> Martha said:
> > Anyway, nobody said "I hate vegans," it's just
> >an impression I formed.
Peter speculated:
> Assuming your impression is correct the real question is whether
>this hatred is justified?
And my answer is no. But then I'm an idealist.
Peter continues:
> If our vegan friends had made a minimum of effort to conduct
>themselves in a civil manner and tried to abide with list guidelines they would
> still be with us. However, at this point I am very pessimistic of the
> prospects of anybody with strict, vegetarian ideals joining our list,
...
Maybe your "welcome" message should read:
"Anybody with vegetarian ideals are advised to remain silent, except
where they agree with the beliefs of the moderator."
Peter continues:
> and why should they indeed if their whole philosophy is built on
>denial of reality?
Arrogance.
> Martha said:
> >And I'm getting weary, too. Not from being blasted, just from
> >overload. The volume's too heavy, even when Bodhi's taking a
> >powder. The recent death in my family has really driven home to
>>me how much better so much of my time would be spent interacting
>>with my family,
Peter said:
> I am sorry to hear of your loss.
Thanks, but this sounds pretty hollow in light of what follows.
> Martha said:
> >than trying to sort out which side is more militant, zealous,
> >bigoted, hostile: the vegans or those who hate them.
Peter pontificated:
> Trying to sort out? I am sorry but anybody with just half a brain who
> has followed the debates on this list would be able to tell that there
> is a world of difference between the vegan zealots and those who
cannot stomach their message & tactics of intolerance and prejudice.
Then that lets me out from those of you who do have half a brain. I
frankly don't see a world of difference at all. I'm not saying you're
wrong about NFL, I'm just sick of vegans-this and vegans-that. I
respect vegans as a group. That makes me a damn vegan-lover.
Peter goes on:
> I am frankly getting sick and trying of beating around the bush on this
> issue.
If what you've been doing is beating around the bush, then you're
even more hostile and zealous than I thought.
More Peter:
> Even hating zealotry is a far cry from practicing it, and how
> this can be such a difficult thing for such a bright woman like
> yourself to understand really boggles the mind.
Hypocrisy.
> >I live in Santa Barbara, CA, where I have lived most of my life. ...
Peter observes:
> If vegan company is what you are looking for, you ought never to
>be lonely in Santa Barbara. :-)
That's just it. I've never specifically sought out any particular type
of person. As a result I've not run across many vegans. That was just
my point, that there aren't all that many out there.
Peter:
> >> However, when you start to seriously challenge some of their
> >>vegan tenets, you will encounter their darker sides like we have
>>>seen in this forum.
I suppose if sticking your neck out to defend a group who're getting
a too-harsh treatment, risking the wrath of the group's elite, is a dark
side, then you're now seeing my dark side too.
> Martha said:
> >I think this is true of most people who believe in something.
Peter:
> Even more why we should try to raise the standards.
To keep people who believe in something out? My suggestion
above for your "welcome" message should be expanded with "or
any other beliefs".
> Peter said:
> >> You are then considered as a threat & part of the problem and
> >> treated accordingly with the ends justifying the means.(personal
> >> attacks - mockery & ridicule - evading issues - lies - not
>>>answering questions - copping to holier-than-thou attitudes -
>>>subscribing to extreme political & religious ideas.)
> Martha said:
> >You've covered a lot of ground here. I think you're overgeneralizing.
> >I would guess a lot of vegans, rather than being threatened,
>>simply get tired of getting the 3rd degree about nutrition, and of feeling
> >like an oddity, and get a little defensive. Maybe like some
> >instinctos?
Peter:
> A little defensive? When I hear words like this I can no longer
>pretend to respect you.
I do think it's better to know the truth, even if it hurts. So you've =
only
pretended to respect me. Now I know.
Peter continues:
> How many lies, how much hypocrisy, how much arrogance &
> hatred do you need to witness before you open your eyes and
realize
> that there are no excuses for such zealotry?
This reminds me of an acquaintance who says, "How many times do
you have to open up the paper and see crimes committed by ******s
and ****s to see that ...?"
Peter, if you can open yourself up and look at yourself honestly in
the mirror and not see hypocrisy, arrogance and hatred, then you are
right. I don't even have half a brain.
Peter goes on:
> What conclusion have you reached from the literally hundreds of
questions posed to the vegans on this list left unanswered?
Literally hundreds? I don't think so. Would you go through the
archives and prove it? I have seen some unanswered questions.
Some were asked to the ether, not to any individual.
If they are not answered does that mean all the vegans on the list
are hostile, zealous hypocrites? Maybe some vegans are, and
others don't set themselves up as experts, and still others simply
didn't see the question because they don't read
every word of every post on the list, especially during peak periods.
Or, after spending hours reading the posts, are just too tired to go on
to answer any. Some questions were asked to NFL, point blank
I agree that they should have at least tried to answer them.
I have several times asked *you* questions that you either didn't
answer at all, or replied to with a nonsequitur.
And more Peter:
>That they have been too traumatized by a
> lifetime of 3rd degree interrogations by cruel SAD-eaters to answer
> them or that their vegan purity puts them above everybody else?
>Do not worry - I am not expecting an answer.
Why not, because I'm just like the rest of 'em?
I never said the inquisitors were cruel. Just that from my own
experience I get tired of answering the same questions over and over
again.
> Peter:
> >> non-judgmental people. They are the "true" vegans and have
>>my deepest respect. Vegan zealots on the other hand are the
">>false" vegans who are just using veganism as a vehicle for their own
> >>personal agendas, and I seriously question if they deep down
>>>really give a hoot about the (vegan)cause they claim to have
>>>embraced.
Martha said:
> >Well, maybe, and maybe not. We may never know.
Peter posits:
> What are you waiting for? A written full confession? I suspect the
> truth is that you do not want to know...
I'm not waiting for anything. The truth is that I am not the judge of
what these so-called "false" vegans care about, and neither are you.
Peter, you win. I'm not really that much of a fighter.
As soon as I see this reply come through, I will u*n*s*u*b*s*c*r*i*b*e
from the list. It looks like I will be the only one to shed a tear over
it. It hurts to leave a group in disgrace towards which you only recently
felt a friendship. If there's anybody left on the lists with feelings of
friendship to me, then to you, good-bye.
Kirt, I want to thank you one last time for the Health & Beyond. It
may well become my last regularly-scheduled health reading
So long,
Martha
|
