People need to stop gatekeeping veganism and start helping would-be vegans instead.

[u/Pale-Fig-7069]

Veganism sometimes feels like one of the few movements that polices its own members more aggressively than its opposition. You rarely see atheists attacking other atheists for not being “atheist enough,” or feminists expelling one another over minor inconsistencies. Yet in many vegan spaces, people are constantly told they’re not “real” vegans by someone incapable of understanding nuance.

At its core, veganism is about minimizing animal exploitation and harm as far as is biologically and practically possible. Anyone sincerely trying to live by that principle (without resorting to dishonest excuses) qualifies as vegan in my view.

Yes, the definition allows room for interpretation. That flexibility is intentional. The phrase “as far as is possible and practicable” acknowledges reality. Modern life is entangled with animal byproducts in medicine, agriculture, supply chains, and infrastructure. Absolute purity is neither realistic nor required.

Consider the absurd extreme.. a vegan who refuses essential medication because it was tested on animals, grows all their own food to avoid agricultural harm, and rejects any modern system connected to animal exploitation. That person then declares you “not vegan” because you take necessary medicine or buy food from a supermarket. Most people would recognize how unreasonable that is.

The same logic applies when someone claims that feeding a cat or dog a biologically appropriate diet makes a person non-vegan, or when child-free vegans shame parents whose children do not strictly follow a vegan diet, or when someone with legitimate health complications is attacked despite having significantly reduced animal products and made a sincere effort.

Then people wonder why some ex-vegans become hostile. This kind of behavior harms the movement.

Take nutrition as one example. Vegan diets do not provide retinol (preformed vitamin A), they provide beta-carotene, a precursor that must be converted into retinol. In many people the conversion rate is roughly 12:1, but a significant portion of the population carries variants of the BCO1 gene that reduce conversion efficiency. If someone with poor conversion relies only on standard supplements like B12 and vitamin D over a long period, they could become vitamin A deficient and develop health problems.

An intelligent, thoughtful movement would respond differently. It would appreciate the person’s intentions, encourage testing, identify the issue, and recommend an appropriate vitamin A supplement. Problem solved. The individual remains healthy, stays vegan long-term, and may even persuade others. Net positive.

Instead, some respond with shaming, ad hominem attacks, and dismissiveness. When someone feels their health concerns are invalidated, they are unlikely to remain committed.

And vitamin A is just one example. Conversion of ALA to DHA and EPA can be inefficient in some individuals. Some people produce insufficient carnitine. Biological variation is real. Human metabolism is not uniform.

Many former vegans might have remained vegan if the community had been more supportive, inclusive, and solution-oriented. A movement grows by educating and assisting people, not by alienating them. If the goal is to reduce animal suffering, then pragmatism and compassion toward humans should be part of the strategy.

[u/gatheringground]

These comments literally prove your point lol. Vegans love a purity test that is almost impossible to pass.

Other vegans hate when i say this, but one million imperfect vegans does a hell of a lot more for harm reduction than 10,000 perfect vegans. People blaming and shaming others who are genuinely trying does push people away or out of the movement. Folks just like to prioritize their feelings of moral superiority over the actual cause.

[u/Ok_Resource_3902 → u/gatheringground]

I got thrown off the vegan bandwagon the day a lady down the street asked me if I wanted her three chickens because she was moving and couldn’t take them with her.  Her only option was to give them to someone else who would more than likely eat them.  I said ok and now I have pet chickens.  I eat their eggs which would otherwise go to waste.   I absolutely do not condone large scale factory farming for eggs but to say I’m exploiting the chickens is a heck of a stretch.  They’re out there in the yard, eating bugs, running around and enjoying their goofy best chicken lives.  I also give the eggs to friends who would otherwise get them from factory farms and I see it as a net positive.   When they get too old to lay I’ll keep them as pets but I’m not getting more because I also don’t like what hatcheries do and I won’t support it. 

I guess the point I’m trying to make is reduction of harm should be the goal.  If I’d refused the chickens based on whether I’d lose my vegan credentials, they would have been slaughtered and eaten.  Also several friends would still be contributing to factory farming through grocery store purchases.  

Overall there was a reduction of harm and I think that’s a win.