You must log in or # to comment.
They stopped being “their” gains when they ceased to live, and became “your” gains when you ate them.
The same statement is true for plants, too.
(Saying this as someone who eats very little meat for animal rights reasons, and merely wishes to be padantic right now for some reason)
That seems just like a strange interpenetration to me, like the point is that is should be theirs?
For the plants part, it’s worth mentioning that it takes more plants for animal products than it does to eat them directly
1 kg of meat requires 2.8 kg of human-edible feed for ruminants and 3.2 for monogastrics
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S2211912416300013
Fake and homosexual
Warning!
Instructions Unclear…
You have acquired a new skill:
[Cannibalism]
hmmmm I should load up Rimworld again
Ironically I did yesterday. Got a good spawn area as well.
No, no it’s fine they were free-range, cage-free and organic humans /s
You said they were cage-free! This one has a call center name tag!
Lying about what a label means? That would be crazy
Bringing up a Tyson competitor, the farm manager wonders how other poultry companies handle supposedly free-range-raised chickens. The short answer: They don’t, really.
“Those birds don’t go outside — you know that,” the technician replies. “They don’t all go out … Look that up online.”
The manager chimes in: “It’s not like they make it like all of ’em come out and enjoy the sun.”
“That is strictly for commercial [advertising] purposes,” the technician says.
[…]
In 2017, the Intercept reported an investigation into a dozen California farms owned by a free-range chicken company that found no evidence of any animals spending any time outdoors. The chief animal care officer for Perdue Farms, a major chicken producer, has even said the vast majority of its free-range chickens stay indoors.
lol yeah that was fun to read when I first read that. Tyson is such a shit company, I’ve been boycotting them so long
This is kind of an industry wide thing that’s more than just Tyson, I should note
Not directly related to the post, but what is it with people getting all pissy when they find out you’re vegetarian/vegan? More than once I’ve had someone act like I told them I punch babies for fun when they find out I don’t eat meat. I don’t bring it up unprompted, it’s always in relation to a dietary concern. For example, I ordered a veggie dish at a restaurant, and they brought me the meat equivalent. I politely let the server know I ordered something else (apologetically I might add, because I feel like I’m being difficult to a service worker even though it’s about a dietary restriction), and she acted like I was out of line. Rolling eyes, huffy, and asked me if I wanted her to take it back (um, obviously?).
This has happened to me or friends in various social settings, and I just don’t get it. I even attended a cookout once where the host got mad at me for not eating his burgers. After I responded to the dietary restriction email. And brought my own dish. People act like you’re being a bitch for not eating meat! I’ve never once pushed my diet on anyone or brought it up out of necessary contexts, but people still talk behind my back like I’m being dramatic for not eating things I don’t want to.
fuck that server though. what if instead of a voluntary dietary restriction you were allergic to meat?
What if – stick with me now – you wanted what you ordered and it was the server’s job to bring that to you? Fucking chaos, man.
The same goes for the vegan/vegetarian side too, tbh.
Like, it’s something more related to group dynamics. Give people a way to distinguish themselves and they’ll build all of their identity around it, then they’ll discriminate the out-group and suck the in-group’s balls even if they’re wrong.
As of myself, I’m omnivore and I can’t get carnists nor vegetarians and/or vegans points, but I do respect them as long as they respect me too.
My main point is that meat is really bad for the environment. It takes way more water, land, and lets off more emissions by far for the same amount of food, since you need to feed the livestock.
I think it partially has something to do with the internet brainrot propaganda against veganism/vegetarianism
I hear you. I was raised vegetarian (mom is awesome) and have flip flopped between that and veganism my whole life. Growing up meatless and male has been a weird experience, with countless people telling me I’m not manly be cause I don’t eat dead animals. Wtf.
Sadly, I’ve also received the opposite, telling me I don’t really care because I’m not vegan enough (sigh)
Remind yourself that a lot of people fall into the trap of boosting themselves at the expense of others around them because it’s a low-hanging-fruit way to make themselves feel better. Their comments aren’t really about you. Someone’s always going to judge, no matter what we do. At least you try, that *is *worth something.
Because your lifestyle choices are an affront to their lifestyle. In many places in the world eating meat is an important part of the culture. Saying that you don’t eat meat is seen as a rejection of the culture. And they will immediately label you as “the other”.
It’s like if a person says they are an atheist in a country where everyone is religious and religion is an important part of daily life. Even when the atheist isn’t judging anyone the atheist will receive negative reactions and even violence.
Hugs.
This is why I don’t bring it up to other people.
I try not to, but sometimes I have to for dietary reasons. I have to choose between going somewhere that has nothing I can eat, ordering a drink or a side, saying “I’m not hungry,” and eating at home, or risking peeving others with the audacity to not consume meat.
I’ve never once pushed my diet on anyone or brought it up out of necessary contexts
And that’s a good way to go about it. But unfortunately that’s not the case for every vegetarian or vegan, and as for every demographic, the loud and confrontational ones are always the ones that get the most attention. And this is coming from an atheist that doesn’t talk about religion unless directly asked about it, so I can sympathize.
The sad fact is that most people that are wary of vegans and vegetarians are like that because they’ve run into ones that are varying forms of asshole about their diets. Some of the antagonists throw insults, some will be dishonest, most will be some mix of the 2. Of course it’s not fair that those bad impressions are being applied to you as an individual, but it’s unfortunately also just human nature.
Just going through the other responses on here. Pretty much every other responder is trying to come up with some complicated Psychology 101 argument as to why people don’t like vegans despite the answer being simple.
Hell, I’ve run into vegans criticizing keto (which is weird because you can be vegan/vegetarian on a keto diet), and their tactic was to throw out something like 14+ research papers and pretend that they all backed up their claims. I went through all of the papers, and 1/3 were completely irrelevant, 1/3 weren’t even looking at proper keto (or even properly low-carb) diets, and the final 1/3 contraticted their points.
While this may have seemed like a tangent, it’s relevant to my point: people are messy, and they’ll sometimes be dishonest and/or contradictory, especially when they think they have the moral high ground. And people that are on the fence or disagree can see that dishonesty and it leaves a bad impression for the whole group.
To recap: just like with atheism, a lot of the issue is a small number of bad apples that give the group a bad name. All you can do is mind that fact and try to avoid being one of the bad apples yourself.
I, too, hate it when people get all uppity about something.
And that also happens to carnist ppl and omnivore ppl (I’m from the latter category, I eat everything except fish because I’m allergic to it plus I can’t tolerate its flavor because of neurodivergency issues).
I’m really moderated and it really pisses me out how so many carnists and even omnivore ppl can be such assholes. Like, please, just fucking respect other ppl dietary decisions.
And this leads me to the worst part: the ones who want to completely ban and prohibit meat eating, without considering that a) vegan and vegetarian diets are expensive asf, so they’re being actually elitists and fascistoids as they’re pushing for an standard only they can afford, and b) they’re not taking into account that a human can’t actually live without eating meat if they don’t then replace it with something that can more or less give them the same nutrients but not animal-based, and that’s something that’s 1) not scalable, 2) again expensive as hell and 3) makes you more prone to develop dietary issues and even dietary diseases.
They’re living in their priviledge bubble and pretend us to adjust to their power fantasy.
About people that I had the bad luck to interact with (both online and offline).
And notice that it’s about “my own people” too.
The BBC has a good article on this concept
The tension that results can make us feel stressed, irritated, and unhappy. But instead of resolving it by changing our beliefs or behaviour, it’s quite normal to blame these feelings on something else entirely – all without realising we’re doing it
In the case of eating meat, Rothgerber suggests we have a number of strategies – around 15 – which allow us to avoid facing up to the meat paradox. These include pretending that meat has no link to animals, imagining that we eat less of it than we really do, wilful ignorance about how it’s produced
[…]
Unfortunately, most of these are derailed by the presence of vegans.
According to Rothgerber, people tend not to think of meat eating as an ideology. The dominance of meat eating around the world helps the omnivores among us to avoid the idea that it’s a choice – it’s just what everyone else is doing. But when a vegan turns up at a dinner party, suddenly we’re bumped out of the comfortable “mainstream diet” category and into the unsettling “meat-eating” category. By their mere existence, vegans force people to confront their cognitive dissonance. And this makes people angry.
https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20200203-the-hidden-biases-that-drive-anti-vegan-hatred
I mostly eat meat when it’s served to me, but if making my own food or eating out, it’s mostly vegetarian. At the same time, though, I fish and eat the fish I catch.
A friend of mine makes faces at me when I mention fishing and says stuff like how she feels bad for the poor fish. When I point out she is not a vegetarian or vegan, she just straight up says she tries not to think about it. But “poor fish” when I look at my kill directly and gut it with my own hands. 🤷🏻♀️
I’m a lot like you, I make vegetarian food myself. But if I’m visiting someone and they serve meat, I’ll have a slice.
My exception is game, as a large chunk of my family are hunters
Yeah, people much prefer the far away abstract violence compared to a softer violence they have to face
I have so much more respect for hunting for food than industrial agriculture. But in some ways there’s a stigma that hunting carries in a way industrial agriculture doesnt, even though the way it treats animals is infinitely more horrifying
…or in some cases it’s much simpler: some of us have conditions that make it impossible for us to survive or to thrive on a vegan diet and we’re sick unto death of vegoons pushing Evangelical Veganism and acting like we don’t exist or we’re making it up to justify the moral failing of eating meat. And there’s the constant push to normalize veganism, which just expands the number of places I can’t eat and/or people I can’t eat with.
If that type of vegan didn’t exist I wouldn’t immediately start side-eying vegans until I find out of they’re safe or not.
Huh. I haven’t heard of anything that explicitly requires meat protein for you to live, what do you have? And if you prefer not to say, obviously that is fine, I’m just curious. And not a vegan.
You must be like the only person in 100,000 to have a good reason to fear a vegan restaurant opening up nearby.
Additionally, what conditions make it impossible to survive or thrive on a vegan diet? I’m not challenging you, I’m genuinely curious. Is it like multiple allergies? I know some people believe the “you can’t get nutritionally complete diet from veganism” thing, which isn’t true. All vitamins, proteins, and nutrients we need are available while vegan. Is it like a fiber sensitivity or allergy problem?
Copy-paste from another comment I made:
The problem is that’s an elitist and exclusionary take.
Vegan and vegetarian replacements are way too expensive for almost the 99% of the population, and while you can theoretically replace some of these with medication and supplementation, it will never be the same as the synthetic replacements will never have the exact nutritional matrix that the natural animal source has, and as such it will not interact the same with our metabolism and our organs, thus causing a higher probability on related diseases and health issues.
This take is also especially crazy to me because I’m dirt poor, like one missed check from homelessness poor. I’m living entirely off of savings while I try to earn a certification and also work full time to survive. Kinda insulting to call it elitist when I’m barely surviving.
What? You don’t need replacement meats. I eat veggies and cheap plant protein crumbles or tofu, both cheaper than meat equivalents, and I have regular blood work done and all levels are normal. I don’t take any supplementary vitamins either. Going vegetarian is definitely not more expensive, and going vegan isn’t either if you’re willing to change your diet. Obviously, one to one replacements for egg, cheese, and meats are gonna be pricey, but you don’t need those.
You’re taking veganism much too personally. I can count on one hand all the places that don’t serve meat at all within my city. Your options are not limited. Other’s dietary choices are not a slight to you. It is so easy to find a place that has at least one dish for either dietary preference. What if they were Buddhist, or another religion that restricts diet around meat, would that irk you as well? Why must others consume meat for your comfort?
What do you mean “can’t eat at”?
Do you have an allergic reaction when you consume non-meat foods?
the number of places you can eat at went from like 99% of restaurants to like 97% because of vegan places opening up. youre not a victim here.
I should note that technology is increasingly helping provide more options. With precision fermentation, there is a lot of ways to biologically identical proteins, enzymes, etc. For instance, you can now buy non-animal whey protein, egg white protein, non-animal heme iron, and more in the stores. It’s super cool stuff and ironically the dairy industry was a big pioneer of it in the 90s for one of the enzymes they use widely in cheese. There’s a lot more coming down the pipeline with it
The problem is that’s an elitist and exclusionary take.
Vegan and vegetarian replacements are way too expensive for almost the 99% of the population, and while you can theoretically replace some of these with medication and supplementation, it will never be the same as the synthetic replacements will never have the exact nutritional matrix that the natural animal source has, and as such it will not interact the same with our metabolism and our organs, thus causing a higher probability on related diseases and health issues.
As they scale up, the costs will be lower. It’s a supply chain thing, not a fundamental limitation. The input costs are lower. In the broader sense, plant-based diets from whole-foods are actually already cheaper
It found that in high-income countries:
• Vegan diets were the most affordable and reduced food costs by up to one third.
• Vegetarian diets were a close second.
• Flexitarian diets with low amounts of meat and dairy reduced costs by 14%.
• By contrast, pescatarian diets increased costs by up to 2%.
https://www.ox.ac.uk/news/2021-11-11-sustainable-eating-cheaper-and-healthier-oxford-study
This is also true in real spending data
Based on primary data (n = 1040) collected through an online survey, representative of the Portuguese population, through logistic regressions, it was possible to conclude that plant-based consumers, particularly vegan, are associated with lower food expenditures compared to omnivorous consumers. In fact, plant-based consumers are shown to spend less than all other consumers assessed
https://agrifoodecon.springeropen.com/articles/10.1186/s40100-022-00224-9
Compared to meat eaters, results show that “true” vegetarians do indeed report lower food expenditures
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0921800915301488?via=ihub (looking at the US)
EDIT: I should also note that in an increasing list of countries, non-whole plant-based things like this are already cheaper too. With meat prices rising further, that’s only likely to increase more
Yeah, I understad that.
But most countries are underdeveloped, or in ways of development, and there it’s not really viable now.
Also, take into account this. The scalability IS a fundamental issue because the quantity, quality and speed of production needed to feed the global population are not compatible with the limited space, resources and the physics, chemistry and biology of soils. You will cause massive soil losses due to the mere fact that such soils will be above their limits.
There’s also enviromental and echological issues, such as the point that you’ll be displacing many native species (both from plants and animals) to be able to grow others that are edible to us, massively altering ecosystems. If with the scale of plant production that we now have that’s a serious problem, imagine with such a drastic increase. We wouldn’t give enough.
Moreover, think on the issues of transport: not all plants are able to grow in every country, and as such you’ll have to move a massive amount of these around the globe, boosting the carbon footprints of global transport.
And then we have all the hydric issues, and all the issues with fertilizers and insecticides.
And it could go on, but it would never end.
I have to look better at these studies, tho, I’ll do it later because nevertheless it looks like there are interesting advances I haven’t heard of before, and that makes me a bit excited because anything that can help both humanity and animals is good.
Perhaps counterintuitively, it’s the other way around. Meat, dairy, etc. production is what does not scale well. Low income countries don’t have nearly as much of it because high income countries have to subsidize the hell out of animal farming to make it as common as it is. It actually takes significantly less plant farming to eat plants directly
we show that plant-based replacements for each of the major animal categories in the United States (beef, pork, dairy, poultry, and eggs) can produce twofold to 20-fold more nutritionally similar food per unit cropland. Replacing all animal-based items with plant-based replacement diets can add enough food to feed 350 million additional people, more than the expected benefits of eliminating all supply chain food loss.
https://www.pnas.org/doi/abs/10.1073/pnas.1713820115
Pesticide and fertilizer use is significantly lower
To produce 1 kg of protein from kidney beans required approximately eighteen times less land, ten times less water, nine times less fuel, twelve times less fertilizer and ten times less pesticide in comparison to producing 1 kg of protein from beef
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25374332/
Even if we maximally used manure, it’s still lower
Thus, shifting from animal to plant sources of protein can substantially reduce fertilizer requirements, even with maximal use of animal manure
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0921344922006528
For transport, it’s actually not the driver of food emissions. The production itself is more important, especially when it comes to animal products
Transport is a small contributor to emissions. For most food products, it accounts for less than 10%, and it’s much smaller for the largest GHG emitters. In beef from beef herds, it’s 0.5%. Not just transport, but all processes in the supply chain after the food left the farm – processing, transport, retail and packaging – mostly account for a small share of emissions. This data shows that this is the case when we look at individual food products. But studies also shows that this holds true for actual diets; here we show the results of a study which looked at the footprint of diets across the EU. Food transport was responsible for only 6% of emissions, whilst dairy, meat and eggs accounted for 83%.
Ah fuck. I didn’t know iron was derived from animals. Fuck, it’s basically blood!
Heme iron, specifically in animals, is in fact from blood. Heme being short for hemoglobin which is the protein in red blood cells that transfers oxygen around the body (both for humans and most non-human animals). Being able to make that from precision fermentation is pretty cool
I was joking about being a vampire and that being blood on Discord, I didn’t know I was twlling the truth 😭
There is also plenty of non-heme iron, to be fair, which is not from blood. Plants have tons of it from the ground and such
It points out how shameful and lazy meat eaters are to their face, and people don’t like having their poor choices pointed out to them.
It is the same when telling people that you dont drink or take other drugs…
“You don’t smoke crack?! If I couldn’t smoke crack, I’d kill myself.” ~ them, probably.
A good friend of mine is vegan and has been actually assaulted (old lady slapped him, which isn’t exactly being attacked with a tire iron, but it’s still fucking assault) because of it.
Another good friend is vegetarian, and when we went out for pizza, he ordered this one fancy pizza, and told them to hold the meat (entire pizza is veggie except for prosciutto). They brought it out with prosciutto on it, and when he said “I don’t eat meat” the server replied “it’s very thin” as if that made a difference to it being meat. It was genuinely quite funny in the moment. Lol. They did replace the pizza without any qualms or attitude, but I’ll never forget that moment. It’s thing, so it doesn’t count!
… Also, I do wish they’d left that pizza instead of taking it back. It looked so good, and whenever I visit them they like to starve me to death because they’re all tiny people with caloric deficits D:
I think some cultures are entirely unfamiliar with the idea of not eating meat at all.
Like that line from Big Fat Greek Wedding. “He doesn’t eat meat? Is okay, I make lamb.”
They treat it the same way we might treat the phrase “he doesn’t drink.” Which means no alcohol, not “no consuming liquid of any kind.”
No meat is just taken to mean no whole meats, like cuts of steak. So you get “no meat in the soup, just a bit of the chicken stock for flavour.”
deleted by creator
weirdly ive noticed alot of behavior like this even on lemmy and even in leftist communities on here. people just get really mad when a post even mentions someone being vegan. similarly i see people demonizing people who for riding bikes and i just get so confused at why they are on lemmy (a very leftist platform) if they despise commonly leftist things
The only instances when i noticed it happening is when a vegan post ridicules or mocks who eat meat, though, i’d like to note that I don’t see many vegan posts on my feed
There’s a name for this in the broader sense, though riding bikes may or may not fill into this (can if it’s for environmental reasons)
Do-gooder derogation is a phenomenon in moral psychology where a person’s morally motivated behavior leads to them being perceived negatively by others. The term “do-gooder” refers to a person who deviates from the majority in terms of behavior, because of their morality
Coming off the back of an asshole vegan calling meat eaters ‘genocidal monsters’, yeah im not seeing this supposed unprompted hate on vegans.
Based
A token “fuck you” to the bitch that down voted you
Generally I don’t care. I prefer phrasing it as dietary restrictions. I can’t eat wheat or lentils. And a lot of fruit makes my lips tingle and itch.
No dhal tadka? Damn, sorry to hear that mate. I’d be morose for ages. Also my favourite type of veggie burger.
Yeah it’s weird, I thought what’s the difference it’s like beans when I tried a vegan diet. Nope, I’ve never had anything that made my body want to vomit unless it was spoiled.
it’s all stars maaaaaaan
From gains to grains.
Should be a vegan zombie movie where they eat grains.
Plants vs Zombies: The Movie
Finally!
There’s a single Real Life Comics strip about that, but that comic is impossible to search.
I know this is kind of a joke but this is legitimately one of the reasons I went vegetarian. Felt very “icky” to build my body out of other dead bodies.
This is actually a fundamental part of dark magic. To eat the blood, heart, or liver of a pure person to gain their power.
Shit. Did I just make myself a vegan?
You’re still building your body out of mushrooms and plants dead bodies, and also stealing other animals food! /s
I’m positive on veganism as a whole, but consuming corpses to grow stronger is kind of metal as hell
Confirmed. Mushrooms are metal
That’s also a bit of a peculiar feeling after being vegan for a while. My whole body consists out of plant matter and the occasional mushroom. I’m practically a plant at this point.
(Obviously irrational, though. Meat, dairy, eggs etc. are also just pre-digested plants. We’d all be practically plants by that logic.)
Its sunlight all the way down.
Due to how the US meat and dairy industry works, most US omnivores are largely corn based. You can have the carbon in your hair tested to verify this.
deleted by creator
Let’s say that plants really feel pain. How do we reduce that pain to a minimum? To get 1kg beef you need roughly 50kg plant matter. So eating only plants would be much more humane.
Anyways, the poing on eating meat is that plants don’t give you as much energy as plants, so you’ll need to be as a panda, a koala or a cow to be able to survive (like, pass the vast majority of every day in your life just eating).
Or well, at least that’s in a purely natural/primitive/pre-industrial enviroment.
That’s only for certain plants. I could get fat off a pre modern vegan diet. Mostly it’d be by overconsuming nuts, grains, and legumes. Probably mushrooms fried in olive oil as well. Like it’d take some doing because fiber sends satiation signals. But of course, I could bypass the fiber easily with beer, and it’d make having too many nuts sound perfect.
People that only eat plants exist and they are doing totally fine.
Because they’re taking a lot of meds and a lot of supplements. Not everybody can’t do that.
deleted by creator
We know plants can respond to stimuli, saying they feel pain is a big jump to conclusions
The evidence is pretty weak for plants, but even it that were true, it takes more plants to produce animal products than it does to eat plants. If we are concerned about plant death, it’s happen even more for animal products
1 kg of meat requires 2.8 kg of human-edible feed for ruminants and 3.2 for monogastrics
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S2211912416300013
Plants can feel pain the same way a machine can learn. Which means not at all outside of marketing.
In reality they simply have mechanisms to react to damage. But that’s not pain.
Pain is the processing of injury in a nervous system. Plants lack the nervous system required to feel anything.
Just like a brain dead human, sponge or bacteria plants cannot feel pain in any meaningful way.
And what is a nervous system really? Why is it so special and different from any other chemical reaction?
It’s more the processing that’s relevant for pain. No processing, no pain.
For instance, some humans have very specific genetic mutations that do not allow them to feel pain. The peripheral nerves still send the pain signals to the brain but it cannot process them. Therefore, no pain.
There could be a discussion on whether very simple nervous systems (like in jellyfish) without a central component (brain) can process pain. But I’m not a biological researcher or philosopher so that’s outside my Lemmy paygrade.
And what makes them different from any other chemical reaction is a little disingenuous. Might as well ask what’s the difference between burning a human on a stake and melting glass? Both are just chemical reactions involving heat from a certain perspective.
There is simply no organ comparable to the brain in plants that would allow for plant pain. That’s pretty much it.
Aren’t we just like Quarks on the most basic level? So why would one arrangement of Quarks, produce feeling people and not another?
Maybe objects feel pain, but can’t remember it, or react to it.
Why does one combination of quarks produce a shiny, malleable solid that’s conductive and stable, and yet another produces a highly reactive liquid at room temperature
You are aware systems are more than the sums of their parts…?
A book is more than the sum of its words.
A painting is more than the sum of its pigments
Music is more than the sum of its sine waves.
This is called emergence and is a very basic principle of - well anything, really. The same building blocks arranged in different ways will result in entirely different new objects.
If you’re interested in philosophy, feel free to read a few Wikipedia articles. You’re not the first one to ask about the nature of feelings and I am not qualified to have deeper discussions about this topic.
Really living up to your username today
I mean, it’s not really fair because plants don’t have any of the same “parts” we do that would constitute a body as such. When I think of growing my body, I think of organs and tissues such as muscle, bone, blood, neurons, etc. These are primary components of what would be considered nutritional intake from a dead body that would be reconstructed for use in our own body. Plants do not have muscles, bones, etc. We are using basic nutrients like cats, proteins, and carbohydrates as building blocks for our own parts. As noted elsewhere it takes a fraction of the plant matter necessary to build our own muscles than it does to feed a pound of meat to them use to build muscle from that. So even by your flawed logic, it’s still less plants to eat them directly than it is to eat meat grown from them.
Additionally, the vast majority of plant products don’t even require a plant to “die” to eat. Many fruits and vegetables are just the reproductive structure of the plant, not vital for the health of the plant at all. I am an avid gardener and the only plants I can think of that have to “die” for me to eat them are root vegetables. Even then if you’re diligent you could save, for example, the tops of carrots or bottom of onions to regrow.
They are completely different concepts and it’s bad faith to argue otherwise.
I recommend veganism to everyone - at least for a while- just because how different you can see farm animals. When I look inside the eyes of a pig I feel a connection. I know the kindness of this animal just by mutual respect. Try it, it feels great.
My cat would put me in an air fryer if she could.
Pigs aren’t vegan though. They’ll eat your dead corpse in a heart beat.
I’ve known some real asshole pigs too, though most I’ve interacted with are usually pretty chill.
Hell, pigs will eat their dead family members. And not like a dog, which will wait several days and only do so when starving. More like cats where it’s within an hour and there’s still food in their bowl. Pigs don’t give a shit
I’m pretty sure my cats may not even wait until I’m dead.
Humans too are often cruel to one another, but we rightly don’t think eating them is justified
but we rightly don’t think eating them is justified
That really depends on the society in question. Go look up “kuru” also known as “laughing sickness”. There’s tribes that historically ate parts of their dead relatives.
That being said, for health reasons it’s a bad idea due to the spread of prion diseases. But the tribe didn’t know about that hence why it’s wasn’t taboo.
And acceptable cultural practices around death vary wildly across cultures. Catholics used to think (and some still do) that cremation is an abomination. But for many cultures cremation is more the norm. Historically (though less so now) there were cultures that practiced sky burials, even though most people would find that horrifying.
I more so meant the killing for consumption part. The cultures that did that were not exactly intentionally killing them to eat them like we are with non-human animals
That’s because humans take too long to grow; they’re inefficient as livestock. 9 months to gestate a single baby that would take 16 to 18 years to get to adult size for harvest? The American South has already plumbed the depths of “humans as livestock.” It was just missing modern, industrial equipment.
Humans are competing against: cows that get to adult size in 2 years and then you can milk or eat them, or pigs that give a whole litter of new pigs?
If humans grew to adult size in like a year, prior to learning about the health risks, humans would definitely be farming other humans for food.
People don’t think in terms of species, they think in terms of relations. That’s why some people feel worse for a dog in the pound than they do for the countless numbers facing genocides across the planet.
I think this is missing the point? None of that is a moral justification?
The American South has already plumbed the depths of “humans as livestock.” It was just missing modern, industrial equipment.
Which very notably become morally apposed by an increasingly larger and larger group at the time and we now think of horrific
Oh, I’m not morally justifying any “contrapoint” to your statement.
If anything, I’m saying that the appeal to human morality is an unstable basis. Slaves weren’t freed because it was the right thing to do. And “we now think of [as] horrific” is a claim that needs qualification, if the rise is far-right ideology is anything to go on.
Many things humans have done is for expediency, dressed up as something else. Livestock is expedient for food and clothing and all else, so the belief that those animals are the ones that it’s fine to eat gets draped over it all.
Even though humans are the only animal that could meaningfully consent to being eaten. It’s an interesting (if uncomfortable) moral quandary.
I disagree, things eat each other. It’s just an exchange of resources. What matters is intent, process, and waste. I an fine with eating animals that were raised in non-cruel conditions(which is also a food safety issue), killed humanely, and all parts are utilized.
Also like, if some animal gets the drop on me and returns the favor, them so be it, good on them,
It sounds like you’re saying that they deserve to be eaten due to their personalities.
no, it’s just that calling a pig a friendly animal probably isn’t the best example to use for this argument
They are talking about the pig’s intelligence and understanding of the world. They are sentient, is the point
How’s that messed up? This is literally how the natural world works. Predators eat prey. We are the apex predator species.
Natural does not mean we should do something? Cannibalism is also natural, but we rightly find that horrible
Brushing aside moral considerations, cannibalism leads to things like kuru, so that’s a no go either way.
I have no qualms eating animals, provided they weren’t factory farmed.
On a related note, it’s worth mentioning that factory farming is the vast majority of global meat, dairy, egg, etc, production
We estimate that over 90% of farmed animals globally are living in factory farms at present. This includes an estimated 74% of farmed land animals (vertebrates only) and virtually all farmed fish.[1]
https://www.sentienceinstitute.org/global-animal-farming-estimates
We estimate that 99% of US farmed animals are living in factory farms at present. By species, we estimate that 70.4% of cows, 98.3% of pigs, 99.8% of turkeys, 98.2% of chickens raised for eggs, and over 99.9% of chickens raised for meat are living in factory farms. Based on the confinement and living conditions of farmed fish, we estimate that virtually all US fish farms are suitably described as factory farms, though there is limited data on fish farm conditions and no standardized definition.[1] Land animal figures use data from the USDA Census of Agriculture[2] and EPA definitions of Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations.[3]
https://www.sentienceinstitute.org/us-factory-farming-estimates
That’s why I prefer New Zealand or Australian lamb. Just lamb living their best lamb lives out on pastures.
Can’t wait for deer season this year so I can restock on venison.
Who doesn’t love dying during childhood?
New Zealand’s pasture based systems aren’t exactly the idealistic visions people have of them. Even just environmentally, their attempts to scale them up have required huge amounts of fertilizer and lead to huge amounts of pollution. For instance for their dairy production:
The large footprint for milk in Canterbury indicates just how far the capacity of the environment has been overshot. To maintain that level of production and have healthy water would require either 12 times more rainfall in the region or a 12-fold reduction in cows.
[…]
The “grass-fed” marketing line overlooks the huge amounts of fossil-fuel-derived fertiliser used to make the extra grass that supports New Zealand’s very high animal stock rates.
Damn, guess I’ll just keep eating 100% factory farmed then.
You can always stop eating meat
I mean, there’s no rule that says that one must consider nature, as a whole, to be ethical. It’s perfectly possible to believe that nature itself is “messed up” in a moral sense and merely outside the capacity of humans to change for the foreseeable future. One’s own behavior is much easier to impact by contract.
I would even argue, that nature as a whole, cannot be ethical, since the ecosystem is essentially build on organisms eating each other. And nothing outside human experience can, really, if we get to technical nitpicking. Ethics are things created out of human mind, they do not exist outside us… Anyway, that does not mean you cannot aim for being as ethical as possible. Since ethics are real to us, if we want to be Good, we should all strive towards that.
Hoards ravaging neighboring communities and killing everyone up to the children is perfectly natural for humans but you don’t have to do it.
It just sounds like a vegan wrote this story
From the collection of made up stories.
They left out the part where everybody clapped.
You might underestimate the effect of suddenly thinking about something differently.
Or maybe they were just trying to be funny after going vegan?
I became vegetarian when I saw the “How to Serve Man” episode of the Twilight Zone in high school. It horrified me and I didn’t look back.
