The big issues

Vegans want to strike a blow for compassion, and we are willing to deny ourselves things for that. We know where we stand on the big issue of animal slavery even though it’s opposite to how the majority believe, and we realise why people (who would like to agree) don’t agree because it logically leads to going vegan, and that for many people is a scary idea. Vegans have faced their fears on that score, to enable themselves to advocate for animals. Vegans who are abolitionist oppose the use of animals under any circumstances.
Everyone agrees slavery is a terrible thing but because of the scariness of becoming vegan most people can’t let their horror of slavery apply to animals, not the ones they eat anyway. They have to rationalise it that: they’ve been brought up with animal foods and noble theories about animal slavery must give way to conventional eating habits. Convenience must outweigh ethics.
This is where vegans and non-vegans part company. And often it’s the reason we don’t feel at one with the omnivore who, apart from food items, also buys clothing and other commodities that are animal based or tested. It’s why vegans feel separate from those who aren’t vegan, and once that separation is apparent it puts us one rung up (or down) the ladder, and that gives us a bad look. But it often doesn’t rest there. It’s because we itch to discuss this subject, when others would prefer we didn’t, that vegans seem to be spoiling for a fight or wanting to cause embarrassment. If an argument starts up it can easily and quickly become intimidating. How can any non-vegan know, if the subject arises, that things won’t turn nasty? From a vegan’s point of view, if the subject comes up, we feel justified in ‘speaking up’, our reasoning being - why let anyone get away with opinions that we passionately disagree with, why not make it clear where one stands?
It’s a trap for all concerned. For example you visit someone’s house. Food is offered out of hospitality. It is refused. The reason is given, a response is made. The non-vegan thinks they can brush matters under the carpet, change the subject or say something that will appease. The vegan decides to bludgeon their way through by suggesting a whole attitude change to animal food. And if we (as a vegan) seem a bit rude, we hope our rudeness will be outweighed by an admiration for having the courage of our convictions, etc. Each party underestimates the strength of opinion of the other and each underestimates the willingness of the other to accommodate differing views. The non-vegan thinks that because they do what almost everyone else does, they are protected from being condemned. They have no idea how badly they are thought of for lacking enough moral fibre to make a stand. The vegan likewise has no idea how their pushy approach offends. The problem is that vegans think hard about something that matters to them whilst non-vegans think almost nothing at all about the very same matters. Obviously the world is a very wicked place today but there are so many issues crowding out our conscience that we have to ask which issues are more important than others? Which are the major decisions we should be making to rescue any of the terrible situations facing humanity and the planet? Which decisions should we be making when we behave in questionable ways. If we travel by air it’s our carbon footprint; if we ignore the plight of suffering people it’s our selfishness. We are faced with our own behaviour all the time, and at the first whiff of criticism, it’s likely we resent it and dig our heels in. It’s twice as likely we’ll refuse to change. We’ll simply try to avoid the critic. And when someone is avoiding a vegan for fear of confrontation then it soon becomes obvious. From a vegan’s point of view, when they are avoided they want to hit back by attacking the “meatheads”. Is this why we don't seem to get anywhere today?