Why aren't figs considered vegan?

https://www.quora.com/Why-arent-figs-considered-vegan/answer/Beth-Goldowitz

by sethbannon • 7 years ago

115 99 7 years ago

fsniper• 7 years ago

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• 7 years ago

I had the same journey. If anyone is curious what we're talking about: https://youtu.be/08kMdn8L7Yw

kabacha• 7 years ago

Most of wasps are also polinators and in general are considered a boon to the environment: https://www.dw.com/en/good-bees-bad-wasps/a-45555518

gambiting2• 7 years ago

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.

amelius• 7 years ago

Yes, see e.g. https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/but-not-simpler/i-hate-...

jpatokal• 7 years ago

From the friendly article:

Even the ones that do contain wasps can be considered vegan in my opinion. Veganism is about reducing harm and suffering, and these wasps aren’t being harmed. After all, no one is forcing the wasps to fertilize the figs. It’s part of their natural life cycle.

Fnoord2• 7 years ago

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

devoply• 7 years ago

https://invbrain.neuroinf.jp/modules/htmldocs/IVBPF/General/...

keithnoizu• 7 years ago

Well. I think the trick is, if you are cultivating figs specifically for sale, and wasp corpses are a necessary component of the trade then part of your food preparation process specifically relies on the death of wasps. With out the fig farmer there would fewer insects captured in the fruits.

So, if one thinks insects aren't vegan I think you can make a logical basis for not wanting to include figs in your diet.

For hyperbole, if the only way for mango trees to grow was by soaking up the nutrients of dead sheep, and so every mango farm would chop up a ewe for fertilizer once a week to maintain their orchards, than would mangoes still be considered vegan?

gambiting2• 7 years ago

As someone else pointed out - those wasps dying in the figs is part of their life cycle. It's not us exploiting animals to produce something for consumption - if anything, by cultivating more fig trees we allow more wasps to breed.

As for your example - if the sheep's natural life cycle included being consumed by a mango tree in order to breed then sure, I'd consider those mangoes vegan. If we have to kill the sheep in order to grow mangoes ourselves(but the sheep gets nothing out of it) then I would not consider them vegan.

bloogsy• 7 years ago

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• 7 years ago

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.

rhn_mk1• 7 years ago

Anecdata vs anecdata, but I've met people who consider themselves vegan, while eating any kind of food destined to the trash to avoid the waste.

That kind of behaviour could easily be misunderstood, so none of them advertise it much.

croisillon5• 7 years ago

I have yet to meet an omnivore who would do it

[edit: omnivore instead of carnist]

rocgf2• 7 years ago

Veganism is seen as a label, but it's actually not a binary trait, it's a spectrum at the very least. What I mean is that there are vegans who would never eat meat under any circumstances, ever. There are vegans who would eat eggs if they know that the chickens laying them are living healthy lives. There are vegans who would also eat meat under some circumstances, but ultimately these things matter very little in the grand scheme of things because, again, it's not black or white.

Most vegans are vegans because they are compassionate and caring people. They see cows as friends, not as a steak machine. Therefore, your argument is, honestly, irrelevant. It's simply a non-starter for most vegans, the same way as you would not eat a dead dog.

ZeroFries2• 7 years ago

Buddhist monks won't purchase meat for themselves, but will happily accept an omnivorous meal as a gift.

cyphax• 7 years ago

I think maybe there are different "kinds" of vegans. As in: maybe not all vegans are vegan because of the same ideology.

One vegan explained his motivations like this: he's against slavery, using animals is like a form of slavery and he's against that. Even if you treat the animal like a king; it's still not free to do its own thing. I really liked his reasoning, it seemed consistent and coming from a good place.

That logic would allow him to eat figs because it's a natural process, as you're no actor in the process of the fig forming itself.

ma2rten3• 7 years ago

I'm not sure what you mean by "there are different kinds of vegans". The term vegan was coined by the Vegan Society.

They have the following definition: "Veganism is a way of living that seeks to exclude, as far as possible and practicable, all forms of exploitation of, and cruelty to, animals for food, clothing and any other purpose."

brusch64• 7 years ago

Does she or he have a pet ? Just wondering.

raverbashing2• 7 years ago

"Even if you treat the animal like a king; it's still not free to do its own thing"

This person should get out of their gentrified neighborhood flat and go see what "do its own thing" mean in the wild. (There's also a good subreddit for it as well)

It is not pretty, it is not idyllic

Grustaf5• 7 years ago

Well, producing honey is also very much part of the bee’s natural cycle, as is laying eggs for the hen and unfertilised eggs don’t suffer. Of course commercial animal husbandry causes endless suffering, but most vegans would probably object even to naturally produced honey and eggs. Just saying.

croisillon5• 7 years ago

bees and hens don't produce "naturally" food for humans, they have their own use of honey and eggs

[addendum to people answering "bees don't produce for bears either" or "plants don't produce food for humans either" : that's a strawman, I merely commented the term "naturally produced honey and eggs"]

ddeokbokki• 7 years ago

Hen in the wild eat their unfertilised eggs to regain the nutrition they lost making the egg.

chris_wot• 7 years ago

How does milking a cow harm an animal?

ToolsDevler• 7 years ago

Cows are manipulated to produce much much more milk than they would naturally. Also the machnines doing the work are harsh and painful. But even when it is from a farmer doing everything by hand on a really happy cow. Being vegan means in the first place avoiding everything produced by or out of animals. The rule "It must not harm any animal to be vegan" is an additional rule for products which are not made by or out of animals. Standard super market milk violates both rules.

Source: A friend of mine is vegan since almost 20 years (before it was hyped).

Lio2• 7 years ago

I'm neither vegan nor vegetarian but in order to have a female cow produce milk regularly you need to cycle it through pregnancy.

So the question is what happens to the calves?

Well the females go on to be milk cows but males calves are raised just long enough to be slaughtered.

If the male is particularly unlucky it will become a veal calf, which I'm sure you'll agree is not a great life.

If the male cow is "lucky" it will be castrated and allowed to grow into a bullock (British terminology, known as a steer in USA).

Very rarely a male calf will be raised breeding but it's a pretty small chance.

So milk.

In the case of egg laying hens, most male chicks will go off to be gassed as they have no commercial value.

So eggs.

cannonedhamster3• 7 years ago

Milking a cow requires that you keep the animal producing milk which means numerous pregnancies that produce either another dairy cow that has been born into milk slavery or a meat cow destined for the slaughter house after fattening. I'm not sure where people get the idea that milking hurts the cow as it doesn't. The machines are automated and some are ones the cows voluntarily enter for milking. If the cows don't milk regularly it can be painful for them.

skilled2• 7 years ago

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• 7 years ago

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.

skilled2• 7 years ago

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

lostlogin5• 7 years ago

Done right, beekeeping doesn’t stress bees very much at all and there is a feedback mechanism which trains the beekeeper very quickly if they are bad at it.

If the beekeeper works in hot, still weather, is careful and avoids the squashing of bees they can work without smoke or protective gear. Even basic things like entrance size are not controlled in the wild, and having a beekeeper open the entrance or reduce it down is a huge advantage to a colony. Managed bees can be looked after such that they live far longer than any feral colony will. Diseases haven’t been shown to be spread to native bees in New Zealand, but competition for food sources is definitely going to be occurring.

Grustaf5• 7 years ago

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.

seanwilson• 7 years ago

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• 7 years ago

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.

strainer2• 7 years ago

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.

scandinavegan5• 7 years ago

extreme fringe views (who is actually claiming this? how many are?)

I agree. This topic recently ran as Today I Learned on Reddit, and of all the vegans checking in, no one had heard about this. It's the same with me and all my vegan acquaintances, no one has heard that figs wouldn't be considered vegan.

The article title makes it sound like everyone agrees that figs aren't considered vegan, which is weird.

Speaking of fringe views, I read an interesting article debunking the idea that vegans are deficient in common nutrients. It looked deeper into the studies presented, and it turned out that they had studied fruitarians (only eats fruits and perhaps nuts and seeds without killing the plant), or religious groups with extremely limited food sources. Those groups are vegan, but they are a small subset of all vegans, and it would be incorrect to say that findings with these groups apply to people eating varied vegan diets.

YeGoblynQueenne2• 7 years ago

Eating dogs and cats doesn't sound tasty, but how does it compare to eating an animal alive?

If it's about not eating intelligent animals- pigs are way smarter than both dogs and cats. Yet meat eaters wouldn't find eating them "fringe" (I don't).

LogicalBorg• 7 years ago

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...

triplee• 7 years ago

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

Why aren't figs considered vegan?

Related Stories