• protist@mander.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    5 days ago

    Carnism would still technically cover “vegan plus (animal-based) bacon”

    And this all-or-nothing approach is precisely what I’m referring to. I consider myself pretty well-read, and the only time I’ve ever seen the word “carnist” used in the wild is when someone who’s vegan is hurling it as an insult

    • r1veRRR@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      3 days ago

      It’s not all or nothing, it’s definitional! Why even have words describing concepts if everyone makes up their own version just to get mad at it.

      Veganism is based on anti-speciesism, the philosophical belief that discrimination based solely (SOLELY) on species is immoral. It makes perfect sense, then, to find a word that describes the opposite stance. Carnism is that word.

      This is, quite frankly, just as ridiculous as TERFs getting pissed at being called “cis”. Or “TERF”, for that matter. It’s entirely reasonable that someone might not like people holding opposing philosophical views (TERFs, carnists), but that does NOT make those words insults in and of themselves.

      All this is ENTIRELY divorced from whether reducing meat consumption is good (it is!).

    • Makeshift@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      4 days ago

      Sorry to break it to you, but if you believe that the Christian god exists yet don’t think there was ever a guy named Jesus that rose from the dead after 3 days, you’re still a theist even if you call it atheist.

      And if you think it’s acceptable to kill pigs because you like their cooked bodies, you’re still practicing carnism even if you call it veganism.