We have this reputation solely because people feel threatened and offended when you tell them that you refuse to eat animal products. They suddenly start being confrontational and refuse to listen to your reasoning.
It’s like arguing with little children who plug their ears and sing while you’re trying to explain that 30% of the reason we’re in a climate crisis is their overconsumption of animal products, derived from creatures capable of emotion, able to see, hear, and smell not unlike you and me.
And those conversations do not come up unsolicited but provoked by meat eaters asking “but why would you do that to yourself?”
But maybe I’m being overly dramatic and preachy 🤦
If I didn’t completely kill your interest in the topic, check out Ed Winters on YouTube.
We have this reputation solely because people feel threatened and offended when you tell them that you refuse to eat animal products.
Not even close to true. If you tell me in the same way that I’d tell you my dietary preference, I wouldn’t mind at all. I’m not in the business of telling other people what to eat or not eat and as long as you extend me the same courtesy, we should get along just fine.
It’s only when you go out of your way to shame people into agreement like the comment I first replied to that I have any problem with vegans.
They suddenly start being confrontational and refuse to listen to your reasoning.
Yeah, weird how people will confront you about it when you’re being needlessly aggressive and judgmental and not feel like listen to THAT kind of reasoning 🙄
It’s like arguing with little children who plug their ears and sing while you’re trying to explain that 30% of the reason we’re in a climate crisis is their overconsumption of animal products, derived from creatures capable of emotion, able to see, hear, and smell not unlike you and me.
It’s like arguing with a holier than thou arrogant person that insists that anyone who doesn’t live their lives like them are wilfully ignorant children. Funny how most of us frightfully ignorant meat-eaters aren’t very receptive when being treated that way.
And those conversations do not come up unsolicited but provoked by meat eaters asking “but why would you do that to yourself?”
Not true. In this specific case, nobody asked. A very openended asklemmy prompt is NOT the equivalent of your strawman
But maybe I’m being overly dramatic and preachy
Yeah, you very much are, especially the latter.
If I didn’t completely kill your interest in the topic, check out Ed Winters on YouTube.
I already know a lot about the topic and yeah, anyone recommended after such arrogant tirades is not someone I’d be likely to check out.
If his approach is anything like yours, I expect he’ll be showing me gruesome slaughterhouse footage and calling me an evil ignoramus within the first minute of every video.
If you tell me in the same way that I’d tell you my dietary preference, I wouldn’t mind at all. I’m not in the business of telling other people what to eat or not eat and as long as you extend me the same courtesy, we should get along just fine.
The point is that this is not like having different favourite colours.
One “dietary preference” slaughters intelligent beings with complex social behaviour and emotions, the other does not.
One contributes a massive amount of greenhouse gases and thus fuels climate change, the other’s impact is much, much smaller.
One degrades soils and pollutes rivers, the other less.
One leads to zoonotic epidemics, the other does not.
One leads to incredible water consumption, the other much less.
In short, one “preference” has a massive negative impact on many aspects of life and the earth, the other is a plant-based diet. Consequences!
You don’t need to get anthropomorphic to argue the ethical case. Besides, I have given many more arguments than the ethical aspects, while you only point to “nature”, so I will not engage in this discussion any further.
Thank you for the exchange though, and I’d be happy if you would reflect on your views one day and consider the perspective of other beings.
Concepts like rape don’t exist in the animal kingdom
Did you forget humans are animals? If you don’t like using the word rape to describe sexually violating an animal, there’s another one we’ve come up with… bestiality.
Same for the thing about taking children away
Are you seriously trying to say humans are the only species who should have a right not to be sexually violated or have their children taken from them and killed? Since we know that cows are thinking, feeling, emotional creatures capable of forming strong family bonds… what exactly is it about humans that makes them special in that way?
Did you forget humans are animals? If you don’t like using the word rape to describe sexually violating an animal, there’s another one we’ve come up with… bestiality.
Humans are special in more than one characteristic. One of them is that humans have consensual intercourse and have a word for and laws against intercouse that isn’t.
Cows don’t have that. Animals in general don’t have that. You wouldn’t say one shark is raping another. Or lions are raping each other. Unless you are really missing the point at least
Bestiality is another term you don’t seem to understand. Artifical insemination does not involve the performance of sexual acts from the human’s point of view.
It’s a human term from a human’s perspective.
You wouldn’t call it Bestiality when a dog humps your leg. the animal’s perspective does not matter here. It should be that way because animals cannot in a meaningful way consent.
Are you seriously trying to say humans are the only species who should have a right not to be sexually violated or have their children taken from them and killed?
I don’t agree with the term sexual violation.
In a perfect way no animal would ever die, but nature is eat or be eaten most of the time. Cows usually are the ones that will be eaten.
We have this reputation solely because people feel threatened and offended when you tell them that you refuse to eat animal products. They suddenly start being confrontational and refuse to listen to your reasoning.
It’s like arguing with little children who plug their ears and sing while you’re trying to explain that 30% of the reason we’re in a climate crisis is their overconsumption of animal products, derived from creatures capable of emotion, able to see, hear, and smell not unlike you and me.
And those conversations do not come up unsolicited but provoked by meat eaters asking “but why would you do that to yourself?”
But maybe I’m being overly dramatic and preachy 🤦
If I didn’t completely kill your interest in the topic, check out Ed Winters on YouTube.
Not even close to true. If you tell me in the same way that I’d tell you my dietary preference, I wouldn’t mind at all. I’m not in the business of telling other people what to eat or not eat and as long as you extend me the same courtesy, we should get along just fine.
It’s only when you go out of your way to shame people into agreement like the comment I first replied to that I have any problem with vegans.
Yeah, weird how people will confront you about it when you’re being needlessly aggressive and judgmental and not feel like listen to THAT kind of reasoning 🙄
It’s like arguing with a holier than thou arrogant person that insists that anyone who doesn’t live their lives like them are wilfully ignorant children. Funny how most of us frightfully ignorant meat-eaters aren’t very receptive when being treated that way.
Not true. In this specific case, nobody asked. A very openended asklemmy prompt is NOT the equivalent of your strawman
Yeah, you very much are, especially the latter.
I already know a lot about the topic and yeah, anyone recommended after such arrogant tirades is not someone I’d be likely to check out.
If his approach is anything like yours, I expect he’ll be showing me gruesome slaughterhouse footage and calling me an evil ignoramus within the first minute of every video.
The point is that this is not like having different favourite colours.
One “dietary preference” slaughters intelligent beings with complex social behaviour and emotions, the other does not.
One contributes a massive amount of greenhouse gases and thus fuels climate change, the other’s impact is much, much smaller.
One degrades soils and pollutes rivers, the other less.
One leads to zoonotic epidemics, the other does not.
One leads to incredible water consumption, the other much less.
In short, one “preference” has a massive negative impact on many aspects of life and the earth, the other is a plant-based diet. Consequences!
If the description above is not dramatic the idk.
Concepts like rape just don’t exist in the animal kingdom. It’s like the standard way of having offspring.
Same for the thing about taking children away.
Yep, totally natural way of having offspring
CW: faecal matter
Not what I said. Something being unnatural doesn’t make it rape though.
In vitro insemination in humans also isn’t rape.
No, but you keep arguing by applying naturalistic fallacy.
You keep arguing by anthropomorphic fallacy
You don’t need to get anthropomorphic to argue the ethical case. Besides, I have given many more arguments than the ethical aspects, while you only point to “nature”, so I will not engage in this discussion any further.
Thank you for the exchange though, and I’d be happy if you would reflect on your views one day and consider the perspective of other beings.
Did you forget humans are animals? If you don’t like using the word rape to describe sexually violating an animal, there’s another one we’ve come up with… bestiality.
Are you seriously trying to say humans are the only species who should have a right not to be sexually violated or have their children taken from them and killed? Since we know that cows are thinking, feeling, emotional creatures capable of forming strong family bonds… what exactly is it about humans that makes them special in that way?
Humans are special in more than one characteristic. One of them is that humans have consensual intercourse and have a word for and laws against intercouse that isn’t.
Cows don’t have that. Animals in general don’t have that. You wouldn’t say one shark is raping another. Or lions are raping each other. Unless you are really missing the point at least
Bestiality is another term you don’t seem to understand. Artifical insemination does not involve the performance of sexual acts from the human’s point of view.
It’s a human term from a human’s perspective.
You wouldn’t call it Bestiality when a dog humps your leg. the animal’s perspective does not matter here. It should be that way because animals cannot in a meaningful way consent.
I don’t agree with the term sexual violation.
In a perfect way no animal would ever die, but nature is eat or be eaten most of the time. Cows usually are the ones that will be eaten.
Choose one
I didn’t say all characteristics so I don’t think I have to