This is less a tactic than a footing for the tactics that follow. Many advocates hesitate to start conversations because they worry they do not know enough or will be unable to answer every question. Watching experienced advocates online can reinforce that feeling.

No one has all the answers, and productive conversations rarely depend on having them. They are more likely to result from thoughtful questions, careful listening, staying focused on the animals, and responding honestly when you do not know something. Confidence grows with experience.

Sprinkled throughout this briefing, we’ll cover how to use the resources on this website to help you prepare, but do not wait until you feel completely prepared. You can begin by starting where you are, learning as you go, and using each conversation to become more effective.

How you approach a conversation depends on who you’re talking to. You don’t have to change your principles for different audiences. Just convey information in a way that the audience can understand.

Family

Family members can be among the least receptive people to conversations about veganism and animal ethics. This is not because they care less. Rather, the relationship gives the conversation more weight. Relatives may feel judged, worry that family traditions are being criticized, or anticipate unwelcome changes to meals or routines.

Try to have the conversation when a natural opening appears; pressing the issue can work against the long game. The better approach is to make clear that you are open to further discussion, answer sincere questions when they arise, and set an example through your own choices.

Another approach is to have a dedicated conversation whose stated purpose is simply to help your family understand why your way of thinking about animals has changed and how that will affect your choices. Avoid asking them to make the same changes or implying that they should during this exchange. This leaves the door open for future conversations.

Because family members care about you and now know someone who is vegan, they may pay more attention to documentaries, news stories, social media posts, or other exposures they might otherwise ignore. Your presence can make the issue harder to ignore over time.

Friends

The closeness of a friendship will affect your approach. With a close friend, you may hesitate to risk tension or misunderstanding, yet that trust can allow for a more open and honest conversation.

You may be able to take an approach similar to the dedicated conversation suggested for family members: explain that you value the friendship and want them to understand why your way of thinking about animals has changed.

With more casual friends, there is often less at stake if the conversation is not well received. That can make it easier to be more direct.

Friends also provide natural openings. A friend may express concern about justice, nonviolence, climate change, health, or another value that intersects with veganism. These moments create opportunities to connect the issue to something the friend already cares about.

Acquaintances

Acquaintances often call for more patience than friends. You may know enough about each other to have a meaningful discussion, but not enough to predict how the topic will be received. Listen, ask questions, and learn what the other person values before deciding how deeply to go.

Acquaintances can become friends, so think beyond the immediate conversation. If they seem open, continue. If they push back or lose interest, it is usually better to leave them with a good food-for-thought question than to press for agreement.

As with friends, natural openings often work best. Look for moments when the person expresses interest in your food choices or concern about animals, health, the environment, fairness, or another topic that connects naturally with veganism and animal ethics.

Coworkers

Coworkers require additional judgment because the conversation takes place in a professional environment. Workplace dynamics can be tricky, especially when supervisors, employees, or advancement are involved. A bad interaction can also make day-to-day work uncomfortable. Consider whether the setting is appropriate and whether the other person seems interested before raising veganism or animal ethics.

When opportunities arise naturally, keep the conversation respectful, professional, and proportionate to the situation. A question over lunch or during a break is different from a discussion that interrupts work or makes others uncomfortable. If a coworker shows genuine interest, you can continue the conversation outside the workplace or at another time.

Strangers

Conversations with strangers can occur almost anywhere: during outreach, while traveling, at social gatherings, in restaurants or coffee shops, while waiting in line, or through unexpected comments in everyday life. Many begin with a natural opening, as discussed in the next tactic.

These conversations may never continue beyond the initial interaction. That can make it easier to be direct, try different approaches, and learn from the response. Because you do not know each other, you will need to break the ice quickly and avoid assumptions about what they already believe.

Note: This tactic applies mostly to activists who are actively looking for opportunities to engage.

During organized outreach, people generally understand why you are there, so you can begin discussing animal ethics with little or no small talk. Otherwise, opening with your intended topic can feel abrupt. You can usually tell early if someone is not in the mood to talk, and you should respect that.

Look for ways to begin a conversation that can naturally segue into animal ethics or veganism. Topics that lend themselves to this include companion animals, wildlife, nature, food, health, the environment, social justice, and shared values.

Use Your Shared Situation

The easiest way to start a conversation is to comment on something you both are experiencing in that exact moment. It feels natural and unforced.

• “Those are beautiful dogs. Are they rescues?”
• “Have you tried the plant-based burgers here?”
• “I love this farmer’s market. The veggies are so awesome here it make you wonder why anyone would eat meat.”
• “I noticed you choose the oat milk, which is my favorite. Are you vegan?”

Compliment Then Question

Compliments are good, but a standalone compliment can sometimes end a conversation immediately (“I like your shoes.” -> “Thanks!”). Pair the compliment with a question to keep the momentum going.

• “I love your fur coat. Isn’t it great they can make it look so real now and don’t have to harm animals?”
• [After concern for an animal has been shown]. “That was really kind of you. Have you always been an animal lover?” Then, if they say yes and you’re brave, you can say “That’s great, thank you so much for being vegan!”
• “I keep forgetting my shopping bag, but I see you didn’t. Have you always be so environmentally minded?”
• “That’s a beautiful basket of vegetables. Do you cook much?”

Ask for a Small Favor or Opinion

People naturally want to be helpful, and asking for help, for a recommendation, or their opinion shows you value their input.

• In the grocery store’s yogurt aisle: “I’m trying to find the best plant-based yogurt. Have you found one you like?”
• Ask the clerk: “I’m looking for a body wash, but it has to be cruelty-free. Any recommendations.”
• At a book club meeting: “I noticed the author barely mentions farmed animal sanctuaries, but went into detail about companion animals. Do you think that was intentional?”

Notice Their Interests

Pay attention to what the person is carrying or wearing. People often use accessories, books, or graphic tees as silent signals of their interests.

• In the coffee shop: “I noticed you’re reading a book on the environment. Just curious, does it discuss the impact of animal agriculture?”
• “I noticed your ‘Adopt, Don’t Shop’ sticker. Do you consider yourself to be an animal lover?”
• “I noticed yourTennessee Titans shirt. I read somewhere that most of the team is plant-based.”

People are generally more receptive to difficult ideas when they feel comfortable with the person presenting them. Even a small amount of rapport building can reduce defensiveness and encourage genuine dialogue. For this reason, building rapport is one of the most effective communication skills an advocate can develop. We explore it in much greater detail in the separate briefing, Building Rapport in Advocacy and Outreach.

In the previous tactic, we often chose conversation starters with a natural segue in mind. Another approach is to begin with almost any genuine shared interest, spend a little time building rapport, and then introduce animal ethics. This works especially well in street outreach and tabling, where people generally expect the conversation to move in that direction.

The shared interest can come from something the person is wearing, carrying, reading, or doing, from the setting itself, or even from an overheard comment. The specific topic matters less than creating a moment of genuine human connection before discussing more challenging ideas.

Once some rapport has been established, you might say something like, “You seem like a compassionate person. I volunteer in animal protection, and I was wondering if I could ask you a couple of questions.”

Not every conversation should continue. It is best to recognize this early, but you should continue assessing the conversation throughout. Some discussions that begin on a promising note become unproductive, while others that begin badly become engaging.

There is no need to continue simply because the conversation has begun. If the conditions for a meaningful discussion are not present, end it politely and move on. This allows you to spend your time and energy where they are more likely to make a difference.

When ending a conversation, remain courteous. Thank the person for their time, wish them well, and leave the door open to future discussions.

Some signs that it may be time to disengage include:

• The person shows little or no interest in having a genuine discussion.
• They repeatedly interrupt or refuse to let you finish a thought.
• They ignore your answers and simply move from one objection to another.
• The conversation becomes primarily about winning or provoking a reaction.
• They resort to insults or personal attacks.
• They appear rushed, distracted, intoxicated, or otherwise unable to engage thoughtfully.

Your emotional state can influence the conversation as much as the words you choose. People are generally more receptive when you remain calm, patient, and respectful, even when they strongly disagree. Becoming frustrated or defensive often shifts attention away from the animals and onto you.

Realize that some people have never examined the ethical questions surrounding our exploitation of animals, and related ideas that seem obvious to you may be new to them. Remaining calm helps keep the focus on the ideas being discussed.

If you find yourself becoming emotionally invested in winning the discussion, pause and redirect the conversation, or end it respectfully. A calm ending is more likely to leave the door open to future conversations than an exchange that leaves everyone discouraged.

People reject veganism for different reasons. One person may have concerns about health, another about convenience, culture, or tradition. Another may simply never have thought much about the issue. The same response will not be equally effective for everyone.

Early in the conversation, before presenting facts or making an ethical argument, try to understand the beliefs and concerns shaping the person’s views.

A few thoughtful questions can help you identify what is keeping them from being more receptive to veganism or animal ethics. For example, if someone thinks they need animal products to be healthy, they probably will not be receptive to ethical arguments until that concern is addressed.

Not every conversation requires using these kinds of questions, and they should not feel like an interrogation. Use them naturally and selectively as the conversation develops.

The words we choose can influence whether people focus on the animals or get sidetracked by terminology.

Using our suggestions about word choice should not make terminology a point of contention in the conversation. Instead, they should be integrated naturally into your overall approach so that your language communicates clearly.

Word choices are covered in much greater detail in Words of Concern in Vegan and Animal Advocacy and are only abbreviated here.

Some considerations include:

• Use veganism clearly. People often use vegan to refer only to food, while terms such as plant-based and vegan diet describe dietary choices rather than opposition to animal exploitation. When appropriate, clarify that veganism is an ethical position that extends beyond diet.
• Refer to animals in ways that recognize them as individuals. Avoid language that treats animals merely as products, commodities, or objects. Names, personal pronouns, and terms such as farmed animals can help keep the focus on what is being done to them.
• Use sensitive comparisons with care. Terms such as slavery, Holocaust, genocide, rape, murder, and concentration camp can provoke strong reactions. They should be used only when they help clarify the relevant similarity rather than shift attention away from animals and toward the word itself.
• Avoid inaccurate or juvenile labels. Phrases such as chicken periods or bee vomit are likely to distract from the ethical issue and can make the advocate seem less credible.
• Use movement terms judiciously. Words such as speciesism, abolitionist, and animal liberation can be valuable, but unfamiliar terms should usually be explained before they are relied on.

The Socratic method uses thoughtful questions to encourage reflection and examine beliefs. These questions differ from the earlier questions used to find out what is holding someone back. Socratic questions help the person reach their own conclusions rather than being told what to think.

This approach can reduce defensiveness and encourage genuine engagement. Questions invite participation, while statements often invite rebuttal.

Every non-advocacy briefing on this website includes Socratic questions tailored to its specific topics. These questions appear in the Advocacy Resources section of each briefing. The few examples below are drawn from those briefings, each of which provides additional questions that can be adapted for conversations.

Earlier, we discussed building rapport as a way to begin conversations and make difficult truths easier to hear. That process does not end once the conversation turns to veganism and animal ethics. Throughout the discussion, continue looking for opportunities to identify areas of agreement and acknowledge experiences you have in common.

Finding common ground helps reduce defensiveness and reinforces the idea that you and the other person are working through the issue together rather than debating from opposing sides. It can also make it easier to challenge assumptions and hold people accountable later in the conversation.

Find Points of Agreement

When you recognize a valid point, acknowledge it. Doing so demonstrates that you are listening and that your goal is understanding rather than simply waiting for your turn to respond.

Examples:

• “You’re right that vegans need a reliable source of vitamin B12. Fortunately, supplements are inexpensive and readily available.”
• “You have a point. Some people do return to eating animal products. Why do you think that happens?”
• “I agree that convenience can be a challenge, especially in some situations.”
• “You’re right that many people care about animals. The question is how that concern translates into our daily choices.”

Acknowledge Shared Experiences

One way to connect with people is to confess that you once held similar beliefs, concerns, or habits. This shows empathy and helps the other person feel understood rather than judged.

Examples:

• “I know what you mean. I used to think I could never go vegan either.”
• “I understand that concern because I had the same question when I first looked into veganism.”
• “I also used to think animals needed to be treated better, but I had never questioned whether we should be using them at all.”
• “I know what you mean about cheese. That was one of the things I thought would be hardest to give up.”
• “I enjoyed the taste of meat too. For me, the question eventually became whether enjoying a beef hamburger justified taking a life.”
• “I remember feeling exactly that way until I learned more about how animals are raised and slaughtered.”

Facts are important, but they are most effective when they support a conversation rather than replace one. Advocates may make the mistake of overwhelming people with facts and statistics. Here are some tips to help you avoid this problem.

Let vBriefings.org be your crutch.

Share the information you know and then refer people to the relevant briefing at vbriefings.org for supporting evidence, citations, and additional information. This allows you to focus on the conversation rather than worrying about perfect recall.

Commit key facts to memory with vBriefings flashcards.

While you can and should use vBriefings as a crutch, advocates who want to reach the next level should consider using flashcards provided by the vBriefings platform.

Flashcards are not available for every briefing. For briefings that include them, they are linked in the Advocacy Resources section. You can also use the status report to quickly see which briefings currently have cards.

vBriefings partners with Brainscape because of its advanced learning features, including spaced repetition, randomization, and multi-deck study. A free account is all you need.

When someone challenges the numbers, help them put it in perspective.

People sometimes focus on a specific figure rather than the broader point being made. When this happens, explore whether the exact number is really the issue.

Questions can help keep the conversation focused on the underlying concern, for example:

• “What number would you find acceptable?”
• “If the actual number were half that, would it change your conclusion?”
• “Do you disagree with the statistic itself, or with the point it is intended to illustrate?

During a conversation, objections will inevitably arise. When an objection appears to be a superficial repetition of something the person has heard rather than the result of meaningful reflection, it may not be worth spending much time on. Give a brief response before steering the conversation back to ethics. More considered objections deserve just a little more attention.

Some people will try to distract from your response to an objection rather than acknowledge it. Watch for two common patterns:

• Pivoting to another objection before acknowledging the response. When this happens, call out the shift and bring them back: “You are trying to pivot on me and change the subject. Before we can move on, do you acknowledge that [brief restatement of your response]?”
• Gish-galloping. This means raising several unrelated objections in rapid succession, attempting to overwhelm you. When this happens, slow the conversation down: “Sure, there are good answers for all that. Which one would you like me to address first?” After one objection is covered, they will often forget about the others, and you can bring the conversation back to ethics.

The objection briefings on this website provide multiple talking points for responding to each covered objection. There is rarely a need to present every point provided in the briefing. We generally place the more important points first, but the most useful point depends on how the person presents the objection. Keep in mind that many objections have nothing to do with veganism. Tailor the answer accordingly.

• Examples:
  • If someone says, “Almonds use so much water,” use the first talking point in the /almonds briefing: “This is not a vegan issue.” If they persist, decide if it’s worth going to a later talking point: “Compared to almond milk, cow’s milk has a much higher environmental impact, even for water.”³
  • If someone says “transitioning to veganism would devastate the economy,” pick up on the word transitioning, and use this key point in the /economy briefing: “Economies have historically weathered transitions and emerged stronger.”

Health, environmental, and other practical considerations can be valuable parts of a conversation, removing concerns that would prevent someone from reconsidering their relationship with animals. If a person is especially interested in these topics, it may be worthwhile to spend additional time on them.

As early as practical, bring the conversation back to the ethics of exploiting animals. Veganism is fundamentally about how we treat animals, and the ethical case is the strongest and most difficult to dismiss. A person may debate nutritional studies and environmental projections, but it is harder to deny that animals used for food, clothing, and other purposes are disrespected and harmed by being abused and slaughtered.

Most briefings on this website suggest multiple segues back to ethics. Look in the Advocacy Notes section under Advocacy Resources.

Examples copied from specific briefings:

• /environment: “If we care about the destruction of forests and oceans, shouldn’t we also care about the destruction of the lives of billions of sentient beings?”
• /kill: “Even if incidental deaths occur during plant harvesting, how does that justify our intentional breeding, abuse, and violent slaughter of billions of farmed animals each year—animals who, incidentally, eat even more harvested crops?”
• /protein: The protein question often falsely implies that eating animals is necessary. But since we can get all the protein we need from plants, shouldn’t we ask whether we have the right to exploit and kill animals at all?”
• /expensive: “If eating vegan really were more expensive, would that justify harming animals?”
• /souls: “If someone was kicking a dog, would you stop them? Or would you say, ‘It’s fine, the dog doesn’t have a soul’?”
• /economy: “If we know animals suffer in industries we no longer need for survival, isn’t the real question whether it’s right to keep exploiting them at all?”

As part of keeping the focus on the animals, help people consider the situation from the victims’ perspective. Many discussions about veganism become centered on human preferences, traditions, convenience, or practical concerns. While those topics can be important, it is easy to lose sight of the individuals whose lives are most directly affected. The following are some examples of questions you could ask:

• “If you were in that situation, how would you want to be treated?”
• “How do you think the animal experiences that situation?”
• “Do you think the animal would choose that if given the option?”
• “If a dog or cat were treated the same way, how do you think people would react?”
• “What do you think life is like for the animal involved?”
• “Do you think the animal’s interests matter in this situation? If so, how much?”
• “When we talk about this issue, whose perspective do you think is most often overlooked?”
• “If someone did that to a human with similar cognitive abilities, how would we view it?”
• “What do you think the animal loses by being used in that way?”
• “If the roles were reversed, what would seem fair?”

Many people acknowledge that animals suffer in modern animal agriculture, yet continue to view the issue as something caused by corporations, governments, farmers, or society in general. While these institutions certainly play a role, meaningful ethical reflection requires considering one’s own complicity.

One way to encourage this reflection is to move the discussion from abstract systems to individual decisions. The following are some questions that can be asked in order to help them see that they are accountable for their decisions:

• “Who do you think pays for animals to be raised and slaughtered?”
• “If consumers stopped buying a product, what do you think would happen to the industry that produces it?”
• “Do you think our purchases influence which business practices continue?”
• “If someone believes unnecessary suffering is wrong, what responsibility do they have when their choices contribute to it?”
• “How much responsibility do you think consumers bear for the products they buy?”
• “If a practice is harmful, does the fact that it is common reduce our responsibility for participating in it?”
• “Do you think it is enough to oppose cruelty in principle, or should our actions reflect that opposition as well?”
• “What role do you think individual choices play in social change?”

Asking for a commitment will not be appropriate in every conversation. It is most appropriate in street outreach, tabling, or other settings where the person understands that veganism and animal ethics are the point of the discussion. It can also be appropriate in personal conversations that have become serious and reflective. It will usually be less appropriate in brief, casual, workplace, or family conversations where the person has not shown enough openness for a direct ask.

Many advocates hesitate to ask for veganism because they fear the request will seem too large or unrealistic. As a result, they may ask only for reduction or something vague like “do what you can.” While reduction can lessen harm, there are good reasons to ask for veganism instead:

• Those who still feel they can’t go vegan likely choose the smaller step of reduction anyway. Asking for veganism keeps the ethical goal clear, and that goal may be realized later after further reflection or exploration.
• Asking for reduction may unintentionally communicate that reduction is a morally adequate goal and that the person is free of further responsibility.

Below are several example questions that vary in directness and approach. We generally prefer a direct ask, but the best wording will depend on how the conversation has unfolded.

• “Now that you know what you know, are you vegan now?”
• “Based on everything we’ve discussed, are you willing to go vegan?”
• “Are you now willing to give veganism a try?”
• “Do you think it’s time to align your actions with your values and go vegan?”
• “The only ethical conclusion is for you to stop being complicit in disrespecting and harming animals. Agreed?”
• “If we agree animals shouldn’t be harmed unnecessarily, what does that mean for us?”
• “What conclusion do you think follows from everything we’ve discussed?”

Whether the person is ready to consider veganism, needs more time, or responds by taking a smaller step, give them a clear way to continue exploring the issue.

• Mention vBriefings.org as a place to continue exploring the topic, get other objections answered, and find fact-checked citations for points discussed during the conversation.
• As appropriate, point them to the briefing Getting Started with Going Vegan.
• If available, leave them with a leaflet or a getting-started booklet that best reflects your values from one of the organizations that supply them.
• If possible, provide an outreach card as a tangible reminder of the conversation and a way to offer follow-up recommendations tailored to the person’s interests, concerns, or objections.
  • For details, see our briefing on Outreach Cards: Why They Work and How to Get and Use Them.

First impressions matter, and so do last impressions. We suggest you close the conversation in three parts, usually in three brief sentences, delivered in a positive tone. The exact phrasing should depend on your relationship, the rapport you have established, and how receptive the person was during the conversation.

1. Thank them for their time, their willingness to listen, or their openness to the conversation.
2. Acknowledge something they said, a concern they raised, or a thoughtful part of the exchange.
3. Express a hopeful expectation that points toward meaningful action.

By way of illustration, here are some sample wordings for varying circumstances. If some of these sound a little soft, remember that they assume that at this point in the conversation, you have already asked for a commitment and encouraged further follow-up.

• Stranger, brief conversation, somewhat receptive. “Thanks for taking the time to chat. I appreciated your point about convenience—it’s something a lot of people wrestle with. I think you’ll find some practical ways to start making choices that better reflect your own values.”
• Stranger, good rapport, quite receptive. “I really enjoyed our conversation. Your concern about treating animals fairly stood out to me. I can see you taking veganism seriously putting that concern into practice.”
• Friend or acquaintance, good rapport. “Thanks for hearing me out. I thought your point about consistency was especially important. I hope you’ll keep looking for ways to bring your choices more in line with your values.”
• A person who expressed concern for animals. “Thanks for the conversation. It’s clear that animals genuinely matter to you. I think that concern will keep moving you toward choices that respect them.”
• A person who took a small step. “I appreciate you taking the time to talk. I liked your willingness to consider practical changes rather than dismissing the issue. That sounds like a real first step toward living more consistently with your values.”
• Skeptical but engaged. “Thanks for the discussion. You asked good questions about whether change is realistic. I’m confident you’ll find that it is more doable than it may seem right now.”
• Close to a breakthrough. “I really appreciate the conversation. Your comments about not wanting to cause unnecessary harm stood out to me. Honestly, you sound like a pre-vegan who is already making the connection.”
• Younger person, enthusiastic. “Thanks for chatting with me. I loved how curious you were about all of this. I hope the curiosity will turn into meaningful change for the animals.”
• Longer conversation, strong rapport. I’m glad we had the chance to talk. Your thoughts about living according to your values really resonated with me. I think those values are going to keep pushing you toward meaningful change.”
• Playful conversation. “Thanks for putting up with me. [jokingly] You made it harder than most people do. I still think there’s a pre-vegan in there somewhere.”
• Very warm, highly receptive conversation. “Thank you for such a thoughtful conversation. I was especially encouraged by what you said about wanting your actions to match your values. I think you’re ready to start turning that concern into real change and be vegan”
• Already reducing animal products. “Thanks for taking the time to talk. I was encouraged to hear about the changes you’ve already made. It sounds like veganism is the next step.”
• Committed to veganism during the conversation. “Thank you for such a meaningful conversation. I was encouraged by your willingness to follow your convictions once you reached a conclusion. I’m excited for you as you begin putting those values into practice.”

Each conversation becomes part of your preparation for the next one.

After each conversation, take a few moments to think and make notes about what happened. What worked well? What could have gone better? Were there questions you didn’t anticipate? Did you miss an opportunity to ask a better question or keep the focus on the animals?

Don’t judge yourself harshly. Even awkward conversations can help you improve. And remember that even if the conversation didn’t go as well as expected, you may have planted a seed that will grow.