To be mad at FIL for feeding my daughter meat?

[Fruitypebbles]

Hi, just joined the site to ask this.

We're vegans, and my daughter has been raised and weaned vegan. She's 5 and happily eats anything put in front of her. She's very healthy, not lacking in any vitamins or nutrients at all and is beautiful, happy and refuses to eat meat usually because she knows in child friendly terms why we are vegans.

Despite her health being perfectly fine (she rarely ever gets ill, let alone any deficiencies in iron and protein - there's plenty of protein in plants!) my FIL thinks we're evil. We've given him all the information, shown him exactly how much she gets in a normal day and he can see how healthy she is. He fed her a meat casserole, she obviously couldn't recognise the meat in the stew because we use meat subs occasionally. She was very, very sick after this as her body can't digest meat after never eating it. Why can't he just respect our choices to not eat animal products? AIBU?

Ginger - we need the OP to come back. I eat eggs and we've gone beyond my knowledge of veganism. I know vegans who won't eat honey, so it's not as if there's much give in the argument.

Personally I dislike intensive farming but I think we live within an ecosystem in which animals depend on each other. That dependence extends to eating each other. I respect vegan arguments, I just don't agree with all of them.

Martina, yes, I know. Soya is not imo a good crop and I avoid it much of the time. Whatever we eat has an impact somewhere. I think all we can do is weigh up how much impact and whether we think it's acceptable.

I meant from a moral point of view.

What other point of view did you think we would assume?

You wont eat the meat or wear the wool that those animals are bred for, but you will keep them in an alien (to them) environment because they are cute? Yes that is worse. Sheep are use to living in flocks on wild land, not a couple of them in someones back garden. But hey, as long as you dont eat them then thats ok, right?

Who said anything about someone's back garden? Lots of people in rural locations have plenty of space you know.

By your logic, keeping any pets is immoral, which is utter nonsense.

Vegan consumption of staples, such as soya and quinoa amounts to a fraction of what is fed to cattle.

Some vegans do think keeping any pets is immoral. Personally I think keeping pets like parrots and other birds, is immoral. But not cats or dogs.
I have known people who keep sheep as pets who have not a clue what they are doing. It is not just a case of sticking them on some grass and giving a bit of supplementary feed. You need to research it so you look after them properly.

I'm not a vegan but think keeping pets is cruel. The only pet I would keep is a cat, because they can go if they like with no obligation to stay. Apart from people who keep their cats inside, that's cruel.

Keeping pets is actually considered cruel by many people. It usually involves keeping them out of their natural habitat and fixing them or messing with their reproductive cycle and removing their young too early (under 6 months). No different to farm animals.
Working dogs that live outside on average live longer and have less health problems than dogs that are kept inside heated or cooled homes. They don't have inforced high intense exercise bouts but rather all day roaming like wild dogs. Cats are better off but when they are left to raise their own kittens they will often continue to breastfeed for a long time.

As for feeding children. I have a vegetarian 6 year old, his choice. He is very healthy. I'm glad he's not vegan, I have my reasons for that.

I will also say that if someone eats eggs from a source they know, they are within their rights to call themselves vegan. Let's say for example they decided to call themselves vegetarian because they are not "allowed" to use the term vegan. The only reason you tell people your diet prefrences is when they are cooking for you or booking a place to eat. What if a host makes a fantastic vegetarian dish with cheese, milk, butter and barn eggs. What are they supposed to say "I don't eat dairy, or eggs from other sources". It would be much better to say "I am a vegan". People can use whatever terms they need so they can get the message across.

Dizzy if I tell people I'm vegetarian they often come back with "oh that's OK, I got some chicken/ fish". Which actually isn't OK. Vegetarians do not eat fish. Or chicken. It is problematic if you don't stick to commonly agreed definitions because then people start thinking "Oh vegans, fine, I've got free range eggs, I'll make them an omelette."

Just as people who eat no meat other than fish call themselves pescatarian or vegequarian, people who eat no animals or by products other than eggs call themselves veggans. Personally I'm happy to leave people to make their own choices but it does annoy me that people assume vegetarians eat fish, because so many people who eat fish call themselves vegetarian. If the commonly accepted definition of the word "vegetarian" is going to be used to include those who eat fish (or chicken) we're going to need a new word for vegetarians.

makes as much sense as arguing that my cocker spaniel is being exploited because she doesn't roam the hills in a pack while hunting deer

Your cocker spaniel might be OK. Personally I wouldn't countenance a Cavalier King Charles, or any of the brachycephalic breeds. I wouldn't want anything with Queen Anne legs, or those prone to hip dysplasia. I wouldn't want a toy dog or anything else easily damaged. Some of the things we do to pet animals is exploitative. Some of it I can reconcile with my conscience - I am a horse owner after all - some of it I can't.

I also have cats. It's a great way to have a pet whilst also feeling exploited yourself. Mine are free to roam and grew up feral, but they like a home where they get 2* meals a day and warm places to sleep.

• More than that if they nag enough

You're right, it can get very confusing sometimes. I'm one of those in the 'doesn't eat meat but does eat fish' group. I never call myself a vegetarian though, as you say it would only blur the lines.

Even though my wife does eat locally sourced eggs when at home, it still makes sense for her to call herself vegan to friends and family, because at all other times she is. It actually makes it less confusing for people.

X post - totally agree about damage humans have done to breeds. I work with dogs every day and there's nothing I hate more than breeders and the like who care more about supposed breed standards than animal welfare - like that Crufts judge this year was rightly panned for awarding the group prize to an obviously crippled German Shepard.

Gabilan people who feed chicken or fish to vegetarians are probably just dim. My chickens could be described as many things, but vegetables they ain't!

FYI - Marmite, great natural source of B12, so doesn't always have to be fortified foods. As I explained in a previous post, b12 is a problem for everyone now.

Also, no one, no animal, needs dairy. No other animal consumes the breast milk of another animal in adulthood. Milk is for babies, that's it, and mammal milk is for the babies of that animal only. Cows milk is designed to help a baby cow grow into a 400lb cow in a year. It's never necessary or healthy for humans.

Also, no one, no animal, needs dairy. No other animal consumes the breast milk of another animal in adulthood.

No they eat bones, clay and dirt to meet their calcium needs. I don't know about you but I would rather drink the milk of a cow than chew on clay with chimps

PaperdollCartoon - no other animal cook or bake their food either.

Using animals as an example for our diet is admirable but I won't be sharing my cats' favourite meal of fresh mouse or rat any time soon, thank you very much. They seem to think the paws are the biggest delicacy.

dizzytomato
No they eat bones, clay and dirt to meet their calcium needs. I don't know about you but I would rather drink the milk of a cow than chew on clay with chimps

Cows do not routinely eat bones and human options for calcium are not limited to cows' milk vs clay with chimps. That said, given your preference for the former, would you change your mind if the convenience of 'expressed' milk disappeared and you were required to breastfeed from the cow instead?

fascicle Cows like other herbivores get their calcium from plants, but in order to do this they need to spend 8 hours a day just eating. Omnivores or carnivores cannot or do not do that so they developed other ways. Comparing humans with cows or animals like dogs that chew bones is silly but comparing humans with other primates paints a better picture. Humans developed by manipulating grazing animals. Other primates developed their own ways of getting calcium mainly licking minerals or eating clay. So those are the natural alternatives.

I don't breastfeed from the cow, nor do I buy milk. We have cows, I milk them, boil the milk on the stove and drink it. So no need to eat clay, buy factory produced alternatives or pop pills

dizzy There aren't enough options in your human/animal scenarios. Humans can obtain enough calcium without a) spending 8 hours a day eating calcium rich food b) consuming dairy c) licking clay or d) popping pills. Plus, there are multiple factors which affect calcium status in humans - it's not just about consumption. On the subject of popping pills, if that is a reference to vegans who take supplements, there are many situations where humans on an onminvorous diet might consume fortified foods, require supplements, require medical interventions etc.

dizzy, you dodged the question. If push came to shove, would you be prepared to access your dairy milk directly from the tap ?

omnivorous not onminvorous!

I do access dairy milk directly from the tap? Why would I put my mouth on a cows udder when I can use my hands? I don't understand the point of that question.

There are a lot of calcium rich foods, nuts for example. The problem is sourcing nuts ethically is not easy as most calcium rich nuts are grown outside Europe, many require a lot of water to grow and to meet demand most are grown intensively rather than naturally. The ideal would be a small scale existance that balances nut foraging and small scale dairy herding. People's lives do not allow for that and if everyone switched to nuts and seeds to meet their calcium needs then we would probably have a global disaster on a scale we currently have with cow farming.

I do access dairy milk directly from the tap? Why would I put my mouth on a cows udder when I can use my hands? I don't understand the point of that question.

It's breastmilk and the question is relevant to your natural/unnatural scenarios. I'll take that as a no.

There are plenty of other non dairy sources of calcium in addition to nuts.

It's breastmilk

Actually it's uddermilk as we don't call cows breasts, "breasts". But yes it is the breastmilk of another animal.

If I lost the ability to use my hands to extract a cows milk are you asking if I would put my mouth on a cows udder and suck her milk? Yes I would, I have actually seen people do this, there are hundreds of photos of people all over the world who do this all the time. I think it is pretty logical that this has been done, given that humans have domesticated cows for centuries.

Yes there are traces of calcium in some fruit and vegetables, the sheer amount you'd need to eat (if you physically could) to get the same dose as nuts and dairy is far more than the healthy recommended amount. So it makes sense that humans eat dairy and nuts and other primates lick minerals. Humans probably did and perhaps in some parts of the world they still do.

If you put "where to buy clay to eat" into google, you'll find it's quite common. In humans.

Gabilan amazing, there are loads of sources. Like almost anything these days, you can buy it online. I have just read how NASA astronauts eat clay. So it's not just for chimps. Plus it's vegan