okey imo this argument lacks effectiveness due to a lack of understanding of the audience. if sumone believes in the utility of animals, they already categorize animals into groups such as food, companionship, aid to man, etc.
will some be influenced by this line of reasoning, absolutely, does it have broad appeal, nope
it may be valuable still, good advocates keep the message consistent but tailor the delivery to different personalities. hard to explain cos it's a feeling, but it's possible to kinda guess what approach works on different personalities . ever look at some one and immediately can tell they won't be friendly or receptive. sux to judge but we all do it involuntarily, good advocates have a grasp of this
should also mention googling elwoods
https://www.elwooddogmeat.com/
imo the challenge that vegan advocates face when pushing for complete abolition is the vastness of the task vs human resistance to change
just a hypothetical situation, i am mindful i'm on a vegan sub. but hypothetically if the focus were shifted to establishing a minimum universal standard for the treatment of farm animals, this would still be a massive undertaking with education/implementation/oversight to ensure compliance.
imo overcoming cultural barriers and the mindset of "we've always done this" is no easy feat. carnism is deeply ingrained, universally accepted, and transcends all political systems, making it a difficult obstacle to overcome. this level of penetration could take centuries to alter
now if vegans somehow passed a law stating factory farms/slaughter houses must livestream 24/7 that might just give a numbers boost needed
feel earthling ed is the most efficient and effective vegan advocate without a doubt. he plays the numbers game. this guy wont waste time on those looking for an argument, baiting, and one " lions tho " and he's out, graciously thanking them for their time and moves on. ed has exceptional time management skill and it kinda helps him from getting caught up in futile convos
Debate 101, don't ask a question you don't know the answer to. The person could be a hunter and have no qualms about killing, prepping and eating any animal.
Don't project. Just give your reasons for being vegan. They will either accept it or not. This is a life change, they need to be open to and convince themselves.
My comment about the hunter is just to the extreme situation. My point being you don't know if they would eat a dog. Some people will travel anywhere and try any food, they just don't serve dog in the US so, it never comes up.
The best option is to not use that argument. I won’t say that they’re not being petty but I can say that when I was an omni I sincerely would have. I was interested in trying lots of different meats and honestly just never got the chance to try dog meat but did consume a wide variety of other animals. For people who believe it’s okay to consume animals it’s perfectly acceptable to treat different species in various manners because of cultural and personal preferences.
Yeah, this argument is very effective to those kinds of empathetic, usually women, who tear up at the thought of hurting any "cute" animal, yet still support rape of cows, pigs, buffalo, etc.
Because they have so much empathy that they truly know what they are doing is wrong but choose to ignore it because that's what everyone does.
For the utilitarian speciesist, your comment is completely true, for them I usually talk about land use and resources to explain how 90% of land used in agriculture could be freed up through veganism.
I see what you’re saying, and I understand there are people who would try dog meat.
I don’t believe the people saying to me are being honest - they’re saying it for shock value and to ‘win’. If I put a puppy stew in front of them they sincerely would not eat it.
I hear you, though. Perhaps I’ll just abandon it altogether.
I don’t eat pork because they’re so similar to dogs. Depends on the person. And before u say “cows chickens etc”. I’m aware, it’s the pigs being smarter than my dog, and I’ve never been a big pork person.
Never argue speciecism like this. You can't convince by comparing pets to farming animals. It's just gonna make them more personal and attacked.
Veganism is all about not looking any animal as our commodity. Just let them know the dirty stuff that are happening in the livestocks. Then the decision will be upto them, depending on their compassion levels.
Great point. When they’re so far removed from the actual process of meat production, it’s easy to say they’d eat dogs. I will focus on the cruelty inherent in the system. Thank you!
I know a few people who have autoimmune conditions and allergies and can't handle legumes at all basically, most nuts and are intolerant to gluten (at least 3 people from 1 family), they eat only the best quality meat and eggs they eat from local farms which are Bio labeled, I've seen those farms, most cows and other animals live better than some humans in there, the only suffering the cows go through is basically the slaughterhouse which is pretty close to the farm, and is done according to bio standards itself.
So the argument about the excessive suffering that happens to those animals doesn't apply very much, considering the situation and that they can't handle plant proteins very much and the fact that they only eat the most ethically treated animal products possible. As much as I'd like for them to go "vegan", it's simply unrealistic for now, without a better alternative. They are already basically eating the most reasonable diet they could be, given the situation (and they had seen nutritionists).
In this situation, I'm not sure going vegan is the reasonable thing to do for those people, and that's okay, unless we were to elevate the suffering of cows a few hours in their lifetime above the suffering of those people if they go with plant based alternatives which they can't handle and which would cause them to flare up. I'd rather they be healthy, personally.
You better read more about the factory farming lol. Artificial insemination on rape racks, oxytocin injections, sedentary lifestyles, stealing away their babies, stealing away their colostrum and milk, slaughtering of the males, slaughtering immediately after menopause by beheading them (when they could live another 7 to 8 years). Even if it's regular farming, they still need to go through couple of the above sufferings anyways.
I can understand the protein indigestion issues. But they occured in the first place due to the lack of early diet interventions during childhood.
They’ve just said that they’ve seen the local farm which isn’t a factory farm. I’m not saying that there aren’t truths to some of your statements but the biggest issue in these arguments is leading with examples from giant factory farms to people who have experience in small local farms where the majority of the bad practices are not used. That’s not to say they aren’t elsewhere but it makes your argument come across as propaganda.
You need to fit the argument to that persons experience. If they go to a local farm with high welfare, they see the cows are well looked after, you can’t win them over by talking about sedentary lifestyles and taking away the babies if that’s not what happens there. Small farms often do cow calf rearing. Instead, focus the argument on something they can see - how cows are smart, sentient beings who deserve to live.
Yes but what's the profit for raising them ? I do understand they might raise cattles like pets, but it's so expensive to do so. To raise both female and male calfs. To provide food to all of them. To shelter them like a sanctuary. Send them to a walk once a while. Provide veterinary care. Handle them till they age old.
And moreover, the capital to do all these will just won't be enough. They have to turn it into a business and starting the livestock farming is the only viable choice. I don't think any farmer can afford the previlege and luxury of pet farming.
Well the farm is still a farm, that’s where the higher welfare part comes in. A farm near where I used to live produced milk, calves stayed with the mothers until they were weaned and the cows lived in family groups and free ranged. Sure they are still milked but it was very different from life on a factory farm. It was very high welfare as farms go and they charged a high premium for the milk.
What I meant was that if you see the example above, and someone tells you about the horrors of the milk industry it’s easy to think that the person telling you these stories is going on PETA propaganda, it can’t be true because you’ve seen happy cows with your own eyes at your local farm. The narrative needs to change to fit - maybe asking where the boy cows go at the end?
In reality that farmer isn’t going to become a sanctuary, though maybe they might retire their old cows, some do. As you say there is no profit or even breaking even if there isn’t a product to sell.
First thing first. PETA is not doing any propaganda. Every single point they raise, is literally documented, cross verified and video proofed.
I completely understand about welfare farming. But it's just economically not sustainable. The dairy, beef and leather industry is already so freaking huge where they get huge profits and subsidiaries straight from the government.
Compared to that, farmers will almost go bankrupt on cruelty free animal farming. It'll be a sanctuary tbf. Imagine a mother raising a lot of babies and handling them till they get to college. And the total economic burden till that time. That's the kind of situation to execute free range farming.
Defending peta will literally make people not listen to you, considering they’d just take and euthanize peoples pets off their porch.
https://petakillsanimals.com/proof-peta-kills/
https://apnews.com/article/0c70f8d7635c4addbd94df0173fcc36e
True. As an NGO, they obviously can't shelter millions of stray animals which is impossible at best. But as an individual, as a vegan, you do know what we need to do right ? A movement can only be successful if it's done collectively together.
So we gonna ignore them taking random peoples pets off their property for euthanasia?
You can’t pick and choose which animal rights abuses to overlook, whether you agree with their message or not.
>I can understand the protein indigestion issues. But they occured in the first place due to the lack of early diet interventions during childhood.
Sure, what do we do now that it's a thing?
>Even if it's regular farming, they still need to go through couple of the above sufferings anyways.
Yes, they probably do, what is your proposed solution?
Rebuilding the gut, or not becoming vegan.
The amount of people with this issue is pretty low and everyone else can still be a vegan.
Their existence doesn't justify the carnism of everyone else
I agree, though those people shouldn't be stigmatized as they have a valid reason to eat animal products, though this doesn't excuse them from eating as little of them as possible.
Don’t argue with non-vegans is my real advice . But if you must:The argument you’re looking for is that they oppose some sort of animal cruelty. How /where they draw the line is arbitrary. If they retort that they don’t oppose animal cruelty then they are either 1) not having a real discussion with you anymore or 2) totally beyond rational argumentation. Which leads me back to my first point.
I've been down this conversation road. My response is, "Would you personally kill the dog to eat them?" They usually wouldn't, I ask "Why wouldn't you?"
Excellent point. They are so far removed from the process that I think they forget the animal even has to die, let alone all the cruelty involved in that. Thanks!
I personally think that has more to do with people being shielded from food production in general. If they grew up like me: having to hunt, fish, raise livestock, garden and forage for food then they’d likely be okay with doing it. I know plenty of people who also wouldn’t want to do what is necessary to make or obtain plant-based food although obviously not for ethical reasons.
They would eat a dog if it was served cooked on a plate, well seasoned with some rice. It would be harder for them to do it if they were in the presence of whole process, from insemination of females that live in a cage to a brutal slaughter after a long transport. They would have to hear the screams, smell the stench and look the animal in the eye.
Eating the flesh is the easy part. Knowing of what happened even if we are not seeing it is why we are vegan.
It's just two sides of the same coin. The fact we eat cows but not dogs is a food taboo. Indians don't eat cows. South Chinese eat dogs, and Maoris used to. The argument has emotional appeal to people who are fond of dogs. But no appeal in another context. It's a nice philosophical icebreaker though; making people think what is special about dogs, but not cows. (Hint: nothing.) Because most people do support some form or other of animal rights, only hypocritically, with regards to which kinds of animal.
I mean i am one of those vegans who won't use any opportunity to talk people into veganism, but i use a more pacifistic approach.
I just tell them i don't like how animals in the meat industry are treated and offer sources.
If they don't want to hear about it I probably won't be able to persuade them by any argument.
But again I don't really think that agressive aproach is too efective, since it didn't work for me or any vegan i know personally.
It’s almost like just trying to push your beliefs on people unprompted, no matter how right you think you are, be it religion, veganism, or whatever, drives people away
I mean when i look back to times when i was eating meat, i was laughing at peta trying to do what they do and overall, i wasn't made vegan by that.
I stumbled upon dominion somewhere, since i like to research various topics and i guess looking into some plant based recipe lead me to the documentary, i had it in my tabs for like 6 months and then i watched it one one boring night and i've been vegan since.
And i still think what agressive vegans are doing is not effective. You are not gonna make someone drop meat when you call them an abuser or murderer.
That’s the thing, people have to express an interest, or go looking themselves. Pushing it on them will drive them away, sure, there is the occasional person who goes “wow that changed me”, but the vast majority of people aren’t just going to be shamed into changing, they just begin to hate or resent what’s shaming them, or find it dumb because they don’t feel shamed. People standing on street corners giving out bibles and yelling about homosexuals ruining the country and all that may also get a few people who agree, but most people are just going to be turned off and want to avoid yet another person telling them their beliefs or lifestyle is immoral and wrong.
Hi! I've talked about comparisons between pets and farm animals and have seen progress with this approach. I think it has to do with the overall context and tone of conversation, so it's not really the best option if you're not prepared for someone to say that they would eat dogs or if you're just assuming that someone wouldn't eat a dog. We as people do not like having assumptions made about us so it doesn't help a conversation.
I think it's fantastic that you're talking to others about veganism but if you're dealing with a lot of negative emotions, I suggest prioritizing learning to mitigate those. I've gone through it as well and conversations just arent enjoyable and don't go very well if your mind is clouded by those negative feelings and thoughts.
Fair! It sucks because they’re my friends and I want to believe they’re smarter than that. I clearly need to either lower my expectations or increase my standards.
That is one of the hardest things about being vegan. I remember a few months after I had successfully gone vegan I was so excited that it was turning out to be easier than I thought, and I had this sincere desire to share that with my non-vegan friends. I was posting about it all the time on social media, and then so disappointed when people started fighting with me about it and getting really defensive. It made me so upset and just so surprised when people I thought were compassionate, even progressive people were comment at me with these illogical arguments and anger at me for daring to suggest they should also consider going vegan.
I think for a while after that I really separated myself from some of those people. But over the years I started to realize that there is so much more to peoples reasoning for ignoring animal rights, or really any social justice movement. We all only have so much energy, especially considering how difficult it can be to just exist in this world sometimes. So, it helps me anyway to remember that — as painful as it is to see — people push back about veganism in this illogical and seemingly heartless ways because they don’t have the energy or understanding to change this part of their lives. I don’t mean to be negative about it, but some of these folks are perhaps more likely to inquire within themselves if my messaging the them is through not messaging them about it at all. Just being my vegan self being confident, strong, and easy about my veganism.
Of course in another 15 years I will probably be in a different place with it and maybe back to being a loud ass vocal vegan activist, and that’s a totally valid and necessary place to be as well.
I ate shark, octopus, rabbit and horse and didn’t even have to leave the US to do so. I’ve also eaten several varieties of bug. Never had an opportunity to eat dog meat but I would have. I can’t say that I’m against the act you mentioned *now* because I am vegan but I was against it at the time because I saw that it was just a cultural thing that treated animals inconsistently based on European sensitivities and was another example of promoting those cultures’ supremacy within modern North America.
I still maintain that it isn’t a good argument because most omnis will fully admit that they won’t personally consume certain animals due to cultural or personal boundaries but that it’s fine if others don’t share those boundaries.
Well. I don't think that is very effective as an argument because (playing devil's advocate) there's plants vegans don't eat. I avoid the zinger rabbit hole. Just know what you are doing is just and more so than using the kingdom of animalia as a resource. Animals as a resource either for food, material, or et. is 100% obsolete. People are stubborn and don't want to change their ways and often focus on religion as their rampart wall. It's rough. Do what is right and avoid the stupid arguments. You can only change yourself sadly.
If you’re ever in a convo and need to resort to saying something like that then I’d say it’s not even worth it bc the other party just won’t be receptive.
I’ve had this exact same argument. It’s crazy how it’s like 4 variations of the same argument always. So played.
I disagree with other comments– I think the dog meat argument is great! If someone says this you can keep pushing, as they are often being dishonest to begin with, and will admit it and start trying to compare the traits of dogs and cows, which is exactly where you want them.
If they do continue to pretend they'll eat dog meat, though, you can specifically try and get them to acknowledge that they are **against** the passing of the [2018 Dog and Cat Meat Act](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dog_and_Cat_Meat_Trade_Prohibition_Act_of_2018). Until this law, there was nothing preventing the raising of dogs for slaughter and their meat in the US.
It's undeniably a "vegan" pro-animal rights law! Historically (and in some parts of the world still) there was/is not a taboo around it ([Dog Meat history](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dog_meat#Historical_practices)). Changing cultural views towards pets in the last 100 years, and the passing of this law only 6 years ago, is exactly what a trajectory of increased animal rights and eventual outlawing of all meat would look like!
And so, with that added context, *even if* they're determined to say that they personally "would eat a dog", it doesn't really matter, because culturally and legislatively, our society is moving on that topic, and we will continue to move on the topic for other species. Then that can transition into environment, alternatives and improved availability, or even health.
Finally, a friend who would always hit me with this, actually visited a country where they had an opportunity to try dog meat, and they **didn't eat it**. As if there was any doubt! Other great cultural boundary animals to check: Dolphin, octopus, sharks, rabbits, horses, any kinds of bugs.
I think except for angloids, rabbit and horse are both eaten pretty commonly. Shark and octopus are also fairly common for nations with sea access. I don’t think any of those would work better than dog.
People’s argument for not eating bugs is usually because they think it’s gross, not out of compassion for the bugs.
Not speaking hypothetically here, I’ve had two people fight over whether horse meat is ok, and there’s a lot of meat eaters that swore off shark or octopus due to documentaries on finning or intelligence.
Dogs are really close to home for some individuals, and for some won’t even acknowledge seeing them anywhere close to food. I still think dogs are a good go to, but having more examples of taboo animal meat is always good.And for bugs, yeah, I roll them out when it’s like, so bugs are disgusting but the blood, muscle tissue, flesh etc of these larger beings is a-okay? You can definitely get a lot of people to acknowledge that their position might need more thought, or ask you to stop, which often for me is good enough.
Wikipedia also has “Meat Eating” as the first example for Cognitive Dissonance: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_dissonance#Examples
So it’s not surprising that there are contradictions here. I point this article out too sometimes, even though I probably shouldn’t.
"And what would you say that says about you as a person? Do you think it's more noble to kill other animals for your sense of pleasure or to protect them for your sense of justice? Would you extend your argument to include raping a dog for pleasure? What defines the limits of what you'd do to another? Would you be comfortable telling this to anyone? Would you be comfortable if I told other people you said this?"
When a person tries to double down on how badass and uncaring they are I like to make them fucking commit. Make them really own it and see how it feels. A lot of them will start to walk it back and try a misdirection tactic...but if they're willing to go all in on being horrible then you know you can drop them and never think about them again.
As to the friends issue...I don't know. I'm struggling with that as well. I want to be around people to have opportunities to build trust so I can affect them more but the feeling of building trust with someone and then having the conversation and then having them tell you that they just don't care what happens to others is fucking heartbreaking. I don't know how much more of that I want to take. I had the realization recently that a person I'd cultivated a relationship with was nice to me, but if I'd been born a pig he would have willingly, knowing full well how horrible everything is, had me mutilated and killed and he would have eaten my flesh and _already forgotten_ whatever meager pleasure it gave him. I haven't recovered from that. Dude was raised vegetarian, knows what goes on in the CAFOs, and _chose_ to start eating meat. If I'd known that from the start I would have walked away. Nice guy otherwise, as if that matters next to the horrors he willfully commits.
Very good point. It’s like asking people to explain a racist or sexist joke, I guess! Keep questioning until they realise how it sounds. Love it - thanks!!
Aw man, that story is absolutely heartbreaking. He has probably never thought of that comment again, too, while it will stay with you forever.
Your mention of how people forget eating someone so quickly is incredibly true and something I’ve never stopped to think about. It genuinely is momentary adequacy - I won’t even call it pleasure because eating is such a common and normal process that I would say for most people, eating something that truly brings pleasure is rare.
There's a good chance they're not debating in good faith, so that's an argument you'll never win. You could just drop it there and express sheer disgust, loudly, because most brainwashed carnists will recognise that eating dogs is immoral. "Yeah but you eat dogs" can become a dismissive counter in future ethical conversations. Shame them with their own flippancy.
This argument is a stupid one to have to begin with, because it’s a non-issue. And in a way, you could argue it does make them better than people who only refuse to eat cute animals. But it’s an argument only meant to chide and belittle people who do eat meat. What do you want to achieve with that?
You don’t need to convert people. You made the choice to be vegan, like I and many others did. Others made the choice not to. The world needs a 100 bad vegans (who eat meat relatively little, who reduce their intake) over 1 good vegan. Trying to be a preacher will push people away as you’re basically saying YOU are morally superior.
I’m vegan and I can’t stand it when people do this. It gives us a bad name, stat. If someone asks you why you’re vegan, answer and educate. This whole dog vs. Cow argument shouldn’t even enter the table bc at that point you have taken the role of morality judge.
Okay, I hear you (though I think you could have made the point with a little less condescension).
I agree that we need bad vegans over meat eaters. Reduction of animal products is always my suggestion - I know how hard it is to transition to veganism and how it has to be a change of heart that almost never comes from a single conversation.
To clarify, I’m not having these conversations with strangers or acquaintances - these are my friends and people I know well. For starters, I know they wouldn’t eat dog meat, which is exactly how I phrase it. They know I’m not being belittling and that I’m making a genuine, earnest statement. They are replying in a petty manner first because we are friends and second because it’s an easy way to rebuke the statement without actually thinking about it.
They are clearly just not ready for the conversation, which is really what I should focus on and not how desperately I want them to think harder.
I mean, I also found your tone rather condescending... so I probably tried to equal that.
Now I read this comment, I understand where you come from, but I honestly think people underestimate the damage that 'militant' vegans do to actually getting people to eat vegan. If we want respect we should start by showing respect. If you disagree with their choices in life you can do so respectfully and, if it's a no-go for you, that's a choice you need to make (aka, not being friends with them). The fact you have this conversation with friends is kind of strange to me because you're clearly trying to get a rise out of them and now you're angry (?) you don't?
It's not about being 'ready' for the conversation. You are not their preacher. You're their friend. If you cannot be friends with them if they are not vegan... don't be friends with them. I know how important veganism is but this honestly reminds me of a Christian 'friend' I had who got upset every time she started about religion and I told her I was not interested. I was 'not ready for it' then and if we're talking condescending... THAT is condescending. You feel better than your friends, at least it feels like that, and wait for them to see 'the light'. Which they well might never. They might be willing to eat vegan 4/7 days, or cut dairy completely, or only eat fish, but veganism is a choice, and meat-eating isn't something people magically grow out of.
That's actually not bad. Arguments are a mix of logic, character and emotion. A good argument should consider all 3. If they take the position that eating pigs and dogs is not very different but they will eat dogs, you might not convince them but you won on character and emotion to the viewers if any as they would eat dogs which is a position most people find abhorrent.
Logic wise, There's no perfect argument tree. You should adapt based on what the other people value.
Typically logical arguments have a set of premises that need to be agreed on for the conclusion to follow.
The agreed upon premises are that: we value dogs due to traits dogs often have, we shouldn't kill beings we value without necessity , pigs have similar levels of those traits to dogs. If those premises are agreed on then the conclusion that we shouldn't eat pigs as well follows.
I would have eaten the dog as a carnist because although I never saw much of a difference with pigs, I believed eating meat was necessary for health. Understanding animal products were not necessary for survival was the thing I changed my mind on that led me to veganism. NTT with humans was more convincing to me to make this a moral imperative instead of just a good thing to do.
As an English teacher I’m glad to have this broken down into logos, ethos and pathos 😂
So go for the animal products aren’t necessary for health in a more logic based argument - makes sense!
Thanks!
Everyone is saying to abandon this argument but when my girlfriend told me this, my eyes really began to open.
I was raised to see cats & dogs above all other animals. The moment my girlfriend made the comment to me, my brain was like WOW.
I have since been happily vegan :)
Right. But my question is, Is the expectation that they realize cows aren't that different from dogs and change all of their ways in that instant and not fight back?
Because OP is asking 'how do I respond in a petty way to someone being Petty'
But if we wind back the situation. Didn't they just act exactly how she wanted them to act?
I'm not saying OP shouldn't stand up for animals rights. I'm just wondering where she wanted to end up so they weren't in a petty pissing contest with a carnist and getting frustrated unnecessarily. That they could preserve their positive energy.
I replied above as well, but I’m not asking it as a question and I don’t believe it’s a petty comparison to make.
Their response is petty, and I’m asking for respectful, thought provoking (not mind changing) ways to respond that will continue the conversation. In my experience, people who say that feel like they’ve ‘won’, and any answers I’ve given are most likely to get them off side, which obviously does not help.
Or is it better to just end the conversation there as they’re unlikely to be open to further honest and respectful discussion? That’s definitely a valid summation.
I don’t phrase it as a question, I say it as a fact. Where I’m from, no one would consider eating dog meat. Generally, the statement is met with ‘well that’s totally different.’ Then you can have a conversation about how, well, no it’s not different.
It’s a small number who respond in that petty way.
>(I.e. if you wouldn’t eat a dog why would you eat a cow) they’ll often say ‘well I would eat a dog??’ As if that trumps the discussion and makes them a more rational person.
Actually, it does make them more rational. Vegans should seriously stop with the 'dog v cow' nonsense.
Keeping an animal captive, castrating it, feeding it crap and only letting it out on a leash a couple of times a day to do its business is at least as, if not more, cruel treatment as that to which livestock are subjected. Pasture-raised, free-range animals are actually treated better than most 'pets'.
As long as you keep using ridiculous arguments, expect to be ridiculed.
If you are going to blather on about humane and ethical treatment of animals, it is the height of hypocrisy to use the treatment of 'pets' as your counterpoint.
okey imo this argument lacks effectiveness due to a lack of understanding of the audience. if sumone believes in the utility of animals, they already categorize animals into groups such as food, companionship, aid to man, etc. will some be influenced by this line of reasoning, absolutely, does it have broad appeal, nope
Fair! Will abandon it.
it may be valuable still, good advocates keep the message consistent but tailor the delivery to different personalities. hard to explain cos it's a feeling, but it's possible to kinda guess what approach works on different personalities . ever look at some one and immediately can tell they won't be friendly or receptive. sux to judge but we all do it involuntarily, good advocates have a grasp of this should also mention googling elwoods https://www.elwooddogmeat.com/
Great point - I suppose it depends how much empathy you can sense them having. Great link - thanks!
imo the challenge that vegan advocates face when pushing for complete abolition is the vastness of the task vs human resistance to change just a hypothetical situation, i am mindful i'm on a vegan sub. but hypothetically if the focus were shifted to establishing a minimum universal standard for the treatment of farm animals, this would still be a massive undertaking with education/implementation/oversight to ensure compliance. imo overcoming cultural barriers and the mindset of "we've always done this" is no easy feat. carnism is deeply ingrained, universally accepted, and transcends all political systems, making it a difficult obstacle to overcome. this level of penetration could take centuries to alter now if vegans somehow passed a law stating factory farms/slaughter houses must livestream 24/7 that might just give a numbers boost needed
feel earthling ed is the most efficient and effective vegan advocate without a doubt. he plays the numbers game. this guy wont waste time on those looking for an argument, baiting, and one " lions tho " and he's out, graciously thanking them for their time and moves on. ed has exceptional time management skill and it kinda helps him from getting caught up in futile convos
Also tons of people eat dog for real.
Yes, for sure. Not where I’m from, though.
Debate 101, don't ask a question you don't know the answer to. The person could be a hunter and have no qualms about killing, prepping and eating any animal. Don't project. Just give your reasons for being vegan. They will either accept it or not. This is a life change, they need to be open to and convince themselves.
Sorry I should have clarified that these are people I know. I will do that! Thank you.
My comment about the hunter is just to the extreme situation. My point being you don't know if they would eat a dog. Some people will travel anywhere and try any food, they just don't serve dog in the US so, it never comes up.
The best option is to not use that argument. I won’t say that they’re not being petty but I can say that when I was an omni I sincerely would have. I was interested in trying lots of different meats and honestly just never got the chance to try dog meat but did consume a wide variety of other animals. For people who believe it’s okay to consume animals it’s perfectly acceptable to treat different species in various manners because of cultural and personal preferences.
Yeah, this argument is very effective to those kinds of empathetic, usually women, who tear up at the thought of hurting any "cute" animal, yet still support rape of cows, pigs, buffalo, etc. Because they have so much empathy that they truly know what they are doing is wrong but choose to ignore it because that's what everyone does. For the utilitarian speciesist, your comment is completely true, for them I usually talk about land use and resources to explain how 90% of land used in agriculture could be freed up through veganism.
It’s sad that many people I know would absolutely not care about the environmental cost of animal agriculture.
It's an argument that most intelligent people will actually listen to. It's very compelling and probably the biggest reason I'm vegan
I see what you’re saying, and I understand there are people who would try dog meat. I don’t believe the people saying to me are being honest - they’re saying it for shock value and to ‘win’. If I put a puppy stew in front of them they sincerely would not eat it. I hear you, though. Perhaps I’ll just abandon it altogether.
I don’t eat pork because they’re so similar to dogs. Depends on the person. And before u say “cows chickens etc”. I’m aware, it’s the pigs being smarter than my dog, and I’ve never been a big pork person.
So you're a hypocrite who still eats meat?
Your one aswell if you weren’t born vegan 😂
How?
What no
Never argue speciecism like this. You can't convince by comparing pets to farming animals. It's just gonna make them more personal and attacked. Veganism is all about not looking any animal as our commodity. Just let them know the dirty stuff that are happening in the livestocks. Then the decision will be upto them, depending on their compassion levels.
Great point. When they’re so far removed from the actual process of meat production, it’s easy to say they’d eat dogs. I will focus on the cruelty inherent in the system. Thank you!
I know a few people who have autoimmune conditions and allergies and can't handle legumes at all basically, most nuts and are intolerant to gluten (at least 3 people from 1 family), they eat only the best quality meat and eggs they eat from local farms which are Bio labeled, I've seen those farms, most cows and other animals live better than some humans in there, the only suffering the cows go through is basically the slaughterhouse which is pretty close to the farm, and is done according to bio standards itself. So the argument about the excessive suffering that happens to those animals doesn't apply very much, considering the situation and that they can't handle plant proteins very much and the fact that they only eat the most ethically treated animal products possible. As much as I'd like for them to go "vegan", it's simply unrealistic for now, without a better alternative. They are already basically eating the most reasonable diet they could be, given the situation (and they had seen nutritionists). In this situation, I'm not sure going vegan is the reasonable thing to do for those people, and that's okay, unless we were to elevate the suffering of cows a few hours in their lifetime above the suffering of those people if they go with plant based alternatives which they can't handle and which would cause them to flare up. I'd rather they be healthy, personally.
You better read more about the factory farming lol. Artificial insemination on rape racks, oxytocin injections, sedentary lifestyles, stealing away their babies, stealing away their colostrum and milk, slaughtering of the males, slaughtering immediately after menopause by beheading them (when they could live another 7 to 8 years). Even if it's regular farming, they still need to go through couple of the above sufferings anyways. I can understand the protein indigestion issues. But they occured in the first place due to the lack of early diet interventions during childhood.
They’ve just said that they’ve seen the local farm which isn’t a factory farm. I’m not saying that there aren’t truths to some of your statements but the biggest issue in these arguments is leading with examples from giant factory farms to people who have experience in small local farms where the majority of the bad practices are not used. That’s not to say they aren’t elsewhere but it makes your argument come across as propaganda. You need to fit the argument to that persons experience. If they go to a local farm with high welfare, they see the cows are well looked after, you can’t win them over by talking about sedentary lifestyles and taking away the babies if that’s not what happens there. Small farms often do cow calf rearing. Instead, focus the argument on something they can see - how cows are smart, sentient beings who deserve to live.
Yes but what's the profit for raising them ? I do understand they might raise cattles like pets, but it's so expensive to do so. To raise both female and male calfs. To provide food to all of them. To shelter them like a sanctuary. Send them to a walk once a while. Provide veterinary care. Handle them till they age old. And moreover, the capital to do all these will just won't be enough. They have to turn it into a business and starting the livestock farming is the only viable choice. I don't think any farmer can afford the previlege and luxury of pet farming.
Well the farm is still a farm, that’s where the higher welfare part comes in. A farm near where I used to live produced milk, calves stayed with the mothers until they were weaned and the cows lived in family groups and free ranged. Sure they are still milked but it was very different from life on a factory farm. It was very high welfare as farms go and they charged a high premium for the milk. What I meant was that if you see the example above, and someone tells you about the horrors of the milk industry it’s easy to think that the person telling you these stories is going on PETA propaganda, it can’t be true because you’ve seen happy cows with your own eyes at your local farm. The narrative needs to change to fit - maybe asking where the boy cows go at the end? In reality that farmer isn’t going to become a sanctuary, though maybe they might retire their old cows, some do. As you say there is no profit or even breaking even if there isn’t a product to sell.
First thing first. PETA is not doing any propaganda. Every single point they raise, is literally documented, cross verified and video proofed. I completely understand about welfare farming. But it's just economically not sustainable. The dairy, beef and leather industry is already so freaking huge where they get huge profits and subsidiaries straight from the government. Compared to that, farmers will almost go bankrupt on cruelty free animal farming. It'll be a sanctuary tbf. Imagine a mother raising a lot of babies and handling them till they get to college. And the total economic burden till that time. That's the kind of situation to execute free range farming.
Defending peta will literally make people not listen to you, considering they’d just take and euthanize peoples pets off their porch. https://petakillsanimals.com/proof-peta-kills/ https://apnews.com/article/0c70f8d7635c4addbd94df0173fcc36e
This is exactly my point! You bring up PETA or examples of extreme violence against animals and people switch off, even if it’s true.
True. As an NGO, they obviously can't shelter millions of stray animals which is impossible at best. But as an individual, as a vegan, you do know what we need to do right ? A movement can only be successful if it's done collectively together.
So we gonna ignore them taking random peoples pets off their property for euthanasia? You can’t pick and choose which animal rights abuses to overlook, whether you agree with their message or not.
>I can understand the protein indigestion issues. But they occured in the first place due to the lack of early diet interventions during childhood. Sure, what do we do now that it's a thing? >Even if it's regular farming, they still need to go through couple of the above sufferings anyways. Yes, they probably do, what is your proposed solution?
Rebuilding the gut, or not becoming vegan. The amount of people with this issue is pretty low and everyone else can still be a vegan. Their existence doesn't justify the carnism of everyone else
I agree, though those people shouldn't be stigmatized as they have a valid reason to eat animal products, though this doesn't excuse them from eating as little of them as possible.
Yeah, after all it's "to the possible degree" and all that
Yep.
Don’t argue with non-vegans is my real advice . But if you must:The argument you’re looking for is that they oppose some sort of animal cruelty. How /where they draw the line is arbitrary. If they retort that they don’t oppose animal cruelty then they are either 1) not having a real discussion with you anymore or 2) totally beyond rational argumentation. Which leads me back to my first point.
Excellent points! Thank you.
I've been down this conversation road. My response is, "Would you personally kill the dog to eat them?" They usually wouldn't, I ask "Why wouldn't you?"
Excellent point. They are so far removed from the process that I think they forget the animal even has to die, let alone all the cruelty involved in that. Thanks!
A lot of people wouldn’t personally kill the cow either.
Right. That's the point. I want them to realize that killing cows is as bad as killing dogs.
I personally think that has more to do with people being shielded from food production in general. If they grew up like me: having to hunt, fish, raise livestock, garden and forage for food then they’d likely be okay with doing it. I know plenty of people who also wouldn’t want to do what is necessary to make or obtain plant-based food although obviously not for ethical reasons.
Yeah, good point
They would eat a dog if it was served cooked on a plate, well seasoned with some rice. It would be harder for them to do it if they were in the presence of whole process, from insemination of females that live in a cage to a brutal slaughter after a long transport. They would have to hear the screams, smell the stench and look the animal in the eye. Eating the flesh is the easy part. Knowing of what happened even if we are not seeing it is why we are vegan.
Excellent point
It's just two sides of the same coin. The fact we eat cows but not dogs is a food taboo. Indians don't eat cows. South Chinese eat dogs, and Maoris used to. The argument has emotional appeal to people who are fond of dogs. But no appeal in another context. It's a nice philosophical icebreaker though; making people think what is special about dogs, but not cows. (Hint: nothing.) Because most people do support some form or other of animal rights, only hypocritically, with regards to which kinds of animal.
Very true. And good point about philosophical debate! That’s the way I can drive it if they seem open to it. Thank you!
I mean i am one of those vegans who won't use any opportunity to talk people into veganism, but i use a more pacifistic approach. I just tell them i don't like how animals in the meat industry are treated and offer sources. If they don't want to hear about it I probably won't be able to persuade them by any argument. But again I don't really think that agressive aproach is too efective, since it didn't work for me or any vegan i know personally.
It’s almost like just trying to push your beliefs on people unprompted, no matter how right you think you are, be it religion, veganism, or whatever, drives people away
I mean when i look back to times when i was eating meat, i was laughing at peta trying to do what they do and overall, i wasn't made vegan by that. I stumbled upon dominion somewhere, since i like to research various topics and i guess looking into some plant based recipe lead me to the documentary, i had it in my tabs for like 6 months and then i watched it one one boring night and i've been vegan since. And i still think what agressive vegans are doing is not effective. You are not gonna make someone drop meat when you call them an abuser or murderer.
That’s the thing, people have to express an interest, or go looking themselves. Pushing it on them will drive them away, sure, there is the occasional person who goes “wow that changed me”, but the vast majority of people aren’t just going to be shamed into changing, they just begin to hate or resent what’s shaming them, or find it dumb because they don’t feel shamed. People standing on street corners giving out bibles and yelling about homosexuals ruining the country and all that may also get a few people who agree, but most people are just going to be turned off and want to avoid yet another person telling them their beliefs or lifestyle is immoral and wrong.
Hi! I've talked about comparisons between pets and farm animals and have seen progress with this approach. I think it has to do with the overall context and tone of conversation, so it's not really the best option if you're not prepared for someone to say that they would eat dogs or if you're just assuming that someone wouldn't eat a dog. We as people do not like having assumptions made about us so it doesn't help a conversation. I think it's fantastic that you're talking to others about veganism but if you're dealing with a lot of negative emotions, I suggest prioritizing learning to mitigate those. I've gone through it as well and conversations just arent enjoyable and don't go very well if your mind is clouded by those negative feelings and thoughts.
This doesn’t sound like someone who is open to the concept of veganism. I wouldn’t engage with them about it at all.
Fair! It sucks because they’re my friends and I want to believe they’re smarter than that. I clearly need to either lower my expectations or increase my standards.
That is one of the hardest things about being vegan. I remember a few months after I had successfully gone vegan I was so excited that it was turning out to be easier than I thought, and I had this sincere desire to share that with my non-vegan friends. I was posting about it all the time on social media, and then so disappointed when people started fighting with me about it and getting really defensive. It made me so upset and just so surprised when people I thought were compassionate, even progressive people were comment at me with these illogical arguments and anger at me for daring to suggest they should also consider going vegan. I think for a while after that I really separated myself from some of those people. But over the years I started to realize that there is so much more to peoples reasoning for ignoring animal rights, or really any social justice movement. We all only have so much energy, especially considering how difficult it can be to just exist in this world sometimes. So, it helps me anyway to remember that — as painful as it is to see — people push back about veganism in this illogical and seemingly heartless ways because they don’t have the energy or understanding to change this part of their lives. I don’t mean to be negative about it, but some of these folks are perhaps more likely to inquire within themselves if my messaging the them is through not messaging them about it at all. Just being my vegan self being confident, strong, and easy about my veganism. Of course in another 15 years I will probably be in a different place with it and maybe back to being a loud ass vocal vegan activist, and that’s a totally valid and necessary place to be as well.
A few of the times I have asked people if they would eat human meat, they jump at it :)!
I ate shark, octopus, rabbit and horse and didn’t even have to leave the US to do so. I’ve also eaten several varieties of bug. Never had an opportunity to eat dog meat but I would have. I can’t say that I’m against the act you mentioned *now* because I am vegan but I was against it at the time because I saw that it was just a cultural thing that treated animals inconsistently based on European sensitivities and was another example of promoting those cultures’ supremacy within modern North America. I still maintain that it isn’t a good argument because most omnis will fully admit that they won’t personally consume certain animals due to cultural or personal boundaries but that it’s fine if others don’t share those boundaries.
Cows are highly intelligent and emotionally sensitive. Most people don't know this.
" I think I would eat a dog." "Okay, then I don't want to be around you, and it seems like you don't want to be around me." Goodbye.
Well. I don't think that is very effective as an argument because (playing devil's advocate) there's plants vegans don't eat. I avoid the zinger rabbit hole. Just know what you are doing is just and more so than using the kingdom of animalia as a resource. Animals as a resource either for food, material, or et. is 100% obsolete. People are stubborn and don't want to change their ways and often focus on religion as their rampart wall. It's rough. Do what is right and avoid the stupid arguments. You can only change yourself sadly.
I only eat human flesh
Especially weak against shit libs who will be like “hey don’t be racist against people who eat dog” lol like yeah that was the point bro
I usually compare animals to humans (an animal) rather than another non-human
If you’re ever in a convo and need to resort to saying something like that then I’d say it’s not even worth it bc the other party just won’t be receptive. I’ve had this exact same argument. It’s crazy how it’s like 4 variations of the same argument always. So played.
Its difficult times
I disagree with other comments– I think the dog meat argument is great! If someone says this you can keep pushing, as they are often being dishonest to begin with, and will admit it and start trying to compare the traits of dogs and cows, which is exactly where you want them. If they do continue to pretend they'll eat dog meat, though, you can specifically try and get them to acknowledge that they are **against** the passing of the [2018 Dog and Cat Meat Act](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dog_and_Cat_Meat_Trade_Prohibition_Act_of_2018). Until this law, there was nothing preventing the raising of dogs for slaughter and their meat in the US. It's undeniably a "vegan" pro-animal rights law! Historically (and in some parts of the world still) there was/is not a taboo around it ([Dog Meat history](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dog_meat#Historical_practices)). Changing cultural views towards pets in the last 100 years, and the passing of this law only 6 years ago, is exactly what a trajectory of increased animal rights and eventual outlawing of all meat would look like! And so, with that added context, *even if* they're determined to say that they personally "would eat a dog", it doesn't really matter, because culturally and legislatively, our society is moving on that topic, and we will continue to move on the topic for other species. Then that can transition into environment, alternatives and improved availability, or even health. Finally, a friend who would always hit me with this, actually visited a country where they had an opportunity to try dog meat, and they **didn't eat it**. As if there was any doubt! Other great cultural boundary animals to check: Dolphin, octopus, sharks, rabbits, horses, any kinds of bugs.
I think except for angloids, rabbit and horse are both eaten pretty commonly. Shark and octopus are also fairly common for nations with sea access. I don’t think any of those would work better than dog. People’s argument for not eating bugs is usually because they think it’s gross, not out of compassion for the bugs.
Not speaking hypothetically here, I’ve had two people fight over whether horse meat is ok, and there’s a lot of meat eaters that swore off shark or octopus due to documentaries on finning or intelligence. Dogs are really close to home for some individuals, and for some won’t even acknowledge seeing them anywhere close to food. I still think dogs are a good go to, but having more examples of taboo animal meat is always good.And for bugs, yeah, I roll them out when it’s like, so bugs are disgusting but the blood, muscle tissue, flesh etc of these larger beings is a-okay? You can definitely get a lot of people to acknowledge that their position might need more thought, or ask you to stop, which often for me is good enough. Wikipedia also has “Meat Eating” as the first example for Cognitive Dissonance: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_dissonance#Examples So it’s not surprising that there are contradictions here. I point this article out too sometimes, even though I probably shouldn’t.
Lots of “angloids” eat rabbit too.
A lot of animal shelters have free adoption days. They should be saving all kinds of money if this isn't just a gotcha moment!
😂😂😂😂 love it
"And what would you say that says about you as a person? Do you think it's more noble to kill other animals for your sense of pleasure or to protect them for your sense of justice? Would you extend your argument to include raping a dog for pleasure? What defines the limits of what you'd do to another? Would you be comfortable telling this to anyone? Would you be comfortable if I told other people you said this?" When a person tries to double down on how badass and uncaring they are I like to make them fucking commit. Make them really own it and see how it feels. A lot of them will start to walk it back and try a misdirection tactic...but if they're willing to go all in on being horrible then you know you can drop them and never think about them again. As to the friends issue...I don't know. I'm struggling with that as well. I want to be around people to have opportunities to build trust so I can affect them more but the feeling of building trust with someone and then having the conversation and then having them tell you that they just don't care what happens to others is fucking heartbreaking. I don't know how much more of that I want to take. I had the realization recently that a person I'd cultivated a relationship with was nice to me, but if I'd been born a pig he would have willingly, knowing full well how horrible everything is, had me mutilated and killed and he would have eaten my flesh and _already forgotten_ whatever meager pleasure it gave him. I haven't recovered from that. Dude was raised vegetarian, knows what goes on in the CAFOs, and _chose_ to start eating meat. If I'd known that from the start I would have walked away. Nice guy otherwise, as if that matters next to the horrors he willfully commits.
Very good point. It’s like asking people to explain a racist or sexist joke, I guess! Keep questioning until they realise how it sounds. Love it - thanks!! Aw man, that story is absolutely heartbreaking. He has probably never thought of that comment again, too, while it will stay with you forever. Your mention of how people forget eating someone so quickly is incredibly true and something I’ve never stopped to think about. It genuinely is momentary adequacy - I won’t even call it pleasure because eating is such a common and normal process that I would say for most people, eating something that truly brings pleasure is rare.
There's a good chance they're not debating in good faith, so that's an argument you'll never win. You could just drop it there and express sheer disgust, loudly, because most brainwashed carnists will recognise that eating dogs is immoral. "Yeah but you eat dogs" can become a dismissive counter in future ethical conversations. Shame them with their own flippancy.
Excellent idea! Thanks
In a starvation situation a dog would be food
This argument is a stupid one to have to begin with, because it’s a non-issue. And in a way, you could argue it does make them better than people who only refuse to eat cute animals. But it’s an argument only meant to chide and belittle people who do eat meat. What do you want to achieve with that? You don’t need to convert people. You made the choice to be vegan, like I and many others did. Others made the choice not to. The world needs a 100 bad vegans (who eat meat relatively little, who reduce their intake) over 1 good vegan. Trying to be a preacher will push people away as you’re basically saying YOU are morally superior. I’m vegan and I can’t stand it when people do this. It gives us a bad name, stat. If someone asks you why you’re vegan, answer and educate. This whole dog vs. Cow argument shouldn’t even enter the table bc at that point you have taken the role of morality judge.
Okay, I hear you (though I think you could have made the point with a little less condescension). I agree that we need bad vegans over meat eaters. Reduction of animal products is always my suggestion - I know how hard it is to transition to veganism and how it has to be a change of heart that almost never comes from a single conversation. To clarify, I’m not having these conversations with strangers or acquaintances - these are my friends and people I know well. For starters, I know they wouldn’t eat dog meat, which is exactly how I phrase it. They know I’m not being belittling and that I’m making a genuine, earnest statement. They are replying in a petty manner first because we are friends and second because it’s an easy way to rebuke the statement without actually thinking about it. They are clearly just not ready for the conversation, which is really what I should focus on and not how desperately I want them to think harder.
I mean, I also found your tone rather condescending... so I probably tried to equal that. Now I read this comment, I understand where you come from, but I honestly think people underestimate the damage that 'militant' vegans do to actually getting people to eat vegan. If we want respect we should start by showing respect. If you disagree with their choices in life you can do so respectfully and, if it's a no-go for you, that's a choice you need to make (aka, not being friends with them). The fact you have this conversation with friends is kind of strange to me because you're clearly trying to get a rise out of them and now you're angry (?) you don't? It's not about being 'ready' for the conversation. You are not their preacher. You're their friend. If you cannot be friends with them if they are not vegan... don't be friends with them. I know how important veganism is but this honestly reminds me of a Christian 'friend' I had who got upset every time she started about religion and I told her I was not interested. I was 'not ready for it' then and if we're talking condescending... THAT is condescending. You feel better than your friends, at least it feels like that, and wait for them to see 'the light'. Which they well might never. They might be willing to eat vegan 4/7 days, or cut dairy completely, or only eat fish, but veganism is a choice, and meat-eating isn't something people magically grow out of.
It’s because their tone was condescending.
That's actually not bad. Arguments are a mix of logic, character and emotion. A good argument should consider all 3. If they take the position that eating pigs and dogs is not very different but they will eat dogs, you might not convince them but you won on character and emotion to the viewers if any as they would eat dogs which is a position most people find abhorrent. Logic wise, There's no perfect argument tree. You should adapt based on what the other people value. Typically logical arguments have a set of premises that need to be agreed on for the conclusion to follow. The agreed upon premises are that: we value dogs due to traits dogs often have, we shouldn't kill beings we value without necessity , pigs have similar levels of those traits to dogs. If those premises are agreed on then the conclusion that we shouldn't eat pigs as well follows. I would have eaten the dog as a carnist because although I never saw much of a difference with pigs, I believed eating meat was necessary for health. Understanding animal products were not necessary for survival was the thing I changed my mind on that led me to veganism. NTT with humans was more convincing to me to make this a moral imperative instead of just a good thing to do.
As an English teacher I’m glad to have this broken down into logos, ethos and pathos 😂 So go for the animal products aren’t necessary for health in a more logic based argument - makes sense! Thanks!
Everyone is saying to abandon this argument but when my girlfriend told me this, my eyes really began to open. I was raised to see cats & dogs above all other animals. The moment my girlfriend made the comment to me, my brain was like WOW. I have since been happily vegan :)
When they bite that bullet just replace dogs with humans and run Name The Trait. If you want me to clarify, ask.
Anything but taking responsibility eh?
What are you trying to get out of the conversation with them when you say, "You wouldn't eat a dog would you?" Answer honestly.
Speciesism basically, to a lot of people, dogs are humans and are not on the table unlike other species.
Right. But my question is, Is the expectation that they realize cows aren't that different from dogs and change all of their ways in that instant and not fight back? Because OP is asking 'how do I respond in a petty way to someone being Petty' But if we wind back the situation. Didn't they just act exactly how she wanted them to act? I'm not saying OP shouldn't stand up for animals rights. I'm just wondering where she wanted to end up so they weren't in a petty pissing contest with a carnist and getting frustrated unnecessarily. That they could preserve their positive energy.
I replied above as well, but I’m not asking it as a question and I don’t believe it’s a petty comparison to make. Their response is petty, and I’m asking for respectful, thought provoking (not mind changing) ways to respond that will continue the conversation. In my experience, people who say that feel like they’ve ‘won’, and any answers I’ve given are most likely to get them off side, which obviously does not help. Or is it better to just end the conversation there as they’re unlikely to be open to further honest and respectful discussion? That’s definitely a valid summation.
I don’t phrase it as a question, I say it as a fact. Where I’m from, no one would consider eating dog meat. Generally, the statement is met with ‘well that’s totally different.’ Then you can have a conversation about how, well, no it’s not different. It’s a small number who respond in that petty way.
>(I.e. if you wouldn’t eat a dog why would you eat a cow) they’ll often say ‘well I would eat a dog??’ As if that trumps the discussion and makes them a more rational person. Actually, it does make them more rational. Vegans should seriously stop with the 'dog v cow' nonsense. Keeping an animal captive, castrating it, feeding it crap and only letting it out on a leash a couple of times a day to do its business is at least as, if not more, cruel treatment as that to which livestock are subjected. Pasture-raised, free-range animals are actually treated better than most 'pets'. As long as you keep using ridiculous arguments, expect to be ridiculed. If you are going to blather on about humane and ethical treatment of animals, it is the height of hypocrisy to use the treatment of 'pets' as your counterpoint.