When you hear the word vegan, what comes to mind? Is it angry protestors on the streets, or just a bowl of salad? Is it a yogi meditating in the woods, or a serving of chicken chop without the chicken chop? Know that however absurd these illustrations may be (excluding the salad I hope), our current practices of meat-eating can be even more absurd, but only if you look at it from a certain perspective – the vegan perspective.

Okay, but how is adding the word perspective behind vegan going to help? Don’t worry, I’ll explain exactly what it means.

The first thing to note is that there isn’t just one vegan perspective. Rather, there are quite a few ways through which people approach and embrace veganism (just like the myriad of ways tofu is cooked). Perhaps I should start with the ethical approach, which draws from what vegan, or veganism, is.

Veganism, in simple terms, is the philosophy which seeks to abstain from practices which cause unnecessary suffering to sentient beings, as far as is practicable. Drawing from this definition, a vegan is someone who aligns their actions with the values of veganism, either through mundane acts that make up each of their days, or through activism and advocacy in hopes of raising public awareness on the issues that are associated with veganism and effecting practical change.

As can be gleaned from the definition above, veganism isn’t just about not eating meat. Although that—vegetarianism—can be thought of as a subset of veganism. The philosophy of veganism encompasses our dietary choices into other areas of our lives, and the choices we make therein, such as not wearing leather, or not supporting cosmetic companies which test their products on rabbits’ eyes. Putting aside the animal cruelty rife within the scientific and entertainment industries, let us look at an issue that lies close to us Malaysians, so close that it is said to be tied with our identities—food.

Every single day at every meal, we are faced with a choice, and often, the choice clashes with the concept of veganism, irregardless of whether this choice was made intentionally, or whether the ethics of veganism were even considered. It is then unsurprising that many find it hard to wrap their minds around the gap that exists between the values that underpin veganism and the norms and practices which influence and justify our food choices. To cross that gap is to understand the rationale behind making conscious food and consumer choices. It is to challenge what is often a preconceived notion that carnism (generally understood as the opposite of veganism) is justifiable or in no need of justification. It is to have a shift of perspective in viewing fried drumsticks not as fried drumsticks, but as the legs of what was once a living animal, in viewing milk not as milk, but as the bodily secretion of a mother meant for facilitating rapid growth of her children, in acknowledging that nonhuman animals, much like us, are capable of feeling. Feeling grief and sorrow, as their children are taken away from them; feeling pain and suffering, as they are mutilated or slaughtered; feeling happiness and excitement, at the presence of a loved one; feeling comfort, and longing towards a life free of subjugation and captivity—if they had ever known what that would be like—and in acknowledging this, consciously and intentionally make the kinder choice at the dinner table to take a step closer to animal liberation.

Socrates asked: “Would this habit of eating animals not require that we slaughter animals that we knew as individuals and in whose eyes we can gaze and see ourselves reflected, only a few hours before our meal?” Today, we can answer his question in the negative, as the slaughter of animals are almost always done behind closed doors, cutting off our conscious connection between the neatly packaged animal products and the magnificently intricate animals whose subjective experiences and sentience have been diminished and trampled upon by those who claim to be superior to them; in other words, allowing us to gaze upon not the flesh of animals, much less individuals, but packages of meat and microwave-ready meals.

Quite separate from the ethical approach, is the eco approach to veganism. Indeed, with the wealth of information that has become readily available at our fingertips, it is becoming increasingly hard to deny the environmental soundness of a vegan lifestyle, or even just a plant-based diet. Again, to raise a few points to question our genuineness in saving our environment, consider this: plastic straws account for 0.03% of the plastic entering our ocean, whereas fishing nets alone make up 46% of the Great Pacific Garbage Patch. In fact, six out of seven species of sea turtles are either threatened or endangered because of fishing. So, given that we are generally willing to give up plastic straws to save marine life, perhaps we should also consider making a stand against the mass destruction caused to marine life by the fishing industry (yes, choose not to consume fish to save fish).

Apart from the ongoing destruction caused by the fishing and fish farming industries, the World Wildlife Fund (WWF) website states that:

Even with soy as the second biggest driver of deforestation in the world’s tropical forests, let us not neglect the fact that more than three quarters of global soy is fed to livestock for meat and dairy production. In a study on almost 40,000 farms in 119 countries and covering 40 food products that represent 90% of all that is eaten, Oxford researcher Joseph Poore was quoted in a Guardian article saying that:

Even if we were to disregard the suffering that nonhuman animals have to go through to end up on our plates, it would be naïve of us to believe we can save our environment, and therefore ourselves, without questioning our dietary and consumer choices. Even if we were to treat nonhuman animals as mere commodities, it would be unwise of us to ignore the inefficiency of their production. And even if we were completely apathetic to nonhuman animals, it would be uncharitable of us to deny the hunger crisis that has stricken impoverished nations, and the fact that this crisis can be mitigated and even averted with us choosing plant-based over animal products.¹

Finally, to address the nutritional aspect of a plant-based diet, major health organisations such as the American Dietetic Association and the British Dietetic Association have provided that well-planned vegan diets are appropriate for individuals during all stages of the life cycle. Peter Singer wrote in his pioneering book Animal Liberation that vegans are “living demonstrations of the practicality and nutritional soundness” of their diets. In fact, due to the plentiful health benefits which are linked to a balanced vegan diet, the health approach towards veganism has, for many, acted as a window into the other approaches mentioned earlier and the practical significance of this philosophy as a whole.²

The depiction of Greek mythology in Rick Riordan’s novels displays a vivid imagery of how the mist flows over divine or supernatural entities and objects, in shielding and disguising them from mortals’ eyes. The mist in the context of veganism is the walls of the farming factories and the slaughterhouses, the marketing strategy and advertisements of the food industry, and our own willful ignorance in accepting the truth of the matter. The divine entities are the animals themselves, capable of suffering and enjoyment, yet often objectified for the purposes of profit and taste. And the mortals? Well, we are the mortals, but with an important distinction, and an empowering one: we are different from the blissfully ignorant mortals, because with enough patience and effort, and with enough will and passion, we can pierce through even the densest of mist and see the sentient beings not for what they are, but for who they are, and choose to lead a life full of compassion and kindness.