I don’t want to go there

541:

If we vegans think badly of omnivores we fuel a fire which is already burning hot. We don’t need more heat. We can stir them up, sure. We can get their juices flowing. But what is the risk when we do get into a good argument?

            On this particular, unlevel playing field our arguments can be devastating. We know that and so do they. If we’re to have any sort of exchange on this subject it’s good not to get too cocky with our answers. They’ll want to pull down the shutters, fast - they’ll fix that familiar look on their faces that says, “I just don’t want to go there”.

            Vegans set out to solve problems, ‘your problems’ ... but if there’s no perceived problem in the first place (“I’ve got no problem with the food I eat”), if there’s no questioning going on, there’s going to be no opening for any of our arguments. Therefore there will be no requests for solutions. By bringing up the matter of ‘problems’ and ‘solutions’ (connected with animal-usage) we are seen to be deliberately attempting to preach, as if we want to turn a chat into a church, as if  barging our way into conversations, because we see no other way of ‘bringing the matter up’.

            Animal Rights, as a subject, is one of the biggest, if not THE biggest taboo in our society - most people observe the rule that ‘animal-usage’ isn’t to be spoken about; they see nothing wrong with using them because they believe they are treated and killed humanely.

            Like street traders, vegans have a good stock of very fine answers on display. We stand around, waiting for some interest in what we’re selling. But the passing omnivore shows no interest in either the problem or the solution.

            If we try to draw people into unwilling dialogue, we’ll find the welcome-mat whisked from under our feet. For most omnivores this isn’t even a valid topic of discussion. They don’t acknowledge the presence of any danger. They see no ‘writing on the wall’ … whereas, of course, we do!