I would say that most vegans, even if they’ve never heard it, at least approximately follow the Vegan Society’s famous definition:
Veganism is a philosophy and way of living which seeks to exclude—as far as is possible and practicable—all forms of exploitation of, and cruelty to, animals for food, clothing or any other purpose; and by extension, promotes the development and use of animal-free alternatives for the benefit of animals, humans and the environment. In dietary terms it denotes the practice of dispensing with all products derived wholly or partly from animals.
Striking the parts that seem irrelevant to this specific question:
Veganism is a philosophy and way of living which seeks to exclude—as far as is possible and practicable—all forms of exploitation of, and cruelty to, animals for […] any […] purpose […]
Keep in mind that “animals” in that first part is widely treated as “humans and non-human animals”. So you would have to decide 1) to what extent cruelty was inflicted to create the distro, 2) to what extent people and non-human animals were exploited to create the distro, and 3) if there exist practicable alternatives that meaningfully reduce (1) and (2).
You’ve got me thinking about how the distinction is what the incentive is. Still not black and white, but if you want to suffer because you have only personal enjoyment to gain and your needs are all met, that’s better than consenting to suffering to pay the bills.
No Linux distro can be vegan because none of them can be produced without any suffering
Pretty sure that suffering is consensual, so it’s fine. It’s like how vegans can drink human breast milk or eat people who want to be cannibalized.
I would say that most vegans, even if they’ve never heard it, at least approximately follow the Vegan Society’s famous definition:
Striking the parts that seem irrelevant to this specific question:
Keep in mind that “animals” in that first part is widely treated as “humans and non-human animals”. So you would have to decide 1) to what extent cruelty was inflicted to create the distro, 2) to what extent people and non-human animals were exploited to create the distro, and 3) if there exist practicable alternatives that meaningfully reduce (1) and (2).
Consensual suffering is still suffering. Usually the alternative is just… more or different suffering
BDSM is not vegan, then? Can I get an expert’s opinion?
You’ve got me thinking about how the distinction is what the incentive is. Still not black and white, but if you want to suffer because you have only personal enjoyment to gain and your needs are all met, that’s better than consenting to suffering to pay the bills.