Vegansexuals

Remove all ads!

Some truth. You can smell it on their breath and when they sweat. Also, the chemical contents of, uh, other parts of the body is altered when one becomes a vegetarian and, yes, you can taste a difference (since my wife wasn't a vegetarian when I married her, I know about this one first hand).

Part of my point. The "Plant's are life too!" argument is generally used to discredit the very idea of vegetarianism by pointing out the futility of avoiding killing in order to sustain one's own life. It is generally used to label vegans as hypocrites, but ignores the fact that 1)no vegan that I know has ever actually said they never kill any life whatsoever* and 2)a person kills more plants by eating meat than he does by just eating the plants directly.

* Vegans, like most activists, tend to be a bit more educated and, therefore, tend also to know that every time they take a step, start their car, or wash their hair they are killing something.

 

If it's all about "necessary" killing, then the question is who get's to draw the line? IMHO, that's a line that the majority of society tends to set. I can see how a vegan might say that eating animals is unnecessary killing. The majority of Western society doesn't agree with them and thus sees them as being a little weird.

That said, though, leads me to where MY lines are -- I dislike the idea of inflicting more suffering than is required to kill the animal, and I deeply dislike the idea of killing for sport. This puts ME in the minority (at least where I live) and thus many of my peers consider me to be the weird one.

 

I read the topic title and thought it was about women/men who only have sex with vegetables (the plants, not comatose patients).

I am so disappointed.

I wonder how vegans view oral sex, considering it can be termed "eating meat".

 

To me, that is even weirder than veganism.

Why? I don't think they're idiots. Well, some of them might be, but no more likely than anyone else to be an idiot. I don't think being a vegan makes someone an idiot.

 

This one's really pretty cut and dry. Meat consumption is not necessary for survival or good health. Therefore, in an agrarian society, killing animals for food is always unnecessary except in the most extreme (not to mention contrived) circumstances*. Whether or not is unethical is up for debate, but there really isn't any arguing the point that it's unnecessary. You either need to kill something for food or you don't. There really isn't a grey area, here.

* At this point, someone usually brings up the proverbial guy living in the woods with no food who will die without eating meat. In such a case, meat consumption would be necessary. Such cases, however, would also be exceedingly rare and virtually unheard of in an agrarian society.

 

My understanding is that to get certain proteins, you need either meat or certain legumes. Given that I don't enjoy those legumes, I need meat to get those proteins. Most North Americans (and I would wager people everywhere) feel the same way -- a vegan diet is not to their taste. The idea that we could all get by just duckily without meat is about as contrived, to me, as the guy trapped in the woods and FORCED to eat meat.

In any event, our bodies are certainly designed to eat meat, though I concede that we don't need it the way we need air or water.

 

Not really. It is true that only meat, dairy, and soy beans provide "perfect" protein, but you don't need to get all your amino's every meal. As long as you aren't just eating one type of food over and over again (in which case, you're going to have far bigger problems than your protein intake...malnutrition isn't fun), you'll get all of your protein in without having to think about it. Outside the first world, protein deficiency is exceedingly rare. Even among vegans.

If you want to worry about something, you should be worried about B12. Due to the fact that most of our plant food is irradiated and produced from land laden with chemical fertilizer, it isn't as rich in B12 as it once was. Most vegans supplement their B12 intake (which isn't hard, since most soymilk already has B12 added to it).

Be careful with that word "design". That our bodies are able to digest and process meat does not mean that we are designed to eat it. While we know that our ancestors as far back as 10,000 years ago ate meat, this is not to say that we are meant to consume it. Only that we are able to do so. Unless your name is God, you don't really know what humans were designed to eat*.

* As an interesting sidenote, humans actually share more defining characteristics with herbivores than they do with omnivores. This is not to say that humans are meant to be herbivores or that we are not omnivorous. Science has yet to form a consensus on this one.

 

Canine teeth.

By deific design or by godless evolution, the mouth of homo sapiens sapiens was MEANT to tear meat off a carcass. Find me an alternate purpose for having a tooth that works MAGNIFICENTLY for puncturing and then rending flesh off of an animal, and I will retract the above.

(I'd stick my tongue out at you, but I'm afraid you might bite it! )

 

While I have no desire to convert to a vegan diet (I'm actually trying to replace Chocolate bars with Beef Jerky in hopes of getting less sugar), there are things we can learn from a vegan that may make for healthier choices. While I see nothing wrong with eating meat, it is likely that we as a society eat too much meat. Perhaps the things that vegans offer could substitute for meat occasionally or even be an appropriate side dish to reduce our meat consumption.

LKD has a point about necessary killing as well. In some parts of South Western Ontario, the deer population occasionally becomes so large that they become a threat to public safety (increased risk of motor vehicle accidents) and a nuisance to farmers (by eating too many of their crops). The Ministry of Natural Resources has been known to order a cull, by allowing hunters into areas they normally can't hunt to thin the herds. The MNR also controls the issue of hunting tags to encourage a certain amount of hunting to keep the herd size in an area under control.

In such situations, if you must kill an animal, why not eat it if it's edible?

 

i fully agree with this and did that when i moved away from home, i'll never be a vegetarien (the taste of good meat is just to good), but from eating meat every day i whent to eat meat once or twice a week at most and actually i felt better., allthough i did find i have a hard time feeling full when i only eat vegetables especially on the days where i work out.

 

Just as much as appendix was meant for ruminating. Works almost as magnificently

 

Umm....have you ever tried to rip meat off a carcass with those canine teeth of yours? It won't work.

Here's an idea. When you get the chance, count how many canine teeth a true omnivore like, say, a dog has. Then count how many canines you have. You'll notice a bit of a disparity. Our canines (not to mention our meager jaw strength) are insufficient for ripping meat from a carcass.

 

Jaded:

The mere presence of canines is not evidence that a species is a red blooded carnivore.

Just for fun, what species do you think this skull was taken from? Note the elongated canines

http://s5.photobucket.com/albums/y188/Red_Wizard/?action=view&current=skull.jpg


Drew:

Are you claiming that humans aren't omnivores? Dogs aren't really that good a comparison, as it's debatable as to whether they should be lumped in with carnivores, or omnivores.

 

We seem to have drifted from the concept of ruling out people as sex partners due to their carnivorous tendencies to a debate on the merits of veganism. My bad, and this'll be my last comment on the matter.

I see nothing wrong with the personal choice of veganism, though I think it's odd. What I DO have a problem with is the idea that we who choose to eat meat are either idiots, immoral or somehow lesser people. THAT attitude I will fight.

 

I fully agree.

 

And I agree with LKD's & Ragusa's sentiments both on the topic drift and the 'resistance' many people have to veganism/vegatarianism.

I'm not directing my contempt at YOU, Drew, or anyone else that has the decency to respect my opinions, but on those few fringe elements of stridency and militancy and evangelism and bigotry (if you hate me for a single aspect of my mindset without caring about anything else, that makes you a prejudging bigot) that always seem to garner the lion's share of attention...

I have no problem with someone who merely states "people can live just fine without consuming meat" (heck, I agree - it's one of the advantages of being an adaptable omnivore), but my hackles raise when I am confronted with "well, I don't touch animal flesh, and I don't have the problems these carnivorous people do!"

Whether it was actually present or not (likely not) I was beginning to pick up an note of attitude from your posts - as implied earlier in this sentence, probably transferred from previous experience with fanatical, condescending vegans. I apologize for lumping you in with THEM, since I have come to know already that you are not like that and your posts here bear that out.

ANYWAYS, one more drift on the Tangential Tide, then back to topic:

Hmmm, from the 'facial' profile, I'd be inclined to say some kind of ape; maybe a gorilla? The canines look a little pronounced, though...

But back to vegans who only date (and mate) vegans - it sounds like a natural extension of the lifestyle. As Drew confirmed what I suspected already about differing scents of 'carnivorous' and 'herbivorous' people, and a host of other factors - people of similar dietary aspirations tend to have other beliefs, hobbies and habits in common, and are more likely to develop relationships strong enough to permit or encourage physical intimacy.
(excuse me, typing all that dry, dessicated PC jargon gave me cottonmouth; gotta get some water! )

 

Humans behave omnivorously. Science doesn't agree on whether or not we are omnivorous by design. Deer, for example, have been known to consume slaughterhouse waste.....even though they are herbivores and clearly not designed to eat meat, so behaviour is not really an indicator of design. As a species we lack the natural weapons, jaw strength, and teeth to be true omnivores. Of course, We don't really fit in with herbivores, either, since we can consume meat with fewer ill effects (but not no ill effects) than, say, a deer. As species go, humans are kind of a wild card.

Perhaps we were once truly omnivorous, but as they became obsolete, evolution slowly took away many of the defining characteristics that we look for when determining a species is omnivorous. Maybe we were originally truly herbivores and, as we were continually forced to turn to consume meat in order to survive, we began to slowly lose some of the identifying traits we look for when determining a species to be omnivorous. There's really no way to know, but the fact remains that we aren't really a perfect fit for either category.

[ August 05, 2007, 00:32: Message edited by: Drew ]

 

jaded empath:

Good guess! It is a gorilla (a mountain gorilla). I'm quite impressed, given that I've always had trouble distinguishing between different primate skulls.

And yeah, gorillas (and many other herbivorous primates, such as baboons) have pronounced canines. Chimpanzees (who are omnivorous) also possess canines. You can't really extrapolate a species diet from two teeth.

 

I have doubts about the validity of the "factory farm" coming from an agricultural background myself. Most of the flesh that we consume is the actual muscles of the creatures. Cattle allowed to roam a pasture and fed proper amounts of grain, with good access to grass and hay would probably yield a better quality of meat than those locked in small pens and force fed with little room to move. I can tell a difference in the meat that I get in a restaurant compared to farm raised meat. You get more meat and less fat on the home grown animals.

 

They weren't in cages. They could have eaten vegetation, but chose to consume slaughterhouse waste because it was easier....or maybe because they liked it. The deer weren't forced to eat slaughterhouse waste. They chose to. Why forage when someone brings out new food, even bad food, for you every day? Humans don't own the patent on laziness.

So you are saying that there are scientists out there willing to argue that humans were designed to be omnivorous? I'm not arguing that humans aren't omnivores. If the only measuring stick used is our behaviour, then we are. I'm arguing that we have no idea whether we were designed to be omnivorous or not. We don't know what we were designed to be. In fact, we don't even know if we were ever designed to begin with. You see, you are assuming I'm arguing something that I'm not. (My initial point of contention was with the use of the word "design".) You've also been really rude about it. In the future, I'd ask that you not be so rude, or at least address me with a PM. I'm actually quite reasonable.

I can't....but, then again, I'm also not arguing that. You can find lots of folks that will, however, argue that omnivores need to at least be able to rip meat off of a carcass without employing a tool (which would require either good jaw strength or, perhaps, claws). Chimps, for example, while devoid of natural weapons just as humans are, are capable of doing exactly that. Does the inability of our species to rip the meat off a carcass with our teeth mean that humans aren't omnivorous? I'd say that depends entirely on whether or not you think being able to rip flesh from a carcass without the aid of a tool is a requirement. In all honesty, I don't really think it matters, anyway, and was never interested in arguing about this. The only issue I was taking was with the employment of an argument that we were designed to do X, Y, or Z. We simply don't know what we were designed to do (I, at least, was not born with an instruction manual or FAQ tattooed to my ass, and neither were my boys), so we shouldn't be making such statements.

I'll refrain from commenting about the fact that a vegetarian has no crueler judge than a fellow vegetarian. I've been a vegetarian for my entire adult life, and one thing I've learned is that most people don't actually care about the millions of animals that suffer horrendously in factory farms each year....at least, not when they find out how much money the employment of these methods saves them on their burgers. We live in a world where we eat chocolate produced by child slave labour and no one does anything. We live in a world where the exploited child laborers producing our bananas are required to continue work, without even the most basic protective equipment, while they spray their fields with caustic chemicals, and no one does anything about it. We live in a world where people pay top dollar for carpets woven by children who were sold into slavery and chained to their looms. And don't even get me started on blood diamonds. Frankly, my friend, if we allow the children of our own species to be treated like this, I wouldn't hold my breath where real progress on the animal rights front is concerned. Sad though it may be, those millions of animals suffering so horribly are going to have to get in line. Until we've learned to respect our fellow man, animals don't have a prayer.

[ August 05, 2007, 08:14: Message edited by: Drew ]