Compromised values: a comparative response during the COVID-19 crisis by ethical vegans and vegetarians

Author:

Díaz Estela M.,Almiron Núria,Aranceta-Reboredo Olatz

Abstract

AbstractAnimal advocacy is a complex phenomenon. As a social movement encompassing diverse moral stances and lifestyle choices, veganism and vegetarianism (veg*) are at its core, and animal testing raises as a notably contentious issue within its members. This paper addresses this critical topic. Employing data from an international quantitative survey conducted between June and July 2021, our research explores how ethical vegans and vegetarians responded during the COVID-19 crisis. By comparing the experiences and choices between the two groups, we aimed to understand the variances in attitudes and behaviors in the face of an ethical dilemma, highlighting the interplay between personal beliefs and social pressures in times of a health crisis. Our findings reveal stark contrasts in how vegans and vegetarians navigated the pandemic; vegans displayed less conformity yet experienced a significant compromise of their ethical values, particularly in their overwhelming acceptance of vaccination. This study enhances the field of veg* research and social movement studies by exploring how a social crisis shapes members’ behaviors and perspectives. Our findings also contribute to a better understanding of the challenges and prejudices that a minority group such as vegans may face and how they cope with the pressure to go against the mainstream at a time when society is polarized by a single discourse that goes against their moral values.

Publisher

Springer Science and Business Media LLC

Reference144 articles.

1. Akhtar A (2012a) The costs of animal experiments. In: Akhtar A (ed) Animals and public health. The Palgrave Macmillan animal ethics series. Palgrave Macmillan, London

2. Akhtar A (2012b) Animals and public health. In: Akhtar A (ed) Why treating animals better is critical to human welfare. The Palgrave Macmillan animal ethics series. Palgrave Macmillan, London

3. Akhtar A (2015) The flaws and human harms of animal experimentation. Camb Q Healthc Eth 24(4):407–419. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0963180115000079

4. Almiron N, Thornton G, Martins G (2022) The media’s forgotten animal link: species-patriotism in world press coverage of COVID-19. Anim Eth Rev 2(1):60–77

5. Animal Welfare (Sentience) Act 2022 (2022) Government Bill. Originated in the House of Lords, Session 2021–22. https://bills.parliament.uk/bills/2867

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3