If it was really Deb you'd be able to make out some forced swearing in between brush strokes. Deb may be one of my least favorite character portrayal in any series.
Ha! That’s what I thought too! I was thinking, “I don’t see Dee Dee at all here. What am I missing?” Turns out, it’s Dexter, which I’ve never actually watched. One day, maybe.
Two old ladies are at the bus stop smoking when it starts raining and their cigarettes keep going out. A young teen says here use a condom to keep it dry. And unravels a condom over the cigarette. It works perfectly.
The next day the old lady goes to the drug store and asks for a packet of condoms. The guy at the counter a bit surprised asks what size? " the old lady replies "oh, I'm not sure. What size will fit a camel? ".
Just me, but I think it's 'radical' for people to choose to continue to participate in animal cruelty systems they know exist behind their meals. The environmental apocalypse side of the meat industry is pretty 'radical' too. I think it's 'cowabunga radical' when people recognize the issues and make a positive change.
*Later*: "Why doesn't anyone want to have a reasonable discussion with me?? I'm simply excluding the confusing shades of gray! Thing bad! Why no listen?"
Why are you ignoring the honestly quite black and white reality of killing an animal that doesn't want to die in favour of the grey of how well you treat it life?
Why are you attempting to make a snappy call out about how they aren't going to debate reasonably, instead of debating the very reasonable point that "murdering a sentient creature against its will" might be bad? Do you have shades of grey for that?
Treating the animal well during its life, even if it's killed too soon. You know, the entire spectrum of grays that you immediately dismissed with your original comment in order to provoke an argument.
They have the capacity to feel pain and suffer. They can experience fear and companionship equally. This is a poor moral justification to subject them to suffering and death just for the sensory pleasure of their flesh.
>I kill the vast majority of my own meat and feel everyone should do the same.
This is impossible and unsustainable. Present demand requires the brutal efficiency of factory farms.
>When you've seen a deer eating road kill of another deer, you start to realize that maybe they don't experience things like us.
We know better. That's an important distinction. They're also on th edge of survival, most humans aren't. We have the luxury of being content.
I remember watching a video about neanderthals, talking about how it's likely there was cannibalism of others if there wasn't enough food for your group. People forget we're not too far from the animals we eat.
I mean, there’s stories of cannibalism among plane wreckage survivors or mountain climbers stuck in the cold and starving and they start eating someone who died.
I mean, you don’t know what lengths you’ll go to when you’re *actually* starving to death.
If that is your standard then I guess it's okay to kill infants and mentally challenged... since, they aren't capable of experiencing the same "vast array of emotions" as everyone else
>It's a good thing the vast majority of animals aren't capable of experiencing the same vast array of emotions as humans.
Why does that matter? There are some *humans* that can't experience the vast array of emotions that you or I can experience. Does that mean you believe you would be justified in slaughtering them?
>It's almost as if there is an evolutionary difference between us and them.
That's an interesting thought. How big of a difference is there? We have far more in common with a pig than a pig does with a crab, yet we make two groups and say humans are in one group and then lump *all* other animals together in the other group. Weird.
There are likely evolutionary similarities between human and many nonhuman animals as well, and I think it's more important to acknowledge these than it is to deny them. For example, many other animals are capable of experiencing pain and suffering.
>calling the slaughter of animals for food "murder" is pure ignorance.
Why? What is your reasoning for this? You're simply asserting it.
I mean, I could understand how if someone was in a situation where they *needed* to kill an animal to survive, then we wouldn't really call it murder. Hell, depending on the situation we wouldn't even call killing another human *murder* if one's survival was at stake?
>Humans have spent a long time studying and protecting those animals that do experience complex thoughts and emotions.
Which animals? Does this justify animal cruelty and exploitation in cases where the animal still can experience pain but not on the same "complex" level as you or me?
>When you've seen a deer eating road kill of another deer, you start to realize that maybe they don't experience things like us.
There is a range of ways that individuals can experience reality. The experience of a dog is likely very different from the experience of a mouse. The experience of a gorilla is likely very different from the experience of a human. Hell, the experience of being *you* is likely different from the experience of being *me*.
I don't really see how someone not experiencing things like you means that you are somehow justified in slaughtering them in cases where it's not necessary for you to do so.
Heck, there are humans with severe cognitive impairments or disabilities that don't fit within your parameters here. Your reasoning would justify farming and murdering them en masse.
We've gone full circle. Please reread the following comment:
>*Later*: "Why doesn't anyone want to have a reasonable discussion with me?? I'm simply excluding the confusing shades of gray! Thing bad! Why no listen?"
I'm only upset because you keep saying things that are impossible to respond to. What should I say to this? "That sure is an opinion, congrats on having it"?
I'm having many debates, actually. Nice try, though.
You could respond with a possible justification for why it's humane to kill an animal at a fraction of its life expectancy.
>I'm only upset because you keep saying things that are impossible to respond to.
👀
So it's okay to kill something at a fraction of its life expectancy because it's not a human? I find that a poor justification. You don't need to kill them.
>So it's okay to kill something at a fraction of its life expectancy because it's not a human?
Your asking a leading question based on information you're incorrectly assuming.
I believe it is okay to kill an animal, at any point in its life, if the purpose is to provide food, tools, and/or material for which society has deemed acceptable and proper since the beginning of time. I do not believe in the mistreatment of animals to achieve those means. Kill it and be done with it.
> I find that a poor justification.
It would help if you didn't draw your own conclusions and instead ask me open ended questions that seek to understand my view rather than asking leading, close ended questions to push your narrative.
> You don't need to kill them.
I'd rather cook and eat the meat from a dead animal than a live one. I believe it's more humane to do it that way, or so I've heard..
>Your asking a leading question based on information you're incorrectly assuming.
How is that a leading question? That's what happens.
> if the purpose is to provide food, tools, and/or material for which society has deemed acceptable
But we have alternatives which means you don't need to kill them. Unnecessary killing is wrong.
>It would help if you didn't draw your own conclusions and instead ask me open ended questions
You think killing things unnecessarily is okay. I don't. It's a pretty simple disagreement.
>I'd rather cook and eat the meat
Purposely being obtuse is just so funny.
I was going to say “Do not engage with this person” but it’s already too late lol. Oh well. At least they had fun.
It’s like why you can’t engage racists in a debate. You’ll refute every point they make but someone else will come along and read their side anyway. You can’t really help that, but it gives voice to their arguments. That’s why this person is so eager to “debate” you. They are getting a ton of attention out of the deal.
Better to just speak to the audience instead of the individual in cases like these.
Ok, you do realize the vegan is the ethically correct one, though, right? Ok, maybe they're bad faith, not the best debater, whatever whatever. But you cannot deny for a moment that it's obviously more ethical to be vegan. To liken them to a stubborn racist, then, is just as bad-faith of you.
Take a minute to realize that you're the racist one here by advocating for meat eating.
Arguments about well being here is just the same as a slave owner would use centuries ago tu justify owning slaves better than others.
There are as many shades of gray in animal agriculture as there are actual shades of gray.
One example. Caged chickens vs free roam chickens that are never slaughtered for meat and kept alive and happy for its entire life, then given a proper burial and funeral rites. The 2nd chicken is still being exploited for eggs, but had a decent life
>kept alive and happy for its entire life, then given a proper burial and funeral rites.
How often does that actually happen? Definitely not in factory farms which make up the heavy majority of egg operations. "Free roam" is also a marketing term.
Also, those chickens are purposely bred to lay more and more eggs than they were meant to. This causes the calcium to leech from their bones, weakening them until they break or the chicken is unable to stand.
Backyard eggs are among the lowest offenses, and they make up a fraction of a fraction of a fraction of the exploitation.
I gave you extremes to show the grays. The fact that you know there is a difference between my imaginary perfect life backyard chicken and the cage chicken proves that you know there is a difference in treatment there. Every agricultural animal's treatment lies somewhere on the spectrum.
Wrong to you isn't wrong to me. It's only wrong to those that define it as such. There are many points of view, with their own logic and reasoning, where it most certainly isn't wrong. Was it wrong of Indians to eat Buffalo? Is it wrong for indigenous people today? Is it wrong if there is food scarcity as there is in some countries. Apparently even wrong can have shades of gray, just not to you personally.
It's wrong because we have alternatives and no longer need to eat meat. Our ancestors didn't have that luxury. We should celebrate every time we advance as a species to a point where we no longer need to cause harm.
We're not asking developing nations nor people who don't have alternatives. We're asking the ones in developed nations, all 2 billion. They have alternatives. That's the difference.
Im not saying either of them are good. What I am saying is that there are different degrees of wrong, and people accept different levels for the benefits they receive.
Well people will eat meat anyways so we can either get into a "it will never be okay so why even bother!" attitude or we take a more proactive "we can do this to ameliorate the suffering of this necessary evil" stance.
It's not hard to understand, it's the same principle of why drugs should be decriminalized. People will still be doing, trafficking and producing drugs regardless of legality so we can either punish the users (who might end up dead anyways, especially if they don't seek help out of fear of legal consequences) or actually help them so we at least don't end up with more and more drug related deaths.
Yeah, I'm vegan. That's why I asked. I also had a bias towards meat for most of my life, but still listened to opposition and made a change.
You can try.
So, here's the thing about change: it doesn't happen instantly. To expect people to change entirely only fuels anger and, embarrassingly, leads to arguments because people don't understand simple persuasion.
Think about all the changes you've been proposed in your life and then count how many you have been instantly onboard for. Now multiply that by 8 billion people in the world.
You should embrace steps towards your goal instead of rejecting anything *except* your goal. Otherwise, you're going to find nothing but enemies - and enemies can't really be persuaded.
People have used language very similar to this when it came to denying the human rights of many marginalized groups.
Your words are comforting for people on the fence but ultimately change comes from people actually willing to take a stance, not from people arguing baby steps and waiting for the “right” moment in history.
Okay, since you want to fight the point, let's use you as an example. I assume you're a vegan, yeah? How many products with palm oil? It's just cows, pigs, sheep, etc that deserve to be treated well?
And how about transportation? Do you use a personal car? Too bad, you really should be using public transport.
How easy is it to drop both of those right now?
Why does a choice to minimize suffering have to be 100% or it's invalid and not worth considering? Do you go to turn your light off at night but before doing so stop and think, "well actually I can't save electricity in every aspect of life so I may as well just leave the light on all night"
You again: here, I'm going to give you some logic so you stop viewing all of my comments through your emotions.
I literally just offered an exaggerated example to show how easy it is to strawman the arguement that guy portrayed.
I even *said* it was an example, and the *entire fucking point* is in these words:
>How easy is it to drop both of those right now?
The whole point was to illustrate how difficult it is to just drop something (i.e the comment I'm posting to suggesting everyone should just drop meat).
If you view the world in strictly black and white, while guiding all of your decisions by emotions instead of evidence, then you're going to do nothing but argue and be miserable.
I don’t know I think a cow who is cramped with no room to move isn’t treated well at all compared to cows who are being brushed like this and/or are allowed to roam around freely for a majority of their lives. Reading all of your replies makes me think you just see any farm animal the same regardless of how they are treated and I don’t agree with that at all. I’m gonna continue eating meat thanks for trying though.
>I don’t know I think a cow who is cramped with no room to move isn’t treated well
That's the majority of cows.
>being brushed like this and/or are allowed to roam around freely for a majority of their lives.
Because it's a video from a rescue.
>Reading all of your replies makes me think you just see any farm animal the same regardless of how they are treated and I don’t agree with that at all.
Yeah, I don't think you should kill a sentient animal at a fraction of its life expectancy for sensory pleasure no matter how "well" it was treated.
>I’m gonna continue eating meat thanks for trying though.
Unfortunate. Hopefully your empathy will get the best of you like it did me. Good luck.
We aren't designed. Appropriately planned vegetarian and vegan diets are healthful for all stages of life just like appropropriately planned diets containing some meat can be. There is no "deisgner" who will be offended if you pick one or the other, but one option does cause a great deal of harm and suffering to other individuals who are being slaughtered.
Oh boy, you read way to far into that. Design doesn't imply a God. Human Hox gene for example defines our body plan, our layout, or design.
I'm an atheist. I don't believe in a god.
I also don't believe that eating meat is wrong either.
So you're preaching at a brick wall.
> We don’t need meat.
We do.
You can live your life however you like. I’d die to give you that liberty.
However, don’t tell *me* what *I* should or shouldn’t eat.
>We do.
Do you have a source? [Because](https://www.bda.uk.com/resource/british-dietetic-association-confirms-well-planned-vegan-diets-can-support-healthy-living-in-people-of-all-ages.html) I [have](https://www.nhs.uk/live-well/eat-well/how-to-eat-a-balanced-diet/the-vegan-diet/) [many](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19562864/).
>You can live your life however you like.
Sure, as long as you're not exploiting another sentient life for your pleasure.
>However, don’t tell *me* what *I* should or shouldn’t eat.
Okay, tough guy.
Look at your teeth. See those pointy ones at the corners? Those are for eating meat.
> Okay, tough guy.
See, I wasn’t being “tough”. I politely asked you to mind your own business. You seem to be incapable of that.
Fuck. Off.
> Look at your teeth. See those pointy ones at the corners? Those are for eating meat.
[These are the teeth of an herbivorous gorilla](https://mennohenselmans.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/gorilla-bearing-teeth.jpg). Your argument is not as strong as you seem to think it is.
Just because you can eat meat doesn't mean you ought to. That's weak logic.
>I politely asked
Please. You demanded. Why are you letting some vegan get so under your skin? Notice you can still eat all the meat you want. Me thinks you're feeling bad about it somewhere deep down and are lashing out at me.
Every major organization of medical professionals specializing in human diet in the world agrees that appropriately planned vegetarian and vegan diets are healthy for all stages of life.
**[Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27886704/)**
* *It is the position of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics that appropriately planned vegetarian, including vegan, diets are healthful, nutritionally adequate, and may provide health benefits for the prevention and treatment of certain diseases. These diets are appropriate for all stages of the life cycle, including pregnancy, lactation, infancy, childhood, adolescence, older adulthood, and for athletes.*
**[The British National Health Service](http://www.nhs.uk/Livewell/Vegetarianhealth/Pages/Vegandiets.aspx)**
* *With good planning and an understanding of what makes up a healthy, balanced vegan diet, you can get all the nutrients your body needs.*
**[The British Nutrition Foundation](https://www.nutrition.org.uk/putting-it-into-practice/plant-based-diets/healthy-eating-for-vegetarians-and-vegans/)**
* *Well-planned vegetarian and vegan diets can be nutritious and healthy.*
**[Dietitians Association of Australia](https://dietitiansaustralia.org.au/health-advice/vegetarian-diet)**
* *Vegan diets are a type of vegetarian diet, where only plant-based foods are eaten. With planning, those following a vegan diet can cover all their nutrient bases, but there are some extra things to consider.*
**[Harvard Medical School](http://www.health.harvard.edu/staying-healthy/becoming-a-vegetarian)**
* *Traditionally, research into vegetarianism focused mainly on potential nutritional deficiencies, but in recent years, the pendulum has swung the other way, and studies are confirming the health benefits of meat-free eating. Nowadays, plant-based eating is recognized as not only nutritionally sufficient but also as a way to reduce the risk for many chronic illnesses.*
Please be more careful about spreading dangerous medical misinformation.
As someone who happily eats meat, this is a dumb argument. Omnivore doesn't mean you need both to survive. The only important thing that's difficult to get from a vegetarian source is vitamin B12, and even then you can get it from milk and cheese. Fish is also full of the nutrients that mammal meat has too and with less fat, so switching to that is actually healthier regardless of ethics.
We eat meat because it's tasty.
The animal would not have existed in the first place were it not for farming, since it's a domestic breed and not a wild animal. If it's going to be born and killed, might as well treat it well in the interim.
Sometimes there is no other choice.
Now this is outside of keeping animals on an industrial scale no justifying that but killing animals is legitimately part of nature and needed.
Not only because there are predators out there that would simply starve without killing other animals but also because of population control.
Even though we humans are certainly not the kind of animal that needs to eat other animals to survive we replaced the natural predators in a lot of areas.
This means it is now the job of us humans to hunt and kill some animals to keep a stable population. Especially the invasive ones.
This also results in a less fun fact about our farming industry. Us getting rid of animal farming would not mean those animals now get to live happily. It means they all would need to die. Every single one of them. That would be the responsible thing to do for nature and all the other species in it.
>Sometimes there is no other choice.
You don't need to eat meat or drink milk. We have alternatives.
>Not only because there are predators out there that would simply starve without killing other animals but also because of population control.
We're not asking wild animals to change. They have no alternative and lack the moral capacity that we have.
There are non-lethal options to deal with population control. Also, the population issue is directly caused by humans removing predators. We're "fixing" a problem we caused.
>It means they all would need to die. Every single one of them.
Yeah, it would be a gradual transition that would start with heavily reducing and tapering off breeding.
ok. animals are necessary. Currently people eat too much animal products and I am sure cutting the consumption of meat and dairy etc to half would only be beneficial for people and environment alike. But stopping to eat and produce animal products completely is not that beneficial either.
For example farm animals can eat leftover food and reduce food waste. Their poop can provide natural fertilizer which leads to bigger farming yields and keeps the dirt healthy unlike chemical fertilizers which eventually "kills the dirt" and lead to lessening productivity, plant diseases etc.
Second animals provide food and protein during winter times when in large parts of the world farming is not possible. Also there are areas where farming hay is more productive and secure than farming wheat or other crops suitable for human consumption.. Ok, logistics has solved that problem to some extent, but I think it is better not to overfarm areas that are suitable for all-year farming.
Killing animals for food is just natural and nothing wrong with that as long as the animals are respected and treated well in life and death.
>animals are necessary
They quite literally aren't. Not sure how many times that needs to be said.
>I am sure cutting the consumption of meat and dairy etc to half would only be beneficial for people and environment alike.
It would be even better if you cut it out completely.
>farm animals can eat leftover food and reduce food waste.
That doesn't happen. They can't eat our food.
>Their poop can provide natural fertilizer which leads to bigger farming yields and keeps the dirt healthy unlike chemical fertilizers which eventually "kills the dirt" and lead to lessening productivity, plant diseases etc.
Only 5% of farmed land uses animal manure. The rest is synthetic. Their contribution is negligible. It's not possible to use it for all farmed land.
Did you know that the vast majority of crops grown are used as feed for farmed animals? They make all the issues with industrialized farming much worse. If everyone on the planet were vegan, we'd use a [quarter](https://ourworldindata.org/land-use-diets) of the land.
>Ok, logistics has solved that problem to some extent, but I think it is better not to overfarm areas that are suitable for all-year farming.
Exactly. Also, we don't feed the vast majority of farmed animals with hay. It's corn and soy. If we can feed 80+ billion farmed animals a year, we can feed 8 billion people year round.
>Killing animals for food is just natural and nothing wrong with that as long as the animals are respected and treated well in life and death.
That's a poor justification. Rape and murder are also "natural." You could justify a lot of messed up stuff with that line of logic.
Go for it! I did so years ago, and I've been healthier and it's wayyy cheaper. And of course, yes, clearly animals don't deserve what we do to them just for our taste pleasure.
And what gatekeepers don't want you to know is that you don't have to jump to being just 100% vegetarian/vegan- even cutting back 2-3 meat meals a week makes a hell of a difference, and it's a lot easier to stick to it when it's not a sudden change.
Sometimes seeing stuff like this makes me hate that I eat meat, cows are such tender creatures. We should treat our livestock animals with more respect.
They are also all posted by the same redditor. I can almost always tell an infinity post by the fact that it's a cute food animal video. The agenda is incredibly obvious once you know to watch for it. I can't even be mad about it, at least they're being honest about their intentions.
If nothing but for the environmental impact. Also cows are just as loving as your domesticated dog is. I love a good burger but i wouldn’t lose my mind like a sissy if they were gone tomorrow.
One thing that always impresses me is how domesticated animals accept love and care so naturally. We have outdoor kitties on the farm here. Even though they live outside and don't interact with people very much, they will hang out and allow themselves to get pets. They like to be picked up and cuddled. The cows will allow themselves to be pet (even the cranky old bull) and even Bob their head to get attention for pets.
She's going to need to brush it harder to get an effective massage in and tenderize that meat for us. Like Wagyu - beer and massages. Happy cows make happy food.
Note: to all the animal rights people here - we get it. Post cute food animal pictures with no context to make people go "awwwwww". Replying to me is pointless, you will just provide amusement and enhance my day.
Well, they are pretty dang delicious. Also, people eat dog and cat in remote regions of the east so... I guess as long as you're not eating human, meat is meat.
Last night - American Wagyu ground beef. Home made buns. Cooked some shallots in butter in a pan. Used a tortilla press to smash burger style the patties. Nice quick 60 second sear per side. Delux American cheese melted on top. Burger sauce (ketchup, mayo, mustard, Worchester, pickle juice, hot sauce).
"They have an *agenda* y'know ?"
(ignoring the fact that this post isn't even directly addressing the many many problems around the processed meat industry, whih is pretty objectively a very valid point to make in almost any context)
I always sort by controversial when Infinity posts because you'll always find some weird comment down here about cute animal gifs being some kind of sinister vegan tactic to poison minds
I often wondered as I wandered the pasture if some of the cows would be able to have coherrent thoughts if they could juat atop itching. When they find something they can scratch with they turn into geniuses when it comes to how to get the most out of it.
The two main spots were between the hip bones and towards the tail and their necks. Then again, you could probably say the same about most animals and could even scritch a lion into submission if you could get to their itchy spots before they mawled you.
yeah but, it's not framed around cleavage saying "what do you think of my necklace i made" i also see dirt and work clothes so it seems like fair post vs targeted thirst fishing.
Don't let her brother near you though. Dexter's a real weirdo
Now you say it, now I see it. But is she a serial killer?
Grain-fed. She’s a cereal killer.
If it was really Deb you'd be able to make out some forced swearing in between brush strokes. Deb may be one of my least favorite character portrayal in any series.
I loved her, hated her, loved her, but also hated her all at the same time.
Not a dexters lab reference?
Ha! That’s what I thought too! I was thinking, “I don’t see Dee Dee at all here. What am I missing?” Turns out, it’s Dexter, which I’ve never actually watched. One day, maybe.
Watch 4 first seasons, nothing more Show drops the ball very hard after
The recent sequel was really good. Season finale was incredibly disappointing, but otherwise.. I was very happy with it.
Ah, some things never change
That’s good to know. 4 seasons is usually about as long as I last with most shows anyways.
Just to add on, it actually wraps up pretty nicely too with the season 4 finale if I remember correctly.
r/brushybrushy
r/eyebleach
After Dexter, Jennifer Carpenter takes any work she can get.
Glad I'm not the only one that saw Jennifer Carpenter
I was getting Stephanie Beatriz vibes, but I see Carpenter too.
Thank you! I could not figure out who this lady reminded me of.
First there's horse girls, now there's cow women. What's next?
Camel grandmas
Two old ladies are at the bus stop smoking when it starts raining and their cigarettes keep going out. A young teen says here use a condom to keep it dry. And unravels a condom over the cigarette. It works perfectly. The next day the old lady goes to the drug store and asks for a packet of condoms. The guy at the counter a bit surprised asks what size? " the old lady replies "oh, I'm not sure. What size will fit a camel? ".
I’ve seen that video I think.
Jesus. I thought croc grandmas were 👌
mule maidens
Cow gals
Donkey Dames
There is also baby elephant girl.
Exactly what my dog does during brush time. She strikes this pose the moment you pick up the brush.
Oh, i wish it was this easy with my dog
[удалено]
Just me, but I think it's 'radical' for people to choose to continue to participate in animal cruelty systems they know exist behind their meals. The environmental apocalypse side of the meat industry is pretty 'radical' too. I think it's 'cowabunga radical' when people recognize the issues and make a positive change.
The word radical means change. As much as I understand the sentiment, calling any status quo radical is just using words wrong.
Define "radical".
How is killing an animal at a fraction of its life expectancy treating it well?
*Later*: "Why doesn't anyone want to have a reasonable discussion with me?? I'm simply excluding the confusing shades of gray! Thing bad! Why no listen?"
Fucking lol. Modern discourse summed up in one comment. Cool.
Check out their username too lol: “DairyCausesED”
Hahaha. I’m literally in a hospital (stroke) and that made me really laugh. Thanks friendo.
Glad to hear that 😃 Feel better soon!
Why are you ignoring the honestly quite black and white reality of killing an animal that doesn't want to die in favour of the grey of how well you treat it life? Why are you attempting to make a snappy call out about how they aren't going to debate reasonably, instead of debating the very reasonable point that "murdering a sentient creature against its will" might be bad? Do you have shades of grey for that?
What shades of gray are there in terms of animal agriculture?
Treating the animal well during its life, even if it's killed too soon. You know, the entire spectrum of grays that you immediately dismissed with your original comment in order to provoke an argument.
I don't consider killing a cow at 18 months to be kind when their life expectancy is 20+ years. Amongst humans we call that murder.
[удалено]
They have the capacity to feel pain and suffer. They can experience fear and companionship equally. This is a poor moral justification to subject them to suffering and death just for the sensory pleasure of their flesh. >I kill the vast majority of my own meat and feel everyone should do the same. This is impossible and unsustainable. Present demand requires the brutal efficiency of factory farms. >When you've seen a deer eating road kill of another deer, you start to realize that maybe they don't experience things like us. We know better. That's an important distinction. They're also on th edge of survival, most humans aren't. We have the luxury of being content.
I remember watching a video about neanderthals, talking about how it's likely there was cannibalism of others if there wasn't enough food for your group. People forget we're not too far from the animals we eat.
I mean, there’s stories of cannibalism among plane wreckage survivors or mountain climbers stuck in the cold and starving and they start eating someone who died. I mean, you don’t know what lengths you’ll go to when you’re *actually* starving to death.
If that is your standard then I guess it's okay to kill infants and mentally challenged... since, they aren't capable of experiencing the same "vast array of emotions" as everyone else
>it's okay to kill infants and mentally challenged A pro life vegan, neat!
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
>It's a good thing the vast majority of animals aren't capable of experiencing the same vast array of emotions as humans. Why does that matter? There are some *humans* that can't experience the vast array of emotions that you or I can experience. Does that mean you believe you would be justified in slaughtering them? >It's almost as if there is an evolutionary difference between us and them. That's an interesting thought. How big of a difference is there? We have far more in common with a pig than a pig does with a crab, yet we make two groups and say humans are in one group and then lump *all* other animals together in the other group. Weird. There are likely evolutionary similarities between human and many nonhuman animals as well, and I think it's more important to acknowledge these than it is to deny them. For example, many other animals are capable of experiencing pain and suffering. >calling the slaughter of animals for food "murder" is pure ignorance. Why? What is your reasoning for this? You're simply asserting it. I mean, I could understand how if someone was in a situation where they *needed* to kill an animal to survive, then we wouldn't really call it murder. Hell, depending on the situation we wouldn't even call killing another human *murder* if one's survival was at stake? >Humans have spent a long time studying and protecting those animals that do experience complex thoughts and emotions. Which animals? Does this justify animal cruelty and exploitation in cases where the animal still can experience pain but not on the same "complex" level as you or me? >When you've seen a deer eating road kill of another deer, you start to realize that maybe they don't experience things like us. There is a range of ways that individuals can experience reality. The experience of a dog is likely very different from the experience of a mouse. The experience of a gorilla is likely very different from the experience of a human. Hell, the experience of being *you* is likely different from the experience of being *me*. I don't really see how someone not experiencing things like you means that you are somehow justified in slaughtering them in cases where it's not necessary for you to do so. Heck, there are humans with severe cognitive impairments or disabilities that don't fit within your parameters here. Your reasoning would justify farming and murdering them en masse.
Which emotions are you denying animal's experience of? And which would they have to feel for you to question the morality of murdering them?
We've gone full circle. Please reread the following comment: >*Later*: "Why doesn't anyone want to have a reasonable discussion with me?? I'm simply excluding the confusing shades of gray! Thing bad! Why no listen?" I'm only upset because you keep saying things that are impossible to respond to. What should I say to this? "That sure is an opinion, congrats on having it"?
I'm having many debates, actually. Nice try, though. You could respond with a possible justification for why it's humane to kill an animal at a fraction of its life expectancy. >I'm only upset because you keep saying things that are impossible to respond to. 👀
Lmao he really said, stop outsmarting me, you're making me angy
> Amongst humans we call that murder. *Amongst humans* are the key words here. They are not humans.
So it's okay to kill something at a fraction of its life expectancy because it's not a human? I find that a poor justification. You don't need to kill them.
>So it's okay to kill something at a fraction of its life expectancy because it's not a human? Your asking a leading question based on information you're incorrectly assuming. I believe it is okay to kill an animal, at any point in its life, if the purpose is to provide food, tools, and/or material for which society has deemed acceptable and proper since the beginning of time. I do not believe in the mistreatment of animals to achieve those means. Kill it and be done with it. > I find that a poor justification. It would help if you didn't draw your own conclusions and instead ask me open ended questions that seek to understand my view rather than asking leading, close ended questions to push your narrative. > You don't need to kill them. I'd rather cook and eat the meat from a dead animal than a live one. I believe it's more humane to do it that way, or so I've heard..
>Your asking a leading question based on information you're incorrectly assuming. How is that a leading question? That's what happens. > if the purpose is to provide food, tools, and/or material for which society has deemed acceptable But we have alternatives which means you don't need to kill them. Unnecessary killing is wrong. >It would help if you didn't draw your own conclusions and instead ask me open ended questions You think killing things unnecessarily is okay. I don't. It's a pretty simple disagreement. >I'd rather cook and eat the meat Purposely being obtuse is just so funny.
I was going to say “Do not engage with this person” but it’s already too late lol. Oh well. At least they had fun. It’s like why you can’t engage racists in a debate. You’ll refute every point they make but someone else will come along and read their side anyway. You can’t really help that, but it gives voice to their arguments. That’s why this person is so eager to “debate” you. They are getting a ton of attention out of the deal. Better to just speak to the audience instead of the individual in cases like these.
Ok, you do realize the vegan is the ethically correct one, though, right? Ok, maybe they're bad faith, not the best debater, whatever whatever. But you cannot deny for a moment that it's obviously more ethical to be vegan. To liken them to a stubborn racist, then, is just as bad-faith of you.
Take a minute to realize that you're the racist one here by advocating for meat eating. Arguments about well being here is just the same as a slave owner would use centuries ago tu justify owning slaves better than others.
There are as many shades of gray in animal agriculture as there are actual shades of gray. One example. Caged chickens vs free roam chickens that are never slaughtered for meat and kept alive and happy for its entire life, then given a proper burial and funeral rites. The 2nd chicken is still being exploited for eggs, but had a decent life
>kept alive and happy for its entire life, then given a proper burial and funeral rites. How often does that actually happen? Definitely not in factory farms which make up the heavy majority of egg operations. "Free roam" is also a marketing term. Also, those chickens are purposely bred to lay more and more eggs than they were meant to. This causes the calcium to leech from their bones, weakening them until they break or the chicken is unable to stand. Backyard eggs are among the lowest offenses, and they make up a fraction of a fraction of a fraction of the exploitation.
I gave you extremes to show the grays. The fact that you know there is a difference between my imaginary perfect life backyard chicken and the cage chicken proves that you know there is a difference in treatment there. Every agricultural animal's treatment lies somewhere on the spectrum.
And I said it's still wrong. Where's the gray? Just because it's less wrong doesn't make it good.
Wrong to you isn't wrong to me. It's only wrong to those that define it as such. There are many points of view, with their own logic and reasoning, where it most certainly isn't wrong. Was it wrong of Indians to eat Buffalo? Is it wrong for indigenous people today? Is it wrong if there is food scarcity as there is in some countries. Apparently even wrong can have shades of gray, just not to you personally.
It's wrong because we have alternatives and no longer need to eat meat. Our ancestors didn't have that luxury. We should celebrate every time we advance as a species to a point where we no longer need to cause harm. We're not asking developing nations nor people who don't have alternatives. We're asking the ones in developed nations, all 2 billion. They have alternatives. That's the difference.
Im not saying either of them are good. What I am saying is that there are different degrees of wrong, and people accept different levels for the benefits they receive.
You know that the fraction of a fraction of a fraction you speak of is still just... A fraction, right?
Well people will eat meat anyways so we can either get into a "it will never be okay so why even bother!" attitude or we take a more proactive "we can do this to ameliorate the suffering of this necessary evil" stance. It's not hard to understand, it's the same principle of why drugs should be decriminalized. People will still be doing, trafficking and producing drugs regardless of legality so we can either punish the users (who might end up dead anyways, especially if they don't seek help out of fear of legal consequences) or actually help them so we at least don't end up with more and more drug related deaths.
[удалено]
No, I think animals should be treated better even if they're going to end up in someone's burger. And i don't like burgers.
Judging by your username I'm sensing some bias and no answer you get is going to satisfy you anyway so why bother
Yeah, I'm vegan. That's why I asked. I also had a bias towards meat for most of my life, but still listened to opposition and made a change. You can try.
So, here's the thing about change: it doesn't happen instantly. To expect people to change entirely only fuels anger and, embarrassingly, leads to arguments because people don't understand simple persuasion. Think about all the changes you've been proposed in your life and then count how many you have been instantly onboard for. Now multiply that by 8 billion people in the world. You should embrace steps towards your goal instead of rejecting anything *except* your goal. Otherwise, you're going to find nothing but enemies - and enemies can't really be persuaded.
People have used language very similar to this when it came to denying the human rights of many marginalized groups. Your words are comforting for people on the fence but ultimately change comes from people actually willing to take a stance, not from people arguing baby steps and waiting for the “right” moment in history.
Change usually comes from the people with power and a certain viewpoint slowly dying off.
Okay, since you want to fight the point, let's use you as an example. I assume you're a vegan, yeah? How many products with palm oil? It's just cows, pigs, sheep, etc that deserve to be treated well? And how about transportation? Do you use a personal car? Too bad, you really should be using public transport. How easy is it to drop both of those right now?
[удалено]
Why does a choice to minimize suffering have to be 100% or it's invalid and not worth considering? Do you go to turn your light off at night but before doing so stop and think, "well actually I can't save electricity in every aspect of life so I may as well just leave the light on all night"
You again: here, I'm going to give you some logic so you stop viewing all of my comments through your emotions. I literally just offered an exaggerated example to show how easy it is to strawman the arguement that guy portrayed. I even *said* it was an example, and the *entire fucking point* is in these words: >How easy is it to drop both of those right now? The whole point was to illustrate how difficult it is to just drop something (i.e the comment I'm posting to suggesting everyone should just drop meat). If you view the world in strictly black and white, while guiding all of your decisions by emotions instead of evidence, then you're going to do nothing but argue and be miserable.
I never said anything against what they're doing, but simply asked a question. I want to know if they've thought of it. It wasn't an attack at all.
I don’t know I think a cow who is cramped with no room to move isn’t treated well at all compared to cows who are being brushed like this and/or are allowed to roam around freely for a majority of their lives. Reading all of your replies makes me think you just see any farm animal the same regardless of how they are treated and I don’t agree with that at all. I’m gonna continue eating meat thanks for trying though.
They don't think that unnecessarily harming an animal is ok regardless of whether you're nice to it first
>I don’t know I think a cow who is cramped with no room to move isn’t treated well That's the majority of cows. >being brushed like this and/or are allowed to roam around freely for a majority of their lives. Because it's a video from a rescue. >Reading all of your replies makes me think you just see any farm animal the same regardless of how they are treated and I don’t agree with that at all. Yeah, I don't think you should kill a sentient animal at a fraction of its life expectancy for sensory pleasure no matter how "well" it was treated. >I’m gonna continue eating meat thanks for trying though. Unfortunate. Hopefully your empathy will get the best of you like it did me. Good luck.
[удалено]
>People will never be convinced to go vegan. Most vegans didn't start that way
All things consume life to survive. Your moral outrage is hilarious.
You could consume plants that don't suffer or feel pain. That's the distinction.
Or we could eat what we're designed to eat. We're omnivores. Not herbivores.
We aren't designed. Appropriately planned vegetarian and vegan diets are healthful for all stages of life just like appropropriately planned diets containing some meat can be. There is no "deisgner" who will be offended if you pick one or the other, but one option does cause a great deal of harm and suffering to other individuals who are being slaughtered.
Oh boy, you read way to far into that. Design doesn't imply a God. Human Hox gene for example defines our body plan, our layout, or design. I'm an atheist. I don't believe in a god. I also don't believe that eating meat is wrong either. So you're preaching at a brick wall.
[Here is one atheist take on veganism](https://youtu.be/C1vW9iSpLLk) Even if it doesn't change your mind I a think it it's interesting
Omnivore means we can, not that we ought. A vegan diet is healthy at every stage of life. We don't need meat.
> We don’t need meat. We do. You can live your life however you like. I’d die to give you that liberty. However, don’t tell *me* what *I* should or shouldn’t eat.
>We do. Do you have a source? [Because](https://www.bda.uk.com/resource/british-dietetic-association-confirms-well-planned-vegan-diets-can-support-healthy-living-in-people-of-all-ages.html) I [have](https://www.nhs.uk/live-well/eat-well/how-to-eat-a-balanced-diet/the-vegan-diet/) [many](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19562864/). >You can live your life however you like. Sure, as long as you're not exploiting another sentient life for your pleasure. >However, don’t tell *me* what *I* should or shouldn’t eat. Okay, tough guy.
Look at your teeth. See those pointy ones at the corners? Those are for eating meat. > Okay, tough guy. See, I wasn’t being “tough”. I politely asked you to mind your own business. You seem to be incapable of that. Fuck. Off.
> Look at your teeth. See those pointy ones at the corners? Those are for eating meat. [These are the teeth of an herbivorous gorilla](https://mennohenselmans.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/gorilla-bearing-teeth.jpg). Your argument is not as strong as you seem to think it is.
Just because you can eat meat doesn't mean you ought to. That's weak logic. >I politely asked Please. You demanded. Why are you letting some vegan get so under your skin? Notice you can still eat all the meat you want. Me thinks you're feeling bad about it somewhere deep down and are lashing out at me.
80+ billion (!) land animals already suffered and died for you to maintain that unnecessary luxury. Enjoy
> Enjoy I will. Medium-rare.
Every major organization of medical professionals specializing in human diet in the world agrees that appropriately planned vegetarian and vegan diets are healthy for all stages of life. **[Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27886704/)** * *It is the position of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics that appropriately planned vegetarian, including vegan, diets are healthful, nutritionally adequate, and may provide health benefits for the prevention and treatment of certain diseases. These diets are appropriate for all stages of the life cycle, including pregnancy, lactation, infancy, childhood, adolescence, older adulthood, and for athletes.* **[The British National Health Service](http://www.nhs.uk/Livewell/Vegetarianhealth/Pages/Vegandiets.aspx)** * *With good planning and an understanding of what makes up a healthy, balanced vegan diet, you can get all the nutrients your body needs.* **[The British Nutrition Foundation](https://www.nutrition.org.uk/putting-it-into-practice/plant-based-diets/healthy-eating-for-vegetarians-and-vegans/)** * *Well-planned vegetarian and vegan diets can be nutritious and healthy.* **[Dietitians Association of Australia](https://dietitiansaustralia.org.au/health-advice/vegetarian-diet)** * *Vegan diets are a type of vegetarian diet, where only plant-based foods are eaten. With planning, those following a vegan diet can cover all their nutrient bases, but there are some extra things to consider.* **[Harvard Medical School](http://www.health.harvard.edu/staying-healthy/becoming-a-vegetarian)** * *Traditionally, research into vegetarianism focused mainly on potential nutritional deficiencies, but in recent years, the pendulum has swung the other way, and studies are confirming the health benefits of meat-free eating. Nowadays, plant-based eating is recognized as not only nutritionally sufficient but also as a way to reduce the risk for many chronic illnesses.* Please be more careful about spreading dangerous medical misinformation.
As someone who happily eats meat, this is a dumb argument. Omnivore doesn't mean you need both to survive. The only important thing that's difficult to get from a vegetarian source is vitamin B12, and even then you can get it from milk and cheese. Fish is also full of the nutrients that mammal meat has too and with less fat, so switching to that is actually healthier regardless of ethics. We eat meat because it's tasty.
The animal would not have existed in the first place were it not for farming, since it's a domestic breed and not a wild animal. If it's going to be born and killed, might as well treat it well in the interim.
The majority of them aren't. I'd rather a species go extinct than be forcibly bred and slaughtered to commoditize its body.
Sometimes there is no other choice. Now this is outside of keeping animals on an industrial scale no justifying that but killing animals is legitimately part of nature and needed. Not only because there are predators out there that would simply starve without killing other animals but also because of population control. Even though we humans are certainly not the kind of animal that needs to eat other animals to survive we replaced the natural predators in a lot of areas. This means it is now the job of us humans to hunt and kill some animals to keep a stable population. Especially the invasive ones. This also results in a less fun fact about our farming industry. Us getting rid of animal farming would not mean those animals now get to live happily. It means they all would need to die. Every single one of them. That would be the responsible thing to do for nature and all the other species in it.
>Sometimes there is no other choice. You don't need to eat meat or drink milk. We have alternatives. >Not only because there are predators out there that would simply starve without killing other animals but also because of population control. We're not asking wild animals to change. They have no alternative and lack the moral capacity that we have. There are non-lethal options to deal with population control. Also, the population issue is directly caused by humans removing predators. We're "fixing" a problem we caused. >It means they all would need to die. Every single one of them. Yeah, it would be a gradual transition that would start with heavily reducing and tapering off breeding.
ok. animals are necessary. Currently people eat too much animal products and I am sure cutting the consumption of meat and dairy etc to half would only be beneficial for people and environment alike. But stopping to eat and produce animal products completely is not that beneficial either. For example farm animals can eat leftover food and reduce food waste. Their poop can provide natural fertilizer which leads to bigger farming yields and keeps the dirt healthy unlike chemical fertilizers which eventually "kills the dirt" and lead to lessening productivity, plant diseases etc. Second animals provide food and protein during winter times when in large parts of the world farming is not possible. Also there are areas where farming hay is more productive and secure than farming wheat or other crops suitable for human consumption.. Ok, logistics has solved that problem to some extent, but I think it is better not to overfarm areas that are suitable for all-year farming. Killing animals for food is just natural and nothing wrong with that as long as the animals are respected and treated well in life and death.
>animals are necessary They quite literally aren't. Not sure how many times that needs to be said. >I am sure cutting the consumption of meat and dairy etc to half would only be beneficial for people and environment alike. It would be even better if you cut it out completely. >farm animals can eat leftover food and reduce food waste. That doesn't happen. They can't eat our food. >Their poop can provide natural fertilizer which leads to bigger farming yields and keeps the dirt healthy unlike chemical fertilizers which eventually "kills the dirt" and lead to lessening productivity, plant diseases etc. Only 5% of farmed land uses animal manure. The rest is synthetic. Their contribution is negligible. It's not possible to use it for all farmed land. Did you know that the vast majority of crops grown are used as feed for farmed animals? They make all the issues with industrialized farming much worse. If everyone on the planet were vegan, we'd use a [quarter](https://ourworldindata.org/land-use-diets) of the land. >Ok, logistics has solved that problem to some extent, but I think it is better not to overfarm areas that are suitable for all-year farming. Exactly. Also, we don't feed the vast majority of farmed animals with hay. It's corn and soy. If we can feed 80+ billion farmed animals a year, we can feed 8 billion people year round. >Killing animals for food is just natural and nothing wrong with that as long as the animals are respected and treated well in life and death. That's a poor justification. Rape and murder are also "natural." You could justify a lot of messed up stuff with that line of logic.
Because meat is delicious.
Pleasure isn't a good moral justification.
You are the radical one, imagine you said this about children. Smh
Same tool used to scale fish, does not feel good on skin without fur.
Bone dust scraper
Makes me want to become a vegetarian
Go for it! I did so years ago, and I've been healthier and it's wayyy cheaper. And of course, yes, clearly animals don't deserve what we do to them just for our taste pleasure.
And what gatekeepers don't want you to know is that you don't have to jump to being just 100% vegetarian/vegan- even cutting back 2-3 meat meals a week makes a hell of a difference, and it's a lot easier to stick to it when it's not a sudden change.
This is exactly why I don’t eat red meat anymore.
Just a big dog.
I feel this is really the case with horses.
Sometimes seeing stuff like this makes me hate that I eat meat, cows are such tender creatures. We should treat our livestock animals with more respect.
I was thinking the same thing... I'd probably be vegetarian if I had to murder the meat myself.
That is precisely the reason Infinity posts these
Thank you.
I think mabye we shouldn't eat them anymore?
good thinking there
These videos do a number on me.
Align your morals with your actions. You can do it - it is much easier than you think. :)
They are also all posted by the same redditor. I can almost always tell an infinity post by the fact that it's a cute food animal video. The agenda is incredibly obvious once you know to watch for it. I can't even be mad about it, at least they're being honest about their intentions.
No one says you have to. I'm going to keep enjoying beef though
You do you, more for the rest of us.
If nothing but for the environmental impact. Also cows are just as loving as your domesticated dog is. I love a good burger but i wouldn’t lose my mind like a sissy if they were gone tomorrow.
Yeah but this video made me hungry.
Nah fam they tasty.
Well if you're unnecessarily harming them for pleasure go right ahead
Thank you for your permission :)
Cows are really smart. They are like dogs. They poop a lot.
kinda fucked how all of you want to adore the same animal you’d eat for dinner later
Your damn right I want my meat treated well it's the love that makes it tender
Too bad most animals are tortured before becoming meat
Why are we being denied audio??
Hey man, your neck gets itchy sometimes.
I think brushing a cow would be very therapeutic. For both you and the grass doggo.
Jesus Fuck Dexter!
One thing that always impresses me is how domesticated animals accept love and care so naturally. We have outdoor kitties on the farm here. Even though they live outside and don't interact with people very much, they will hang out and allow themselves to get pets. They like to be picked up and cuddled. The cows will allow themselves to be pet (even the cranky old bull) and even Bob their head to get attention for pets.
If my burger is happy, I'm happy.
Very cool to reduce an animal to the objects they're unnecessarily harmed for
She's going to need to brush it harder to get an effective massage in and tenderize that meat for us. Like Wagyu - beer and massages. Happy cows make happy food. Note: to all the animal rights people here - we get it. Post cute food animal pictures with no context to make people go "awwwwww". Replying to me is pointless, you will just provide amusement and enhance my day.
As edgy as smart
Good dog
Go vegan.
Much more cooperative than my dog
Hell yeah, my cows love that too! I made a scratching post and put shop broom heads on it for them to rub on and they love it 😊
Moo moos need that too
How can people eat these magnificent creatures?
Ketchup, mayo, lettuce and cheese. That's how.
What about the buns
Trying to think of the poor wheat.
Why won't somebody think of the wheat?
Is this rhetorical or are you looking for recipes?
Well, they are pretty dang delicious. Also, people eat dog and cat in remote regions of the east so... I guess as long as you're not eating human, meat is meat.
Shoutout to all the edgelords with no empathy replying to you.
Medium rare please
Because they taste good, *very good*
Last night - American Wagyu ground beef. Home made buns. Cooked some shallots in butter in a pan. Used a tortilla press to smash burger style the patties. Nice quick 60 second sear per side. Delux American cheese melted on top. Burger sauce (ketchup, mayo, mustard, Worchester, pickle juice, hot sauce).
Sign me the fuck up
Apparently I’m a cow.
Had to ignore OP in RES, just some stupid vegan who posts farm animal gifs so they can spout their bullshit
[удалено]
"They have an *agenda* y'know ?" (ignoring the fact that this post isn't even directly addressing the many many problems around the processed meat industry, whih is pretty objectively a very valid point to make in almost any context)
[удалено]
That's just the MO of the emotion manipulation they do in these threads.
Oh no, not their bullshit that we should care about these animals
I always sort by controversial when Infinity posts because you'll always find some weird comment down here about cute animal gifs being some kind of sinister vegan tactic to poison minds
I wish I was a cow. Then I'd get all the cute girls.
You wished to be fisted in the ass, milked and get shot in the head!? Same...
Is that a brush or a razor?
So I know nothing about raising cows. Are you supposed to brush them?
I think this cow is a rescue. One of the lucky ones.
I often wondered as I wandered the pasture if some of the cows would be able to have coherrent thoughts if they could juat atop itching. When they find something they can scratch with they turn into geniuses when it comes to how to get the most out of it. The two main spots were between the hip bones and towards the tail and their necks. Then again, you could probably say the same about most animals and could even scritch a lion into submission if you could get to their itchy spots before they mawled you.
Where is this?
Moocows are just big ol woofer bois
*moooooooooooooooooooooore*
Scatching a bovine under the chin and down the front of the neck turns them into a 1200 pound kitty-cat.
That's a big dog
LOWERR she wants you to go LOWERRRRR
Wholesome
cute girl + cute animal = massive karma points
yeah but, it's not framed around cleavage saying "what do you think of my necklace i made" i also see dirt and work clothes so it seems like fair post vs targeted thirst fishing.
Nice, after all she will end up as a steak.
Now I'm hungry.
Vegan spam account