Except its scientifically proven, that our possibility tonevolve was Not from Hunting, but agricultural Farming. But great Shitpost
No it wasn’t.
Otherwise humans wouldn’t have been smart enough to figure out farming in the first place.
Also humans were already humans when farming was invented. We’re not pokemon.
Don’t fucking tell me what I can and can not be!
With the power of friendship I will finally become a Glurak (also screw English Pokémon names)
the first crop was rare candy and evolution stones
That’s not how evolution works. Evolution doesn’t have a plan, it doesn’t wait, or speed up. Evolution just happens and our human ancestors would have continued to evolve regardless of agriculture. The path that evolution takes could have been very different but it would have happened. The human species is still evolving and will continue to do so until it’s extinction.
Modern humans are around 300.000 years old … we’ve only been farming for 10.000 years. Doesn’t quite add up.
It was fire ya dingus.
Fire allowed us to cook our food, making us die less from pathogens and bacteria AND making more food digestible. ESPECIALLY meat.
Agriculture was what provided our exponential expansion.
Except that all Species of Human Like apes Had that - homo sapiens, homo neanderthalensis, homo erectus etc. What US AS Homo Sapiens Sets US apart is agriculture: https://socialsci.libretexts.org/Courses/College_of_the_Canyons/Anthro_101%3A_Physical_Anthropology/12%3A_Homo_sapiens_our_History_and_our_Future/12.4%3A_Agriculture_and_its_Effect_on_Humans
It allowed is to stay in one place, developing it instead of living nomadic Livestyles in Hunter & Gatherer Fashion.
Before insulting someone on a discussion Platform, you should consider the possibility of checking their Claims yourself First.
I’m not going to get into a cherry pick our sources argument with you, agriculture is very important to humanity culturally.
Becoming an agrarian society is not what made us humans though.
An entry level anthropology course is a weird source to point at though as because I’m making biological and evolutionary argument and you’re referring to culture.
Regardless anthropological sources hold up the advent of fire and our ability to break free from simple nutrient sources and day time caloric gain AND venturing into colder regions. It allowed the dispersal of humans. Well before agriculture.
PS: fire more strongly supports the notion that humans were originally largely vegetarian, if you care to have a more salient point.
Not a vegan, but I don’t think I’ve ever heard a vegan say that. We’ve all watched nature shows. Rationale is usually a little bit deeper. Overconsumption, abuse of animals in meat/dairy industries, responsibility of humans to aim for a higher level of morality than animals, etc. Sure some go overboard, but I wouldn’t underestimate the complexity of the thinking behind it.
does this look natural to u?
I can side with the vegans that the meat industry needs to be clamped down on hard
But eating meat in of itself is not wrong, that is what is natural
Yo this seems to be a bad take
I think something that defines humanity is that we really try not to follow the “rules of nature”, ie. the rule of the stronger over the weaker
Yes, but most people in the west don’t have the option to eat meat that are not from the meat industry.
That is exactly why veganism is attractive in the west.
Exactly as a vegan ex explained it to me.
99% of vegans dont say eating meat in itself is wrong and this bullshit narrative needs to stop
🤣 go to the Lemmy vegan community and say that. I’m sure you’ll easily get 99 upvotes and only a single downvote
It’s all about assumed context. If you ask that question in English on the internet, most readers assume you’re talking about in the US, or failing that, in a developed country in the West. Therefore if you buy a pound of beef, it’s from a factory farm.
They’re not going to assume you’re a scavenger harvesting meat from already dead caribou in the artic.
The majority of humans don’t scavange meat from already dead animals, even in poorer countries wtf
Soy Salvadoreño y nadie en mi familia ni los vecinos ni el pueblo estaban comiendo animales muertos ni cuando tenían zapatos. Chele morongon, que crees tan bajo de los pobres???
Incredible that you were able to mental gymnastics what I said into an attack on poor people and you assumed I can read Spanish.
I wish you well in your mental health crisis.
-
Not all English speakers are from the “west”, since it’s a lingua franca.
-
You literally put in that the only option in developed countries is factory farmed meat, which is also not true. There’s even European countries where the factory farming of the USA isn’t allowed, and plenty of developing countries where it’s encouraged.
-
you imply by saying only developed countries have this option, as if developing countries don’t, and for some reason bring up fucking scavanging as one of developing countries alternatives? Really? You think that lowly of them that just classic old ranching didn’t come to your mind??? The fuck dude. You just pulled a “those kids in Africa” or “the doctor is the male nurse” moment even if you didn’t mean to. You clearly haven’t traveled much.
-
we were talking about chickens not beef.
-
I can go to a conservative community and say liberals have horns and get the same result. It proves nothing.
You haven’t been here long, have you?
Youre saying vegans want to stop animals from eating other animals? I dont think so.
I would go as far as to say that most vegans wouldn’t have a moral problem with eating roadkill. The physical act of eating meat is only harmful to an animal if it’s still alive while you’re eating it. The problem is the part before that, where you paid someone to hurt it
Murder and rape are also “natural.”
Yeah, I wash shocked to find out that Squirrels hunted and ate smaller mice when they felt the urge.
Almost all herbivores are opportunistic cannibals. Cows are known to eat rats found in the hay. Horses sometimes gobble down a chick if they feel like it.
All these strict rules people believe about biology were prescribed by scholars of old who believed in a perfect creation where everything had its place, but reality is very messy.
Carnivores, not cannibals lol
All cannibals are carnivores but not all carnivores are cannibals.
Thanks 😅
There are plenty of things that are ‘natural’ that are wrong to do, why is eating meat any different?
Homosexuality has been observed among a great many species, particularly birds and mammals.
What where we talking about again?
Killing and eating your children has been observed among a great many species, particularly reptiles and mammals.
What where we talking about again?
Eh, it doesn’t mean that it wasn’t at one point or that it can’t be part of our reproductive strategy in the future. I’d even say that murder and cannibalism are very normal aspects of our species.
You’re probably getting downvoted (I didn’t just fyi) because it wasn’t really relevant to the discussion. No one’s disputing if cannibalism is natural, I was just trying to point out that killing and eating children is natural and yet still morally wrong to do.
What were you hoping to achieve with this? You sure showed them, not all natural activities are bad. Unfortunately, they didn’t say that. You’re arguing against nobody
That’s a personal choice that people are allowed to make for themselves.
Are the animals also allowed a choice in the matter?
That misses the question a bit, no? Everything that is wrong to do is a personal choice. It’s not relevant to whether or not it should be done
Not really, some things are objectively bad and wrong and other things are merely subjective.
Killing someone who’s done nothing to you and doesn’t want to die is pretty objectively bad.
Yes, killing other people is objectively bad. Thank you for agreeing with me.
Could you tell me how you measured that badness and how I can repeat the experiment?
What is the ‘objective’ source of your morality?
There is none. It’s just my view based on how people see things. You’re allowed to not agree, it doesn’t have to be combative.
even things like killing being bad is not objective in my opinion, it just simply stems from our minds and societies’ process of growth through natural selection.
We believe that killing is bad only because we share the majority of their DNA and we are close genetically to what we’re killing. It was evolutionarily incentivised to not kill those that are genetically close, as they and we share common ancestors from which such thoughts evolved.
this is imo why we value humans more than other animals, animals more than vegetables and relatives over strangers. Friends being valued more than strangers make sense as well, as they share ideas in the place of the shared genome.
in a wider scope none of this matters anyway, our lives and deaths are irrelevant to the universe and our lives don’t actually matter outside what our minds tell us.
See this is what I told people when they found out I had sex with my dog, and they said I was crazy and abusive! Like, it’s my own choice!
>inb4 some child left behind replies with “are you equating eating meat for sustenance with rape?”
Yes. You could eat something else for sustenance. The reason you choose meat is because it’s a more enjoyable experience for you, despite the inherent harm. That sounds similar to another topic I mentioned in this comment
Pretty horrifying if you let yourself think of it.
What ever horror humanity has done, we are still holding the beer of invertebrates.
And yet nature’s is is not a justification for aught. The fruit of the tree of wisdom (mythically) gave us empathy that we may live in harmony with neighbors, and in the late game, we have learned the imperative to see value in the fallow wilds.
A century ago, a vegan diet for humans as extremely difficult, possibly impossible. And to quote Saruman the forests will burn in the fires of industry! And they have.
We are not a vegan culture today because the food industry focuses on sales and profits, not on nutrition and health.
Though to be fair our massive land-hungry industrial farms will affect the biomes around them regardless of whether we grow plants or ranch livestock. Veganism is part of a solution towards a more harmonious civilization, but misses several pieces.
What the crap is this response?
As much as I admire the morality and overall health of vegetarian/vegan folks, I would also super respect anyone who got all their protein by monstering whole live mice that they caught by hand.
I’d support a “you can eat all the meat you can catch and kill with your bare hands” diet.
Great, now I have to replace all my beef with veal.
I’m vegetarian and my partner is vegan but neither of us are strictly against the “hunter and gatherer” approach.
Where I live traditional hunting is almost nonexistent, but fishing and other ocean-based “hunting” (crabs, crays, oysters etc) is super popular. I’ve considered taking up spearfishing as it’s more intentional than throwing in a hook and dragging up whatever, and requires more (in my opinion) skill and nerve to pull off successfully. But even if I actually caught something the thought of cleaning it puts me off and I’d more than likely ruin it and waste a life for nothing.
No issues with anyone that can fairly catch and prepare their own meat for themselves, but I’ll stick to my tofu and seitan for now.
IMHO traditional hunting isn’t a problem at all. It’s sustainable and the animal gets a real life and a respectful death.
I’m not gonna do it myself but I’m not going to tell some Inuit that his ancestors were all wrong.
Hell yeah
Our ancestors have been using sharp sticks, heavy sticks, and sharp rocks since they could walk upright, so I’d support that, too.
Well… I’ll allow a sharp rock but only hand chipped.
Vegans and vegetarians are not often more healthy than meat eaters. In fact a lot of them subsist mostly on junk food and ultra processed shit.
I dunno about their morals. For me it depends on whether they are opposed to meat because they think it’s murder (absurd notion: see op) or because they opposed the treatment of living animals in industrial meat farms, which is the real issue.
There is not only a treatment problem, but also that livestock eats a lot of calories that could be used elsewhere
Are you gonna eat all those metric tons of corn that are produced to feed the cows? Because I sure as fuck won’t.
I understand your argument but I think that it is just one way of looking at it and it is still more focused on human welfare rather than sentient life form welfare. Because of that I think the scale of meat production and the treatment is the problem. In a perfect society people would buy a cow to eat per year per 2 people in the household and we would have far more human treatment of a sentient species and they could be afforded good lives and painless deaths.
Life by itself has no value, what is valuable is to what extent that life can be enjoyed.
However you gotta justify your choices I guess.
I just don’t think life by itself has any value, nor that death in itself is tragic. Life for me is valuable so much as you have the ability to enjoy it, and I think it to be the same for all sentient beings. But the reality is we are all interlinked and dependent on one another, we need to eat one another to survive. And so I don’t believe that animals dying is a tragedy in itself, I think an animal living in agony and then dying painfully is the real tragedy. We can eat them but we should have them live like kings before we eat them, in honor of their sacrifice.
So, after reading a lot of the comments, I figured I’d offer my two cents:
What I eat depends on what I feel I need at the moment a lot more than what I’m in the mood for. And because of this, I try to eat as healthily as possible and as a result- it usually ends up being on the vegetarian side of things. Think pastas, fruits/veggies, etc. Occasionally though, it’s a burger, or something meat-based.
What I don’t do however, is spend any time at all being concerned with what others choose to eat, and that is because it has no relevance to me whatsoever.
For the life of me I cannot understand why this is a thing that matters so deeply to so many people when there are FAR more important things to worry about.
If vegans don’t want to eat meat, who cares? They are happy living their life this way. Leave them alone about it. It’s their choice, their diet- and none of your business.
If someone wants to eat a steak, who cares? They are happy living their life this way. Leave them alone about it. It’s their choice, their diet- and none of your business.
The sooner we all stop actively participating in the habits and interests of others unsolicited, the sooner we can start taking on some of the things that actually matter.
/rant.
If someone wants to eat a steak, who cares?
The cow
Realizing now the mistake one makes when trying to remain neutral in a discussion where vegans are involved.
“Realizing now the mistake one makes when trying to remain neutral in a discussion where abolitionists are involved” ~ someone in 1850s Kansas, trying to remain neutral in a discussion about slavery and complaining about those damn abolitionists who can’t see the nuance in owning people
>inb4 some room temperature IQ replies with “are you really equating eating meat with slavery?”
No, slavery is worse than animal agriculture. That doesn’t mean that animal agriculture isn’t wrong for the same reasons that slavery is. You’re driving a demand for unnecessary harm to be done to sentient beings for a product you don’t need to survive.
Well, here’s how it is, and I offer no apologies that you don’t like it:
You say the cow cares? I say the cow never asked for your advocacy. And we both know you cannot prove it has. So, in reality, it’s easily just as safe to assume that the cow never asked for your support as it would be to assume they did. And it’s also safe to assume they are entirely clueless about the concept of meat consumption, and even if they were, they’d be entirely indifferent to it because they lack the ability to conceive even the slightest notion of their own mortality- because they’re cows.
Look… People love to install human emotions and complex thought processes in everything we see. Up to and including inanimate object. It’s how we can connect with the world around us. If it feels what we feel, we can understand it better.
It’s a cow. It doesn’t think about shit. It has a natural preservation of life because that is built into survival instinct because that is part of how propagation of species works.
And no one asked your opinion on the moral responsibility of consuming meat either. You just offer it. So when I say that people should butt-out of others legal decisions regarding dietary habits- it’s shit like what you’re song here that illustrates my point.
What someone wants to eat, provided it is legal- is only considered to be your business to you and you alone- not to them. So your opinions of their consumption of cheeseburgers is every bit as important to an omnivore as the opinions of Christian fundamentalists are to the LGBTQ.
They don’t care.
Done arguing this. It’s obnoxious and a waste of time to bother. The only lesson learned here is a neutral stance doesn’t exist in a discussion with vegans.
Mistake only made once. Trust me.
You say the cow cares? I say the cow never asked for your advocacy. And we both know you cannot prove it has.
I can prove pretty easily that cows can suffer. I can’t prove that any individual cow wanted to live any more than I can prove that any murder victim wanted to live, but it’s a safe fucking assumption that they did.
And it’s also safe to assume they are entirely clueless about the concept of meat consumption
And a child doesn’t know what sex is, but it turns out that the victim not being able to comprehend the crime being committed against them is not a justification for committing that crime. I know, you don’t think your logic can be expanded to cover things outside of dietary decisions, but it can whether you like it or not.
What someone wants to eat, provided it is legal- is only considered to be your business to you and you alone- not to them. So your opinions of their consumption of cheeseburgers is every bit as important to an omnivore as the opinions of Christian fundamentalists are to the LGBTQ.
Something being legal does not mean it’s okay, and my opinion of me consumption is a bit more meaningful than the opinions of Christian fundamentalists to the lgbt, on account that your perfectly legal dietary decisions actively cause harm in a way that being gay doesn’t.
…… k
Not vegan, but to play the vegan’s advocate—vegans are acutely aware of the level of cruelty in the factory farm system, as well as it’s affect on the environment and don’t want to partake in those systems of harm and taking without consent. To them, it’s not just a dietary choice but an ethical stance against suffering and exploitation. To someone who sees the life of a cow as just as sacred and important as a human’s, you can imagine why it would upset them to see you eating a steak. Just like you might be upset if you saw someone eating a dog or a fellow human. To them there’s no difference.
It’s similar to how evangelical Christians genuinely believe they’re trying to save people from eternal damnation when they get preachy. Just as annoying. The difference is that one is rooted in observable reality—documented animal suffering, environmental damage, and ethical concerns—while the other is a matter of ‘faith.’ and the latter is given a lot more leeway. So when vegans speak out, it’s not necessarily about policing your diet; it’s about trying to reduce harm in a world where harm is often hidden or normalized. And for what it’s worth I have known a lot of vegans and not one of them was ever preachy or judgemental, in fact most tend to keep it to themselves because vegans are so often the subject of ridicule, the butt of played out jokes, or made to host a session of 20 questions and feigned health concerns from people who eat nothing but processed meat and carbs.
I believe everyone should be able to do and live as they want as long as it doesn’t interfere with anyone else’s ability to do the same, and I can fully understand how to a vegan someone eating a steak would break that rule.
And if a vegan wants to help that by abstaining from animal based products, that’s awesome for them! But they don’t need to be telling others how to live their lives.
They can make an effort to put the info out there, and do their part by staying true to their belief, but they have no authority to tell others how to eat.
That’s all I’m saying.
I will not debate the moral implications as that is not relevant to the point I’m making and is a different discussion altogether.
And I’m saying the vegan that tells others how to live their lives is as fictional as the god who damns non-believers to hell. Even the weird publicity stunts by PETA are just to raise awareness of the issue.
And the moral implications are totally relevant as they completely explain the reasoning of someone who would care if you ate a steak, the question your original comment asks.
Okay. You’re entitled to that take, and I’m simply just stating mine.
And that is- The reason for either side’s justification is irrelevant. Just leave people alone to do their own thing. If they want to know about the other side’s cause, they’ll look into it themselves. It’s 2025. The info is out there in spades.
So, maybe… let’s care less about what others eat, as it’s not our business unless asked, and care more about what we ourselves can do to make things better.
Just a suggestion.
Youre entitled to your opinion, but the argument in itself is not a valid one. Not caring about what other people do has is called anarchy. How would you rate the same argument with other context?
“Lets care less about who others kill?” (that ones actually pretty similar now that im writing it^^)
“Lets care less about who others spit on?”
“Lets care less about when your neighbors blast their music at 130dB”Imagine those in a context where there were no laws regulating those actions yet. Someone had to step up and start demanding we regulate behavior and establish rules for generally accepted behavior. Those rules are constantly changing and they should. We need to adjust to new information as we go on. Making animals suffer for our convenience is something many people consider immoral and sometimes people point out when other do immoral things.
Are you people capable of arguing without using false equivalencies?
I made my point that people shouldn’t tell others what to do with their diets, and you’re here to be a perfect example of my point.
Thanks?
But like I told the other person doing the same thing, I don’t argue with people who bring false equivalence to a conversation to derail the meaning of my own point.
Enjoy your evening.
Where is the false equivalency? I dont think you know what that term means.
What if I like eating human meat?
Would you make the same comment if somebody else was eating a human child? If not, why?
“Just leave people alone to do their thing.” “Let’s care less about what others eat.”
Do you see how this very same logic could be used to excuse pretty much any diet or action?
Would you make the same comment if somebody else was eating a human child? If not, why?
No, I would not. Why? Because we’re not talking about human children.
Now. Im done discussing this with you. Enduring two back-to-back attempts to argue in bad faith using false equivalencies is my limit.
I simply wanted to state my point that people should be free to make their own decisions on what they want to eat without being harassed, and you came in to be the perfect shining example of my point.
I see no other purpose in continuing this, ending it here.
I’m a different person, that was my first comment here.
The way I see it, the discussion was about permitting others to commit acts which one considers immoral.
In the case of a vegan that might mean allowing someone else to eat meat, but the ethical dilemma is the very same as allowing a cannibal to eat a child. Does one have any right to intervene in their daily habits and societal norms, just because you think it’s wrong? If yes, why shouldn’t the vegan do the same?
I will say that I can’t claim to be a vegan myself. I just found your logic flawed.
What omnivores eat should actually matter to vegans because theyre responsible for stress and suffering, which many see as their moral obligation to oppose. Funny how its mostly the other way around.
Imagine people going around raging about how you dont beat your wife and kids or dont rape and kill children.
Also the environmental impacts. I don’t own a huge polluting coal powerplant that is actively contributing to fucking up the planet that I live on, and I’m still allowed to criticise them for it. Why should the meat industry be any different?
As I already stated, I’m not getting baited into a morality debate.
If you don’t like eating meat- don’t eat it, but leave others alone about. It’s not your business what they choose to eat.
And WTF? This has nothing to do with beating kids, or raping children, and I don’t appreciate the disgusting false equivalency you feel you need to use in order to make a point.
So instead, here’s an actual equivalency:
Imagine people going around and telling you that you have to do something you don’t want to do because of their belief. Like for instance….
forced birth.
You are actually telling people what they should or should not do, based on how you morally feel about something.
What I’m suggesting, is simply a dietary version of pro choice. You should be free to eat how you feel you need to in order to satisfy your needs, as well as your moral code- provided it remains within the limits of the law. EVERYONE should have this freedom. Even if you or I don’t like it.
So maybe leave people alone about it and put that energy towards something that has a better chance of success
I dont understand your point. Everyone DOES have the freedom you are talking about and noone is debating that. Why are you pretending like thats not the case?
In some areas men are allowed to best their wives. Youre still allowed to critisize them for it, and you should be allowed to.
Yet another false equivalency. You can’t stop, can you?
Explain please how it is not exactly the same.
No.
Thought so. Sorry for demanding you do something youre not capable of.
firstly, i find it funny how u insist this isnt a morality debate. but what is most interesting to me is how u say:
You should be free to eat how you feel you need to in order to satisfy your needs, as well as your moral code- provided it remains within the limits of the law.
so ur ok with the state and its police coming in and telling u what not to eat or to give birth, but when anyone else does it, thats no longer okay?
seems like kind of an arbitrary position. like, what is ur actual stance on the issue? or does it always flex around whatever the law of the place ur in says?
oh and as others have already said, if ur diet infringes on other being’s right to live, u forfeit ur right to not be criticized for what u eat. imo
Yet another false equivalency. Thanks for playing. Not wasting my time.
u made the equivalency first.
So instead, here’s an actual equivalency:
forced birth.
What’re makes you feel better! Take care now!
Don’t get all logical, their heads may explode.
OP’s argument is a fallacy so common it has a formal name. But I don’t want to get “all logical” and put anyone’s scalp at risk.
Which fallacy are you talking about in this case? Like that consciously choosing not to eat meat as an individual does not mean being against all meat consumption?
There are too many people for us all to hunt our own meat, and the same amount of farmland that can feed x amount of livestock can feed significantly more people than the livestock would.
Not all crops are created equal.
Crops intended for livestock are way easier to farm, require less water, less pesticides, less fertilizer, and less taking care of.
Many times crops intended for livestock are a necessary part of rotatory crops. As they tend to be easier on the land.
Farming is not as easy as “you can grow anything in any given land”.
Veganism isn’t about respect for nature. It is a philosophy and way of living against animal cruelty and exploitation.
Congratulations on a legit shitpost.
For me it’s 70% about trying to do something about climate crisis and 30% wanting to eat healthier
Whoosh.
Vegans have to deal with arguments like this but unironically on the daily. That hits a nerve, wether it’s meant as a shitpost or not. Don’t take it personally.
Mayhaps it is the vegans who need to avoid taking things personally
It can be both
I’d agree with both
Yeah, it’s totally unreasonable to get tired of hearing the same shitty comments and warmed over “jokes” every day.
It’s a shitpost on a shitpost community and they’re in here taking it like it’s a personal attack. They’re clearly the ones who need to calm the fuck down in this scenario lol
The fact that it’s such an old, overused, and mostly not even correct only enhances its status as a shitpost. That’s what they’re all about
I wonder how people arguing with them know they are vegans… 🤔
By putting a post on the interwebs making fun of them and waiting for them to arrive? Not what you are implying, but also a quite effective method.
Have you ever tried to not eat in front of people ever? Turns out it’s pretty hard to do. Sometimes, if you’re nice to people, you get invited to go out to eat to a place. Often those places have no vegan options, and you have to explain why you can’t eat there so people don’t just think you’re blowing them off constantly. We don’t just go around telling everyone we’re vegan like all the hate memes like to say.
Most vegans I’ve met, myself included, don’t pick fights with people about veganism. We just live by example. It’d be cool if more people went vegan, but arguing with people about doing it doesn’t help. Doing that is like trying to push religion on people or make people experience empathy. It isn’t easy to go vegan (getting easier at least). Food is tied to a lot of people’s culture who have a hard time relearning how to cook/eat and make generational recipes or comfort foods they’ve always eaten.
Tell them to find a vegan inclusive place next time and go anyway, the animal is already dead and being a patron this one time to satisfy a friend and have a good time is fine
You also have to keep in mind that it sucks to be a vegan sharing a meal with an omni. Even with access to plant-based options, we’re still required to be surrounded by what we see as gore, and people consuming gore.
You know how smokers can’t smell smoke as well as nonsmokers? When I stopped consuming animals I was surprised to find that all meat, no matter how fresh, smells rotten. And everybody who consumes animals smells faintly like rotting corpses - especially during and right after eating.
the animal is already dead
Never heard this one before. I think I’ll use it next time someone says that jerkin it to revenge porn is wrong. I mean, the harm is already done, right?
Ooh I know that one! They are in a social situation that involves food and the vegan politely declines an animal product. Then they make an anti vegan joke and the vegan politely disagrees. Have been there many times.
Really? Because I have seen quite a few times vegan claiming that eating meat is a “murder” when people were trying to enjoy their steaks.
Here on Lemmy one idiot even claimed that cutting sheep wool or something similar is a sexual assault
I’ve seen quite a few times black people have abused welfare programs. Usually they’re posted under conservative accounts, and I get flamed in the comments for pointing out that these are videos posted by someone with an agenda who wants their audience to think certain things about certain groups of people without providing actual data on the subject
Do you think maybe some of the videos of vegans being douchebags that you’ve seen have been posted by someone with an agenda who wants their audience to think certain things about certain groups of people without providing actual data on the subject?
Have you seen how wool is actually collected? It’s quite violent.
Are you one of the idiots claiming sheep are sexually attacked during wool cutting?
Have you seen how wool is actually collected?
Yes, in a sheering shed and not on youtube.
It is not violent when done correctly, and the best shearers in the industry who can smoothly and quickly sheer a sheep without injury are highly sought after.
Here’s a video on wool, but content warning, it is graphic despite blurring.
Is wool cutting a sexual assault according to you?
You know mate you get people with extreme opinions in all walks of life.
No doubt about it, but I am yet to see someone who eats meat calling for vegans to be forcibly fed meat - and I have seen vegans saying that eating meat should be forbidden.
And it gotten so bad, that some people will accuse you being a vegan if you’re not doing keto/carnivore diet, and thus an extremely militant and unpleasant one.
Lmao. Look at OPs comments. They actually believe this shit. Based on all the other shitposts they post here and all throughout lemmy, they probably picked it up on reddit or some other trash site, thought it was funny, and came here to share.
Imagine making this literal exact comment under a post about black people committing a bunch of crime
“Remember this is a shitpost, and some level of inaccuracy is almost required. It’s the shit part of the post” under a 13/50 meme
Tfw keeping animals in cages and slaughtering them after 6 months of misery from the comfort of your 21st century life is different from being a feral animal living in the wilderness
It’s way easier for me to have a vegetarian diet when I’m eating at home. At restaurants the vegetarian options almost always contain the one thing I’m allergic to, so I often have no choice but to eat meat when I go out.
I’ll take “things actual vegans never say” for $500!
it’s not even a contradiction. One can respect something and not emulate it.
I for one have great respect for the ocean, and the brave people who risk their lives sailing across it. I’m fine here in kansas lol
Some people just don’t feel comfortable killing and eating animals. Let people live their own lives.
Anyways, less people eating animal products leads to lower prices for those who do (you).
Temporarily lower prices. A large consumer base is needed to support the infrastructure that provides meat food products. More people eating more meat will normally produce lower prices in the long-term.
Marginal cost doesn’t always decrease. More people buying gold or whatever won’t decrease the price of gold. The cheapest way to feed cattle is to just let them graze, but there isn’t enough land on Earth for everyone to eat as much beef as Americans, even if using intensive agriculture to grow feed (which degrades the soil over time and results in large amounts of greenhouse gas emissions). I don’t think there’s enough land on Earth to maintain the current human population for very long. I.e. I think we are in the overshoot phase of a boom and bust population dynamic. Saw this graphic a while back, and it’s wild how much of the biomass we’ve took over:
And the angel of the lord came unto me Snatching me up from my place of slumber And took me on high and higher still Until we moved to the spaces betwixt the air itself And he brought me into a vast farmlands of our own Midwest And as we descended cries of impending doom rose from the soil One thousand nay a million voices full of fear And terror possessed me then And I begged Angel of the Lord what are these tortured screams? And the angel said unto me These are the cries of the carrots, the cries of the carrots! You see, Reverend Maynard Tomorrow is harvest day and to them it is the holocaust And I sprang from my slumber drenched in sweat Like the tears of one million terrified brothers and roared "Hear me now, I have seen the light! They have a consciousness, they have a life, they have a soul! Damn you! Let the rabbits wear glasses! Save our brothers!
The first time I ever heard this was the night that album released. Lived in a house in Cape Coral Florida with a bandmate, and a few members of another local band as roommates.
I think the other band’s drummer had gotten it earlier that day. Anyway… later that night, we pretty solidly cooked and listening to it, and when the album ended, no one wanted to get up and start it over or put on something else… so we all just sort of quietly sat there.
And then, after a looooong silence, we heard this….
I swear to god- no one moved an inch, no one said a word. We were absolutely floored! What the hell were we hearing! Visions of a white haired Amish preacher, glasses swinging from a chain, as he stomped through a farm plot, yelling at us….
Needless to say… Minds were blown that night.
Such a good memory!
I was sitting around stoned out of my gourd with a coworker (pizza delivery). We were listening to music with the stereo way up and he played this album. He was watching me when it started, kept a straight face through it, died laughing when it got to rabbits wearing glasses. Damn, that’s a good memory.
Actually, I believe current thinking is that we came from grassland, hence the advantage of upright walking.
Depends on how far you go back. Grasslands came after jungles/forests.
Based on some of our traits (nose shape good for diving, can control our breathing voluntarily, fingers get more grippy when wet, lack of fur), we might have even been semi-aquatic for a while.
Source on the semi-aquatic part? Looking it up only brings up the aquatic ape hypothesis which is pseudoscience.
eh, veganism doesn’t work for my relatively unique anatomy (if I eat that much fiber I go to the hospital) but were it not for that I’d probably be eating a plant based diet. people tend to know what works for them, and i’m not going to judge them for their dietary choices. Except foie gras.
Add veal to that list too
you know none of the restaurants i go to serve veal, and i’m not sure whether that’s a comment on my poverty or local society saying fuck veal, but either way i had forgotten about it and i think that’s great.
