“meat’s another word for dick and eating dick is gay”. As problematic as it was, it worked.

It’s both sad and hillarious that this worked. I wonder if you created a new vegetarian as well

Lots of people are really stupid

Generations of marketing.

Some essential amino acids are difficult to find in adequate quantities on a vegan diet. If you don’t vary your protein sources or make sure you are getting the right amino acids, then you may develop a deficiency, which can lead to poor health or even be fatal.

I have a hard time hitting my protein goal and maintaining correct macros even with meat. I have looked at vegetarian options and I don’t see how anyone could do it without just slamming multiple protein shakes a day. Which would destroy my digestive system. I’d probably be ok when I’m not bulking but I’d have to do a ton of research and basically forget about fast food options. If someone could lay out a vegetarian diet for me that would work I’d be more than happy to give it a shot but I don’t have time to make that effort myself.

It’s not just pushy, it’s judgemental and vitriolic

Oh, you eat meat, murderer? Your shoes are made from the skins of defenseless creatures. The sugar you’re so callously adding to your coffee was processed with ground-up bones, you unredeemable monster.

Even the arguments for veganism that aren’t built on animal cruelty still take on an air of moral superiority. Don’t you care about the planet and future generations? How dare you trade carbon emissions for the temporary comfort of a bacon cheeseburger!

The vegan movement has always been associated with anger and contempt, even if it is justified.

The UK has a high rate of veganism, and part of that is attributed to the fact that the major vegetarian and vegan organisations in the UK generally recommend persuading people by offering them delicious food that is also vegetarian/vegan and saying it’s more ethical. On the other hand, the equivalent organisations in the US tend to lean more towards recommending telling people that eating animal products is unethical, and it’s difficult to accuse someone of unethical behaviour without being insulting. It also doesn’t help that multibillion-dollar organisations have run successful smear campaigns against groups like PETA - everyone’s heard of the time they took someone’s pet dog and killed it, but most aren’t aware that it happened once and gets reported on as if it’s news every few months, or that it was an accident as the dog’s collar had come off and it was with a group of strays, and got muddled with another dog, so was put down weeks earlier than it was supposed to be, bypassing the waiting period they had specifically to avoid this kind of mistake.

think there’s nothing wrong with explaining your ideas and why you believe them

That’s actually not the problem. The problem are those who repeat themselves ever louder, even to people who have expressed disinterest.

Have you heard about our lord and saviour of our sins?

I wonder if being within those circles, you’ve been exposed to certain ugliness on a more intimate level; with people who feel comfortable enough in their in-group to express their more radical thoughts. Anecdotally, I’ve known a few vegans but have never been lectured nor had views pushed on me.

Hell, the only time I ever hear about the radical, pushy vegan is when people complain about them. On the flip side, I’ve been exposed to meat eaters who seem to get offended when someone mentions the concept of veganism, as if someone else not eating animal products is somehow a trigger for them.

Again, all anecdotes here, I’m just figuring one’s exposure to the vocal minorities on either side of the conversation is where you run into the problems.

“Meat from herd mammals” is not at all the sum total of use of animal products. Should we all be eating less beef? Sure, I can get behind that. None? I’m okay with that, too. What about eggs, cheese, butter - and that’s only referring to things we eat, not things we use for other purposes.

“Suggesting”

Proceeds to lecture

Those aren’t the vegans that most people are talking about. Being poor and having to eat vegan is different from being vegan because you want to stand out from everyone else with your vegan black bean soy burger with vegan cheese on a vegan sprouted whole wheat bun. If you can afford the overpriced “vegan” versions of typically non-vegan foods, and complain about your struggles being vegan, that’s privilege.

When you’re poor, you don’t advertise the fact that you’re eating vegan. You just make rice and beans because it’s the absolute cheapest food available. You’ll take meat and non-vegan when it’s available. But at the very least, you’ll survive on rice and beans. It’s generally not something that people are proud of.

The privilege is being able to choose to eat that way out of a sense of morality or fashion rather for the reason that it’s literally all there is to eat. The privilege is being able to turn your nose up at perfectly edible food for no other reason than that it’s got a bit of egg, honey, or butter in it without having to worry about starving to death. The privilege is also having access to such an abundance and variety of food that you can maintain a vegan diet year round and not have to fear that you won’t meet all the calorie, protein, and vitamin requirements you need to stay alive and healthy while much of the world is in a constant struggle to scrape together enough calories of any kind to stay alive.

Maybe they mean privilege wrt education? As i understand it, it takes a non-zero amount of knowledge about nutrition to substitute meat completely and not be deficient in something. But I’m a life-long omnivore so I may be wrong

Well, that’s getting into the difference between veganism and vegetarianism.

That aside, although meat is expensive from a cost and input perspective, it is a very efficient and dense source of calories and protein.
Outside of a first world or industrial agricultural setting, they also have the advantage of being able to convert food sources humans cannot eat into one we can, while to a great degree being able to tend to themselves.
Goats, sheep and chickens can have large numbers managed by a few children with sticks, and also produce non-vegan animal byproducts which can be sold for cash.
This is also before hunting is considered.

While vegetarianism and veganism can be practiced outside of a first world context, and indeed have been for thousands of years, they do come with sacrifices that are significantly easier to make with more money or in a post agricultural region.
Eschewing cheese, eggs and honey is not a difficult thing to do for me if I wanted, but there are places where that’s just leaving good food uneaten, or money unearned.

That’s I believe what’s being referred to when it’s called a privilege.

Vegan: no animal products. No butter, no eggs, having to be well-informed (as others have stated) and know about the content of every bit of everything you buy, and making choices on that basis instead of on cost.

Even then, how many of the products you buy and use every day have depended on animal products for their manufacture? I’m willing to bet that a fair amount of human labor consumes and uses animal products to sustain themselves, even if there are no animal products in the thing you’re buying. I don’t think it’s fair to compartmentalize that away from purchasing decisions. The people who put your flat pack MDF furniture in a box, did they have a chicken sandwich on their lunch break? The people who are paving the roads and maintain the rails on which the products you ultimately buy, are they wearing leather boots?

Everyone depends, to some degree or another, on the use of animal products, either as food or for some other purpose. Even vegans.

Edit: Like I said above, reducing dependence on animal products is probably a good idea, but people who believe they have eliminated their dependence on animal products are patting themselves on the back for something they simply cannot accomplish.

I think “the money is made from animal parts and there are no fully vegan cars so you’re arbitrarily picking and choosing when to be vegan” misses the point of ideological veganism. I’m not a vegan, but I believe the goal for ideological vegans (in contrast with those who are vegan for medical reasons) is to minimize suffering and exploitation within reason for the specific reasons you said. No one can be 100% free of animal parts unless they become an off-the-grid self-sustained homestead.

Vegans know that. But most come to the conclusion that just because you can’t live 100% animal free doesn’t mean you can’t try to get to 80% because you want to live your life in a manner you consider morally and ethically consistent with your collective ideologies. You get as close as you can within reason depending on the various constraints of your individual circumstances. “I am still a vegetarian, and I try to be a vegan, but I occasionally cheat. If there’s a cheese pizza on the band bus, I might sneak a piece,” to quote Weird Al Yankovic.

I’d say most people, including vegans, have more than one goal in life. The “lines in the sand” you’re referring to are at the intersection of their goal to minimize suffering and their goal to, say, keep living. Like if a vegan were told by their doctor, “If you don’t start eating meat, you’ll die from this weird disease,” the vegan likely wouldn’t be like, “Well, I might as well indulge in eggs and milk and all other animal products now since I can’t be 100% vegan” and chow down. They’d probably eat just the amount prescribed by their doctor, because they still don’t like eating meat because its origins bother them.

I don’t think we view this quite the same way. I don’t see a problem with something being a defining part of someone’s identity, because it’s not up to me to decide how other people ought identify. We all have identities so on some level everyone identifies with something. Just because say, you and I don’t get how diet can be an significant part of someone’s identity, doesn’t invalidate it being significant for someone else. It just means that we haven’t lived the same life and that’s fine.

In a way we do have to accept other people’s identities, because what else can we do? We can’t force change on others, all we can really do is acknowledge the situation and then choose whether or not we want to continue interacting with them.

It doesn’t really get problematic until you have someone that does try to force things on others. My mother was one of those militant vegans, and she lost a lot of friends for it. She’s the reason I am vegetarian, and the reason I was vegan for a long time. Back then I never had much choice in either regard.

Being vegan wasn’t even really a defining part of her identity. Her trying to force it on others was also less about trying to change others, and more about trying to place herself in some sort of morally superior position to them. She pretended to care about their health and the environment - hell on some level maybe she genuinely did care - but it really was more about making herself look and feel better about herself because she was (and is) a deeply insecure person pretending to be otherwise.

As a final aside; what I’ve written above is what I consciously believe, but I’m obviously not an infallible person. I’m an extremely cynical, nihilistic, and definitely a judgmental person. I try my best not to be, and to see things from the perspective of others, but some days I succeed better than others.