The Conceited Self-Image

1806: 

Edited by CJ Tointon

Question: "Since the inception of 'veganism' seventy years ago and after forty years of media-flooded accounts and images of animal cruelty on farms and abattoirs, why have so few people been outraged enough to convert to a vegan lifestyle?" Could it be that most people are just not intelligent enough to see the great advantages of a plant-based diet?

I get the impression from some vegans that they think non-vegans are just 'beyond the pale'. They think they're either selfish, don't care about animals, or too stupid to make the connection between what they eat or wear and the cruelty involved in using animals. It's a neat, one-dimensional way of viewing others. These vegans think that 'going vegan' is a simple decision to make and everyone should do it simply because - they should! And you really can't argue with that logic. But I think this overview is simplistic, as are the slogans that often go with it, e.g. "ANIMALS ARE NOT PROPERTY", "MEAT IS MURDER", "A CARNIVORE'S STOMACH IS A GRAVEYARD FOR ANIMALS", "MEAT EATERS ARE A WALKING REPOSITORY OF DECAYING ANIMAL FLESH". These slogans are all true enough, but not helpful. Slogans create hostility and when repeated ad nauseam, they tend to become stale. Perhaps some of us don't realise what an interface problem we have with animal-eaters/users.

The question of WHY more people aren't sympathetic to Animal Rights is complicated. Omnivores are generally not bad people (or stupid) so why aren't they 'on the move'? Perhaps the stay-as-you-are decision is based on the strength of one's self-image. If you feel okay about yourself, you aren't likely to be doubting your beliefs or feeling defensive. If friends think you aren't stupid, then you never feel the need to question your own intelligence. Similarly, if you're kind to your children, pets and friends, you won't think of yourself as an uncaring person. And this means you won't be beating yourself up for eating what almost everyone else around you is eating. Is this conceit or simply unselfconscious confidence?

Other issues can draw off our energy, depleting our self-image by questioning our kindness and/or intelligence. A diversity of opinions exist concerning the big issues of the day. It doesn't matter if people disagree with your point of view. You can still do a good job of defending your personal views and basing arguments according to your values, which tend to solidify as one matures.

Most people I know will discuss just about anything that interests them. They'll take risks with their opinions and are able to accept defeat, not always willingly, but not necessarily feeling personally threatened by counter arguments. But, for omnivores, there's one subject where this all goes awry  - ANIMALS. On the subject of the animals we farm, use and eat, they effect a non-interest. They choose to not think too deeply about it and relegate it to a status of un-importance. Just as a person who hates football won't consider the finer points of the game to be important.

In the 'free speech' world, discussion is not compulsory. Avoidance of a subject is acceptable and if someone isn't keen to talk about something, it's impossible to start up a conversation. The exception is with those people who are keen to talk just to bring on combat. That's when 'animal issues' get an airing, usually with those who hold diametrically opposite views to vegans. Things soon get personal and descend into quarrelling. It's the classic trap many vegans fall into and it's what we vegans need to avoid. When it comes to discussing Animal Rights with 'opposers', there's always a no-holds-barred determination to win the argument. And so often, spoiling for a fight and winning it, stops any serious attempt to communicate at the heart of things - just what the meathead apologist intends.

There are usually important people in our lives who at one time or another, have shown some hostility towards us (vegans) during conversations about animals. For some of us, making any headway with non-vegans is blocked because in the early stages of the discussion, our relationship becomes 'shipwrecked'. It's almost impossible then to restore any mutual warmth or to progress with sensible discussion of the topic. It all comes back to a major values difference concerning a disagreement about how animals should be treated by humans.