I mean, it’s not really bestiality if it isn’t sexual. A gynocological exam also isn’t fingering.
A gynaecologist “treats” the patient, benefitting the patient.
Forcibly impregnating someone is also called rape.
Pretty fucked up to try to equate animal husbandry with rape.
If you believe that animals should have rights like humans do, then animals can be raped. If slavery was still legal, would you write “it’s pretty fucked up to equate slave husbandry with rape”? Just because we have historically done something, that doesn’t mean that what we’re doing is in any way moral.
Animals can have rights and be protected from unnecessary cruelty without anthropomophizing them and granting full human rights. You’re equating full, sapient humans with a species specifically bred for a base purpose without higher levels of thought and expression.
I don’t even think that statement is anthropocentric hubris. If ultra-advanced aliens showed up tomorrow and started domesticating humans for food or some other purpose, I would have the default expectation of them having the same or similar morals. Maybe we’d get access to decent healthcare and good libraries before we went to the slaughterhouse.
Cows get more rights than trees or crops because they have an ability to express pain and convey emotion. They don’t have the same rights as humans because they could never give a passionate argument for suffrage to a jury.
And to be clear: there are plenty of real, tangible reasons to end animal husbandry and make everyone vegan without even touching philosophy.
If ultra-advanced aliens showed up tomorrow and started domesticating humans for food or some other purpose, I would have the default expectation of them having the same or similar morals. Maybe we’d get access to decent healthcare and good libraries before we went to the slaughterhouse
I can’t believe you said this with a straight face. This is the depths of depravity and mental gymnastics that a non vegan philosophical position leads to. I’m also sure that if this actually happened, you would throw your logic in the trash, where it belongs, and you would fight for the liberation of the slaughtered race.
Do you want to extend the argument to a person who is in a permanent comatose state? By your definition, they are without “higher levels of thought and expression”. Is it cool to eat them?
If the advanced aliens had the control over us that we exert over animals then I wouldn’t have a choice. And whether I fight or not isn’t relevant to their choice to farm me. If anything it’s in their best interest to keep me healthy and content until I’m harvested.
Your coma example is laughable. They’re a human. A medical procedure (even if we don’t have the technology to perform it) could return them to normal function. Turning a cow into a human-like creature is a different discussion altogether, it would be a transformation at such a fundamental level that we might as well be discussing artificial personhood instead of the ethics of diet.
If we invented a procedure that could make corn moo would it no longer be vegan?
If the advanced aliens had the control over us that we exert over animals then I wouldn’t have a choice. And whether I fight or not isn’t relevant to their choice to farm me. If anything it’s in their best interest to keep me healthy and content until I’m harvested.
You keep avoiding the moral implications here because you know the argument is bs. If some groups of people mass bred and slaughtered monkeys or dogs on an industrial scale would you not care, because they don’t have a choice? It would be the same as your example, without the alien hypotheticals.
A medical procedure could return them to normal function
The disconnect between the logical, robotical analysis in the first case and the childish, optimistic look here really just highlights the compartmentalization you have to go through for a “coherent” position.
Slaves can have rights and be protected from unnecessary cruelty without anthropomophizing them and granting full human rights. You’re equating full, sapient humans with a species specifically bred for a base purpose without higher levels of thought and expression.
Your ancestors, probably
Kind of racist to suggest that slaves were a different species
That’s the point
That’s exactly how people justified slavery in the past, and it is how the person I replied to justified their argument. That’s my entire point. It’s the same argument.
This is a ludicrous argument. If you truly believe that all animals have the same rights then the only internally consistent conclusion is the virtual extermination of the human species.
Life is a zero sum game. Something lives by consuming something else or displacing it for access to limited resources. Optimizing for the minimum harm to earth’s ecosystem is always going to be the end of agriculture, housing, hunting, industry and basically everything other human institution. We’re the most insidious invasive species ever and the world would be healthier without us mucking around.
So unless you’re stumping for that, don’t pretend to have the moral high ground. If you are, stop wasting your time shaming people and skip right to culling them.
Something lives by consuming something else or displacing it for access to limited resources.
True, but no one gives a shit when the consumed life is a plant.
People say the “plants feel pain” thing rhetorically, but it isn’t a serious argument. And if they were somehow actually being serious, then this would actually strengthen the case to only consume plants due the efficiency of doing so vs consuming animal products.
I advocate for humanity to live in harmony and balance with our environment, that is why I am anti-imperialist and anti-capitalist as well as vegan. Our history is plagued with exploitation, that can’t be denied, but I am trying to change it and you are arguing that it cannot be changed and that we shouldn’t even try.
Humanity’s relationship with animals and nature has historically been exploitative but it doesn’t need to be that way.
We have vastly increased our ability to produce food. There are ample resources available on the planet for all of us to share and live in abundance. Human greed and selfishness is rewarded by our society. That means our society needs to change.
I reject your argument that life is a zero-sum game. My happiness does not need to come at the expense of another’s unhappiness. We can all work together to create a better future for all living things on our planet.
Bro would rather exterminate all humans than admit that he should just go vegan
Wow, comparing actual human slavery to cattle production. That’s certainly a take
Fucking hell, now you’re comparing slaves to animals? Seek help
I am, the comparison is extremely apt. An entire group of thinking, feeling, sentient, living creatures, exploited for profit. We look down on them as being beneath us, and a culture that normalizes beating, raping and killing them. Living beings, treated as property. They are slaves. Lots of people like to believe that if they had lived during slavery, they would have been against it. This is the modern equivelent.
Forcibly impregnating someone is also called rape.
someone
Key word.
It’s not rape if it’s your dog
I would really like to see you try to get your dog pregnant.
Why do you want to watch that?
A human can try to impregnate a dog, they just can’t succeed
I’m the dog.
I think I need to mute this thread before I dig this hole too deep.
That’s correct, yes.
However, my dog is my property, and someone can only artificially inseminate my property with my permission.
What in the fuck
Anti-vegans will go to any depths of depravity in order to deal with their cognitive dissonance. Once, on Reddit, I got a commenter to agree that he would be fine if someone had a dog in a cage they tortured for entertainment, rather than agree that it’s kinda fucked up that we slaughter animals because their flesh tastes nice.
So let me get this straight, you were arguing with someone, tried to lead them to a contradiction, but they actually had a consistent view on it that you didn’t like, and your conclusion is that they have cognitive dissonance?
My friend, I do not think that means what you think it means.
Real question, what if there is no cognitive dissonance.
Like someone who knows exactly what’s going on and says “fuck it, it’s delicious” ?
So you’re aware, that’s a really fucked up thing to think. Let alone say.
But maybe we disagree only on terminology?
What would you call the act of nonconsensually sticking your dick into your dog, and do you think it’s horrible?
What would you call the act of nonconsensually sticking your dick into your dog, and do you think it’s horrible?
Raping a dog is bad, yes.
Raping a dog is bad, yes.
So a dog is someone and that’s what makes it rape? Where do you draw the line for someone? Is it the act of rape itself that’s bad, or is it the perpetrator getting sexual satisfaction from it? What if they don’t do it for that purpose, but some other more abstract reason? Is it okay then?
If it applies to one animal it should apply to all, but go ahead and be a special snowflake instead
no. different things are different.
Like, what a fucking stupid answer that can apply to anything and nothing at the same time.
Animals are animals, and humans are animals. Kangaroos are not cows, but both are also animals - different things ARE different, but at the same time, in some aspects, they are not.
Why doesn’t my dog have a right to vote? Why can a snake eat eggs but I can’t? Why is it OK for ants to farm aphids but not for humans to farm cows?
Different things are, in fact, different. There are lots of dead simple and airtight arguments for veganism without counterproductive emotional appeals. Talk about economics or ecology or health and not about sad puppy dog eyes.
Hell yeah! Morals are just a suggestion, lions eat their young, but I can’t? That’s bullshit and we all know it. If you wanna argue against eating our young (just the disabled ones, of course), please keep that melodramatic stuff out of here.
Artificial insemination is a treatment.
If the recipient asked for it and the donor is giving it out of free will with the explicit intention then yes it is a medical treatment.
With humans yes, but in the case of non-human animals these decisions are up to the owner.
edit: clarification for the ultra-dense.
You are aware humans are animals? The differentiation “human” is artificial and made up…
non-human animals … I didn’t think it needed spelling out.
The differentiation “human” is artificial and made up…
Uh… So the differentiation between ‘cow’ and ‘chicken’ is also artificial and made up, as well as the differentiation between ‘rock’ and ‘jetplane.’
What’s your point?
The differentiation “human” is artificial and made up…
You share 25% of your DNA with a tree, is it slavery to own four apple trees?
Ah yes so when I give my dog antibiotics for an infection against his will it’s definitely not medical treatment
Making an animal pregnant isn’t solving a medical issue. How do you not see the difference?
Personally I view it the same as giving medicine to a baby. They don’t understand, sometimes you have to make decisions in their best interests.
Key point: in their best interests, not for personal gain.
Are you planning on eating said dog?
If we’re gonna eat it then same goes for my chickens
Artificial insemination without consent is rape. Natural insemination without consent is rape.
Cows cannot give consent to humans. No animal can. Hell, even if we discovered another human-like species but couldn’t have meaningful communication with them, it’d still be rape.
You can get consent from the cows owner. Definitely don’t inseminate some else’s cow without asking.
Consent from the owner?
And what if chattel slavery still existed? Would you be free to rape a black woman if her “owner” said yes?
No, because owning humans is wrong.
If owning humans were ok, nothing else would be stopping you from going into your slaves?
Why is it wrong?
Not a vegan but if you think what happens to cows is a medical “treatment” then you are a dumbass
it is not a needed treatment for the health and well being of the cow, it is a unecessary treatment forced upon the animal
Right, but we do need more cows in the long run.
You can find cows that fuck, no need to insert yourself into the reproductive cycle of cows.
You can find cows that fuck,
are they in my area
a) we don’t b) they can happily fuck on their own, it just makes it harder to exploit them for their body fluids. Nobody cares about the calves, they are just needed for the mothers to lactate
Wouldn’t it make more sense to simply induce lactation than go through the whole rigmarole of artificial insemination and then having to dispose of the unwanted calves?
*Procedure, a treatment is to relieve negative symptoms
It is rape!
Remember there have been at least one-doctor that did this to women, not in his offices to become pregnant (warning, SP?). A famous case was a doctor that raped/impregnanted (SP?) a lot of women looking to become mothers, with his own sperm. The obvious results/proof came after birth,
Cows are not on the same level as humans
Arguing with vegans is like arguing with antivaxxers, they are positions based on emotions and they have their own version of reality they use to reinforce their believes. They often claim they have studies to back up their claims but the most shallow dive shows them to be bullshit.
It’s literally evident as they try to reframe this as rape. Their need to lean on rhetoric shows they have a strong basis for their believes.
What do we call a sexual act with a being that did not consent?
Does it matter if the being is human? And what if the being is a neanderthal?
Or say we find a lady on the street and DNA test her, find out she’s technically not human. What would we call sexually acting upon her without her consent?
If defining this action triggers you emotionally this much, that’s a reflection of your ability to have level-headed conversations. It’s not your interlocutor as much as you’d like to claim.
My criticism here isn’t about any specific group or topic. It’s about this aggravating debate pattern where rhetoric is used to paint the opponent’s argument into a morally charged form rather than addressing the actual claim being made.
That style of engagement is not something that ever leads to meaningful discussions.
A similar dynamic occurs in other highly polarized subjects where participants are more focused on signaling moral positions than resolving the underlying question.
This sort of shit has been going on since at least the times of Artistole who championed logic over emotion.
Do bulls obtain consent? Nature is rapey as hell
It is sexual, it sounds like they jack them off to acquire genetic material to impregnate the female livestock with
Trying to be “facts forward” so make of this what you will. Source: I was in FFA in highschool in a beef intense-ish area.
The method of collecting semen I’m most familiar with is when they take a female cow in heat and tie her up, then bring a male bull they want to collect semen from into the same pen. The male will smell the female is in heat, gets erect, and will attempt to mount her.
As the male is trying to mount the female, people in the pen with the cattle will have a large rubbery “sleeve” on a pole (imagine a cow sized condom on a stick) that they will maneuver around the bull’s penis as it mounts the cow. He does his thing in the condom thinking he’s inside the female (usually less than 30 seconds) dismounts and then the ranchers have their semen for artificial insemination.
I’ve been out of that area for over a decade now so a new method may have emerged since then, but in my Animal Sciences class, that’s how we were taught semen is harvested for most livestock.
Edit: I distinctly recall the “artificial vagina” being on a stick (and laughing about it in class), but best video I can find on the quick: https://youtu.be/-4ma3WeOxbo
TBF that one sounds like no lines are crossed
Eh, I feel like the female cow is still getting a raw deal. Less raw than the classic “breed this bull with this cow” arrangement, but still somewhat not good.
You left out the rest, where the calf is seperated from its mother, tortured and killed for veal, while the mother mourns the loss of her child that the milk she produces is actually for, so the milk can be stolen from her for profit.
almost no calves end up as veal at all. the vast majority are brought to full weight before slaughter
Unless they are jacking off themselves at the same time, it’s not sexual.
I get what you’re saying but it’s sexual assault, no?
Is artificial insemination of livestock sexual assault?
…
No.
If I were to artificially inseminate a woman with sperm from a spermbank without her consent, would that be sexual assault?
Unless that women is a literal cow, yes.
Others Beings have rights!!! If you believe in god(s), then you are in real trouble after death, let alone those that do this.
it’s a veterinary procedure
Veterinary in the sense that “it’s a duty a veterinarian might perform do,” but in this context it’s done to create more animals for us to harvest food from. Because letting them do it at their own rate wasn’t fast enough for this industrialised society’s appetite.
It’s disingenous to call it a veterinary procedure; we’re under no illusions about why this is being done. The cow didn’t ask for a bloody sperm donor, lol.
“This is the police! Hands up you FREAK!”
“…im a farmer”
“omg thats so cool, can i bring my kids to watch and maybe they can try?”
deleted by creator
“Natural” and “Unnatural” isn’t a thing unless you believe in ghosts
If ghosts were real, they would be a natural part of the universe.
I miss r/natureismetal. It was at times highly educational
You want to show me an ant jerking off an aphid to reproduce them?
They would if they had hands.
I came across a vidya on the interwebs many hears ago where a monkey grabbed a frog and used it as a fleshlight… Ever since then Ive had a different relationship with the word “unnatural”. The truth is that shoving your arm up a cows ass and eating vegan fervantly and being a hater ass bitch are all perfect examples of natural human behaviour…and im well past thinking theyre not.
An act being natural or unnatural is not a reason to say that action is good or bad. I think we all agree unecessarily harming a sentient being is bad though.
I agree with that sentiment, yes. On both counts.
reads some comments
makes a couple comments
reads more comments
…
…
I think this post might be too powerful for lemmy shitpost.
I’m genuinely impressed by the amount of reports I’ve gotten from this thread. This is top tier shit.
This post is like the one ring of power, if we let it go on for too long everyone here will become a shitpost gollum. The proper thing to do is cast this shitpost into the toilet bowl of mordor where it was forged.
It is a gift. Why not use this shitpost against the foes of the fediverse?
You cannot wield it. It answers to the enemy alone. It has no other master.
No, it is my own! I finds it!
Can we get a peek? Sounds juicy
ITT: Animal abuse apologia
no one is defending animal abuse
Just supporting
no one said they support it either
If you buy milk or meat, you support this with your money.
you’re stretching the definition of support to meaninglessness
Would you say that you support a good cause by giving money? Like a donation for doctors without borders, or world central kitchen?
Are you supporting your family by paying their bills? Is the government supporting low income families by giving them money?
say what you want to say. I don’t care for your interrogation.
I mean… it is.
Looking at this directly from a viewpoint of what is “natural” for the human body, being vegan is unnatural.
Being an omnivore is. Our entire digestive system is such that the natural diet of the human body is an omnivorous one and it does best when treated as such. And that means a small amount of animal fats, proteins, trace minerals, and amino acids in one’s diet.
I’m not going to argue morals or ethics, because that wasn’t what the post was about. It’s what’s about what is “natural.”
Yes, you may disagree with me. Strenuously, and just know that I respect you and hope that you and yours have an excellent day wherever you happen to be on this flaming cannonball of a planet we call home.
The best Thai soup I ever had was from a place called Don Vegan in Quebec City. It was absolutely amazing. Still love a good beef dip though
ITT being morally superior punching down on vegans complaining that they act morally superior and punch down. All done under a photo of someone elbow deep in cow.
I don’t think you know what punching down means
I dont think most people on this thread do. Who here is of higher rank or social status or superior? I dont think anyone does, they just want to grandstand in the comments.
Seems the person that posted who is vegan thinks they are. Seems the people making all sorts of comments are also defending themselves or think they are superior.
It’s always been funny to watch this. Who gives a fuck what you eat and why, its a personal choice not a morally superior quasi-religious issue.
Can you expand a bit more on being a personal choice? Would you say an action is a personal choice even if there’s a victim involved?
What you eat is a personal choice from what’s available to you. Some people can’t afford organic vegetables and can only get protein from animal sources because they subsistence farm. Some people live in industrialized societies and have the time and resources to make most of their own food from scratch and not eat anything from animals (that’s me).
Grandstanding about it on the internet or thinking one way or another is superior abstracts this to philosophy and outside of reality. Ultimately its a choice and moralizing it or talking about hypotheticals or judging others character based on your own beliefs is ridiculous. Some people think meat is murder, some people hunt species that are over populated because humans have killed all the predators, there’s always a counter point to every part of the discussion.
You have Jains in India causing public health crises feeding pigeons and causing disease to spread, and you have people eating meat contaminated with shit giving them e coli from factory farms. There’s people that hunt and respect the animals they kill to feed their families, and people that grow their own food in their backyard because they have time and property.
It’s all relative, it’s all a personal nuanced choice. Ive heard the same moralistic arguments ad nauseum, there’s no one way to live and no one way to eat in this current world.
What you eat is a personal choice from what’s available to you.
Would you say the same about exercise? Say out of the activities available for me there’s my two favorites: walking and kicking dogs. Do you think it’s a personal choice whichever option I pick?
thinking one way or another is superior abstracts this to philosophy and outside of reality
You don’t care what people do? Even if it would impact your personal choice?
I think you are either a vegan that is still at the “I enjoy sniffing my own farts and want to rage at everyone” stage (usually <5 years and under age 30) or you are just a typical internet troll.
You claimed lots of things, but when comes the time to justify your beliefs, applying reason, you chose not to. Then you make claims about me without giving a proper reason. I think you’re unreasonable.
deleted by creator
I don’t agree with the use of the word “sociopathic”. It’s Greek for “socially ill” and has historically been associated with pseudoscientific stereotypes applied with people with antisocial personality disorder. Mental disorders are not bourgeois, they are proletarian. They are associated with hardship and trauma, not privilege.
deleted by creator
Why would I read books by authors willing to use ableist slurs? Martha Stout and Paul Babiak sound like terrible people I want to hear nothing from. I’m already sure their opinions on mental disorders are worthless pseudoscientific garbage.
comparing slaves to animals is exactly what slavers do
We are all animals, and we are comparable
So according to you slaves are animals, neat
worst bad faith argument ive seen in a while, thanks for not trying
That’s what they said.
I think it’s a bad faith arguement to equate human enslavement to cattle production. Yet here we are
It is though, just because you think being a non-human animal is bad doesn’t make you less of an animal.
OK, so first of all, what they are doing in this picture is checking if the cows are pregnant. I have never seen someone being table to impregnate cows by sticking their arm up their ass.
Second thing you should remember: In nature the bull literally does not fucking care. If a cow is ovulating (bulls and cows are able to detect when this is the case), he will literally try to fuck the specific cow the entire fucking day. IRS not like he fucks the cow once and then its done, we are talking about the bull following the cow the whole day and continuously (trying to) fucking her.
I would argue, that a single small metal rod is less tiring than a horny bull trying to fuck you the whole day.
And before people are going to throw shit at me: No, this does not mean, that industrial grade factory farming is in any form or shape a good system. I have seen it all and I know how incredibly bad it can be. However, I Am not a fan of throwing the word rape (even if the exact word has not been used here) around, simply because you could somewhat classify the natural process as rape too.
And the cow often ends up hurt, sometimes permanently. Culling for hip displacement and broken legs is not uncommon.
Thats quite of an exaggeration and this can be counteracted.
It is common, that cows can get hurt by the bull, but these wounds are usually only on the skin (this comes from the bull and other cows continuosly mount a single cow). If the ground however is slippery, it can happen that a cow gets hurt due to slipping when another animal tries to mount her. However counteracting this can be quite easy. Since you as a farmer usually know when a cow is ovulating just put her and the bull in a separate area, that has straw on the ground. At least in germany this is also mandatory (to be exact, its illegal to let the bull walk with the rest of the herd).
Well, we end up with at least a few hobbling around for a couple months, and other that show evidence of long-term damage that we will cull after weaning. That’s from a herd of 334 Angus/Simmental which aren’t a huge phenotype like Charolais, where it’s more common. And pasture breeding is the defacto standard in North America.
So no, it’s not an exaggeration, it’s actual experience.
Thats interesting. My parents have a herd of about 100 Fleckvieh/spotted cattle (Including followers) and I couldnt remember that we ever had a case where a cow had a displaced hip or broken leg, because it has been mounted. We had to cull animals because of broken legs, but those were caused by other accidents.
They are not checking for pregnancy. They are impregnating the cows.
Though the anus they hold the cow’s cervix in order to stick the insemination rod: https://www.youtube.com/shorts/l6AdaYfgcfk
Getting fisted is better than getting mounted all day? Sure, you’re still gonna exploited throughout your whole life and when they can’t exploit you anymore, killed. But you forgot at least another option besides fisting and getting mounted: not being bred into existence for the sole purpose of being exploited to death.
Why do you care if factory farming is bad?
… Because they have seen it in person and know how different factory farming is to ranching properly?
I assume from reading their comment, I’m just guessing
If they don’t hold the cervix, they’re gonna be poking that insemination rod into the cow’s cervix for a while until it gets to the canal.
After taking a second look you might be right. Its kind of hard to see, due to shitty image quality, but they might have insemination rods.
However, I will not engage in any fundamental discussions about veganism, because its a completely pointless discussion that always ends in throwing shit at each other.
Why do you care if factory farming is bad?
Because I’ve seen it all. I know how bad factory farming can be. I was raised on a farm and therefore I would say, that my knowledge about farming is quite big and I know what farming can look like if its done properly.
Sure, you’ve seen and know how bad it is. You also know how not as bad it can be when done otherwise.
But I’m asking why is it bad? And does it have anything to do with the treatment of the animals?
this entire post and thread.
My take on the veganism I’ve come to know personally is that vegans think they put themselves in the place of animals, but what I see is they put the animals in their own place. In this case, they think that consent should be placed in the animal realm because they believe it for themselves.
I can’t make much sense of your statement. I am flexitarian with a strong leaning towards vegetarian (meat is a rare exception) and a convenient leaning towards veganism (I love cheese, sowwy). But the reason I avoid animal products is because if I can enjoy good food without animals being hurt, then I will prefer that to eating animal products, for which animals get hurt. That’s a very easy decision and doesn’t involve nor require consent of any kind.
This is actually well put. To be honest, I only eat less meat (never really eat red meat unless it is served on special ocations) primarily because of the environment (meat production is far the biggest cause of poluted lands and forrest decrease on earth.) and health. Much meat and in those amounts, isn’t good for your overall health throughout a whole lifetime.
The hole killing thing… As a hunter myself, I have seen what nature does on it’s own. I can say that the way most people kill animals is far more humane than how animals treat animals in nature. Nature is fucking cruel, and so are we.
We get wrapped up in our abstract thought about animals so much that sometimes we forget that we are them.
You’re no man. You’re not even a mammal! You’re an anti-mammal. I call you “an-i-mal”.
Veganism is unnatural because we’re all omnivores, and evolved eating both plants and animals.
Impregnating cows this way is also unnatural.
Both can be true.
we’re all omnivores
Except, you know, the vegans.
that’s a choice by an individual. doesn’t change how their body behaves due to millions of years of evolution.
ironically, the thing that gave them the ability to make the choice to be vegan is the thing they are rebelling against. high volumes of protein, specifically those from consuming the brains and muscle of prey, allowed the species to grow larger and more complex brains.
in a few million years vegans are going to be too stupid to make the choice for themselves and will return to consuming meat because they’re omnivorous.
By your logic, obligate carnivores would have the larger brains. Humans are obligate omnivores. Studies show no significant differences in cognitive function, cardiovascular risk, or bone health when vegan diets meet recommended dietary allowance levels. Animal protein contributed during the evolution of the human brain, but the development was driven by cooking. Cooking externalized the energy required for digesting food, which allowed for a reduction of jaws/jaw muscles, and especially gut size, freeing energy that could be used by the brain instead.
Also, the brain is fueled by glucose, not protein …
Video of me after I found an actually good vegan wing place
good vegan food is hard to find. anything I’ve ate almost always has to be made at home.
Look for Indian, look for Thai, look for Greek/Türkiysh(sp?)/mediterranean and i think falafel is vegan maybe? just tell them to hold the yogurt even though it is delicious it has garlic and dill and cucumber in it (it is called tzatziki). they are probably used to the falafel folk being vegans.
L + ratio + touch grass
Our monkey, or rather ape, ancestors were more vegan than meat eater.
More vegan.
What a curious phrase. Not just for the substitution of vegetarian for vegan, but for the use of “more”. More vegan. I thought it was binary. Are there partial vegans? I thought that wasn’t allowed.
Because my diet includes more calories and nutrition from plant matter than meat most days, am I more vegan now?
You may already be a https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flexitarianism
"International research explains that flexitarianism is used as a broader term to describe partial reductions in meat consumption without fixed requirements.[7]"
Sorry, you’re too late. I now identify as More Vegan. ;)
Not only that, but also vegan diet is literally making people crazy (or crazy people are more often on vegan diet, dealer’s choice).
Source: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/10408398.2020.1741505#abstract
The majority of studies, and especially the higher quality studies, showed that those who avoided meat consumption had significantly higher rates or risk of depression, anxiety, and/or self-harm behaviors. There was mixed evidence for temporal relations, but study designs and a lack of rigor precluded inferences of causal relations. Our study does not support meat avoidance as a strategy to benefit psychological health.
I think people on the left as whole would be more prone to depression and anxiety too. People who care about the world are generally more concious, more self-aware and critical, which turn into more worrying and at the extreme, anxiety.
I mean, the part you cited already mentioned it but later in the study it’s stated even more clearly:
Across all studies, there was no evidence to support a causal relation between the consumption or avoidance of meat and any psychological outcomes.
A sentence later it says
These authors posited that mental disorders may lead to the adoption of a meat-less diet. The authors stated that individuals with mental disorders may “choose a vegetarian diet as a form of safety or self-protective behavior”
And I wrote
or crazy people are more often on vegan diet, dealer’s choice
You wrote
vegan diet is literally making people crazy
You were wrong about that, just walk it back dude, it’s not a big deal, it’s okay to be wrong about things.
Also, people with anxiety and depression aren’t widely considered to be “crazy”.
Reading comprehension my dude. I wrote A or B, study says A or B.
I am honestly and genuinely trying to help you out here. I used to struggle to accept when I was wrong about something because it made me feel stupid, but in reality, people actually respect you a lot more when you demonstrate that you can admit when you’re wrong about things.
You don’t need to concede the whole argument, just a simple “oh yeah, you’re right, the first part was definitely wrong, but I stand by the second part” would be a solid step in the right direction.
Anyways, feel free to take my advice or not, I don’t really care about the thing you’re arguing about, I just saw someone who I thought I could maybe help avoid some of the problems I had in life.
All the best!
what they said is true.
I used to struggle to accept when I was wrong about something
you still have this problem
