Comments | xfifthcolumnx: leather isn't vegan... its just not.

xfifthcolumnx

leather isn't vegan... its just not.

Jan 17, 2008 22:57

i'm on this community in LJ land, people often ask for advice and others give a lot of advice. it really leaves me dumbfounded that so many "vegans" still wear leather, and encourage others to do so as well ( Read more... )

Comments 28

with_redribbons January 18 2008, 04:11:14 UTC

I especially love the post about such as "I only eat chicken on my period, otherwise I am vegan" or "I cannot live without my beloved eggs!!"

Guh. gross. seriously.

ryansmithxvx January 18 2008, 05:37:14 UTC

any specific post you're referencing? i'm guessing it's from veganpeople
the amount of times people try to excuse or justify using products built upon the exploitation of other species is dumbfounding to me

xfifthcolumnx January 18 2008, 14:36:38 UTC

well, there's the "new vegan" one thats up there now, where everyone is saying how they still use their leather items and not to worry about it.

seems to be a recurring theme. no one would be saying the same if the person also happened to find a steak in the freezer that was bought before going vegan.

ryansmithxvx January 18 2008, 17:42:37 UTC

when i decided to go vegan, i finished up the items in my fridge, but committed myself to not acquiring new items that weren't vegan. i finished wearing my leather shoes, until i got new shoes, which would be vegan.

at that time, however, i saw things from a 'treatment' perspective, not a 'worth' or 'rights' perspective. now, i think it's inherently cruel to profit from exploitation. however, i also find it inherently cruel to cause undue waste. how those two work together is difficult. i don't want people just throwing a bunch of shit away and filling landfills. i also don't want people profiting at the expense of others.

imyourboss January 18 2008, 14:01:09 UTC

I actually very much agree with you.

I know wool is included in this, too, right? No wool products, like in pea coats or scarves, etc? This question's completely out of ignorance, but I was wondering why? Isn't it detrimental to not sheer the sheep? Is organic wool okay? I always wondered about that.

xfifthcolumnx January 18 2008, 14:34:45 UTC

wool is definitely included.

the "sheep need to be sheared" myth is kind of like the "cows need to be milked" myth.

runrevolt January 18 2008, 19:03:15 UTC

I disagree...but will get back later to further clarify.

runrevolt January 18 2008, 20:44:04 UTC

I think claiming that someone is not vegan because they are utilizing leather or any other animal product falls into the ridiculous trappings of "purity" and moralism, which tends to promote an acceptance of guilt and self-righteousness with those who accept that notion. Purity, is always an absolute, and seems to stem more from a dead christian ethic than anything rooted in actual human experience. The problem is that we can hyper-examine and nitpick to the point that NO ONE is vegan, if we base our definitions on absolutes. As you well know, we all use animal products to some degree. Driving. Walking. Living. Whatever. I'm not saying there should NOT be parameters to our decisions and definitions, but if we create some sort of absolute to the definitions, without any leeway or consideration of the many lifestyles people are forced to live, we are then discouraging people from even making the attempt to make better decisions ( ... )

xfifthcolumnx January 18 2008, 21:36:54 UTC

to me it comes down to this ( ... )

runrevolt January 18 2008, 22:20:22 UTC

Vegan does has a definition, whether you buy into that definition (based on your goals, premises, etc.) or not is a whole 'nother story. It could be argued that Christianity has a definition. Straight Edge has a definition. Etc. But we know definitions (inherently absolute) are problematic when established by one and told to be forcibly accepted by everyone that follows. I find a fluid and flexible proposal of definition parameters to be more appealing ( ... )

ryansmithxvx January 18 2008, 23:30:35 UTC

i think we should accept the converse of your point, though.

I wouldn't convey a racist message or a sexist message for the same reason i wouldn't wear a fur coat (due to the message it sends)...but primarily because that message is BLATANT. wool socks, a leather bracelet, and so forth aren't as blatant and/or recognizeable as permitting the usage of animals. They can be perceived as synthetic or whatever.instead of accepting that they could be synthetics, i think we should stop accepting the synthetics/mocks for the potential message they could could send of the acceptability of leather, fur, etc. even promoting the replicas of animal exploitation permits a mindset in which it is ok to view other species as commodities to be consumed. thus, i think true animal/human liberation, a true end to speciesism, means re-framing how we think and view the world--an end to viewing the products of exploitation and their direct imitations/replicas as ok for consumption. to me, this means not promoting fake leather, fake fur, fake meats, etc as ( ... )

Thread 19