• Lux@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    36
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    14 days ago

    Reasons that I, as a vegan, do not use honey:

    1. I cannot guarantee that the bees consented to their product being harvested. Some beekeepers clip the queen’s wings, which can prevent the colony from leaving.

    2. I cannot guarantee that bees were not harmed in the process of harvesting (potentially getting crushed by the honeycomb frames, for example) or in the process of controlling the colony (like clipping the queen’s wings).

    • Akareth@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      23
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      14 days ago

      Regarding your second point, you also cannot guarantee that small animals like rodents are not harmed in the process of harvesting plants.

      • Mrs_deWinter@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        13 days ago

        But renouncing honey is very easy, while not eating plants would mean starving to death. Since veganism is about reducing harm as far as possible, unavoidable suffering doesn’t make anything non vegan.

        • Szyler@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          13 days ago

          (Strawman)

          Killing a few bees when collecting honey

          Vs

          Killing a lot of insects and rodents when plowing/tilling land to grow sugarcane/corn(sirup).

          Why discount one but not the other if they are equal?

          • Mrs_deWinter@feddit.org
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            13 days ago

            I assume that for many vegans the specifically exploitative element of farming honey does make a difference to the rather unavoidable collateral damage of agriculture in general (since if we don’t want to starve to death; each and everyone of us, vegan or not, will have to accept that those are happening) - but if you assume that honey comes with less suffering than corn syrup you’re very welcome to replace them accordingly. Based on your tone I assume you’re not a vegan and not actually interested in reducing animal suffering, but I could be wrong.

            • Szyler@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              13 days ago

              I am not vegan, but simply trying to understand how honey is bad, but as you say “unavoidable collateral damage of agriculture” or not.

              There are many ways agriculture could be less harm, less pesticides, less monotone growing practices, more spread out growing. We do not have to accept these practices to not starve.

              I don’t think honey collecting is worse than agriculture (even of direct plants for human consumption), so I don’t think vegans should discount honey.

              • Mrs_deWinter@feddit.org
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                4
                ·
                13 days ago

                I am not vegan, but simply trying to understand how honey is bad, but as you say “unavoidable collateral damage of agriculture” or not.

                Is bad as well, we simply have no good way of avoiding it.

                Think about it this way: Beekeeping is bad, agriculture is bad. Can we avoid both? No. But can we avoid at least one of them? Easily so. So let’s do that - half a win is better than nothing.

                There are many ways agriculture could be less harm, less pesticides, less monotone growing practices, more spread out growing. We do not have to accept these practices to not starve.

                I agree, which is why many (if not all) vegans strive to support those more sustainable forms of agriculture. But economic constraints are a real thing for many people. Not everyone can always decide to buy the higher quality produce. If we can - good, let’s do that. While and if we can’t, same thing with the honey: Can we avoid all the problems at once? No, but at least we can do as best as reasonable possible, so let’s do that. That’s veganism for many people.

                I don’t think honey collecting is worse than agriculture (even of direct plants for human consumption), so I don’t think vegans should discount honey.

                Even if it’s just 1% worse than agriculture wouldn’t we reduce a bit of suffering by replacing it? And I mean it’s not even like we need honey for anything. We consume too much sugar anyway. Even if honey is exactly as harmful as sugar cane farming (which is debatable), by omitting it we would save not only agricultural resources but animal exploitation as well. Not consuming it is better than consuming it in terms of animal suffering. Since we don’t need to consume it, from a vegan perspective I think it’s understandable why that’s seen as preferable.

                • Szyler@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  13 days ago

                  I agree with your arguments. We’re on the same side of all of this.

                  I disagree on having to remove one if both are bad. It would be like the trolley problem. 10 people suffer repeatedly indefinitely vs infinitely many suffering eventually. Moving all use to sugar cane will be worse for the environment than spreading some honey and some sugar cane. See my previous monocultulturalism point.

                  Personally I think honey vs sugar cane is equal, so for me the choice is bad either way. I don’t know which is worse, I try to use less, but what I use I feel is ambivalent, so I use both.

    • daniskarma@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      14 days ago

      Bees can kill their queen and make a new one no problem.

      If the colony would want to move away they would just do that. I don’t think clipping the queen wings would do nothing.

      But I doubt any beekeeper colony would want to move as they are keep at a perfect environment so they can produce more honey that they would actually need to survive. Even industrial ones. It’s part of basic beekeeping that bees must be in a good place so they produce the most honey.

      Hurt of mistreated bees would not produce honey. If they are mistreated the try to leave (and as stated they can just kill their Queen if she is crippled), they eat all the honey, or just die.

      Bees are really complicate to get advantage of. Our relationship with them need to be symbiotic to work.

      Not trying to convince anyone to consume honey if they don’t want to. As it’s basically just sugar so whatever.

      • Lux@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        7
        ·
        14 days ago

        Bees can kill their queen and make a new one no problem.

        This doesn’t make the mutilation of the queen bee any less bad. It’s still harming the bee. I am not aware if a bee has the ability to make an informed decision on whether to kill the queen and relocate, so I cannot make an informed decision about whether the bees actually want to be in their current hive.

        If the colony would want to move away they would just do that.

        I don’t know if this is true. It’s possible the bees are being manipulated into staying at their current hive in some way.

        I don’t think clipping the queen wings would do nothing

        It would hurt the queen, which is more than I want to be involved in.

        But I doubt any beekeeper colony would want to move as they are keep at a perfect environment so they can produce more honey that they would actually need to survive. Even industrial ones. It’s part of basic beekeeping that bees must be in a good place so they produce the most honey

        Making an assumption about what the bees want is not strong enough of an excuse for me to be ok with their exploitation. I don’t believe we should have the right to make decisions for other organisms, and the bees are not able to tell us how they want to be treated, so we should not try to control them or take what they produce.

        Hurt of mistreated bees would not produce honey.

        This appears to also be an assumption. I do not know if it is true, so I cannot use it to make a decision

        If they are mistreated the try to leave (and as stated they can just kill their Queen if she is crippled), they eat all the honey, or just die.

        If this is true, there is likely to be a minimum amount of mistreatment before they take action. I do not know how much mistreatment a bee can take, so I cannot use this to make a decision.

        Bees are really complicate to get advantage of. Our relationship with them need to be symbiotic to work.

        I do not know if this is true. We take advantage of many animals without giving them much in return, so I am not sure if the bee-beeker relationship is actually symbiotic.

        • daniskarma@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          edit-2
          13 days ago

          Now I’m just curious.

          How do you manage the amount of animals that are hurt during agricultural process then?

          Tons of invertebrates are killed by pesticides, while harvest or during the cleaning process of the vegetables.

          It seems to me that being killed by pesticides or drown with water is worse fate that beeing in a nice artificial honeycomb where they may or may not clip the wings of one queen or make you a little sleepy once in a while with smoke.

          On matter of animals hurted/killed during production process honey seems more vegan that most vegetables.

          • Lux@lemmy.blahaj.zone
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            13 days ago

            This comment section has led me to more deeply consider the effects that all types of food production have on animals. I previously have just been ok with any non-animal product, but I now realize that this is not enough, and I am still causing harm to animals with the products that I do use. I will try to ensure that I buy the lowest-impact food available in the future, but I don’t think it is even be possible to stay alive without causing harm to some animals.

            I think using products produced by animals is generally going to be worse than harming animals to stop them from destroying crops, but I will need to consider this more deeply to make the best choice I can.

    • too_high_for_this@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      13 days ago

      Do you personally grow everything you eat? If not, animals (and humans) are absolutely harmed in the process. Commercial agriculture, even organic, kills huge numbers of small animals and destroys habitat just to prepare the soil, not to mention all the insects killed by pesticides. Farmers will also kill deer, wild pigs, birds, etc. to protect their crops. And agriculture in some places still relies on child and/or slave labor.

      • Lux@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        13 days ago

        You are correct. There is more that i can and need to do. That still does not make it good to use honey.

        • Strawberry@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          13 days ago

          Hey no wait you’re supposed to throw your hands in the air and just eat industrially farmed animal corpses because there are also negative outcomes of vegetable production so obviously the two are completely equivalent

          • too_high_for_this@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            13 days ago

            Nice strawman, strawberry. The point is that avoiding honey to reduce possible harm is vain at best.

            But since you want to talk about meat, I’m curious about your opinion of hunting.

            Do you know how animals die in the wild? The lucky ones get hit by a car and die instantly. The rest die from disease and starvation, both agonizing slow deaths, or they are literally eaten alive by predators.

            If the aim of veganism is to reduce animal suffering, surely you would support ethical hunting, right?

        • Szyler@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          13 days ago

          Do you avoid all sugar products, or just honey?

          Sugar growing also kills animals. You cannot avoid all harm, so why discount honey for the harm you know, but not discounting harm from growing sugar?

          Reducing harm, sure, but it seems selective to discount honey for small amount of harm, when other things you (assumed) eat do equal (potentially unknown to you) harm.

          Do you need to know every process of growing/transporting something to eat it? Or does you list of edible products shrink as you learn every new form of harm?

          • Lux@lemmy.blahaj.zone
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            13 days ago

            The list of edible products shrink as I learn of new harm. As a modern human, I am addicted to sugar, but I do need to make more of an effort to use less of it, as well as lessen the impact of what I do use.