this post was submitted on 19 Oct 2024
695 points (97.8% liked)

Science Memes

11021 readers
4388 users here now

Welcome to c/science_memes @ Mander.xyz!

A place for majestic STEMLORD peacocking, as well as memes about the realities of working in a lab.



Rules

  1. Don't throw mud. Behave like an intellectual and remember the human.
  2. Keep it rooted (on topic).
  3. No spam.
  4. Infographics welcome, get schooled.

This is a science community. We use the Dawkins definition of meme.



Research Committee

Other Mander Communities

Science and Research

Biology and Life Sciences

Physical Sciences

Humanities and Social Sciences

Practical and Applied Sciences

Memes

Miscellaneous

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Kyle_The_G@lemmy.world 93 points 3 weeks ago (17 children)

I feel like bees are a bit of a grey area. We're not eating them, we're kind of like landlords that give them a nice place to stay and they pay rent in honey. I'm not vegan so I'm not quite sure what the rationale is for bee stuff.

[–] dharmacurious 91 points 3 weeks ago (5 children)

Best friend's a vegan who raises bees. He doesn't clip wings or use smoke. From what I gather he basically just maintains their boxes, feeds them sugar when it's too cold for em, and collects honey when it's time. Someone is about to come along and say "he's not a vegan. Sounds like a vegetarian" and then I'm going to think "sounds like you're gatekeeping a lifestyle like it's a religion, and not even all vegans who don't use honey agree on whether or not a vegan can use honey" but I won't, because I don't wanna get wrapped up in the nonsense.

But either way, yes, some vegans do use honey. And some, like that theoretical commenter, don't eat anything that casts a shadow.

[–] leftzero@lemmynsfw.com 24 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

don't eat anything that casts a shadow

Anyone who doesn't exclusively survive on naturally dried up lichen ain't no real vegan in my book!

[–] Sal@mander.xyz 9 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)
[–] leftzero@lemmynsfw.com 5 points 3 weeks ago

That's why I specified naturally dried up. The mites will have moved to greener pastures, I mean lichens.

[–] cecinestpasunbot@lemmy.ml 12 points 3 weeks ago

Personally I’m not sure the gate keeping you’re observing is all that much of an issue. I think it’s useful to remember many vegans are also public advocates for veganism. It’s important to them that people generally know what they mean when they advocate for veganism.

However, the definition of all words are always in flux. It’s not uncommon to see people call themselves vegan when a more apt description of their lifestyle would be plant based, flexitarian, vegetarian, etc. As such, I think edge cases like your friend take on an outsized importance that goes beyond the morality of your friend eating honey.

Basically, the goal may not be the social exclusion of your friend which is what I think is usually the problematic aspect of gatekeeping.

[–] littlewonder@lemmy.world 12 points 3 weeks ago (4 children)

Beekeeping family here: who the fuck clips bee wings?

[–] dharmacurious 3 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Iunno, never personally seen it. Just heard about it online when I first started looking into beekeeping (which I ultimately did not take up).

Still interested in doing it (the keeping not the clipping), if you have any advice on getting started for someone with like 18 dollars between paydays. Lol

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] funkless_eck@sh.itjust.works 10 points 3 weeks ago

also - does this distinction matter? Is someone who runs 100m dash vs an ultra marathon runner both runners? When I run for the bus I'm also running. Sonic the Hedgehog also runs. They have distinctions in context that make sense - but they are all running.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] neidu2@feddit.nl 51 points 3 weeks ago (4 children)

I'm not sure I'd be comfortable with my landlord harvesting my vomit as rent.

"I'm eating it, I promise it's not a sex thing."

[–] BigDanishGuy@sh.itjust.works 32 points 3 weeks ago

If my bank accepted vomit as mortgage payments, they could smack my ass and call me bulimic, I don't care what y'all do with my vomit, let's talk about pool house options and a second car.

I'd be cool with creaming their coffee twice a week if it meant I got my house for no money.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] TherapyGary@lemmy.blahaj.zone 26 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Well landlords are the badguys so...

[–] jafo@lemmy.world 13 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

What if the hives are rent controlled?

[–] TherapyGary@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 points 3 weeks ago

Sounds spooked with extra steps

[–] chuckleslord@lemmy.world 25 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

Couple of reasons. One, honey is made not from local pollinators but from European honey bees. Two, European honey bees are really good at producing honey, which means they're more efficient at removing pollen and nectar from flowers, denying food for native pollinators. Three, while only a few bees are directly harmed during honey harvesting, the need for their honey to be harvested means that they've been bred to make big, uniform honeycombs and a glut of excess honey. This makes them more susceptible to diseases, even before you factor in the monoculture nature of their existence.

Essentially, it's not that eating honey is harmful to bees. It's that the creation of honey at scale is cruel both to the bees producing the honey and the native pollinators who get pushed out by them. We (my household) do have honey on occasion, but only from local, small scale honey producers.

[–] blaue_Fledermaus@mstdn.io 18 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

Here in Brazil we have Meliponiculture, farming honey from native stingless bees.

[–] angrystego@lemmy.world 3 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (1 children)

Wow, that's interesting! Does the honey differ from the honey bee one?

[–] blaue_Fledermaus@mstdn.io 6 points 3 weeks ago

Depends on the species, but in general the honeys have variation in the nutrients, some considered even more medicinal than that of European Honey Bees.
They usually also have more water content, so unlike "regular" honey, they can more easily spoil.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] smeg@feddit.uk 5 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Do you think there are no vegans in Europe?

[–] azertyfun@sh.itjust.works 7 points 3 weeks ago

Probably yeah. But also the European honeybee is not the only European bee nor pollinator so the argument holds true to some extent.

However I'm not convinced the impact is worse than the monocultures which makes up the majority of our calorie intake. Thousands of hectares of nothing but beets or corn probably does more for killing insect diversity than a handful of beehives, but what do I know.

[–] Bosht@lemmy.world 17 points 3 weeks ago (6 children)

So my wife went vegan for a bit and the logic is basically any living thing we take advantage of or make their lives more of a labor. So eggs, honey, milk aren't vegan because companies put those animals in situations they normally wouldn't be in in the wild to take advantage and harvest products from them.

[–] angrystego@lemmy.world 10 points 3 weeks ago

Yeah, some vegans draw the line at the animal kingdom. (Plants, algae, mushrooms - these are all living things as well, but one has to eat something.) Some vegans I know do eat honey though. It depends on what feels like animal exploitation to the person.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] Ephera@lemmy.ml 10 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Eh, I doubt most people care about being vegan for the sake of being vegan, but as has been said, honey bees are bad for pollinators, so from a moral viewpoint, you get to the same conclusion.

Ultimately, though, honey isn't hard to give up. Certainly nothing that I felt was worth contemplating whether it's grey area or not.
At best, it's annoying, because the weirdest products will have honey added. One time, I accidentally bought pickles with honey, and they were fucking disgusting.

[–] scrion@lemmy.world 15 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (2 children)

honey bees are bad for pollinators

Hm? What do you mean?

From this paper:

A. mellifera appears to be the most important, single species of pollinator across the natural systems studied, owing to its wide distribution, generalist foraging behaviour and competence as a pollinator.

This is a genuine question btw.

[–] frosch@sh.itjust.works 24 points 3 weeks ago

I read an article on this a while back that made me refrain from actually getting bees. I can’t find it right now, but the gist is that domesticated honeybees will compete with a lot of other pollinators (mainly solitary bees) over the exact same food sources.

However, the honeybees have a gigantic advantage in being supervised, housed and generally looked after by the apiary. Which will also employ methods to stimulate hive-growth, driving the hives demand for food.

That is something a solitary bee - or another pollinator depending on the same nutrition - cannot compete with, driving them away.

So, in a nutshell: adding bees to a place already rich in honeybees? Whatever. Adding honeybees into a local ecosystem not having them rn? That will drastically lower biodiversity

[–] Ephera@lemmy.ml 5 points 3 weeks ago

I'm no biologist, but as for why they're bad for other pollinators, yeah, what @frosch@sh.itjust.works said sums it up quite well.

I'd like to add that, to my understanding, they're actually relatively ineffective pollinators, too. They might do the highest quantity in total, but I'm guessing primarily because of how many honeybees there are.
I believe, the paper you linked also observes this, at least they mention in the abstract:

With respect to single-visit pollination effectiveness, A. mellifera did not differ from the average non-A. mellifera floral visitor, though it was generally less effective than the most effective non-A. mellifera visitor.

...but I don't understand the data. 🫠

As for why this is the case, for one, honeybees are extremely effective at collecting pollen, with their little leg pockets, which reduces the amount of pollen a flower has to offer.

But particularly when they're introduced into foreign ecosystems, pollinators that are specialized for local plants get displaced.
This may mean just a reduction of pollination effectiveness, or it could mean that the honeybees turn into "pollen thieves", i.e. they collect pollen without pollinating the plant.
Here's a paper, which unfortunately no one may read, but the abstract describes such a case quite well: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/20583711/

[–] Strawberry@lemmy.blahaj.zone 6 points 3 weeks ago

I don't think comparing beekeeping to landlordism makes it sound very ethical at all

[–] Anticorp@lemmy.world 5 points 3 weeks ago (4 children)

One of my best friends is vegan. They won't use anything that comes from animals. Nothing. That includes wool, even though the sheep is harmed in the process. They're absolutely opposed to any animal products or bi-products.

[–] Tabula_stercore@lemmy.world 7 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

even though the sheep is harmed in the process

This is such a funny typo

[–] Sunshine@lemmy.ca 1 points 2 hours ago

I mean it’s accurate because wool shearers are often rushed with the sheep, hurting them to meet the quota of the day.

[–] Klear@lemmy.world 4 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

The dark vegan. Eats only food that causes as much suffering as possible.

[–] Sunshine@lemmy.ca 1 points 2 hours ago

It’s more accurate to say carnivore cannibal.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Chev@lemmy.world 4 points 3 weeks ago

As long as we canot ask them, if it's ok if we take their honey (consent), it's not vegan. For an counter example, it's fairly easy to get consent from a dog to touch them. Most people are able to tell if they are fine or not.

[–] multifariace@lemmy.world 3 points 3 weeks ago (15 children)

I find vegan intellect fascinating. I love hearing their responses to my epistomology. They all make it up as they go along. It's very similar to religious beliefs in the way it is personal. Each has their own set beliefs on where to draw the line of what is vegan and what is not.

My personal understanding of the world is that plants aren't so different from animals that they can be classified separately from other food sources. For example, how much different is r-selected reproduction from a fruiting plant. Plants react differently to different colors of light and so do we.

It helps to understand the goal of a vegan. The extent to which we are tied to every living thing on Earth means that many vegans have set impossible goals.

Just fascinating.

[–] ebc@lemmy.ca 22 points 3 weeks ago (6 children)

I've always wondered if vegetables from a farm that uses horse-drawn tills instead of tractors would be vegan... It's a real question, but everyone I ask thinks that I'm trolling.

[–] howrar@lemmy.ca 9 points 3 weeks ago

Or animal manure, or pesticides

[–] multifariace@lemmy.world 4 points 3 weeks ago

Each vegan will have their own answer. If you are truly curious, and a vegan is sharing their mindset with you, ask them.

[–] littlewonder@lemmy.world 3 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

Here's my weird question: if faux leather is plastic and someone is vegan for environmental reasons, would leather be preferable? What if it's a byproduct and would otherwise be trashed? These are things I think about as someone who tries to reduce my impact on the environment as much as I feasibly can in a capitalist society.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] v4ld1z@lemmy.zip 3 points 3 weeks ago

I'd say no because horses can't consent to being used for this. Horse riding is generally not considered vegan either

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Robust_Mirror@aussie.zone 20 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

I mean I think it can be boiled down pretty simply: cause the least harm to living things that you can personally manage, according to your definition of harm. Having impossible goals isn't necessarily a bad thing. If your impossible goal is to make a billion dollars ethically, and you get to 50 million being 95% ethical, you could still consider that a win, even though you didn't reach your impossible goal.

Even the simple goal of "always being a good person 100% of the time" is probably impossible to achieve over an entire lifetime while meeting every person's definition of it. That doesn't mean it's useless for someone to strive for that within their definition of "good person".

In fact I'd say the vast majority of meaningful, non trivial goals could be considered "impossible".

[–] itslilith@lemmy.blahaj.zone 13 points 3 weeks ago (4 children)

ethical vegans (and not people who eat plant-based for nutritional reasons, and often get conflated with people doing it for ethics reasons) generally agree on one very simple rule:

To reduce, as much as possible, the suffering inflicted upon animals.

That's it.

Where that line is drawn of course depends on your personal circumstances. Some people require life-saving medicine that includes animal products, and are generally still considered vegan.

I'd like to see what about this confuses you and your epistomology [sic, and that word doesn't mean what you think it means]

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] Hammocks4All@lemmy.ml 7 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

What a word salad. Your comment can be applied to anything because people are different lol. All my friends who are dads have different ideas on how to be a dad. Fascinating. It helps to understand the goal of a parent. All my friends with jobs define success in different ways. It’s like they’re all making it up as they go along. Fascinating. It helps to understand the goals of a worker.

It’s ok to set “impossible” goals if you view them as directions rather than destinations.

Fascinating huh?

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (11 replies)
load more comments (7 replies)