Vegetarianism has strong supporters

[Bernhard]

Yes and no. I knew it would trigger some people (hence my disclaimer), but I didn't think that many. I was surprised to hear from people I never hear from ever and how everything I said was ignored and mis-interpreted. The diet topic created more controversy than anything else I ever post. So I was surprised about that, considering what else is going on in the world.

I think it might say something about your "Friends" list too? I posted the exact same graphic Saturday, and it got 56 shares, 8 likes and one positive comment.

Then again, maybe I've just already offended the vegetarians so often I don't have any on my list?

Well, it did get a lot of likes (around 30) and shares (around 40) as well as some positive comments. It was just a couple of people who kept commenting with their opinions rather than first reading what has been posted. It was just going in circles adding up to 75 comments with just "noise". I hardly add friends on FB. Most of them have added me over time because of my blogs and videos I made with de-tached. Seems there are a lot of vegetarians on my "friends" list but there is no way to "screen" them, but many of them reveal their "true nature" when "scratched" a bit and "discussions" like that are essentially good to separate the "wheat from the chaff". I already deleted the ones who simply cannot "listen" before "talking."

I also posted this on my status update today:

General disclaimer:
As I've stated numerous times, everyone who wants to engage in discussions on my wall needs to read/watch first what has been posted before forming "opinions". I have zero tolerance for people commenting on posts without having read/watched what has been posted first. If anyone has a problem with that please refrain from commenting or feel free to remove yourself from my friends list.
And if this clear disclaimer still bounces off deaf ears and blind eyes and people keep commenting without "listening", I will delete them. It's nothing personal, but I really have no time and energy to repeat myself and engage in those "non-discussions".

 

[anart]

So I was surprised about that, considering what else is going on in the world.

Ah, but humans are extremely emotionally involved with food - it's a very personal thing (meaning they are very identified with what and how they choose to eat) - doesn't even compare to what's going on on the rest of the world, especially to those who are asleep to everything other than their own wants/needs/illusions. In fact, next to sex, I think food is the supreme "pleasure for the self" - and most people use food for comfort/pleasure/indulgence - thus when you poke a stick in that nest, they'll come out stinging even when they don't stir an inch over pictures of dead babies in Gaza.

 

[Laura]

Yes and no. I knew it would trigger some people (hence my disclaimer), but I didn't think that many. I was surprised to hear from people I never hear from ever and how everything I said was ignored and mis-interpreted. The diet topic created more controversy than anything else I ever post. So I was surprised about that, considering what else is going on in the world.

I think it might say something about your "Friends" list too? I posted the exact same graphic Saturday, and it got 56 shares, 8 likes and one positive comment.

Then again, maybe I've just already offended the vegetarians so often I don't have any on my list?

EXACTLY! I'd start deleting those people!

 

[Bernhard]

Yes and no. I knew it would trigger some people (hence my disclaimer), but I didn't think that many. I was surprised to hear from people I never hear from ever and how everything I said was ignored and mis-interpreted. The diet topic created more controversy than anything else I ever post. So I was surprised about that, considering what else is going on in the world.

I think it might say something about your "Friends" list too? I posted the exact same graphic Saturday, and it got 56 shares, 8 likes and one positive comment.

Then again, maybe I've just already offended the vegetarians so often I don't have any on my list?

EXACTLY! I'd start deleting those people!

As I said, it's already happening, not only deleting, but blocking. On the other hand there are a few vegetarians I've engaged with in the past who were open to new ideas, made the effort to read and educate themselves and have since then changed their diet, re-introducing meat and fats with great results. Some also didn't engage on those posts but checked out the information posted first. Then some time later they wrote me, thanking me for the information and how it has helped and transformed their health. So you never know, I suppose, but my tolerance for those "discussions" is at zero and I'm already using the delete/block button way more often before wasting my time and energy stating the obvious.

 

[Guardian]

EXACTLY! I'd start deleting those people!

See Laura, you're so nice. I'd just keep posting pictures of slabs of thick, juicy, bacon and steaks, etc. until they left in disgust. ;D

 

[Kaigen]

:D :D

EXACTLY! I'd start deleting those people!

See Laura, you're so nice. I'd just keep posting pictures of slabs of thick, juicy, bacon and steaks, etc. until they left in disgust. ;D

;D that's a good tactic. ;D

 

[Sol Logos]

I don't believe all vegetarians are like that. I'm pretty much a vegetarian, basically because I'm not into the way animals are treated / killed commercially, so I mostly don't buy these things. I've generally been healthy over the 15 or so years I've done this. Of course if my health declined and eating meat would help, I'd eat meat, so its not an ideological stance for me at least. I've also never felt compelled to change anyone elses way of eating, or wanted to get preachy about this, but rather Ive been this way for myself. Id only talk about it if someone asked. I personally too always value and prioritise human life over animals, in all cases. I'd say if a person doesn't, they'd have to be really detuned emotionally, so of course the cause of why people value animals over humans isnt a dietary choice one. I figured I'd just say this because I don't feel everyone fits the mould kind of indicated above.

Those two statements seem a bit contradictory to me. Also, I'm curious - what is 'pretty much a vegetarian'?

I've eaten meat, rarely but I have over the years. For example once a lamb dish was bought for me during a work lunch, if I didn't eat it, it would have been thrown out. I didn't have an issue with eating it. So, what I mean't by it not being an ideological stance for me kind of relates to that example, so if I became convinced I have to eat meat to be healthy, I would. At the moment I'm not entirely convinced, so, I'll spend some more time looking into those links and reading suggestions (thanks for those and the other feedback). I reckon on the commercial side of raising and killing animals, it can be definitely improved for the better and yeah I agree with the idiocy of grain feed animals which I understand the Vegetarian Myth talks a bit about. There's a style of grass feed animal farming called Holistic Management (Allan Savory pioneered this), that's actually designed to help lift degraded land / soil - that sort of thing makes a lot more sense to me. I realise too, that the paleo diet is about preferencing grass-feed cattle and sheep, so I can see the idea of using animals to improve the environment can be very positive all around. I suppose it would be difficult for myself to kill an animal in a way that causes them a lot unnecessary suffering, and that's often how animals are managed commercially, which is not ideal. I know a number of people here have seen Earthlings, which from hearing about it goes into some of this (haven't yet seen myself). There's for certain a lot of better methods for farming / killing animals for our food source that doesn't include unneeded suffering and doesn't have to destroy the environment, I'm certainly for moving in that sort of direction. I guess I don't feel that all vegetarians fit the mould suggested, plenty I'm sure do and plenty I'm sure don't.

I read this last night which seems pretty apt. I was said by the founder of Sikh religion:

The fools argue about flesh and meat, but they know nothing about meditation and spiritual wisdom.
What is called meat, and what is called green vegetables? What leads to sin?
It was the habit of the gods to kill the rhinoceros, and make a feast of the burnt offering.
Those who renounce meat, and hold their noses when sitting near it, devour men at night.
They practice hypocrisy, and make a show before other people, but they do not understand anything about meditation or spiritual wisdom.
O Nanak, what can be said to the blind people? They cannot answer, or even understand what is said.
They alone are blind, who act blindly. They have no eyes in their hearts.
They are produced from the blood of their mothers and fathers, but they do not eat fish or meat.

Guru Nanak

Note: Changed quote attribution as requested

 

[Sol Logos]

My mistake, the quote above was apparently said (not written) by Guru Nanak, who was the founder of the Sikh religion (not Guru Granth Sahib). Can't seem to see the modify button, but thought best to correct this error.

 

[whitecoast]

Vegetarianism has strong supporters

That's an understatement. A couple of days ago I posted a "funny" pic on FB. It said:

"Every day thousands of innocent plants are killed by vegetarians.
Help end the violence.
Eat bacon."

Knowing that it would trigger some vegetarians, I wrote a "disclaimer", stating, "please don't comment in defense of a vegetarian diet if you haven't read "Primal Body. Primal Mind" and "The Vegetarian Myth" first.

Well, to make the story short, 75 comments later with Veggies just arguing about how great their diet is and how sustainable it is for the planet, I deleted the whole thread because there was no "discussion" and all my attempts to simply state "please READ before posting" were ignored, especially since everything what they talked about is addressed in those books with all the fallacies and lies they believe in. It's the classical "speaking" without "listening". They kept posting just to "hear themselves talk" engaging in almost every logical fallacy possible. No matter what I repeatedly said, it was ignored or distorted with countless assumptions and hasty conclusions. It became waste of time and energy.

But what was even more interesting, how so many of them are passive aggressive, talking about the "ethical" side to the point that one person even said "feeding off other life forms is an error of 3D and that we actually need no food" (paraphrased). It shows how far removed they are from nature actually, the opposite of what they claim to be.

On top of it people commented who I never hear from and who never comment on anything else I post and speak out about the atrocities in the world and what is happening in Gaza right now, for example.

If vegetarians would get as upset and passionate about what's going on in the world as they are when their diet is questioned and the "suffering" of animals, we'd already live in a "better" world.

In the end it just shows how a vegetarian diet affects the brain and thinking in a detrimental way.

Personally I think the whole event showed a lack of strategic enclosure and external consideration. I get that you thought it was funny and wanted to share it with other like-minded people; no harm there. But why agitate vegetarians unnecessarily by sharing a sardonic joke that really just triggers emotional defense? If you read the vegetarian myth, you should know how emotionally invested and identified with their moral stance they are. That kind of thing needs to be confronted with cold, hard facts. Not something sarcastic. That you plugged PBPM and veg myth below indicates you were open to a discussion on it. But you appended them to what a vegetarian would construe as a personal attack on their values, which would just make them close up and not listen to anything you say.

The cross-purposes for the post kind of ruined much of the latter interaction, IMO. Since you said you have a bunch of random people you don't really know on fb, have you considered using friend lists for selective sharing to improve enclosure? If someone's a bonehead, I'd usually just unsubscribe from their inane newsfeed, since there's still a small chance they'd be interested in cometary or Palestinian info I share. At least, that's what I would do.

 

[loreta]

:D :D

EXACTLY! I'd start deleting those people!

See Laura, you're so nice. I'd just keep posting pictures of slabs of thick, juicy, bacon and steaks, etc. until they left in disgust. ;D

;D that's a good tactic. ;D

I did that some months ago with some fanatics about vegetarianism and animals defenders. They were so drastic plus they believed in the global warming. ;) So bye, bye. Now I will do the same and I will become me more drastic: concerning the Gaza tragedy I started to see racism and muslimophobia. So: vegetarians sectarians, racists and morons will very soon disappear from my list of friends.

 

[Andromeda]

Personally I think the whole event showed a lack of strategic enclosure and external consideration. I get that you thought it was funny and wanted to share it with other like-minded people; no harm there. But why agitate vegetarians unnecessarily by sharing a sardonic joke that really just triggers emotional defense? If you read the vegetarian myth, you should know how emotionally invested and identified with their moral stance they are. That kind of thing needs to be confronted with cold, hard facts. Not something sarcastic. That you plugged PBPM and veg myth below indicates you were open to a discussion on it. But you appended them to what a vegetarian would construe as a personal attack on their values, which would just make them close up and not listen to anything you say.

The cross-purposes for the post kind of ruined much of the latter interaction, IMO. Since you said you have a bunch of random people you don't really know on fb, have you considered using friend lists for selective sharing to improve enclosure? If someone's a bonehead, I'd usually just unsubscribe from their inane newsfeed, since there's still a small chance they'd be interested in cometary or Palestinian info I share. At least, that's what I would do.

I don't really see it that way. The type of vegetarians who responded fanatically and were unwilling to discuss the issue were pretty obviously so far up their own backsides that there was nothing to be done but weed them out and save discussion energy for others who might actually listen to anything. If we followed the logic above, we wouldn't post very much at all because someone out there is likely to have their feathers ruffled by one thing or another. People are emotionally invested in all sorts of things and I feel that it's better to agitate them than to walk on eggshells.

 

[Bernhard]

Personally I think the whole event showed a lack of strategic enclosure and external consideration. I get that you thought it was funny and wanted to share it with other like-minded people; no harm there. But why agitate vegetarians unnecessarily by sharing a sardonic joke that really just triggers emotional defense? If you read the vegetarian myth, you should know how emotionally invested and identified with their moral stance they are. That kind of thing needs to be confronted with cold, hard facts. Not something sarcastic. That you plugged PBPM and veg myth below indicates you were open to a discussion on it. But you appended them to what a vegetarian would construe as a personal attack on their values, which would just make them close up and not listen to anything you say.

The cross-purposes for the post kind of ruined much of the latter interaction, IMO. Since you said you have a bunch of random people you don't really know on fb, have you considered using friend lists for selective sharing to improve enclosure? If someone's a bonehead, I'd usually just unsubscribe from their inane newsfeed, since there's still a small chance they'd be interested in cometary or Palestinian info I share. At least, that's what I would do.

I don't really see it that way. The type of vegetarians who responded fanatically and were unwilling to discuss the issue were pretty obviously so far up their own backsides that there was nothing to be done but weed them out and save discussion energy for others who might actually listen to anything. If we followed the logic above, we wouldn't post very much at all because someone out there is likely to have their feathers ruffled by one thing or another. People are emotionally invested in all sorts of things and I feel that it's better to agitate them than to walk on eggshells.

I agree. The "sarcastic" pic was posted by many forum members on here and I actually shared it from a forum member. There are many more of these "funny" pics shared by us on FB. As Andromeda said, if I'd go by your logic I wouldn't really post anything at all because someone always seems to get triggered about all kinds of topics.

I actually like Guardian's "strategy". ;) It's what I've been doing as well.

For example around election time, I got some messages from people asking me to "stop the Obama bashing because Romney must not win". Well, I did exact the opposite and posted more of Obama's lies and fallacies, mostly SOTT articles and pics with his hypocritical and contradictory statements. On top of that I even wrote an article where I quoted those individuals (not by name) based on FB interactions to illustrate the denial and wishful thinking of Obama supporters: http://www.sott.net/article/252684-Voting-Cognitive-Dissonance-and-Fear-of-the-Unknown

Then, last week, a couple of people commented on some graphic pics of the Palestinian victims of the recent attacks by Israel, stating that it was too graphic and "negative" and it would push people away. Well, I posted even more pics of that kind explaining that is has nothing to do with "negativity" but is simply reality as it is. Perceval also made a good comment about that issue and there was a good discussion about it on one of the FB threads.

Same with the vegetarian topic. The day after all the attacks of vegetarians on that "funny" pic I posted lots of links with articles/videos about that topic based on science and facts.

All of that weeded out more people and they just delete themselves while the sincere ones actually took in the information.

FB for me is about spreading awareness and information and there are people who take in the information even if it challenges their current beliefs at first. There are many people who believed in lies and were triggered at first, but the sincere ones actually started to read SOTT more often, bought Laura's books and some even joined the forum. I'd have no idea who to put on a "selected friends" list because most people have "sacred cows" and get triggered about certain topics eventually, even if they seem to be "on the same page" first. And what's the point of sharing information with people who are already aware of that information?

Here's something I wrote from another thread relating to this topic: http://cassiopaea.org/forum/index.php/topic,29702.0.html

Fwiw, I'm very outspoken on FB. However I only post information on my own wall and don't push info on other people's wall (I used to do that and attracted much unnecessary attack because I wasn't externally considerate). Occasionally someone has an issue with what I post on my wall and tries to engage in "discussion". In the past I have wasted much energy and time trying to make that other person "see" when it happens. Now I just keep it short, address the logical fallacies and simply post more facts and info to give the lie what it deserves: the truth. For the most part the individual doesn't even read it and is not sincere but just wants to hear himself/herself talk. I also really don't care if someone deletes me when I "scratch" them a bit with what I write. Sometimes those discussions are good to separate the wheat from the chaff (not that wheat is any good, but you get the point) and I have to delete/block some "friends". I usually then post this "disclaimer" and move on:

When getting into "discussions", I’ve found that some people engage in at least one of the following:

- don’t read the all links/information and resources provided or just skim over it.
- do “selective reading”and have “selected hearing”.
- do not address what has been ACTUALLY said. In other words, many people “talk” without “listening” first.
- make quick assumptions and hasty conclusions
- twist words around and read into words something else than what they actually mean.
- engage in ad hominem attacks, straw man/red herring arguments
- are not aware of their own conditioning (for example national identification), tunnel vision and how it results in lack of critical thinking, lack of objectivity and logical fallacies.

There is also the "silent" and "hidden" reader, so you never know who reads your posts. You can reach people you are not even aware that you are reaching them because they never comment or press like but are still open and curious. The discussions can also be beneficial for the ones on the "side line" and I also learn from them in terms of how to communicate better, being externally considerate and so on. I get messages occasionally from people thanking me about all the info I post but who I don't see online much or ever share/like what I post. Sometimes even friends I have locally (who I never thought would even consider what I post) tell me in person how much they learn from my posts and wish they "had the balls" to be so outspoken. I tell them that it's not about "having balls" but just acting on your conscience and I simply ask them for example: "how would you feel and what would you do if it was your child that is being killed/injured in Gaza?"

I feel much anger as of late, especially with what is going on in Gaza, but it's righteous anger and I try to channel it creatively as Gurdjieff wrote about it too. Actually much of my writings and videos were triggered by other people's complacency and posting disinformation and keeping an objective eye on the world. Reading SOTT daily helps with that. So it's "fuel" to speak up more but still learning in terms of "external consideration" and "strategic enclosure". It's a fine line at times to truly be "externally considerate" but still speaking out even if it's not what the other person "likes" to hear.

As I said above, many of my blogs and the videos I made with de-tached were "inspired" by such FB discussions, pointing out the fallacies and disinformation in more depth. So, in the end, these interactions are also good lessons to help me become more informed about what I'm trying to say. My article http://www.sott.net/article/248735-2012-Collective-Awakening-or-End-of-the-World was also inspired by a FB discussion where some people got triggered, especially "psychedelic guru" Daniel Pinchbeck. I was thinking, how can I write a piece to summarize all the myths about 2012 and the topics that are being ignored or ridiculed as I've seen it on FB so many times?

Even Zoya's recent excellent article http://www.sott.net/article/253772-An-Israeli-speaks-out-against-the-crimes-of-her-government was based on a FB interaction, where she posted what is now the intro of the article as a FB status update. Some very ignorant person called her out on that and justified Israel's right to defend itself. Other forum members and myself chimed in and challenged him on his comment, also providing facts. Zoya then took the opportunity to write this article and integrated some of the information we shared as well. Would Zoya have written the article if that person wouldn't have challenged her on that? I don't know, maybe yes or no. However, I think the comment by him has inspired her on some level to write that piece, because there are many Israelis who think like him. In other words, these "discussions" and people's triggers are also a good insight into how other people think and view the world, hence we can address these issues in more depth and give the lies what they deserve: the truth. At least, these are my 2 cents...

 

[Laura]

Personally I think the whole event showed a lack of strategic enclosure and external consideration. I get that you thought it was funny and wanted to share it with other like-minded people; no harm there. But why agitate vegetarians unnecessarily by sharing a sardonic joke that really just triggers emotional defense?

Well, some people need different strategic enclosures. If it is your family, someone who has power over you or someone who you know you might be able to help, that's one thing. But I quite simply don't want to waste my time with people whose cup is full. I regularly post contentious things on my FB page just to weed out the whackoes.

 

[Joe]

If you read the vegetarian myth, you should know how emotionally invested and identified with their moral stance they are. That kind of thing needs to be confronted with cold, hard facts. Not something sarcastic. That you plugged PBPM and veg myth below indicates you were open to a discussion on it. But you appended them to what a vegetarian would construe as a personal attack on their values, which would just make them close up and not listen to anything you say.

There's a bit of a logical fallacy in what you say here. If vegetarians are so emotionally invested in their diet, "cold hard facts" are unlikely to produce a better result than "something sarcastic". In this case, the exercise was useful for Spiral out to understand, up close and personal, just how emotionally invested some veggie heads are. He also got an id on those who are his "friends" on FB.

 

[Don Genaro]

Vegetarianism has strong supporters

That's an understatement. A couple of days ago I posted a "funny" pic on FB. It said:

"Every day thousands of innocent plants are killed by vegetarians.
Help end the violence.
Eat bacon."

Knowing that it would trigger some vegetarians, I wrote a "disclaimer", stating, "please don't comment in defense of a vegetarian diet if you haven't read "Primal Body. Primal Mind" and "The Vegetarian Myth" first.

Well, to make the story short, 75 comments later with Veggies just arguing about how great their diet is and how sustainable it is for the planet, I deleted the whole thread because there was no "discussion" and all my attempts to simply state "please READ before posting" were ignored, especially since everything what they talked about is addressed in those books with all the fallacies and lies they believe in. It's the classical "speaking" without "listening". They kept posting just to "hear themselves talk" engaging in almost every logical fallacy possible. No matter what I repeatedly said, it was ignored or distorted with countless assumptions and hasty conclusions. It became waste of time and energy.

But what was even more interesting, how so many of them are passive aggressive, talking about the "ethical" side to the point that one person even said "feeding off other life forms is an error of 3D and that we actually need no food" (paraphrased). It shows how far removed they are from nature actually, the opposite of what they claim to be.

On top of it people commented who I never hear from and who never comment on anything else I post and speak out about the atrocities in the world and what is happening in Gaza right now, for example.

If vegetarians would get as upset and passionate about what's going on in the world as they are when their diet is questioned and the "suffering" of animals, we'd already live in a "better" world.

In the end it just shows how a vegetarian diet affects the brain and thinking in a detrimental way.

I wondered where that thread had gone the next day as I got an email notification of a reply by someone who I thought was a member here but now I'm not sure. He was talking about how he was in great shape and (I think) he rarely eats meat. He basically opened by saying that he found many of your posts enlightening but that he didn't think he could ever "buy" this one. He mentioned loads of professional fighters who ate a vegetarian diet as if that were proof. I replied that maybe it wasn't that simple- that genetics and epigenetics play a part; that maybe these people had gotten lucky genetically. I suggested he think about the bigger picture - modern disease epidemics since the world went "low fat" and that he might check out The Omnivore's Dilemma by Michael Pollan as well as Gary Taubes and a few others. I also mentioned the Confirmation Bias and Cognitive Dissonance in relation to how these "super fighters" proved to him the benefits of veggies. It seems he was offended because I "insinuated" that he was "Cognitively Dissonanted." Here's his somewhat passive-agressive reply:

Andrew wrote: "Don Genaro, thank you for the links and many books. I can evidence not just fighters but numerous athletes - as per the reference - including myself. Perhaps you should recognize the justifications you are trying to establish to maintain these limiting belief systems? As it stands I will read a couple of the books as time permits, but as I am in exceptional shape, energy and mind set - perhaps the best balance of my life at 40 - I see no reason to change anything. If people feel the necessity to eat meat then they can. I am very much a believer in free will and ultimately will never preach my opinions, but will defend vigorously on this issue. The myth of eating goes so far beyond meat that I hesitate to open that can of worms, but as it seems to be getting momentum here, I feel compelled. Food itself has now been evidenced to be entirely unnecessary in many cases of not only yogis and gurus but quite common people as well. This new paradigm of consciousness is giving way to unlimited potential of the power of consciousness, as has been evidenced in empirical studies around the world (and consistently remarked on by all ancient teachings) and evidenced by innumerable accounts through out history. State your limitations and they will be yours. Again, I am not preaching only detailing my personal experience and research into the issue. I can provide numerous links and books too if requested.

The interesting thing about cognitive dissonance is that is can play for both teams and is an amorphous term when applied to perceptions and ego.
/Users/nameremoved/Pictures/iPhoto Library/Previews/2012/04/26/20120426-082509/IMG_0041.jpg"

Yeah, that's right; accuse me of what I'm suggesting that you might be doing I'm glad you deleted the post SpiralOut. I think replying would have been a complete waste of time!

I can provide numerous links and books too if requested.

So his books wanna fight my books? ... I'm your huckleberry, and that's just my game :D