This might sound weird, but why is vegetarianism invalid while "piracy" isn't? - eviltoast

I’ve had a certain debate a few times where you might say we argue over the “semantics” of the meat industry.

I am what you would call a vegetarian. While vegetarians won’t eat things that caused harm to produce, a vegan won’t eat anything having to do with an animal. A lot of those who would fall under the latter category hate us because they say anything that remotely resembles someone enjoying an animal product is supporting the meat industry which then kills animals, which means merely eating an animal product makes someone a murderer.

Meanwhile, there’s this concept many call piracy. It’s the idea that, as the meme proverbially puts it, “you can download a car”. The idea here, which I say in the way I do because there’s still an ongoing debate about it, is that it affects nobody. But then there’s the whole industry thing I mentioned. People on the other side of the debate often say “well what about the industry”. I’m not sure where on the scale in this topic you might put me, but I feel like there’s a glaring contradiction here. When it comes to animals, people think of the industry, but otherwise that’s not a factor.

My question is… why?

  • Vince@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    29
    ·
    1 year ago

    While vegetarians won’t eat things that caused harm to produce

    This is nonsense, since there is a lot of animal harm involved in the production of eggs and milk.

    And I don’t see the contradiction you are seeing. Your piracy argument is pro music/movie industry and the vegan argument is against the meat industry. Doesn’t make much sense to equate those arguments.

    • Call me Lenny/Leni@lemm.eeOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      It’s a Lemmy-centric question, maybe that’s why this was brought up. It’s not about supporting/opposing anything, it’s simply a question about why an action is traced back to its relevant industry sometimes but not in all cases (in which case it’s seen as mutually independent).

      • sailingbythelee@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        1 year ago

        One reason why things are sometimes traced back to industry is social marketing. For example, in the fight to ban smoking in indoor public spaces, focus groups indicated that young adults were not put off by threats of death and disease, but were responsive to information about how the tobacco industry engaged in mass manipulation.

        A lot of people are sensitive to animal cruelty, so videos of cruel treatment by the meat industry are useful to groups wishing to promote vegetarianism.

        The entertainment industry has tried similar tactics, but it’s a hard sell. When Tom Cruise makes $50 million per film and Taylor Swift personally makes $10 milliion per night while on tour, it’s just hard to sell the idea that there is a lack of money in the entertainment industry.