I think you're too aggressive. I can't remember many examples besides the one I linked before, but when you enter a friendly conversation with a 'mini virtual protest' just because meat was mentioned, whether people agree with your opinions on the topic or not they are going to think less of you. Not just Kleinbl00, anyone who sees what you said. When people think less of you, they probably won't have as much of a open mind about what you say in the future plus the less mature will associate with the people who disagree with you based purely on how you interacted with them and defend their opinion before even thinking about it for themselves. I only bring it up when I'm offered food or it becomes extremely relevant, generally when this happens the person(s) I'm speaking with already consider me a friend. Often they will curiously ask why I'm vegan at some point after learning I'm vegan, because they know it will be a friendly conversation and not a flame war. This way they're actually prepared to listen. I tell them what I think and not what I want them to think. I think people react a lot better when you're not telling them how to think. Here is a good example, Complexity Asked you about it and you responded with what you thought. It got a great reaction, you were even token'd. It was also relevant at the time.Thank you. Can you be more specific about what's wrong with my "method"?
As a vegan how often to do engage in animal rights discussion? What methods do you use? I'm genuinely interested.
I fail to see which part of "be kind to animals" is aggressive. It might be inconvenient or annoying, I can even understand how it can be interpreted as rude but aggressive? That is great and it's something kind of inevitable, to talk about your lifestyle when it comes up. How often does that happen online? Do you think that a passive attitude is sufficient to stop cruelty? You do not think that those being abused deserve a more proactive approach? I do realise that it'll be less effective to force people to think about something than waiting for the subject to come up. But what's the option? To just sit back and let discrimination go on unchallenged? We wouldn't do that regarding other types of discrimination, why should we regarding animal discrimination? Should we speak only when we are allowed by those contributing to the problem we're tying to solve?I think you're too aggressive.
I only bring it up when I'm offered food or it becomes extremely relevant, generally when this happens the person(s) I'm speaking with already consider me a friend.
By aggressive I mean persistent and forceful, not 'mean' or 'angry'
I suppose there was a clearer word I could use. I'm not great with words. Online, not very often. I sort of avoided mentioning it because I don't want my first impression to be shaped by my diet or poltical views. Maybe now that I'm a bit more known on Hubski I won't avoid it anymore. I think a passive attitude is the most effective, since the aim for me is to have a productive conversation, where both people come out happier, smarter and/or maybe one of us will have a different view. I don't think an aggressive attitude will yield any of those, atleast for me it never does.
Certainly not to sit back and do nothing, there are lots of other things you can do. Like getting into government, protesting against companies you know act cruely to their animals(Curious, is there a way of getting meat you're okay with?), helping people transition to a vegan diet, coming up with good vegan recipes, maybe entering them in grubski if you're not muted from that(I heard you were posting pictures of baby animals there?). Simply by not buying meat you're promoting the vegan diet.That is great and it's something kind of inevitable, to talk about your lifestyle when it comes up. How often does that happen online? Do you think that a passive attitude is sufficient to stop cruelty?
But what's the option? To just sit back and let discrimination go on unchallenged? We wouldn't do that regarding other types of discrimination
I'm sorry, I'm exhausted from trying to justify my methods. I do what I do because I care for those that are suffering. I'm sorry if you find me inconvenient, but that's not going to make me stop. Ultimately everyone has the choice to ignore me. The sad thing is, all this time we wasted talking about me and what are and aren't acceptable forms of activism would have been way better spent talking about those who can't talk. That is the real tragedy, not the inconvenience I caused on some stupid online post.
Don't be sorry. I consider this to be a good conversation, I learned a lot about my own opinions, why I have them and your opinions and why you have them. I'm sorry I exhausted you. who knows? maybe one day you'll see my points and maybe one day I'll see yours.
I asked that very specific question for a very specific reason and I was not disappointed. I had a long reply for this thread but I don't know if it's better sent privately.
It's up to you. If it's posted publicly everyone will have the opportunity to contribute.I had a long reply for this thread but I don't know if it's better sent privately.
I read it back and whilst my motivation was wholesome sadly the result lacks arete. Sorry. Another time.
That's disappointing. I was looking forward to your input.