
Why aren't figs considered vegan? - sethbannon
https://www.quora.com/Why-arent-figs-considered-vegan/answer/Beth-Goldowitz
======
seanwilson
I wish people wouldn't generalise that because 1) some people might consider
figs non-vegan and 2) this line of reasoning might be weird/stupid, then 3)
most vegans must think this therefore veganism is weird/stupid as a whole.

How many people that say they are vegan consider figs non-vegan? Are there
surveys on this? I'm going to guess most haven't thought about it (figs aren't
daily in most places), don't have a strong opinion on it or don't see the harm
if the insect does this process itself, yet the natural reaction of comments
in newspapers is to strongly attack veganism using fringe issues like this.

Most of veganism seems pretty straightforward and rational but there's a bunch
of edge cases like figs, honey, almonds and avocados people love to use a
means to attack the whole concept as stupid. It would be like looking for
fringe cases of things meat-eaters do (e.g. eating animals while they're still
alive, eating dogs and cats) and using that to attack meat-eaters.

I'm seeing recently that newspapers love to run veganism stories where readers
jump in with comments mocking imaginary vegans that hold extreme fringe views
(who is actually claiming this? how many are?) to compound their existing
beliefs that veganism is stupid. It's exactly the same thing as political
filter bubbles where nobody is learning anything because everyone is sharing
extreme and fake stories in an echo chamber.

The goal of veganism seems to be to make choices that are better for the
planet and reduce animal cruelty - it turns out the choices you need to make
to do that aren't always obvious (which is interesting in itself), but that
shouldn't be a reason to ignore the whole concept or ridicule people who are
trying to make a genuine attempt to help others.

~~~
dgellow
> It would be like looking for fringe cases of things meat-eaters do (e.g.
> eating animals while they're still alive, eating dogs and cats) and using
> that to attack meat-eaters.

Don’t worry (or do worry), newspapers will attack veganism, vegetarianism, AND
carnivorism (or omnivorism) if they have ways to create inflammatory
headlines. That’s not something reserved to only one subset.

~~~
strainer
Medias treatment of of different subjects is not randomly balanced in the way
you assure. Clearly, positions which are more popular with readership require
better treatment than less popular ones, and positions which are popular with
advertisers have to be treated most respectfully.

~~~
eeZah7Ux
> positions which are popular with advertisers have to be treated most
> respectfully

Datapoint: the meat, fish and diary industries are provably much wealthier and
more powerful than alternative food-related industries and they are known to
heavily fund "think tanks", lobbying groups, "social media influences", ads.

------
bloogsy
The article touches on this, but veganism is not about only eating plants -
it's actually an ethical decision to avoid anything that harms animals. As
such, figs are definitely vegan since the wasp is living its natural
lifecycle.

~~~
michaelt
I understand what you mean, but I don't know any vegans who would eat a steak
from a cow that had died of old age.

~~~
croisillon
I have yet to meet an omnivore who would do it

[edit: omnivore instead of carnist]

~~~
jjgreen
Omnivores are generally polite enough to call vegans that which you call
themselves, perhaps you'd like to return the favour?

~~~
pbhjpbhj
Were you offended by the parents use of a term for meat-eater? Your's seems
like a needless correction; it didn't seem at all impolite.

People choose all sorts of inaccurate terms for themselves, your reasoning
doesn't seem particularly sound either.

~~~
jjgreen
Carnist, I believe, is a term used by vegans to refer to those who support
_ideologically_ that it is acceptable to use animals for food, rather than
someone who eats meat. There are people who do not eat meat, for religious or
cultural reasons, and those are generally referred to a vegans, in the same
way there are those who eat meat for cultural reasons (my father did it, his
father did it, I've never really thought about it) rather than supporting some
ideology. For vegans to label meat eaters (more accurately omnivores) as
carnist, their ideological/political opponents is, well, not really offensive,
but it does rankle.

As social psychologists say, there is no in-group cohesion without out-group
hostility, but it is a shame for vegans (for which I have some sympathy) to
isolate themselves in this manner, particularly if they want to change the
world for the better.

------
LogicalBorg
Article is missing some relevant information.

1\. Enzymes in the fig digest wasp parts so you don't normally find wasps
inside your figs. So they really are vegan.

2\. The males are flightless and wouldn't have escaped anyway. The females
only escape long enough to go lay their eggs in another fig. So it really
isn't that dramatic.

Source: [https://www.jerseyshoreonline.com/dear-pharmacist/figs-
reall...](https://www.jerseyshoreonline.com/dear-pharmacist/figs-really-
contain-wasp-parts/)

------
gambiting
Considering figs not vegan because of this is insane, frankly. If that's the
standard you want to apply(the food should not have any insect parts in it)
then there will be nothing for you to eat. Zero. Any kind of grain will always
contain finely ground insects, in minuscule quantities but you can be 100%
certain they will be there.

~~~
Fnoord
Insects don't contain a CNS. Therefore, insects are vegan according to my
defintion of vegan. Just like the champignons (mushrooms) and jellyfish and
yeast are vegan.

I'm reminded about this beautiful documentary about the fig tree and her
symbioses: The Queen Of Trees [1]. This is an official version. It was
broadcasted on American TV, and this was ripped on BitTorrent. I can highly
recommend watching this documentary. It teaches us how cruel yet intelligent
nature (and evolution) can be. There are mutual benefits for different species
who suffer or die in the process.

[1]
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xy86ak2fQJM](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xy86ak2fQJM)

~~~
devoply
[https://invbrain.neuroinf.jp/modules/htmldocs/IVBPF/General/...](https://invbrain.neuroinf.jp/modules/htmldocs/IVBPF/General/Insects_nervous_systems.html)

------
fsniper
After watching a YouTube comedy video, where wasps describe themselves as
murderous, but uselessness insects, I was thinking of researching wasps. This
was an unexpected, but welcome read. So they are not only murderous, also
incestuous, but not useless. At least this fig born species.

~~~
wurst_case
I had the same journey. If anyone is curious what we're talking about:
[https://youtu.be/08kMdn8L7Yw](https://youtu.be/08kMdn8L7Yw)

------
triplee
I already loved figs, but TIL they are metal AF and I love them more.

------
skilled
Is there anything similar on Bee Pollen? What are people's thoughts on this? I
have met people who are extremely opposed to it, whereas I myself can't get
enough of it.

~~~
clydethefrog
When someone disturbs a colony to take honey or pollen it places a great
amount of stress on the bees. This disorients them for a period and, in that
sense, their whole order has been tampered with.

We cultivate honey bees just like chickens, cows, and pigs, and like all
agriculture animals, their high population is a harm to wild populations: they
compete directly for nectar and pollen, transmit diseases, and push wild bees
out of their native areas.

~~~
skilled
Hmm, so, my local farmer who sells glass jars of Bee Pollen at the market is
doing this as well?

~~~
lostlogin
Sort of yes, sort of no. You can collect pollen without opening up the hive.
However hives must be opened regularly to inspect and treat, which actually
helps the hive in easily measurable ways, like ‘is the colony alive?’.

------
Grustaf
I’m very curious how the author believes that this story can be used to shut
down anti-Darwinists, and ideas? Self sacrifice for your offspring seems
pretty Biblical.

