Vegans have a tough time. For one thing, Pret’s vegan fare is very soft, many vegans get a bad rap. Chastised for their view that, for whatever reason, sentient beings aren’t meant to be consumed or worn by, or used by or tested on by human beings, they’re often asked to explain these views, over and over again, or treated as humourless and worthy.
However, we now have official stats of how oh-so-terribly vegans are treated. Following on from the scandal where Waitrose Food editor William Sitwell resigned after the public backlash caused when he sent freelancer (and vegan) Serene Nelson an email joking - unfunnily - about killing and force-feeding vegans meat, a survey has been done. The research into ‘vegaphobia’, as the press release from LifeSum terms it, shows that 92% of vegans experienced prejudice from friends and family, 59% whilst dining out, 55% in the workplace and 21% whilst shopping in a market or grocery store.
The survey comes the same week that an ex-employee of The League Against Cruel Sports claims he was unfairly dismissed on the basis of his veganism. Jordi Casamitjana alerted his managers his concerns it was investing pension funds into firms involved with animal testing, and was shortly dismissed for ‘gross misconduct’, not his veganism, the League Against Cruel Sports insist.
The two parties will battle it out at a tribunal, ahead of which Casamitjana told the BBC: ‘for me veganism is a belief and affects every single aspect of my life’. His lawyers say the tribunal will be a ‘landmark case’ because, if it’s found that veganism - or ethical veganism as Casamitjana calls it - is a belief, then, well, discrimination against what many consider to be a lifestyle choice will be made illegal.
The language of an oppressed party is being co-opted here. We’ve all seen people talk about the micro-aggressions they withstand, the little things that happen to them on a day-to-day that, at worst, upset them, and at best, only serve to remind them of the wider system of oppression against them. Same-sex couples get glares for holding hands in public. Women have said wolf-whistling upsets them. BME people have, it is today reported, said, twice as much as white people surveyed, that they’ve been mistaken for staff members in shops they’re just trying to buy stuff from.
Vegans certainly experience similar micro-aggressions, little bits of annoyance that nudge them out of their comfort zone each day. However, actually discriminated-against groups face actual discrimination. Same-sex couples aren’t afraid of holding hands itself, they’re afraid of the violence they expect will greet them should they do so. Women aren’t necessarily upset by wolf-whistling itself, more the reminder that they can be reduced to sexual objects at any moment. As for BME people, that Guardian report shows that they’re more likely to miss out on work because of racial bias.
Do vegans face violence? Do vegans face sexual violence? Do vegans miss out on work? Sure, because vegans come from all walks of life, and will include in their number many who may not appreciate a white guy trying to use veganism to make himself a victim right now. Because vegans aren’t being denied their rights because of their veganism.
Having people joke about your protein intake day in, day out, must be a real bore. Going for dinner with someone only to have them call your meal ‘rabbit food’ must be….annoying? Having to pay the exact same for a cauliflower steak that your friend has paid for a beef steak because, hey, an ailing restaurant industry is using an increased market desire for plant-based foods as an excuse to charge way too much for really cheap vegetables, must be galling. And yes, having your company invest a lot of its employees’ money into companies with rules that don’t agree with yours is a huge ethical tussle. But that’s not prejudice worthy of protection under direly important discrimination law. Because discrimination is about being treated differently for who you are, not for what you choose to do.
And veganism is a choice. How easy that choice is is up for debate. To me, it seems like to be fully vegan, to quit the leather and lanolin and the rest, is to be a tiny minnow, swimming upstream against a huge tide of cultural importance put on non-veganism. Many market forces conspire to tell us meat-eating is natural, milk-drinking is comforting, leather is sexy and having ‘a chicken in every pot’ , as Franklin D Roosevelt once put it, is a sign of economic stability. It’s been, in the main, a good thing that the food and clothes industries have responded to rising veganism with a rise in vegan produce, making veganism an easier choice.
To some, though, veganism is already the easiest choice in the world, and even contemplating consuming any animal-based produce is enough to make these people feel quite unwell. To them, for health, ethical or ecological reasons, they want animals to not be present in their bodies, or to exist free of human constraints, or to simply not exist in such large quantities because all that methane is so terrible for the planet.
Regardless, though, veganism is a lifestyle choice - a worthy one, no doubt - but a lifestyle choice regardless. How do I know this? Because every now and then, I am a vegan! I enjoy vegan meals and vegan booze and wearing a whole bunch of clothes that are vegan. No animals were harmed in the making of my toothbrush! I enjoy vegan fast food, I enjoy foods that are vegan without me even realising they’re vegan, I regularly cook dinner without any animal products. Even though I haven't gone full-whack vegan, because I've not got the time or resource to be a minnow right now, it’s vital, for the planet, I’m told, that veganism is something that meat-eaters can adopt, bit by bit, bite by bite. Now, I can’t do the same thing with race, I can’t do the same thing with age, I can’t do the same thing with pregnancy, and though I’ve had to try at some points, I certainly can’t hop in and out of my sexuality, at least not in a way that aligns with my human rights.
It’s not nice to hear that some vegans have experienced rudeness simply because of what they eat - that sort of judgement helps no-one. And to hear that one respondent to LifeSum's survey that ‘People have purposely put meat in products to see if I will eat it/try and trick me’, is sign that too many friends have dickhead friends.
No lifestyle choice that doesn’t harm anyone should result in unwarranted criticism or teasing or snideness or rudeness. Yet, being rude and mean to vegans isn’t discrimination. To allow the Equality Act to expand to fit people who have certain lifestyle choices into protected categories dilutes down a really important law that many people need right now. Hate crime is on the rise in every area and must be taken seriously.
No lifestyle choice that doesn’t harm any other human - discrimination is about human rights, remember - should result in unwarranted criticism or teasing or snideness or rudeness. A vegan trying to elbow his way into the suffering actually discriminated-against groups have to deal with, to stake (sorry) a claim on something that is designed for people who deal with real, lived prejudices, big and small, that they cannot avoid no matter how much they try, is an insult to those who suffer from actual, proven discrimination. Once a lifestyle choice is made a protected characteristic, what next? What about when it's suggested fans of sailing should never have to set foot ashore, and have their doctor come visit them on-deck? Or people who like to wear non-medical sunglasses should never have to remove them, even when going through passport control, because sunglasses are their thing? Will we all turn into our crusty old relatives saying 'what next?' over and over until we all die?
In case discriminated-against people weren't enough to feel empathy for in all this, trying to make 'vegaphobia' a thing is making it worse for the many vegans, vegetarians and flexitarians who want to go vegan, or introduce more plant-based products into their life, but can’t stand the negative (and sadly, proven by people like Casamitjana) stereotypes of humourless worthiness that'll inevitably head their way. Can't a vegan just eat a tofu burger in peace without being asked if they think anti-veganism should be banned under the Equality Act?