• starman2112@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      Sure, it’s the most braindead definition you can use, and it ignores the very concept of why vegans are vegan in the first place. Big “gender=sex is basic biology” energy here

        • starman2112@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          11 months ago

          When they say “all forms of exploitation,” do you think they mean “exploitation in every form, be it for food, clothing, entertainment, etc.,” or do you think they mean “exploitation by every conceivable definition?” Because the vegan society speaks and acts as if it is the former, and the latter is a semantic argument that’s only ever made in bad faith.

          So what do vegans mean when they say “exploitation?” Well, without a clear definition from them, we have to make inferences. Not breastfeeding is possible and practicable thanks to plant-based formulas, yet they don’t recommend against it. Therefore, it must be the case that human milk, in the context of breastfeeding, is vegan, as if it weren’t, they would necessarily recommend against it. That rules out any definition of “exploitation” that is as simple as “make use of,” because if their definition were that simple, they would have to recommend against “making use of” human milk.

          This leaves us with definitions that are more complex than simply “making use of.” Every single applicable definition of “exploit” that’s more complex than “make use of” involves something to do with unfairness, lack of consent, or some other inequality.

          Now that we’ve established the fact that human-derived foods can be vegan (and we have established that as a fact), we can safely say that human meat can be vegan, as long as the individual consents, is not being unfairly treated, and is giving their flesh of their own volition. You were wrong. It’s okay to be wrong, you can simply admit that your understanding was imperfect, and grow as an individual.

          • commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            11 months ago

            You were wrong. It’s okay to be wrong, you can simply admit that your understanding was imperfect, and grow as an individual.

            this is condescending. it is inappropriate conduct in this community.

          • commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            11 months ago

            Not breastfeeding is possible and practicable thanks to plant-based formulas, yet they don’t recommend against it.

            they may disagree with your assessment of practicability of not breastfeeding

            • starman2112@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              11 months ago

              They would not. Plant-based formula is available. Not breastfeeding is possible and practicable. I was pretty sure you were just trolling, but now I’m certain of it.

          • commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            11 months ago

            human milk, in the context of breastfeeding, is vegan, as if it weren’t, they would necessarily recommend against it.

            unless there were some other carveout that allowed the exception.

          • commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            11 months ago

            Every single applicable definition of “exploit” that’s more complex than “make use of” involves something to do with unfairness, lack of consent,

            none of the definitions I’ve found mention consent or even allude to it.

          • commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            11 months ago

            and the latter is a semantic argument that’s only ever made in bad faith

            I don’t believe you’ve ever encountered this argument before. your accusation of bad faith is, itself, bad faith

          • commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            11 months ago

            the vegan society speaks and acts as if it is the former

            this is only your interpretation of the facts. I’ve already given an equally supported interpretation. the only rational course is to suspend judgement until more is known.

          • commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            11 months ago

            they also say that you only need to practice veganism in so far as it is practicable. recommending the people do the practicable thing instead of the vegan thing is perfectly in line with a vegan society’s definition. that doesn’t change whether it’s exploitation.

            • starman2112@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              11 months ago

              It’s perfectly practicable to not breastfeed your baby, and to only use plant-derived formula. If human milk wasn’t vegan, the Vegan Society would say as much.

              • commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                11 months ago

                then they should change the definition to show that some forms of exploitation of animals is ok.