015/02/18/w ... -of-money/

Wow...an internet celebrity in our midst!

As far as the money donation example goes, if somebody is cognizant of the impact animal agriculture has on the planet and partakes anyway...are they not pretty shitty? It's like a big game hunter donating to preserve the African plains. Though I realize most people are ignorant to the dilemma simply based on ingrained societal norms. People can do good things while being oblivious to the impact their diet has on the world.

The first article touched on the ideal scenario of all animal activists being vegan, but since they can't be - we should support them anyway. I dunno, though. The non-vegan celebrities who do niche PETA fur ads, for example. All they do is lift guilt from an audience that largely couldn't afford to wear fur anyway. It doesn't encourage anybody to do anything different in their daily lives. Copy that for dog meat.

I guess the idea of morality in general doesn't really speak to me. It's all checks and balances. For whatever reason I'm lucky enough to be wired differently to where being vegan seems like such an obvious way to spend my time on Earth.

If I completely missed your point, I apologize. It's a talent of mine .

seitan_forker wrote:Wow...an internet celebrity in our midst!

It's true. I'm kind of a big deal.

seitan_forker wrote:As far as the money donation example goes, if somebody is cognizant of the impact animal agriculture has on the planet and partakes anyway...are they not pretty shitty?

The action is certainly shitty, but the person? It’s an interesting question. We can weigh the actions of each individual in an attempt to see if the good outweighs the bad. Of course, this assumes that we agree on which actions are moral and which aren’t.

I think it’s more important to focus on the actions themselves and deem them immoral or not. Donating money to Mercy for Animals is moral. Eating animals is not.

seitan_forker wrote:It's like a big game hunter donating to preserve the African plains. Though I realize most people are ignorant to the dilemma simply based on ingrained societal norms. People can do good things while being oblivious to the impact their diet has on the world.

Whether or not someone is aware of the harm they’re causing may (and probably will) change how we perceive them, but the impact is the same. Eating animals harms animals whether the person knows this or not.

seitan_forker wrote:The first article touched on the ideal scenario of all animal activists being vegan, but since they can't be - we should support them anyway. I dunno, though.

I don’t see anything wrong with encouraging people who are doing better. Eating less animal products is an improvement and does make a difference.

seitan_forker wrote:The non-vegan celebrities who do niche PETA fur ads, for example. All they do is lift guilt from an audience that largely couldn't afford to wear fur anyway. It doesn't encourage anybody to do anything different in their daily lives. Copy that for dog meat.

So no one should speak out against fur or cruelty to dogs?

seitan_forker wrote:I guess the idea of morality in general doesn't really speak to me. It's all checks and balances. For whatever reason I'm lucky enough to be wired differently to where being vegan seems like such an obvious way to spend my time on Earth.

May I ask why you are vegan? If not because it is immoral to eat animal products, then why?