Excusetarianism

As my readers know, I’ve had to take a hiatus from Think & Thrive to focus on a few other things going on in my life. But I haven’t forgotten about you! Today I wanted to drop in and write a brief impromptu post to share with you guys some thoughts I’ve been having.

The easier and more convenient it becomes to live a vegan lifestyle, the more I have to wonder about non-vegan lifestyles. Why it’s still such a popular choice, how it’s rationalized without severe cognitive dissonance (which it doesn’t seem that it can be), if and when non-vegan people plan on making the right decision for themselves and the innocent victims they’re exploiting; these questions and many more I grapple with regularly.

To be honest, it’s easy to disregard the frustration and disgust that comes with seeing people still choosing to abuse animals… most of the time. Sometimes, though, it’s difficult to ignore. But as much as animal abuse ignites a fire within me, I am not the victim. I am not the one who deserves the pity. The defenseless, innocent holocaust victims are the ones who deserve the sympathy. Shot, gassed, stabbed, sexually violated, and betrayed by the farmers and “caretakers” who they trusted to serve their best interest. That is who we should be giving our compassion to.

Excuses are abundant. The only justification for using and abusing innocent beings is pathetic excuses, which are a dime a dozen. Rather than stepping up and doing the very least they can do for the animals and their own health, many people would rather throw out rehearsed excuses or pretend to be on some silly yo-yo diet like Keto (which is not a real diet, it is a vanity-centered eating disorder that wrecks the metabolism and starves the brain and cells of fiber, nutrition, and vital carbohydrates, ultimately leading to more weight gain that can never be corrected). Me, me, me, me, me. That is what the excuses are all about, not about the victims whose bodies are needlessly being used for indulgent, self-centered purposes.

Before I continue, a disclaimer: Non-vegans are not inherently bad people. While it is willfully ignorant to continue ignoring current nutritional science and choose to act blind to the reality of the senseless holocaust you’re financially contributing to, people are more than their lifestyle choices.

Veganism is not about me and it is not about you, it is about THEM. The innocent beings who are being used and massacred for milkshakes and omelettes and honey and sandwiches. If non-vegans don’t like hearing this, then perhaps they’re more aware of the unethical nature of their choices than they’d like to admit, otherwise why would it bother them so much to hear about the needless violence they’re paying into?

When it comes to health – every single thing that we need in order to achieve optimal nourishment, from protein to vitamins, can easily be gotten in abundance on a balanced plant-based diet. There is absolutely nothing that we need to consume that is only found in animal products. In fact, there is a wealth of scholarly information out there showing that not only is a fully plant-based diet the healthiest diet for all ages, both genders, and all conditions of health and stages of life from pregnancy to elderly, but that also proves how damaging and detrimentally unsafe animal flesh and byproduct consumption is for all parts of the human body.

Animal product consumption is unsafe for humans, feeds into our leading diseases and causes of death, is expensive and wasteful, and most importantly is as unethical as it possibly gets. Given how much more affordable and healthy it is to live a vegan lifestyle, you can imagine my dismay at how much of the population is still funding the cruelties of the animal agriculture industries.

If you’ve read this far, this is a call to action. Step up, consider what your dollars are demanding, and do right by innocent individuals and yourself.

There is no excuse for animal abuse.

 

20 comments

    • Thanks for your comment. Can you be more specific about what you mean by “scholarly forensic”? My education and experience is in English/writing/journalism, which is where the research background comes from.

      With that being said, everything I mentioned in this piece that requires scientific data/opinions I cited sources for, all of which are available to the public. If there is something I said that you think requires a source that I didn’t provide, be specific and I’d be happy to share links to where I get my knowledge/information about nutrition and the industries from.

      Like

      • I’m not sure what your point is or if you even came here to have an engaging conversation, but I think you meant to say “you’re”, not “your”.

        My views are a result of thorough review of the current information available to me, and I’ve in no way been forced to accept anything I don’t objectively agree with. If there were a valid case to be made in favor of animal product consumption, I’d gladly consider it; however I’ve never heard one, which is why my mind has yet to be changed.

        Like

      • Pffft!
        Grammar…really? Gee how quaint you afford yourself full autonomy you seem to have chosen to deny anyone who reaches a different conclusion than yours. While “meat eater’s” may disagree with you, that is in no way is evidence of their “cognitive dissonance” as you assert they MUST suffer from.

        Eating meat is not murder. Animals eat other animals and none of them are charged with murder in any US court that I’m aware of. The ocean is filled with predators eating other predators for survival. So too is it found in the jungles of such places as Africa. It may not sit well with your personal moral beliefs but it remains scientifically factual (citation omitted).

        Attempting to paint meat eaters with the pejorative of “murders” further seems culturally nefarious and disingenuous at best. Predicated upon what I surmise is your ill intent as a vegan advocate and not an objective journalist, I’ll leap to the conclusion you cherry picked your bias citations; of which you only offer links possible because your goal is to demoralize anyone eating meat or further possible, knowing informed people won’t bother to objectively accept regurgitated data not coming from peer review studies that they themselves haven’t authentically sought out to prevent bias by contamination of flawed opinions. I won’t bother to image all the plants you might be killing just to survive!

        I state a position and nothing more because I can. I don’t engage in nonsensical debates where my supposed opponent plays a dishonest arbitrator of what is allowed or factual. Truth be told, I couldn’t care less how meaningful you find…my opinion. Don’t worry, I’ll unfollow you too.

        Like

      • “Eating meat is not murder.”

        I don’t think I said “eating meat is murder” in the piece, but since you brought it up – humans have no need to consume animal products of any kind, and choosing to pay for animals to be used and abused is actively taking part in needless killing. I don’t care whether or not you call it murder, it’s wrong no matter what you call it.

        “Animals eat other animals”

        Carnivorous and omnivorous animals eat other animals, herbivorous and frugivorous animals don’t. Diet is dependent upon anatomy, and human anatomy does not equal a predator. And by the way, no species consumes the breast milk of another animal, in fact no animal consumes breast milk in adulthood at all.

        “Attempting to paint meat eaters with the pejorative of ‘murders’ further seems culturally nefarious and disingenuous at best.”

        Can you quote where exactly I used the word murder? And explain what you mean by culturally nefarious? I don’t see how you came to the conclusion that I attempted to paint non-vegans in some negative way; In fact, if you read the entire piece, you’ll see that I specifically stated that non-vegans are not inherently bad people.

        “your ill intent as a vegan advocate and not an objective journalist I’ll leap to the conclusion you cherry picked your bias citations; of which you only offer links possible because your goal is to demoralize anyone eating meat or further possible, knowing informed people won’t bother to objectively accept regurgitated data not coming from peer review studies that they themselves haven’t authentically sought out to prevent bias by contamination of flawed opinions.”

        If you perceive speaking out in defense of innocent victims to be an ill intent, that’s your opinion and you’re entitled to it. And I’ve never suggested that this blog publishes journalistic content.

        “I’ll leap to the conclusion you cherry picked your bias citations… data not coming from peer review studies that they themselves haven’t authentically sought out to prevent bias by contamination of flawed opinions.”

        That is certainly quite the leap, given that the sources I cite are reputable, independent, and reliable. If you look into the sources I cited here and think they are not reliable, then I encourage you to explain why and defend your claim that they are not peer reviewed (they are).

        “I won’t bother to image all the plants you might be killing just to survive!”

        The issue with unnecessarily using and killing animals is not with the fact that they’re alive, it’s the fact that they’re sentient. Plants are not conscious, do not have central nervous systems, and cannot suffer. Additionally, humans need plant consumption to survive, unlike animal products.

        “I don’t engage in nonsensical debates where my supposed opponent plays a dishonest arbitrator of what is allowed or factual. Truth be told, I couldn’t care less how meaningful you find…my opinion.”

        I didn’t ask you to engage in a debate you find nonsensical. You began the conversation, I’ve merely responded to your remarks.

        “I’ll unfollow you too.”

        I don’t shill myself out to anti-vegans in order to gain followers, this blog does well enough without having to apologize to the occasional angry ranter. One of the main purposes of this blog is to share informed opinions regardless of whose sensitivities they may offend, so please do unfollow if it will make you feel like you’ve accomplished something today.

        Like

      • If you consider not paying into the unnecessary use and abuse of innocent individuals to be biased, then call me guilty.
        Although, if it were I making claim of bias, I would back up the claim with an explanation.
        I think anyone who makes changes to live a more moral lifestyle would “feel better” about themselves for it, that’s kinda what naturally happens when you make better choices.

        Liked by 1 person

      • LOL, oh please! Your continued attempt to qualify your specious bullshit fails miserably. According to your professional diagnoses, any one not on the same page as your grand opinion is mentally defunct and therefore unworthy of being heard. Of course, your not qualified in forensic psychology based upon your own admission so you lean heavily on moralism in hopes to guilt others rather than honesty.

        Emotional conjecture (bias) remains more than obvious for any honest and objectionable reader to notice. Further attempts to bait me into disproving your statements is just more dishonesty and laziness on your part and you know, or- if a real journalist as claimed, you should know it.

        Your welcome to come to whatever conclusion you wish to, even if predetermined just as I’m free to go eat a steak I’ve predetermined sates both my ego and palate. I will give you, the food industry needs to be more human than current laws require however, once again this doesn’t prove eating meat makes me or anyone else a bad person or unhealthy as you need others to believe.

        My chosen moral lifestyle is one I govern and reached by my own methods. I again point out you seem to want to dictate to others what is truth, good and bad as if we’re all simpletons in need of your self-appointed divine wisdom. If you revere some or all animals as Gods on religious grounds, at least be intellectually honest and permit everyone else the same choice in part or whole instead of a dishonest apologist.

        What you think is flawed by narcissism in need of others to be obsequious over, otherwise your opinion is merely just another opinion and carries no more intellectualism or value than anyone else’s.

        As I stated, I unfollowed you, after all I can objectively parse facts for myself from chosen peer review articles and studies who have no monetary pr personal bias to lean one way or another regarding eating a diet that includes meat.

        Like

      • If you intend to respond again then please read my entire comment. It is clear you have not read everything I’ve said and my time is too valuable to continue repeating myself.

        “According to your professional diagnoses, any one not on the same page as your grand opinion is mentally defunct and therefore unworthy of being heard.”

        That is not an accurate or fair statement. What I said is that animal product consumption cannot be rationalized without cognitive dissonance. Cognitive dissonance is not a mental disability and does not require a medical diagnosis, it is a philosophical term referring to the disconnect between thoughts and actions that leads to inconsistencies. (For example, when people say they are against animal abuse or that they “love animals”, but still choose to fund animal abuse and exploitation by buying animal products.)

        “Of course, your not qualified in forensic psychology”

        Again I think you meant to say “you’re”. I’m not entirely sure what part of anything I said has to do with “forensic psychology”, so you’ll have to be more specific if you want me to respond to that.

        “based upon your own admission so you lean heavily on moralism in hopes to guilt others rather than honesty.”

        Do you support human slavery? If not, why do you lean heavily on moralism in hopes to guilt slave owners rather than honesty?
        Also, you’re welcome to point out specifically what I said that you find dishonest. It seems like you find anything to do with morality dishonest, which is a copout, in my opinion.

        “Emotional conjecture (bias) remains more than obvious for any honest and objectionable reader to notice. Further attempts to bait me into disproving your statements is just more dishonesty and laziness on your part and you know, or- if a real journalist as claimed, you should know it.”

        I have no emotional connection with animals; My view on animal abuse is that of rational conclusion. The fact that we do not need to use them makes it, in my opinion, unethical to do so. I can’t imagine why that would enrage you so much, perhaps it strikes a chord?

        “Your welcome to come to whatever conclusion you wish to, even if predetermined just as I’m free to go eat a steak I’ve predetermined sates both my ego and palate. I will give you, the food industry needs to be more human than current laws require however, once again this doesn’t prove eating meat makes me or anyone else a bad person or unhealthy as you need others to believe.”

        Again, “you’re”. I specifically stated in my piece that animal product consumers are not bad people, so you clearly have not read it. And yes, actually, animal product consumption is extremely unhealthy, especially for men, based on current medical science (some of which I cited in the piece).

        “My chosen moral lifestyle is one I govern and reached by my own methods. I again point out you seem to want to dictate to others what is truth, good and bad as if we’re all simpletons in need of your self-appointed divine wisdom. If you revere some or all animals as Gods on religious grounds, at least be intellectually honest and permit everyone else the same choice in part or whole instead of a dishonest apologist.”

        I am simply stating my views on the needless exploitation of innocent individuals. I will not apologize for using this platform to speak on their behalf. There are plenty of useless poetry blogs out there if being challenged is not something you’re interested in.

        “opinion is merely just another opinion and carries no more intellectualism or value than anyone else’s.”

        So you admit that your opinion carries no more intellectualism or value than mine? Glad we could clear that up.

        “As I stated, I unfollowed you, after all I can objectively parse facts for myself from chosen peer review articles and studies who have no monetary pr personal bias to lean one way or another regarding eating a diet that includes meat.”

        Great, thanks for stopping by. (I don’t only advocate against the production of meat, by the way, I’m against all animal products.)

        Like

      • More personal attacks that don’t respond to my points.

        This piece has nothing to do with how I feel, it is about what I think. It quite obviously is not about me being perfect, or about me at all for that matter.

        It’s about the hundreds of trillions of victims each and every year, who I will continue speaking out for.

        Like

      • Yes, of course- I should’ve anticipated you might have control issues and need to have the last word too.

        Grammar again? I’ll have a chat with my speech to text program later on. How embarrassing it will feel being unable to communicate comprehensively enough that even a highly trained scholar like yourself struggled decoding the implied point.

        Personal attacks?? as in like my ad hominem’s? I found them permissible being they are my retorts to your obtuse intellectual dishonesty.

        Your piece has everything to do with how you feel and the personal beliefs you wish to push, so- who are you trying to BS?

        Clearly you detest being called out which is why I suspect you evaded some of my questions and candid points. You see- my conjecture is openly stated and owned in my phraseology.

        And here’s a real barn burner for you: “cognitive dissonance” may well be your psychological fortae after all.

        “…about the hundreds of trillions of victims..? They’re only “victims” in your narratives because you limit the victimized to sentient beings, obviously to avoid being hypocritical as a vegan. After all, these sentient victims have employed you as their spokesperson.

        Junk scientist carries the same value as junk journalist that push it…self appointed and worthless.

        Ok, you have my permission to scold me with a last word. Besides, I’ve been too generous in wasting my time with a “right fighter, a dishonest person who seems so entrenched only in their set of values; so much so, they lack a modicum of an open mind and unwilling to accept that might actually be wrong about anything. Chow-

        Like

      • “Yes, of course- I should’ve anticipated you might have control issues and need to have the last word too.”

        Personal attack, nothing to do with the subject matter of innocent holocaust victims.

        “your obtuse intellectual dishonesty.”

        Again, you’ll have to be specific about what I said that you perceive as “intellectual dishonesty” if I’m to respond to that.

        “Your piece has everything to do with how you feel and the personal beliefs you wish to push, so- who are you trying to BS?”

        As I said, this piece has nothing to do with feelings. My veganism has nothing to do with feelings. I have never been an animal lover or an animal person for that matter, I do not love animals or want to be near them. I merely have the lowest possible level of respect I could possibly have for them, based on their sentience and my lack of a need to use them for food, clothing, etc.

        “Clearly you detest being called out which is why I suspect you evaded some of my questions and candid points. You see- my conjecture is openly stated and owned in my phraseology.”

        If I detested being challenged, my comments section would be closed.

        What “points” did I not respond to?

        “…about the hundreds of trillions of victims..? They’re only “victims” in your narratives because you limit the victimized to sentient beings, obviously to avoid being hypocritical as a vegan. After all, these sentient victims have employed you as their spokesperson.”

        They are, by definition, victims. That is not an opinion. When a baby gets slaughtered, whether he has hands or hooves, he is a victim.

        “wasting my time with a “right fighter, a dishonest person who seems so entrenched only in their set of values”

        Again, you keep alleging that I’ve been dishonest, but have not clarified where. What have I said that’s dishonest? Is it dishonest that humans have no need for animal products? No. Is it dishonest that animals have the mental and physical capacity to suffer? No. Is it dishonest that animals are being exploited by the hundreds of trillions each and every year? No. Be specific.

        “so much so, they lack a modicum of an open mind and unwilling to accept that might actually be wrong about anything.”

        Actually, if you read my comments you’ll see that I said I would be perfectly willing to change my mind IF there was a valid case made for animal product consumption. You have yet to make a solid case in favor of animal use, so my current view stands.

        Like

  1. Thank you for this. I have been dragging my feet becoming full vegan and it’s definitely all on my shoulders. I appreciate your words, they came at the right time to remind me to keep pushing myself with my diet and lifestyle that affects innocent lives.

    Liked by 1 person

    • So happy to hear that you found this to be encouraging. Everyone needs words of encouragement during times of change in their lives. Don’t be a stranger if you ever need advice or tips!

      Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s