Revision as of 23:46, 9 May 2023

Although Veganism is something we strive for society at large to accomplish, we gladly accept any reduction in the consumption of animal products. A person who is making an effort needs to be congratulated and encouraged (especially in a society where meat-eating is the norm), rather than ridiculed for not going far enough. Reducing harm to animals is not all or nothing, and it may be more useful to advocate for a more compromising approach when getting involved with activism.

Of course, we should be critical of people who claim that they are doing enough and don't need to do anything further (which extends to many vegans as well), but every meal without animal products in it is one more step towards a Vegan world. This article lists several different ethical dietary lifestyles that are also viewed to be done out of the concern for animal welfare, and we will also be exploring different types of Vegan diets.

Vegan diets

Whole Food Plant Based

Mock-Meat Focused

Localvore

Freegan

In terms of harm due to food, a freegan diet completely eliminates it due to not contributing to any demand. Even vegan diets result in some amount of harm, with crop deaths and greenhouse gases (though obviously compared to standard meat diets the harm is much smaller). We actively encourage Freegan diets to people who want to stop harming animals but aren't willing to give up meat (and for people who want to save a bit of money).

Although this type of diet negates all harm, it's not something we obligate people to do, due to concerns about cleanliness, being able to eat healthfully easily, and also it sacrifices the ability to promote mock meats which helps more animals in the long run (net positive impact).

Of course there are health concerns with eating food from a dumpster (especially if it includes animal products), but, while we encourage people to eat as healthfully as possible, we don't really care if someone wants to be healthy. We are not the health police; If your lifestyle is only harming you, and you alone, that isn't anyone else's business.

But being Freegan can still be fairly healthful, if you focus on eating plant foods found in the garbage (which can be difficult depending on a few factors), and if you're taking proper safety precautions when dumpster-diving, such as having gloves, mask, cleaning your findings, and foraging in a group.

Beegan

Very, very, very, very, VERY close in terms of harm reduction compared to Veganism, with the exception of honey.

We consider honey to be a much less important issue compared to meat, dairy, eggs, fur, leather, etc. and we actively discourage condemning people who are otherwise Vegan who also consume honey. However, that doesn't mean there is absolutely zero harm associated with honey, since bees, while much less sentient than cows, chickens, and pigs, still have their sentience, and are very likely harmed during honey production. But focusing too much on honey risks Vegans looking crazy and uncompromising, so it's best to keep these debates between Beegans rather than people who are unacquainted with Veganism.

The best argument against honey is the health argument (it's probably even worse than high-fructose corn syrup), but again if someone doesn't care about health, it's a moot point.

Flexi-Vegan

This is a person who avoids animal products 99.99% of the time, but if it's convenient, will partake in the consumption of dairy and egg products.

Vegetarian

Ovo-Vegetarian

Lacto-Vegetarian

Ostro-Vegetarian

Pescatarian

Reducitarian

Non-Vegan Localvore

OK this is a diet we REALLY have an issue with, in particular due to it being a misguided attempt to reduce harm but does not only NOT reduce harm, but may even increase it.

Regardless of food type, the overwhelming majority of the embodied energy is due to production of the food, not the transportation, which makes up a tiny part of the footprint, as discussed in the Vean section of Localvore. But what makes a Non-Vegan localvore potentially worse, is that locally produced animal products usually have aa higher carbon footprint. The animals at these locally sourced farms tend to live longer, which means they stay alive longer to consume food, water, and release more emissions. It's also fairly dudbious to state that the animals here are not treated unethically (just not as unethically than if they were on a factory farm).

Regardless of how well they're treated, they're still being killed at the end for their animal products, which we DON'T need to eat to be healthy. It isn't possible to ethically kill a sentient being that has a vested interest in being alive, especially when there's no need for it.