Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2
Results 51 to 57 of 57

Thread: 'Judgmentalism': There is no vegan police

  1. #51

    Default Re: 'Judgementalism': There is no vegan police

    Quote mysh
    There is the issue in your example that the butter in the rice is no longer hidden (although a real Indian restaurant would commit no such travesty!), so the "proper vegan" reaction would be to not go there. I also wouldn't knowingly wear a shirt made by a slave. But attacking people who are at least trying is foolish in the extreme. Trying to continue the education would be more appropriate.
    Yes, and it is those who already know something is not vegan who I often see use the term "vegan police." This is why I used the BK VEGGIE as an example early on (and why I used butter just now). Up until few a months ago the BK VEGGIE was promoted by some animal advocates as vegan, even though it had butter in the bun. If the BK VEGGIE came up as a vegan option I'd let people know that it had butter, and this would spark one of two very strong reactions.

    Those who knew about the butter would react like Person A in the example I gave above by calling me the "vegan police" in a fit outrage. They would tell me how the BK VEGGIE is going to save billions of animals. And it didn't matter to them that Burger King said the product is not suitable for vegans or even vegetarians. These people were told by an authority that was vegan, so it didn't matter if it had butter in it, it was still vegan. (2+2=5)

    Those who didn't know it had butter would also react with outraged, but for a different reason. They would be upset because they were told by someone else that it was vegan. They feel totally betrayed that a trusted activists or a large animal advocacy organization had misled them into supporting a non-vegan item. What they had been told by an authority just doesn't add up. (2+2=4)

    I think it is worth letting people know that something is not vegan because there are people who want to know the truth. Telling someone something is made with animal products is not an attack. It is education to let people know if something has animal products in it. It is misinformation to tell people that something with animal products is vegan. Those who supported the BK VEGGIE gained nothing from lying to themselves, and in the end Burger King added eggs to the BK VEGGIE making it even more animal exploitive.

    Yes, it is foolish to attack people who are trying. I don't understand why the people who are trying the hardest, avoiding as much animal exploitation as anyone can, should be attacked by calling them the "vegan police," "purist," "dogmatic," "holier-than-thou," etc. There are people who do more to avoid animal exploitation than me, but I don't think that should make them subject to ridicule. To me, the people who know how to avoid the most animal exploitation are inspirations.
    The animals of the world exist for their own reasons. They were not made for humans any more than black people were made for whites or women for men. —Alice Walker

  2. #52
    mysh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Space Coast (Florida)
    Posts
    204

    Default Re: 'Judgementalism': There is no vegan police

    Daniel, that is a good response. I think it is important to keep in mind the difference between the following two responses:

    1). "The BK Veggie contains butter."
    2). "The BK Veggie contains butter, so if you eat it you're no better that a scum sucking omni."

    Both contain the same useful piece of information, but the second also contains a judgement of value of the listener. Even with a milder "so if you eat it you're not a vegan" remains a judgemental statement (in the negative connotation).

    I struggle with this a lot, as I have a strong tendency to add my own judgement to everything I say, rather than allowing the listener/reader to come to their own conclusions. This is the attitude that I think is viewed by most as being somewhat rude. In the case of response (1) above, if the other person responds with "I don't care, I'm having one anyway", it starts to become appropriate to add your judgement, but there's a good chance the response will be "Really!? Why, those !^*(%$%&^!@%&* at BK! I'm never going there again!" If you give response (2) right away, you've put the other person on the defensive, so they'll stop listening.
    No Gods, No Masters.

  3. #53
    Ex-admin Korn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Europe
    Posts
    4,830

    Default Re: 'Judgementalism': There is no vegan police

    We've had some situations on this site... maybe not with dairy products, but other animal products, where people who do not agree with being vegan (or only do it when they're in the mood for it) have used holier-than-thou kind of arguments against those they disagree with. It's easy to see that the 'vegan police'-term can be used as an attack against someone just as an attempt not to face facts or viewpoints that 'semi-vegans' are uncomfortable with. And of course, we shouldn't change the definition of 'vegan' or adjust our guidelines just to be nice and cozy with people who disagree with us.

    We are definitely talking about many different topics here. Some words have different meanings, or they have one meaning, but is commonly used to express something else.


    Situation A:
    Vegan: "I went to a restaurant last night, where I got my standard dish. Afterwards I commented to the waiter that it tasted slightly different than usual, and the waiter said that they replaced the vegetable oil they used to use with butter. I'm really upset!"

    Vegan Policeperson: "You're not a real vegan, then. You should ask for the ingredients of anything you don't cook yourself every time."
    Let's call the behavior of the vegan 'policeperson' 'judgemental, type A' for now.

    Situation B:
    Person A: "Lets go to that Indian place downtown. It's all vegetarian, you know?"

    Person B: "But they have butter in the rice there."

    Person A: "So?"

    Person B: "But I'm vegan."

    Person A: "So am I."

    Person B: "But butter isn't vegan. And I've talked to them about this, but they make all the rice together and they can't make any without dairy."

    Person A: "Who are you to say I'm not vegan? You're acting like the Vegan Police. etc.....
    Let's call person B's behavior 'judgemental, type B' for now.



    I think it's possible to work 16 hours pr. day for animals and veganism and still not be A-judgemental. You can be B-judgemental all your life, and still never need to go into A-judgemental mode. You can be true to everything you believe in, be brutally honest, refuse to consume one single drop of cow's milk for the rest of your life, spend every day writing articles or books about these topics, and still not enter the 'A-zone'.

    We had a post here suggesting that all tofu recipes were crap, because people who ate tofu according to this guy were pretending they were eating meat. He asked how politicised vegans could claim the moral high ground if they are just pretending. To me, this pseudo-attack on other people's lifestyle/feelings/taste/habits seems more common than people who claim to be vegans and still are OK with eating dairy products.


    'Group think' smells bad, but communicating with words is in a way based on a certain type of 'group think'. If a group of people discuss 'policing', but have different thoughts about what policing is, they'll never agree. (Or if they finally come to an agreement, the agreement is an illusion, because they are talking about different topics).

    English is not my mother tongue, but to those of you who have been speaking English all your life.... what is the most common way of using the word 'judgemental'? 'Type A' or 'Type B'? And why is judgemental sometimes spelled with two e's, and sometimes with one? Is it a UK/US thing... please enlighten me!
    I will not eat anything that walks, swims, flies, runs, skips, hops or crawls.

  4. #54
    mysh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Space Coast (Florida)
    Posts
    204

    Default Re: 'Judgementalism': There is no vegan police

    Quote Korn
    English is not my mother tongue, but to those of you who have been speaking English all your life.... what is the most common way of using the word 'judgemental'? 'Type A' or 'Type B'? And why is judgemental sometimes spelled with two e's, and sometimes with one? Is it a UK/US thing... please enlighten me!
    In my experience, Type A is the most common way of using the word, i.e. unduly judgmental. In my opinion, Type B is simply informing, as no judgment is being passed on the other person in the conversation (though they may read such a judgment into those words). But as Daniel quite rightly pointed out, the terms "vegan police" and "judgmental" are both used in that kind of situation as an intentional slur on the person being helpful. Of course the tone in which the statement of fact is delivered can be quite important, too...

    Judgmental is spelled with only one 'e', which clearly contradicts my previous posts. I hope the spelling police don't come and take me away!
    No Gods, No Masters.

  5. #55
    I eve's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Queensland, Australia
    Posts
    2,210

    Default Re: 'Judgementalism': There is no vegan police

    IMO both A and B are being judgmental - A says 'you're acting like ...', so making a judgment, and B says 'but butter isn't vegan' so justifying not eating the rice and making a judgment about A who is willing to do so.

    In that same situation, I'll be C, and after A says 'so?', I'd say 'so it means I won't eat there - how about coming round to my place for a meal?'
    Eve

  6. #56
    Kumem's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Peterborough, UK
    Posts
    336

    Default Re: 'Judgementalism': There is no vegan police

    Lol

  7. #57
    (Ab/i/gail) AbFab's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Wimbledon, London, UK.
    Posts
    117

    Default Re: 'Judgementalism': There is no vegan police

    Judg(e)mental can also be spelt with two 'e's. The Collins English Dictionary lists both, but goes on to use the 1-e version in the descriptions, so it looks like that variant is the more commonly used. I think it's just one of those quaint English things!
    Vegans go all the way.

Similar Threads

  1. Victory against police oppression
    By Pob in forum News
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: Jun 5th, 2009, 04:23 PM
  2. Vegan police
    By boomer in forum News
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: Aug 14th, 2006, 11:57 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •