I want to say ‘exactly’, if I’m reading your comment right. The ‘carnist’ commenter could have ripped on McDonalds, or chicken nuggets in general, which both would have been super easy and everyone would have agreed with, and not made it weird by specifically falling into the stereotype here.
The animals have no rights and no liberty. Plus if it wasnt for us farming them then their evolutionary niche wouldnt exist so if u think about it we are doing them the favour.
On the one hand, the breeding of animals dependent on humans destroys evolutionary niches for animals independent from humans, on the other hand, humans destroy evolutionary niches directly.
Farmers won’t release or breed animals to improve their evolutionary niche, because farmers and consumers don’t farm animals for conservatory reasons.
That’s not entirely true because there are expectations depending on the jurisdiction on the standard of care for animals, in several countries they’re legally seen as sentient beings not property.
Putting them in filthy crowded slaughter houses where they’re kicked and shoved only to be slaughtered as children relative to their life spans is not doing them favour. It is our responsibility to stop exploiting them.
I suggest you keep it to yourself next time, then, as you have only furthered the image that vegans are smug asshats who can’t shut the fuck up about being vegan.
Maybe that’s what you want though, it’s just a suggestion. c:
Usually vegans use the term carnist to represent those who engage in animal products full stop, rather than breaking down the difference into carnivore and omnivore.
To us vegans, whether you’re carnivore or omnivore results in the same outcomes. Plus, many conversations surrounding veganism don’t necessarily involve diets, such as with clothing, in which case again it’s easier to use a single term to describe everything non-vegan.
You might say that non-vegans is a good enough term to describe the above, but that kind of framing can paint carnists in a more benevolent light that acknowledges their freedom of choice, rather than framing carnists with regards to the outcomes they cause, and the victims that suffer because of them.
You might say that non-vegans is a good enough term to describe the above, but that kind of framing can paint carnists in a more benevolent light that acknowledges their freedom of choice, rather than framing carnists with regards to the outcomes they cause, and the victims that suffer because of them.
If your first date is a glorious scam heist, the future looks promising
Maybe don’t order carnist options though
You son of a bitch, I’m in.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=msX4oAXpvUE
Why not let people excercise their liberty to decide for themselves. Plus how is this relevent to a date a majority of people are omnivorous anyways
Was their comment one of those ‘self-identifying without being asked’ moments? Certainly feels stereotypical to me. But, it couldn’t be that obvious.
It is. Some stereotypes exist for a reason, they’re earned.
I prefer Arch Linux over the Golden Arches. It’s much better for your health.
I want to say ‘exactly’, if I’m reading your comment right. The ‘carnist’ commenter could have ripped on McDonalds, or chicken nuggets in general, which both would have been super easy and everyone would have agreed with, and not made it weird by specifically falling into the stereotype here.
BTW > MCD
Yeah lol. The memes are real.
Its not the liberty of the animals to be exploited and murdered.
The animals have no rights and no liberty. Plus if it wasnt for us farming them then their evolutionary niche wouldnt exist so if u think about it we are doing them the favour.
Why?
On the one hand, the breeding of animals dependent on humans destroys evolutionary niches for animals independent from humans, on the other hand, humans destroy evolutionary niches directly.
Farmers won’t release or breed animals to improve their evolutionary niche, because farmers and consumers don’t farm animals for conservatory reasons.
That’s not entirely true because there are expectations depending on the jurisdiction on the standard of care for animals, in several countries they’re legally seen as sentient beings not property.
Putting them in filthy crowded slaughter houses where they’re kicked and shoved only to be slaughtered as children relative to their life spans is not doing them favour. It is our responsibility to stop exploiting them.
the natural lifespan of livestock is exactly when they are slaughtered
Nothing but a suggestion
I suggest you keep it to yourself next time, then, as you have only furthered the image that vegans are smug asshats who can’t shut the fuck up about being vegan.
Maybe that’s what you want though, it’s just a suggestion. c:
Why are you angered?
Rude comment.
If u took offence then it proves u are everything they claimed u to be.
That logic is bad and you should feel bad. You suck. If this comment makes you mad, you’re only proving my point /s
It is not polite to use ad hominems rather than a logical argument.
They made an “if/then” statement based on your statement. They attacked the idea, not the person making it. No ad hominem detected.
yet you, without evidence, attack your interlocutors as murderers.
Nuggies are breaded, not just meat, so this is omnivorous not carnist.
Usually vegans use the term carnist to represent those who engage in animal products full stop, rather than breaking down the difference into carnivore and omnivore.
To us vegans, whether you’re carnivore or omnivore results in the same outcomes. Plus, many conversations surrounding veganism don’t necessarily involve diets, such as with clothing, in which case again it’s easier to use a single term to describe everything non-vegan.
You might say that non-vegans is a good enough term to describe the above, but that kind of framing can paint carnists in a more benevolent light that acknowledges their freedom of choice, rather than framing carnists with regards to the outcomes they cause, and the victims that suffer because of them.
so it’s just loaded language
Carnism
Things can have several properties, for example a thing can be red, which doesn’t mean the thing is not a cube.
Thank you for providing the definition. Keep fighting for the animals!