deleted by creator

It is in theory possible to obtain animal products without violating their rights. Like someone else mentioned, picking up a feather from the ground is totally vegan for example.

Wool however is a bit more complicated. The reason sheep produce massive amounts of wool in the first place is because we selectively bred them to do so. Shearing a sheep can be beneficial for the sheep, but it is a problem we should not have created (or continue to create) in the first place.

I think we should stop breeding animals that have all sorts of genetic problems we created. That includes sheep that don’t shed and need shearing to not overheat in the summer, it includes chickens that lay so many eggs their bones break due to calcium deficiency, etc.

deleted by creator

Basically any animal-derived product, means that there is necessarily an industry around its production, which means the objectification and commodification of animal bodies.

You can find a lot of longer expose’s online of what these animal clothing industries are really like.

“Exploitation” merely means to use for your benefit. If you are using an animal product, you are exploiting the animal it came from. There is no such thing as using an animal product without exploitation, by definition.

Even when cruelty and violence is not directly involved, because perhaps you simply found some bones or something, it’s still exploitation. There are lots of reasons to avoid exploitation that don’t require direct cruelty or violence, such as avoiding dependence and the biasing psychological effect that getting a benefit from an animal product has on our reasoning abilities as stupid apes.

Removed by mod

Yes. Unless it’s necessary for survival.

As for your whool example. While it is possible to shear a sheep without harming them. The sheep that require being sheared should not exist. “Wild” sheep shed and don’t require shearing to survive. We shouldn’t even be breeding them.

It also commodifies them. Which leads to factory farming and harmful practices. The vast majority of all whool is definitely not collected in an animal friendly manner.

As defined by the vegan society. “Veganism is a philosophy and way of living which seeks to exclude—as far as is possible and practicable—all forms of exploitation of, and cruelty to, animals for food, clothing or any other purpose; and by extension, promotes the development and use of animal-free alternatives for the benefit of animals, humans and the environment. In dietary terms it denotes the practice of dispensing with all products derived wholly or partly from animals.” While you could get wool carefully witout harming the sheep, it is still exploitative. That is assuming you are using it for profit or for making things with the wool. Keep in mind in an animal sanctuary you will need to sheer the sheep for their health. Humans have bred these fine fellows to grow more wool than they naturally would, which causes many health issues. We have created a sentient being, for the purpose of expoilting it for it’s body parts, that is dependent on us for their health and safety. So no, even if you sheer them nicely, it’s still expoilting them. Animal sanctuaries, the vegan ones, will often use the wool to keep the barns the sheep are in insulated, for bedding,etc. Basically using it for the sheeps well being. Animals are not ours to use and exploit for our own purposes.

My two cents: “being” vegan is overrated and subtly shifts the goalposts from reflecting and acting upon serious ethical questions to policing each others’ adherence to an imaginary pure ideal. I say this as a vegan btw.

So for example, I reject the idea of veganism as “avoiding animal-derived products as far as practicable” (paraphrasing the exact definition). I.e. if I’m stuck on an island with zero plant foraging skills, and I then catch some fish out of our necessity, I’m not vegan. It’s just that simple.

But I’m not going to feel bad about that fact and guilt-trip myself into inertia. Maybe the fish help me survive long enough to learn to identify edible plants, learn to climb trees to get coconuts etc. Over time, I’m able to completely eliminate my fish intake and rely on plants. So the initial fish helped keep me alive long enough…to protect scores of their fellow fish!

If I’d obsessed over being vegan everywhere and at all times, I’d ignore the ethical possibilities right before my own eyes, and possibly even conclude that the most ethical thing was to starve to death – all in the name of being recognized as “vegan”.

If you solely focus on individual acts of killing, you tend to forget that death is a part of life. It’s impossible not to kill, to be honest – just as it’s impossible not to be killed. We often forget that latter part. It goes both ways.

One notorious example I’ve encountered is when people go vegan for the “wrong reasons”. Say someone learns about the extremely morbid effects of meat & dairy, and then chooses to go vegan. I’ve heard people say that these people have no right to be “vegan” and should call themselves “plant-based”. In either case, the ethical effects on animals are basically the same, except that maybe the “plant-based” folk have a couple of animal-based non-food products around the house.

I’ll skip a few steps here to share my own broader position, which is that it’s consequently possible to have relations with animals that are reciprocal and not merely exploitative. People have practiced such relations all around the world for millennia.

Yes, when you find a bird feather in the forest for example.