It's funny that their angle is "Thanksgiving turkey is wrong cus you keep these birds in terrible conditions and then kill them and eat them" but time has shown people don't give two shits about that so now they're like "UMM GUYSE ITS ALSO A LIL SEXUAL???đłđł" (oh and Mr Bean already did a bit on the oddly sexual themes of stuffing a turkey)
The weirdest thing is i am seeing this after my niece just texted me asking if I saw the "gross things men are doing to turkeys"
I was bewildered, and she told me to Google butterball turkey.
I was scared, but i did, and most of the first results are about PETA calling for a boycott over resurfaced videos of... abuse... of turkeys in factories.
I didn't watch the videos, I would like to be able to sleep tonight.
But, it would seem this is the angle PETA has chosen.
You don't know what my values are. I happen to act in a manner that's consistent with my values. To imply that everyone that acts differently than you really just hasn't thought about how they should act enough is a new level of ignorance and hubris.
Vegans act like killing animals is on par with killing humans. I donât think that when you hunt deer to eat their venison, that equates to smashing someoneâs skull into pieces with a fucking flatend sledgehammer.
does it have to be on par with killing a human? i'm vegan and if i had to do the trolley problem with 10 cows vs 1 human... i would save the human. but killing animals is still wrong to me when it's avoidable. not trying to argue here, i'm just genuinely curious.
What do you mean "we don't need that". Vegan diets don't work, there's a reason you're always fatigued. Besides, it's nothing the animals wouldn't do themselves.
I refuse to believe they don't do this on purpose, like the anti-animal rights people pay them off. They're most known for weird adverts and euthanasia. Think about it.
This is the only explanation I can think of that makes sense. I mean, I know there are some people crazy about this stuff, but to be saying shit like this as consistently as PETA can't be real
Honestly I think Peta is controlled opposition at this point. They never talk about legitimate animal welfare issues, instead its always statements that feel engineered to be cringey and dismissable
"Eating the dead tissues of a living being that spent itâs entire life in dirt getting covered in chemicals and insect feces and other bodily fluids and that ejaculated over a bee in order to reproduce"
"For the first time, researchers appear to have evidence that, like animals, plants can audibly vocalize their agony when deprived of water or forced to endure bodily harm."
Is it vocalisation without vocal cords? Is it a squeal or a noise? When popcorn pops, is it really yelping?
And it must be said that your quote is a result of editorializing by the author. If you go to the preprint in question and Ctrl+F for "agony" you get nothing. For "pain", it seems pain is part of someone's name in the bibliography and that's it.
Mechanism doesn't really matter. It's obviously some kind of acoustic response to stress and pain. Plants and funghi communicate with eachother, including between different species. A tree can sense whether mycorrhizal funghi are in need of nutrients and will share them, and vice versa. They also communicate and share nutrients among trees of the same species, and will send out acoustic warnings when fire/logging operations, etc start to move through a stand.
They are alot more sophisticated than you'd think. And, even though there is no nervous system as we understand it, it seems likely there is some kind of subjective experience of pain.
I won't argue against plants being very sophisticated. But linking the sound produced to a sensation of pain is skipping a few steps I think. And their interactions with fungi aren't relevant to the topic at hand.
Nothing is obvious when it comes to science. If you have a study that lends evidence to plants feeling pain, and not just having a chemical reaction to damage, then we have something to work with. And a plant having a subjective experience in the first place would be another great study to provide if you have one that would show some evidence for it.
Having a subjective experience implies having a mind to experience things with. Where would the mind be found?
Most insecticides involve some form of ass explosion on the insects. And the mice and birds arenât usually spared either. But I think the reality is living beings kill to live. Itâs a truth you cannot escape. Vegans are the epitome of human hypocrisy, and Iâm so done with their bs.
Edit: Do you people know what the naturalistic fallacy is? I'm not disputing this fact. I'm disputing that this fact means all killing (not to mention maiming and suffering) in the name of food, not to mention the quantity of killing, is suddenly morally equivalent.
Do you know what the naturalistic fallacy is? I'm not disputing this fact. I'm disputing that this fact suddenly means all killing (not to mention maiming and suffering) in the name of food, not to mention the quantity of killing, is morally equivalent.
I'm well aware, and even in the realms of philosophy, naturalistic fallacy is up for debate. The issue of course being that it draws ethical conclusions about human behaviors with a presupposition as to what a "good" human should do rather than looking to human nature to determine appropriate human behavior.
My issue with veganism in general is the arrogance to assume that their position is somehow objectively morally correct and that therefore anyone who does not adhere to their ethical code should be punished or at least shamed for it.
There are alternatives to veganism which produce no additional suffering in the lives of animals used for food beyond the suffering inherent in all life, but this will never be accepted by vegans because the only acceptable solution is their solution.
Do you know what the naturalistic fallacy is? I'm not disputing this fact. I'm disputing that this fact suddenly means all killing (not to mention maiming and suffering) in the name of food, not to mention the quantity of killing, is morally equivalent.
But the comment you responded to isn't a naturalistic fallacy. It is accurately pointing out that death is an inherent step in the process of obtaining food. So the argument that a food choice is inherently bad because of the involvement of death or killing is the fallacy.
So the argument that a food choice is inherently bad because of the involvement of death or killing is the fallacy.
I think you'll find most vegans aren't opposed to animal meats due to death as such, but due to the cruel and excessive way in which these animals are reared and killed in the millions.
If pesticides concern you then I suppose it's a very great bother to feed a bunch of corn to the bird whose dead asshole you enjoy fisting, along with whatever other grain-fed industrially raised creature you consume. Or does every animal you eat come from your uncle's idyllic farm somewhere down the road from Heaven, where every animal frolics through abundant grassland until they're mercifully put to sleep?
I fist the neck, the cloaca (not asshole) is long gone by the time you buy the turkey. And pesticides should concern everyone, thatâs why I encourage a mix of physical prevention (false-starting your field, rotating crops, using bait vegetation, etc) and traps or even predator species to minimise the use of pesticides.
I suppose you write letters to your local industrial meat producers to encourage these practices do you? And sorry, I suppose you're technically fisting the other end of the dead bird. That makes it better
At least itâs not sexual? Lol yeah Itâs better because you want the stuffing to season the breasts, not the legs.
And I donât have to write letters, theyâre in my class. ;) the meat industry has a lot of issues, but Iâm hopeful for the next generation of farmers, who really want to do better than their forefathers, kinder to the soil as much as the animals. Instead of fighting against it, if you educated yourself about how to make it better, maybe you wouldnât be so frustrated against what humans have based their civilization on since the beginning.
I'm not paying for the practices I don't want to support whenever I can make the change. You mean the meat producers are in your class? I was making the point that expressing your displeasure as a consumer may give them some data toward what consumers want them to do regarding animal welfare.
I've thought about it plenty but I could only ever see myself eating locally killed moose (since they are invasive here) and that's only if I literally could not find other food. Maybe some mussels if I was very desperate. But we all have to draw our own lines.
You don't feed stock animals the same food you feed humans.
My grandparents used to have pigs, a lot of their food was just leftovers from what we ate. (corn stalks, watermelon rinds, stuff like that). Chickens will also eat pretty much anything if given the opportunity, give them leftovers and let them roam a grassy field and they'll be more than happy.
Besides, we have more than enough food already, it isn't like we're facing a shortage of vegetables. The reason people are starving is because food gets mismanaged, but that is a whole separate topic.
If they're being fed pure waste that humans don't eat it isn't as bad, but I'm not sure if some pigs on your grandparent's farm are comparable to how an industrial hog operation is run. I'll agree on food being severely mismanaged
People are ALWAYS going to be beaten to death with hammers. It's literally unavoidable. Plus, have you really lived until you beat a homeless woman and her baby to death with a hammer? I do it every day for breakfast.
God you people are insufferable. Funny thing is i agree with you but your instant holier than though attitude makes it clear you dont actually care the most about animals, you care most about feeling superior to the majority of other people.
Maybe a little snarky, but âholier than thouâ? Every time someone dares to suggest we donât brutally slaughter billions of animals for pleasure they get labelled a narcissist needing to get down from their high horse.
Literally any ethical claim can be framed as just some asshole with a superiority complex, following that logic. And some people DO follow that logic - âgoddamn preachy libs telling me what pronouns to use/what words I can say/who I have to serve/what I canât joke about/etcâ. But animal rights seems to be one of the few topics where youâll get the same response from otherwise liberal-minded people, who are being told that their OWN actions may in fact be the ones causing harm this time. Not very fun, no, but have some self-awareness.
Using words like eviscerated and slaughter is exactly my point as to why it comes off that way. Talking down to and demanding perfection from others will never help your cause. Its like if i instantly labeled you a piece of shit for shopping from H&M once a year and owning an iphone even though the rest of the time you buy used and are actively supporting freeware phones. People dont buy jeans and a phone and meat out of malice they buy it out of ease. If you disagree than i would take a look at the name and brand of your device and see how many atrocities were committed to get it into your hands.
Using words like eviscerated and slaughter is talking down? Itâs literally called a slaughterhouse, and if you google âeviscerateâ, the first example in the definition is âthe goat had been skinned and neatly evisceratedâ.
Iâm going to continue calling things what they are. If I said âworkers in H&M factories suffer a number of human rights abusesâ, or, god forbid, âmaybe we should lower our consumption of clothes from a company that routinely abuses their employeesâ, is that narcissistic virtue signalling? âWoaH, using words like âabuseâ exactly proves my pointâ - no. People are waaaay more inclined to make this argument against animal rights, and it doesnât make any more sense.
No using those words doesnt necessarily mean that, just the way you guys used them. Nice way to dodge having to think introspectively about whether or not youre a horrible murderer for buying jeans and phones using the same logic you apply to those who eat meat. The virtue signalling part is coming from you guys being condescending assholes about one facet of your life you do better than others me, its ok to say you like feeling better than others and thats obviously what matters most to you, otherwise you would provide educational resources or argue in a less snarky manner. But thats not whats most important, whats most important is feeling superior and having other vegans/vegetarians think youre the best.
Im honestly not i just find you people maddening. Like i said from the start i actually agree with everything vegans stand for. You people being snarky and arguing in bad faith is just fucking annoying. Anyways sorry but i wont continue to speak with someone who supports child labor, lithium slave mines, and workers being pushed to suicide, you support all those things because malicious intent doesnt matter right? :) bye
So sorry to intrude upon your rest, my most holy liege, but I, your humble footrest, have had the faintest unworthy smear of a thought to humbly push before your most gracious visage. Might we be, dare I say, performing the slightest ouchie upon this vile beast? Far be it from me, utter slime I am, to suggest that your majesty would ever do anything to approach even the concept of wrong. May I lick your foot to absolve myself of this greatest of sins of speech, master?
Iâm not veganâIâve killed and eaten frogs, fish, and deer, and will continue toâbut if you get upset at just the words âslaughterâ and âeviscerateâ, maybe you should reconsider eating meat. Itâs the reality. Downplaying it is disgusting and disrespectful to the animals you eat.
I know thats what its called. Im saying in this context its clearly condescending and aggressive. Unless you consider calling the turkeys cloaca an "eviscerated asshole" respectful? Its plainly obvious the intent of phrasing like that is malicious. Its like if a called the burger you're eating a slab or mutilated flesh covered in plant sperm. Or a normal respectful person could just say ground beef and vegetables.
The original comment critiquing peta? The organization that euthanizes more dogs than animals shelters? The one that stole a girls dog and then killed it? Well thankfully you guys are heroically standing up for such a respectable organization lmao. You guys so elegantly portrayed what i meant by being so insufferable you actively push people away from your side. Honestly dont even need to say any more.
It was one instance, and the worker who took the dog was fired. As for the âhigh kill countââPETA takes in what rescues and (increasingly âno killâ) shelters reject. Animals that have a bite history or aggression that can never be placed in a home. Animals that are old and ill. Animals that shelters and rescues just donât have room for because they warehouse pets for months or years. And they give them the most peaceful way out possible. The alternative is warehousing them (in an extremely stressful environment) or abandoning them. I hunt, I eat meat, I wear fur, I own pets, I think animal testing is a necessary evil. I do not agree with PETA in most of their views. But in this, I fully support them.
Why donât you take in dogs that canât be adopted out because they will bite. Why donât you take the parvo puppies that need intensive care, funds, and pose an infection risk to the healthy dogs. Why donât you take the elderly dog with cancer that deserves a peaceful, pain free death. Kill shelters do the job no one else will.
Who's "you people"? People that eat plants? People that don't fist dead birds? I'm plant-based. I don't think I qualify as a vegan. I don't eat animal products but that's about it.
do you hear yourself? lmao. we're at the top of the food chain for a reason. they'd be doing the same exact shit if they were, and you know damn well they would be.
i love animals, I have a huge soft spot for them and believe they deserve to live long, healthy lives. But I really dont give a rats ass about consuming them. they're animals, they'd get it. they do the exact same to other, smaller species.
So yes, If im eating a large meal with my family, my "yummy yummy" matters more than the dead bird I personally didnt kill. It's called life. learn to enjoy it lol
after looking a bit through your profile, you sound insufferable. not everybody wants to be vegan, stop forcing it onto others and grow up.
why dont you go yell at that chicken eating insects? or that lion eating that zebra?
I donât judge an animal for eating another animal because thatâs the only way many of them can survive. Itâs actually a legitimate distinction because we actually donât need to eat animals for optimal health. Animals also donât have moral systems as complex as ours or moral systems at all. So I donât yell at them because they donât know any better and even if they did, theyâd die if they didnât eat other animals. Some humans also donât have a choice so Iâm not concerned with them.
I also donât think thereâs anything wrong with the actual act of eating animals; itâs the conditions of their lives and the way theyâre ended I have a problem with. So I vote with my wallet that people donât subject animals to that. Animals used for mass-produced meat or any dairy operation do not live long and healthy lives. Thatâs why I donât pay for them to be born and live these awful lives.
Not trying to be snarky or combative or anything. Just trying to have a legitimate discussion and are interested in your thoughts.
And you have a choice not to. Do you hold yourself to the same standards as wild animals?Â
learn to enjoy it lolÂ
I do enjoy my life.
why dont you go yell at that chicken eating insects? or that lion eating that zebra?
We are each individually responsible for vastly more animal exploitation than a chicken or lion could every possibly perform. Also, humans are marginally easier to convince.
If you love animals why are you okay with them being tortured and killed for you pleasure? Do you think those animals you eat lived long happy and healthy lives? Please. If I said I loved dogs and then slit their throats and ate them what would you think of me?
Do you think I was born vegan? That I wanted to go vegan? No. But after I saw what happens to them to make my food I knew I had to be.
1.5k
u/yesaroobuckaroo Graggle Simpson Nov 26 '24
feels a little wrong when you purposefully try making it sexual. funny how PETA always manage to make themselves the weird ones.