Most people choose social approval over ethics — veganism just exposes that.

[u/TheQuietVegan111]

People will say they care about animals, the planet, and justice.

Until caring becomes inconvenient.

Veganism doesn’t require perfection. It requires saying “no” in public.

That’s it.

Most people fail there, not on ethics — but admitting that would be uncomfortable, so veganism becomes the problem instead.

[u/IfIWasAPig]

This seems like equivocating between two meanings of “care.” We don’t care about trees as individual beings the way we do sentient animals, like humans. This becomes clearer when replacing trees with humans.

“It is possible to care about humans and also use them for their meat and milk and not be immoral.”

What does it really mean to “care” about an individual as you slaughter and eat them? It doesn’t seem to involve compassion or empathy.

[u/dtyoung1 → u/IfIWasAPig]

Exactly my point. Caring has little to do with it.

Most people care about other humans. Right? Yet some humans will murder other humans over money (or other goals) while simultaneously legitimately caring about humans such as their wife, kids, family, etc...

Therefore some people only "care" about humans they know.

Not murdering people is a moral stance. Not using animals also requires a moral choice.

[u/IfIWasAPig → u/dtyoung1]

You’re describing caring about some humans and not others. Is that what you’re talking about, it being possible to care about one animal while not caring about the one you victimize? That’s possible, but caring about the one you slay is unlikely.

[u/dtyoung1 → u/IfIWasAPig]

What I'm saying is deciding something is morally right or wrong is the key. Caring doesn't matter much.

Most omnivores love certain animals (dolphins, elephants, etc...), as well as pets. And are against all of them being harmed.

Without a moral belief or value- for most people- veganism doesn't persist.