- 0 Posts
- 24 Comments
And what if someone is convinced that acts of cruelty towards some humans is the most effective way to reduce cruelty towards a large number of animals? They might think that you’re not vegan because you’re allowing more cruelty towards animals to exist than they are. I have encountered self-identifying vegans who genuinely think this way.
This has to be the stupidest take on the term “plant based” I’ve ever heard. I swear, “plant based” is just the “No true Scotsman” of vegans… anything that a non-meat-consumer does that a vegan doesn’t like makes them plant based instead of vegan. It’s so asinine and intellectually dishonest.
Vegan people can be assholes too. Assholes will inevitably exist in any demographic that gets sufficiently large. I have known people who identify as vegans who insist that it’s preferable for humans to die than for non-human animals to die.
Also since when is open exchange of ideas and concerns equated with control?
Am I trying to control you if I suggest that you not leave your tap running in California because fresh water is a precious resource in drought-plagued land?
Am I trying to control you if I suggest that you reduce your plastic consumption because we have a major microplastic crisis so severe that human babies are being born with plastic already in their body?
Am I trying to control you if I point out that the modern meat industry is ecologically unsustainable, so you’re going to have to switch to being vegetarian sooner or later since the meat production will literally collapse itself, so you may as well start now before it’s a global crisis?
If I suggest that you not hit yourself in the head with a hammer, is that me trying to control you, or is that just an act of very basic concern for your well being? And if hitting yourself in the head with a hammer becomes trendy, am I trying to control everyone if I suggest that we shouldn’t be doing that because brain injuries will make us dumber as a society?
I like to imagine the profile pic changed immediately after the transition was complete, and at the time of the “completely cis” post it was something manly, like… I don’t know, hotwheels?
4·3 months agoI can’t be bothered to read any of that unhinged raving in detail but this line jumped out to me and the irony is just delectable:
You have a serious ego issue where any time someone challenges you, you have a full on fucking meltdown.
Clearly I’m the one having the meltdown here 😂
TIL caring about issues that cause unimaginable degrees of unnecessary suffering and also threaten to end human civilization as we know it is trolling.
One person posting a lot is not astroturfing. Astroturfing is about faking the appearance that many different people support the same cause. If it’s the same account doing all the posting then they’re not trying to give the appearance of being many different people.
At worst you could call it spamming. But personally I hope they keep up the spamming because seeing all troglodyte meat industry shills make asses out of themselves is giving me a new lease on life.
Shhhh we can’t let them know that George Soros is secretly a radical leftist vegan.
You aren’t weighing in on it while blatantly implying that the group in question is “idiotic”, okay buddy 🥴
You’re also asserting that my definition was wrong without saying anything about how it was wrong or what would be correct.
What are you even contributing to the conversation? Why did you waste the electricity to transmit any of the utterly worthless bytes that you did? And why am I wasting my time responding?
The last question has an easy answer: I have nothing better to do while I poop. But the rest of the questions are truly a mystery.
Just because you personally disagree with the goal of a grassroots movement does not mean it is a fake grassroots movement.
A grassroots movement is very simply a collection of people, usually belonging to a community with a shared interest, who work together to publicly advocate for a particular cause. This is contrast to a powerful or moneyed interest that lobbies for a cause that usually only benefits a small group. When a powerful or moneyed interest is paying large groups of people (or alternatively bot farms) to manufacture the appearance that a grassroots movement is supporting their cause, THAT is astroturfing. The agreeability of the cause has nothing to do with how the strategy gets labeled.
You have such a tenuous grasp on the meanings of such basic words that you might want to consider hesitating before referring to other people as idiotic.
What an absolutely bizarre whataboutism, so vapid and self-evidently disingenuous that I can’t believe I’m about to waste my time picking it apart, but here we go:
First of all, rescuing children from traumatically abusive environments is not the same as what the meat industry does to calves. Separation from parents is inherently traumatic itself, but that needs to be weighed against the degree of harm that the abusive parent might do, on a case-by-case basis.
Secondly, there are certainly cases of the government separating children from their parents that should be protested. Like when Texas defines transgender-affirming households to be committing child abuse and uses that as a reason to forcibly separate the child. Or when immigration control separates migrant children from their parents.
This might come as a shock to you, but it’s possible to care about and advocate for more than one issue at a time. I don’t know if your emotional capacity might be limited to just caring about one thing, but most people don’t suffer from that limitation.
Your idea of nuance would have us all sitting on our hands while unsustainable industries make the world we live in uninhabitable and put an end to humanity as we know it.
Astroturfing implies that a corporation or government agency with large amounts of funding are paying individuals or bots to spread misinformation for their employer’s financial or strategic benefit.
You might not know this, but there isn’t a “Big Vegan” industry with deep pockets to financially support astroturfing. Agrobusinesses that grow vegetation make more money off the meat industry than they would if they centered their produce around vegetarian or vegan diets. Businesses that do cater to vegans barely manage to scrape by and have no margins to support social media manipulation; they barely even have budget for conventional marketing.
What you’re actually witnessing is legitimate grassroots efforts to inform people about the harm that the meat industry causes. You see “astroturfing” doesn’t mean “a lot of people are saying things I don’t like”. It actually means “grassroots campaign but fake”, hence the name “astroturf”, which is a fake kind of grass.
A little disingenuous, yes, but the reality is that if we redirected the meat industry’s subsidies towards a supply chain that centers around plant based diets, we’d have a more sustainable industry as well as a more affordable food supply for everyone.
Sustaining the status quo of meat consumption is a constant battle against the laws of physics.
This is the argument that I used when I was an adolescent who thought himself very wise and smart but in reality just wanted an excuse to not have to change the lifestyle that I was comfortable with.
Saying “life only comes from death” is a cowardly reductionism. It creates a false equivalence between plant and animal life that lets you ignore the fact that sustaining human life does not require the wanton suffering of animals. And it certainly doesn’t require animals to be suffering at such massive scales and in such cruel ways.
You’re probably someone who will cite studies which indicate that plants emit distress signals when they take physical damage, and you’ll argue that therefore plants suffer the same as animals. But that’s an intellectually dishonest argument. Suffering as we understand it is more than just a chemical reaction to stimulus; it emerges from an awareness of being alive and an instinctual desire to remain alive and unharmed. Plants do not have that kind of awareness.
There are predators in nature that only know how to hunt to survive. Their digestive systems are specialized to consume the bodies of other smaller animals. And their ecosystems depend on those predators to balance out the reproductive cycles of their prey, otherwise the prey animals would become overpopulated and wipe out life forms lower on the food chain.
The fact of the matter is that humans have not been a collaborative member of any ecosystem for tens of thousands of years. We cause massive harm to every ecosystem that we’re a part of, and the mass slaughter of farm animals is the worst thing we’ve done to this planet yet, even more harmful overall than CO2 emissions. We’re eroding the soil and using up the fresh water in ways we can’t sustain, and then to top it all off we’re inflicting the largest scale unnecessary suffering in the history of this planet. And all of it is being done so that humans can enjoy a pleasure that is both unnecessary and easily replaced with a small amount of agricultural and supply chain reform.
Humans are omnivores and the simple reality is that as an omnivore with options at your disposal you have a choice about whether the process of sustaining your life involves wanton suffering at a massive scale or not. If you think the suffering of animals is worth the pleasure you derive from eating their flesh then just be honest and say so. Don’t be a coward like I used to be by pretending that animals and plants are the same.
The best way to draw a conclusion is to stop taking estrogen and keep playing until his estrogen level is back to what it was previously and see if there was any correlating loss of ranking.