Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

On ‘Plant-Based’

aliciakennedy.news

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 210 posts

Re: On ‘Plant-Based’

#201

Post by rsj_hn »

philwelch wrote: post #200
vel0city wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you aware of how oil production proceeds fund global terrorism and warlords? Guess you can't buy any gasoline, since some % of oil is sold on the market from warlords committing atrocities in their countries. Did you know when you buy gasoline at the pump you're supporting a market which buys missiles for Saudi Arabia to bomb Yemen?

My point exactly. It’s almost impossible to maintain these kinds of standards with our modern global supply chains.

Slavoj Zizek discusses this idea of "ethical consumerism" in a beautifully illustrated talk here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hpAMbpQ8J7g

Needless to say, the idea that you are "supporting" something by voluntary exchange (how do you know that they aren't supporting you?) is a relatively recent development, and is of course completely unworkable. It's just another form of retail therapy.

Re: On ‘Plant-Based’

#202

Post by riffraff »

ebiester wrote: post #156
riffraff wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But why doesn't the menu say "cauliflower wings" with some "V" icon or leaf icon next to it? I will never understand why parts of the vegan movement need to disguise foods as something else. Vegetables are good!

There are a few reasons. First, it suggests a preparation that is reminiscent of a food that people enjoyed before they stopped eating animal products. This means that the spices and texture will be similar. That's an indication for both vegetarians and non-vegetarians to expect a texture, condiment, and spice experience. Second, it's not about disguising foods as other things; it's about combining foods. Falafel isn…

But we call them falafel, not plant-based meatballs?

Unless falafel does mean that, in which case, I will happily shut up.

Thanks for the answer anyways!

Re: On ‘Plant-Based’

#203

Post by riffraff »

edent wrote: post #18
riffraff wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But why doesn't the menu say "cauliflower wings" with some "V" icon or leaf icon next to it? I will never understand why parts of the vegan movement need to disguise foods as something else. Vegetables are good!

Why do meat eaters disguise things as burgers, sausages, and nuggets?

To be clear, I am only talking of naming things, not preparation. I have no qualms with things that are supposed to emulate a different texture, I just don't understand why my vegan delivery place gives me 'vegetable cutlets' instead of saying "fried celeriac"

Re: On ‘Plant-Based’

#204

Post by dmitriid »

ben_w wrote: post #181
dmitriid wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Yes, and hamburgers have nothing to do with ham, they're named after the city of Hamburg. Frankfurters also not made of Franks. And your point is? > OTOH, what exactly do people think they're eating when they have wieners? That they eat a sausage made of meat that is named "weiner".

> And your point is? That "meaty" names are just as much nonsense regardless of whether or not meat is still involved. Just remembered an even more extreme example, albeit one that may only exist in the UK: christmas sweet pastry called "mince pie" filled with "mincemeat" which is often entirely vegetarian because it's an extremely archaic use of "meat" in the sense of "food". > That they eat a sausage made of meat t…

To quote myself: "Because it turns out people crave meat, and the market is happy to disguise vegeterian/vegan food as meat. Including trying to replicate both taste and texture. Funnily, meat is never (or very very very rarely) disguised as vegetables."

Re: On ‘Plant-Based’

#205

Post by dmitriid »

chc wrote: post #178
dmitriid wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Those are not the natural forms of any animal's meat any more than they are the natural forms of vegetables. Ah yes. The non-natural form of "vegetables that taste like pork hamburger". Funnily how you never see meat producst disguised or sold as replicas of non-meat products.

Animal products are constantly stuck into foods that are not clearly animal-derived. Every vegan is familiar with the experience of having to read the ingredients list on foods to look for random animal products or ask waiters if (for example) their Brussels sprouts are vegan. Many people don't realize that Jello is an animal products. Some "vanilla" flavoring is made from animals. Confectioner's glaze, many food col…

> If "giving foods a different flavor or texture" were a totally new idea that vegetarians came up with, so what?

It definitely isn't. Their new idea is get on a high horse about plant-based foods, but then going out of their ways to pretend it's meat.

Re: On ‘Plant-Based’

#206

Post by ben_w »

dmitriid wrote: post #204
ben_w wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> And your point is? That "meaty" names are just as much nonsense regardless of whether or not meat is still involved. Just remembered an even more extreme example, albeit one that may only exist in the UK: christmas sweet pastry called "mince pie" filled with "mincemeat" which is often entirely vegetarian because it's an extremely archaic use of "meat" in the sense of "food". > That they eat a sausage made of meat t…

To quote myself: "Because it turns out people crave meat, and the market is happy to disguise vegeterian/vegan food as meat. Including trying to replicate both taste and texture. Funnily, meat is never (or very very very rarely) disguised as vegetables."

I know you said that. I'm saying you're wrong, because it's vegetables being "disguised" as generic shapes that don't look anything like natural meat. The historical association you have between shape and substance is as irrelevant as the connection between hamburgers-the-food and the city named after the castle belonging to Hamma.

Re: On ‘Plant-Based’

#207

Post by OJFord »

edent wrote: post #33
OJFord wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not the same at all, 'beef burger' tells me what it is; 'vegan burger' (worse: 'vegan chicken nugget'!) only tells me what it isn't.

Ah, yes. The hamburger with no ham. The hotdog bereft of canine meat. Catsup with no kitty (OK, that one is a stretch!)

In the UK we usually say beef burger, chicken burger; maybe McDonalds has 'hamburger' on the menu, I don't know. In France it's steak haché, unless more in the American style when it's l'hamburger (pronounced l'omburger), borrowing that term.

Although 'hotdog' is familiar, in my experience, at a UK barbecue you'll likely be offered 'sausages and burgers' not 'hotdogs and hamburgers'. Not to say you can't or wouldn't put a sausage in one of those finger rolls, or a stick of baguette, just that probably nobody would say 'hotdog' during the process.

'Catsup', I had to look up, was a widely used term in America for a while, now usurped by (the familiar) 'ketchup'.

In brief, your examples are not contradicting, since they don't really fall in my sphere of experience or usage.

Perhaps though, there's an idea here that you in the US are more comfortable or accustomed to it; so it's natural on packaged products' marketing material, which is then used selling these things worldwide. Maybe.

Re: On ‘Plant-Based’

#208

Post by ebiester »

riffraff wrote: post #202
ebiester wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are a few reasons. First, it suggests a preparation that is reminiscent of a food that people enjoyed before they stopped eating animal products. This means that the spices and texture will be similar. That's an indication for both vegetarians and non-vegetarians to expect a texture, condiment, and spice experience. Second, it's not about disguising foods as other things; it's about combining foods. Falafel isn…

But we call them falafel, not plant-based meatballs? Unless falafel does mean that, in which case, I will happily shut up. Thanks for the answer anyways!

Are you going to rename "mincemeat" while you're at it? or the meat of the nut?

Re: On ‘Plant-Based’

#209

Post by mytailorisrich »

uxcolumbo wrote: post #182
mytailorisrich wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> and eat their eggs and you don't intend to slaughter the chickens later on- I'd class that as vegan, because you're not harming the chickens. You cannot make your own definition of 'veganism' as you go, that makes any discussion impossible even without your strawman argument. What you describe here is not veganism (no animal products at all, including things like honey), it's a common flavour of vegetarianism (no k…

Again - veganism is pragmatic - not dogmatic. There are vegans who have rescue chickens (from factory farms) and they do eat their eggs. The rescue chickens are given a happy life where they can roam freely in a garden. It's a different matter when it comes to milk - which is intended for the baby cow. Same with honey - it's actually being eaten by bees and you can't replace it with sugar water, as it has fewer nutri…

I think you're imagining what you wish should be. You've been to the Vegan Society's website, though... veganism is not pragmatic and is quite strict/dogmatic, that's the whole point, otherwise it would be generic vegetarianism.

If people don't even know and understand terms and philosophies/ideologies then there is nothing that can be discussed.

In any case, best wishes for the new year.

Re: On ‘Plant-Based’

#210

Post by uxcolumbo »

mytailorisrich wrote: post #209
uxcolumbo wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Again - veganism is pragmatic - not dogmatic. There are vegans who have rescue chickens (from factory farms) and they do eat their eggs. The rescue chickens are given a happy life where they can roam freely in a garden. It's a different matter when it comes to milk - which is intended for the baby cow. Same with honey - it's actually being eaten by bees and you can't replace it with sugar water, as it has fewer nutri…

I think you're imagining what you wish should be. You've been to the Vegan Society's website, though... veganism is not pragmatic and is quite strict/dogmatic, that's the whole point, otherwise it would be generic vegetarianism. If people don't even know and understand terms and philosophies/ideologies then there is nothing that can be discussed. In any case, best wishes for the new year.

Happy New Year.

As with many other communities - the vegan community is not homogeneous. Like I said before - yes there are some people within this community who are dogmatic, but that doesn't mean veganism is dogmatic.

The core principle of veganism is not wanting to harm non-human sentient beings and generally not wanting to destroy our biosphere.

So if someone strives to live by those principles, but still has to use products that contain animal products, e.g. if you need to take medication that contains gelatin or similar and there are no alternatives then it's OK - it's not dogmatic.

Further down this article there are various other examples: https://veganfta.com/2022/11/23/practicable-veganism/

Or here is another article talking about this: https://veganstrategist.org/2017/09/13/beware-vegan-dogma/ - this person wrote a book called "How to Create a Vegan World: a Pragmatic Approach".

The goals is to get rid of animal factory farming and the destruction of our biosphere. Dogmatism isn't going to get us there.

Post reply on HN