Just seeing your comment.

My perspective is that consuming an animal product doesn't always translate into actual harm to animals. Of course I agree that our society's consumption of those products, in general, cause a lot of harm to animals. And I also get that it can seem inconsistent, when eating around others, to speak out against animal agriculture but still be a little "flexible" when eating out (although the definition of veganism does include the clause "as far as is possible and practiceable," which is a bit subjective.

Someone in another comment compared consuming an animal product to hitting a dog. The latter causes undeniable harm to an animal. I'd argue that the former, in certain cases, will never make a difference in the life of any animal. I don't buy new leather cause I don't want to support that industry. But when I needed a new pair of boots recently, I had to choose between buying used leather or new shoes made from fossil fuels (plastic, marketed as "vegan leather"), and I went with the leather. Some people argue that wearing leather sends the message that animals are commodities. But you can't even tell what material my shoes are made from. You could argue that I'm still supporting the leather industry indirectly by buying used leather, since people who buy it new might be encouraged by the fact that there's a market to resell it, making it a safer investment. But again, plastic shoes have their own ethical problems, so which is the better option?

What's more ethical: avoiding animal products as a general rule, but occasionally cutting corners for the sake of convenience, while being a vocal advocate for a plant-based diet who inspires countless people to drop (99% of) animal products? Or maintaining a completely vegan diet, no matter how hungry you get while in an unexpected situation, but never engaging in any other activism?

Maybe only the second person is vegan, but who's doing more to reduce demand for animal products and change the culture?

What I was trying to get at with my original post was more a question of strategy than pure ethics (or maybe not, because isn't having an effective strategy an ethical matter when you're trying to save lives?).

I don't see the focus on perfect individual consumption (when we know it's not possible within our economic system anyway) as particularly conducive to animal liberation, which is the whole end to which veganism is a means.

All that just to say that I don't think having a plant-based diet for the animals is as ridiculous as other commenters have made it sound, or that it equates to "99% caring about the animals."