Veganism/Oppression of Animals (merged)

A forum for the respectful exchange of views on thought-provoking topics, whether sexuality-related or otherwise; please read the guidelines prior to posting.

Forum rules

Welcome to the Intellectual Discussion subforum.

This forum is the place for intellectual discussions, such as philosophical or scientific debates. There are some guidelines that apply specifically to posts in this forum, of which you will be expected to have made yourself aware before participating. They are as follows:

  • Intellectually stimulating topics only. If you can't have a deep discussion about something, it does not belong here.
  • If you're going to post, have something to say. When you make a new thread, write the initial post in a way that provides an introduction to the topic and invites further discussion. You could tell us how you feel and why, but always aim for constructive responses that further a discussion about the ideas involved, rather than a simple list of people's views. (Instead of asking "Are you a vegetarian?", discuss some of the arguments involved.) This guideline likewise applies for responses to topics.
  • Write using good English. That means full sentences with proper capitalisation, punctuation, spelling and grammar. No one is perfect, though; this is not an invitation to criticise others for minor mistakes.
  • Be nice. This is a forum for rational discourse, not flame wars. No one is always right. Be respectful of other people's views and accept that we are all entitled to our own.

These guidelines will be enforced by the moderators based on their best judgement, and anyone who does not take them seriously will lose the privilege of posting here. Spammers will be banned from the entire forum.

Re: Oppression of Animals

Unread postby GaycrazyBoi » 4th February, 2017, 6:06 pm

PHMED wrote:
GaycrazyBoi wrote:That's from over-consumption of meat and nutrients. Also, could that NOT be from, say, ANYTHING ELSE? Yes, we know the whole brutal process about meat productions. We know the modern "The Jungle by Upton Saint Clair" information. And- we don't give a damn, because steak and KFC are delicious. Now, do you have anything else to contribute here or do you just want to give us a PSA from PETA?

No, it's not from the over consumption of meat, the two doctors who did this incredibly long studied concluded that people who eat a whole-food, plant-based vegan diet—avoiding all animal products, including beef, pork, poultry, fish, eggs, cheese, and milk, and reducing their intake of processed foods and refined carbohydrates—will escape, reduce, or reverse the development of numerous diseases. They wrote that "eating foods that contain any cholesterol above 0 mg is unhealthy", I am looking at the book right now.

You're the one who isn't even having a constructive conversation with me, you're simply starting arguments because you literally have no idea what you are talking about, which is obviously going to spark anger from people who do.


Implying we will die of cancer and diabetes because we eat meat is kind of not good for your argument.

I would rather not eat carrots and lettuce. Some of us like being unhealthy. I addressed all of your original points, you never responded. S, I'll just quote that here.

GaycrazyBoi wrote:
PHMED wrote:Is slavery--owner, victim, profit, domination--EXCLUSIVE to the human race? Have blacks, women, jews and many other groups SOLELY been the victims of this atrocity? Have not cows been enslaved? What about chickens, pigs, turkeys, fish and sheep? Why is it that we consider oppression against humans unquestionably wrong, but the same oppression that animals face in the SLAUGHTERHOUSES (30 billion a year) goes unquestioned and often times IGNORED?

We are SO conditioned to eat animals, yet we are sheltered from their SLAUGHTERING. There is a REASON why slaughterhouses are not located in densely-populated areas; it's not for lack of space, it's because they don't want you to see it, and that is by DESIGN.

Image



Point by point- No, it is not exclusive to humans. Slavery (or a hierarchy similar to it) can be observed in nature. Slavery is a natural thing. Is it justified? Fuck no. But it is natural.

We are not oppressing the animals that don't have the sense not to shit all over themselves and the floor.

Because we can't/don't eat humans. Men aren't pigs, even if we supposedly taste like them. (Feminist ideology reference)

Because animals taste good. Don't believe me? Eat some KFC.

No, you fucking moron, it's because we don't want to smell the shit of a thousand cows while we eat our hamburgers.


Being a vegetarian isn't healthy. I don't want to take 600 different supplements just to get the recommended daily amount of vitamins. Oh and those vitamins, they might cause cancer too. Oh, and, while we are on the subject, most major food/nutrition authorities say that meat is GOOD for you. I'll believe the government that relies on me being alive and healthy to function over a few sensationalist scientists. Eat some KFC, you might remember why we eat meat.
GaycrazyBoi
Member
 
First name: Nate
Posts: 467
Likes received: 45
Joined: 4th March, 2016, 11:42 pm

Re: Oppression of Animals

Unread postby PHMED » 4th February, 2017, 6:28 pm

JonathanT88 wrote:Cool. Thank you! A lot of that is really interesting. My 10 minutes research is not "offensive" because I didn't claim to know any more than you- I just provided evidence which contradicted what you were saying with the hope that you'd justify yourself further.

No, I was offended that you would prefer to argue rather than asking questions.

JonathanT88 wrote:I'm still not sure how, if our consumption of meat permitted our development into the humans we are today, you can argue against the idea that, historically, meat consumption has been necessary. Your suggestion that it was "intellectual curiosity" may be accurate, but that curiosity does seem to have allowed for our cognitive development. I'm not saying we can't or shouldn't stop eating meat, but that to justify this diet by suggesting that meat consumption has not historically been necessary is wrong.

You believe the consumption of meat is linked to our cognitive development?

I have argued against meat consumption on the basis of human physiology. Again:

*We don't have protein receptors on our tongues like carnivores and omnivores
*We don't have fat receptors on our tongue which renders meat TASTELESS to us without seasoning (it is not ironic that seasoning is a plant).
*San Diego posted a study on the deaths associated with choking and the number one cause of food choking was from meat consumption; our biology, mainly our oral cavity is not designed to chow down on meat like carnivores and omnivores.
*The pH of our stomach is from 4-5 while omnivores and carnivores are around 1, which makes sense for digesting meat.
Herbivores have an intestine 10-12 times our body length, versus omnivores having an intestine length of 4-5 times their length. Guess what? Humans have a stomach length of 10-12 times their length.

JonathanT88 wrote:Sure, but can you blame me for my scepticism or would you have me simply take your word when the first research I found directly contradicted you?

Dude, I already told you that there will be studies that contradict other studies, that is how science works.

JonathanT88 wrote:Apart from the fact that the study I provided (one which you're yet to provide an alternative to) suggests that our intellect governed something which allowed our brains to develop the point where we're actually able to discuss this topic (for the most part) rationally today. I agree that meat consumption isn't beneficial nowadays, but in terms of spurring on our human development, it seems pretty important to me.

What does the development of the brain have anything to do with what we are arguing here?

JonathanT88 wrote:Most people seem to have acknowledged the validity of many of your points without wanting to stop eating meat all together.

I was talking in reference to the vitamin B12 argument, not the oppression of animals.

JonathanT88 wrote:I would regulate the meat/dairy industries within an inch of their lives (which would probably increase prices) and use that as a means of limiting the damage they can do, but wouldn't stop eating those products myself because meat/dairy are, unfortunately, enjoyable and really rather convenient.

What is so convenient about meat and dairy that is not of equal convenience on a plant-based diet? The taste of the meat must be worth a lot more to you than the animals that are suffering, the damage you are causing to the planet and the world hunger issues that are related to the meat industry. I appreciate you recognizing the issues that come along with eating animals, but I don't respect how you can clearly see this and have all the power you need to make a change, yet still eat animals.

Please respect that.
PHMED
Member
 
Posts: 101
Likes received: 4
Joined: 15th November, 2016, 9:32 pm
Location: Westwood, CA
Country: United States (us)

Re: Oppression of Animals

Unread postby Pity » 4th February, 2017, 6:36 pm

I could not give two damns about the "oppression" animals. They are not humans and I see no reason why they should not be used to feed our ever-growing population. Sure, they should not be beaten unnecessarily by food processing employees, but animals are slaughtered because humans eat meat. While a plant diet may be fine with the addition of protein and other vitamin supplements for adults, children need meat to grow up optimally functional. As long as I do not see the animal being killed or processed, I am fine.
Image
User avatar
Pity
hotty & disgraced member
 
First name: Marcus
Posts: 3080
Likes received: 485
Joined: 19th July, 2015, 11:50 pm
Location: Apex, NC
Country: United States (us)

Re: Oppression of Animals

Unread postby PHMED » 4th February, 2017, 6:37 pm

GaycrazyBoi wrote:Implying we will die of cancer and diabetes because we eat meat is kind of not good for your argument.

Uhm, it kind of is because if you look at the distribution of meat consumption and cancer/diabetes rates, it is directly proportional.

GayCrazyBoi wrote:I would rather not eat carrots and lettuce. Some of us like being unhealthy. I addressed all of your original points, you never responded. S, I'll just quote that here.

Sure, as if veganism is all about eating carrots and lettuce. I still eat burgers, tacos, pizzas, burritos, ice creams--you name it! I just look for other substitutes. You do not have to compromise taste when going vegan. In fact, food tastes better in the vegan world (my opinion and many other vegans would say this).

GaycrazyBoi wrote:Being a vegetarian isn't healthy. I don't want to take 600 different supplements just to get the recommended daily amount of vitamins. Oh and those vitamins, they might cause cancer too. Oh, and, while we are on the subject, most major food/nutrition authorities say that meat is GOOD for you. I'll believe the government that relies on me being alive and healthy to function over a few sensationalist scientists. Eat some KFC, you might remember why we eat meat.

What world do you live in? You don't need to take any supplements being vegan. Hell, I know many more omnivores who take more supplements than I do. You wanna know why? Because I get the nutrients I need from plant-based foods that you will NEVER find in animal sources. I don't need a vitamin K, C, D, or E supplement because I actively seek those complex vitamins in the fruits and vegetables that were put on this earth for my consumption. I think you are just generally unaware of being vegan and have a stigma against it.

There are more than a few "sensational" scientists in the field that all warn us on the dangers of consuming meat ,I suggest you look into it. Do you also understand that meat and dairy industries lobby and pay big bucks for big headed individuals to say the good things you want to hear about meat?
PHMED
Member
 
Posts: 101
Likes received: 4
Joined: 15th November, 2016, 9:32 pm
Location: Westwood, CA
Country: United States (us)

Re: Oppression of Animals

Unread postby TheBrunswickian » 4th February, 2017, 6:44 pm

PHMED wrote:
GaycrazyBoi wrote:Implying we will die of cancer and diabetes because we eat meat is kind of not good for your argument.

Uhm, it kind of is because if you look at the distribution of meat consumption and cancer/diabetes rates, it is directly proportional.

Did you know that 100% of cancer patients also inhaled oxygen!?
House Cup 2016 - Team Westeros
House Cup 2017 - Team Lion King



Image
User avatar
TheBrunswickian
Data Collector, Community Ambassador
 
First name: Jesse
Posts: 2858
Likes received: 346
Joined: 30th January, 2014, 11:49 pm
Location: Melbourne
Country: Australia (au)

Re: Oppression of Animals

Unread postby GaycrazyBoi » 4th February, 2017, 6:51 pm

TheBrunswickian wrote:
PHMED wrote:
GaycrazyBoi wrote:Implying we will die of cancer and diabetes because we eat meat is kind of not good for your argument.

Uhm, it kind of is because if you look at the distribution of meat consumption and cancer/diabetes rates, it is directly proportional.

Did you know that 100% of cancer patients also inhaled oxygen!?


You stole my thunder with the "correlation does not mean causation" and link to this site
GaycrazyBoi
Member
 
First name: Nate
Posts: 467
Likes received: 45
Joined: 4th March, 2016, 11:42 pm

Re: Oppression of Animals

Unread postby JonathanT88 » 4th February, 2017, 7:00 pm

PHMED wrote:I have argued against meat consumption on the basis of human physiology. Again:

*We don't have protein receptors on our tongues like carnivores and omnivores
*We don't have fat receptors on our tongue which renders meat TASTELESS to us without seasoning (it is not ironic that seasoning is a plant).
*San Diego posted a study on the deaths associated with choking and the number one cause of food choking was from meat consumption; our biology, mainly our oral cavity is not designed to chow down on meat like carnivores and omnivores.
*The pH of our stomach is from 4-5 while omnivores and carnivores are around 1, which makes sense for digesting meat.
Herbivores have an intestine 10-12 times our body length, versus omnivores having an intestine length of 4-5 times their length. Guess what? Humans have a stomach length of 10-12 times their length.


I accepted all of these things, but the study I linked suggested that meat consumption is what gave us the developmental boost needed to develop beyond monkeys and apes. It may be that when our tongue's protein/fat receptors, oral cavities and stomachs were developed we were herbivores, but that our unnatural move onto meat allowed our brains to develop. I don't know. Nevertheless, that's what the study I linked argued- it might be bullshit, but you've not disproven it.

Dude, I already told you that there will be studies that contradict other studies, that is how science works.


I know- it's how all of academia works. I wasn't suggesting otherwise. However, I didn't want to simply accept what you said because you're at the "2nd best public science school."

What does the development of the brain have anything to do with what we are arguing here?


I'm arguing that meat consumption is unnecessary today but has played a crucial role in our development as a species, and therefore against your suggestion that meat eating is an 'intellectual curiosity' which has not been advantageous. I agree with a lot of the other things you're saying, as I have said.


What is so convenient about meat and dairy that is not of equal convenience on a plant-based diet? The taste of the meat must be worth a lot more to you than the animals that are suffering, the damage you are causing to the planet and the world hunger issues that are related to the meat industry. I appreciate you recognizing the issues that come along with eating animals, but I don't respect how you can clearly see this and have all the power you need to make a change, yet still eat animals.

Please respect that.


Convenient in that: most of the food you buy in the supermarkets contains meat/dairy, veganism can be quite expensive, most restaurants have few to no vegan options. I'm willing to admit that these are highly selfish motives, but I don't think you can get angry at people for simply eating what they were raised to eat and not going out of their way to stop eating foods that are easy to access and which are highly enjoyable. If you want to persuade people to go vegan/vegetarian, you are not going about it in the right way, because it reeks of superiority (even if this is not the reality, nor your intention).

Also, I don't currently have the power. I live at home with my parents and eat what I'm given. I might consider going vegetarian if I were cooking for myself, which I'm not.
Gudrun wrote:

"How many times have I told you? Homosexuality is only to be used for revolutionary purposes!"

Image ImageImage

ImageImageImage
User avatar
JonathanT88
Horny Jonathan of the Homosexual Intifada
 
First name: Jonathan (duh.)
Posts: 4877
Likes received: 393
Joined: 1st June, 2013, 1:19 pm
Location: Scottish Highlands
Country: United Kingdom (gb)

Re: Veganism

Unread postby bluesunstorm » 4th February, 2017, 8:02 pm

Pity wrote:Like Anonymous Boy said, it's probably the placebo effect. Living without any sort of animal products cannot be healthy as you gain valuable nutrients from meat; sure, you can make up a lot of those nutrients with supplements, but I do not buy the notion that veganism is healthier or increases energy levels.

There's nothing in meat, dairy, and eggs that you can't get from plant sources. Veganism isn't automatically healthier and eating animals products doesn't mean someone has an unhealthy diet, but humans can live perfectly healthily without animal products. Obviously though, a person that goes from eating cheeseburgers, hots dogs, fried chicken, steak, pork and pizza is going to feel better and have much more energy and be healthier eating mostly or only foods like vegetables, fruit, whole grains, and nuts. I think vitamin B12 is the only nutrient that someone might need to get somewhere, but tons of non-animal foods are fortified with it and it would be pretty difficult to become deficient in it.
I loves Kylie Minogue, rainbows, sprinkles, teddy bears, Lisa Frank, Hello Kitty, pop & dance music, and Lindsay Lohan movies.
User avatar
bluesunstorm
Member
 
First name: Casey
Posts: 687
Likes received: 4
Joined: 15th February, 2013, 4:32 pm
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Country: United States (us)

Re: Oppression of Animals

Unread postby bluesunstorm » 4th February, 2017, 8:14 pm

Pity wrote:I could not give two damns about the "oppression" animals. They are not humans and I see no reason why they should not be used to feed our ever-growing population. Sure, they should not be beaten unnecessarily by food processing employees, but animals are slaughtered because humans eat meat. While a plant diet may be fine with the addition of protein and other vitamin supplements for adults, children need meat to grow up optimally functional. As long as I do not see the animal being killed or processed, I am fine.

Except your premise is incredibly faulty. Nobody needs meat to grow up optimally, that's just a bald-faced lie and outright stupidity. In fact, most Westerners consume too much meat and it's contributing to childhood obesity. Humans are omnivores who can easily get protein and nutrients from plant sources. It's your prerogative if you want to take a nihilistic and unattached approach to it, but it's just stupid and untruthful to say that humans need to kill animals and eat their flesh to survive and be healthy. It's incredibly costly and wasteful to breed and raise animals for food the way the modern meat industry does and to meet the desires of billions of people. It's only going to accelerate climate change more, and it causes or contributes to most food poisoning. Most people aren't going to change, but lies like that need to be quelled.
I loves Kylie Minogue, rainbows, sprinkles, teddy bears, Lisa Frank, Hello Kitty, pop & dance music, and Lindsay Lohan movies.
User avatar
bluesunstorm
Member
 
First name: Casey
Posts: 687
Likes received: 4
Joined: 15th February, 2013, 4:32 pm
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Country: United States (us)

Re: Veganism

Unread postby Example » 4th February, 2017, 8:25 pm

I've only ever heard of one ingredient that was only in meats but I forget what it was
my vegan friend said he has to take a pill for it
Image
User avatar
Example
Moderator
 
First name: Kyler
Posts: 2730
Likes received: 420
Joined: 25th April, 2011, 10:25 pm
Location: vancouver
Country: Canada (ca)

Re: Oppression of Animals

Unread postby Unseasoned Chicken » 4th February, 2017, 8:29 pm

This is literally veganism thread 2.0 someone merge them.
Anyways again we see why vegans are commonly disliked, you can eat whatever you want if you believe you're saving the animals etc (y'all better not wear leather shoes) but you shouldn't try to demonise meat eaters at every opportunity, we don't set out every day with an agenda to oppress the animals.
Twink enthusiast
User avatar
Unseasoned Chicken
Is shaking
 
First name: Ethan
Posts: 4016
Likes received: 648
Joined: 4th November, 2015, 3:49 am
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Country: Australia (au)

Re: Oppression of Animals

Unread postby GaycrazyBoi » 4th February, 2017, 9:03 pm

bluesunstorm wrote:
Pity wrote:I could not give two damns about the "oppression" animals. They are not humans and I see no reason why they should not be used to feed our ever-growing population. Sure, they should not be beaten unnecessarily by food processing employees, but animals are slaughtered because humans eat meat. While a plant diet may be fine with the addition of protein and other vitamin supplements for adults, children need meat to grow up optimally functional. As long as I do not see the animal being killed or processed, I am fine.

Except your premise is incredibly faulty. Nobody needs meat to grow up optimally, that's just a bald-faced lie and outright stupidity. In fact, most Westerners consume too much meat and it's contributing to childhood obesity. Humans are omnivores who can easily get protein and nutrients from plant sources. It's your prerogative if you want to take a nihilistic and unattached approach to it, but it's just stupid and untruthful to say that humans need to kill animals and eat their flesh to survive and be healthy. It's incredibly costly and wasteful to breed and raise animals for food the way the modern meat industry does and to meet the desires of billions of people. It's only going to accelerate climate change more, and it causes or contributes to most food poisoning. Most people aren't going to change, but lies like that need to be quelled.


It's also incredibly unhealthy to engage in homosexual acts, but nobody here wants to mention that.

In all seriousness, obesity isn't just because of meat. It's also because of the over-saturating of our food products with sugar. Nor is eating meat inherently bad for you. And cows produce a lot of methane, which isn't healthy for the environment... So we eat them to cut down methane emission. We slow the climate change, reduce the amount of living things competing for food, preventing overpopulation among animals which would ultimately cause extinction.

Example wrote:I've only ever heard of one ingredient that was only in meats but I forget what it was
my vegan friend said he has to take a pill for it


Maybe Omega-3?
GaycrazyBoi
Member
 
First name: Nate
Posts: 467
Likes received: 45
Joined: 4th March, 2016, 11:42 pm

Re: Oppression of Animals

Unread postby JonathanT88 » 4th February, 2017, 9:27 pm

GaycrazyBoi wrote:In all seriousness, obesity isn't just because of meat. It's also because of the over-saturating of our food products with sugar. Nor is eating meat inherently bad for you. And cows produce a lot of methane, which isn't healthy for the environment... So we eat them to cut down methane emission. We slow the climate change, reduce the amount of living things competing for food, preventing overpopulation among animals which would ultimately cause extinction.


But there are only so many cows because we breed them for food.
Gudrun wrote:

"How many times have I told you? Homosexuality is only to be used for revolutionary purposes!"

Image ImageImage

ImageImageImage
User avatar
JonathanT88
Horny Jonathan of the Homosexual Intifada
 
First name: Jonathan (duh.)
Posts: 4877
Likes received: 393
Joined: 1st June, 2013, 1:19 pm
Location: Scottish Highlands
Country: United Kingdom (gb)

Re: Veganism/Oppression of Animals (merged)

Unread postby Mawd » 4th February, 2017, 9:48 pm

Hi, sorry but yes people can fully understand how meatworks will render animals into subsequent parts and still be ok woth eating them. We don't have the same base level of squemishness.
You took my point and completely talked past it with your assumption.

Stating that we are born hebivores is a bit questionable when we're living off of our parents diet during gestation.

The link between diet and human intelligebce comes from the loss of muscle mass around the jaw and top of the head. If you look at primates, our onmivore cousins, you would notice that they still have the same strong jaw muscles. Looking at how human ancestral skull morphology has changed we notice a general slackenjng of these strong jaw muscles. You also see their implied intelligence increase from having more room for the brain to expand.

The loss of the muscles is attributed to these ancestors changing their diet from harder plant material to softer material that is more easily chewed. Meat would be just one of these materials but an important one nonetheless.

Also saying that because we don't meet that small list of traits omnivores and carnovores are said to have means we can't be natural omnivores is a bit funny. Convergant evolution exists afterall.

P.s since science is not a monolith it'd probably important to highlight that your knowledge pertains to specific fields after likely taking a wide cut of introductory papers to science. In any case I'm sure more of us would appreciate talking to you if you weren't insufferably parading yourself as an authority.

Also correction, salt, a mineral, is one of our most important seasonings.

Arguing that a baby will pet a bunny and try to eat an apple is an interesting way to go about a weak philosophical argument. Depending on age your pastoral example of a baby may not even recognise the apple. Here's an alternate example: the bunny is left scared from having its body pulled at by the baby while the apple is neglected as an interesting toy. This clearly lets me establish that all babies are killers.
.... no pastoral philosphical epithets are not a good way to run a convincung argument.

Anyway from my own experience it is pretty typical for even third year science majors to feel like they run the world after being with the subject for only a few years but do try to be less obnoxious.

Actually if we go back to where you said evolution begins with genes, I just want to point out that seeing as our behaviour is influenced by our genes, one could quite easily argue that if humans that used fire or used fire cured meat were at the time more successful than their bretheren then the traits that predisposed them to fire use and fired meat eating would have become more dominant.

Going back to the evolution of our brain capacity being linked with the reduction of muscle mass around our skulls, as humans developed ways to make the time intensive tasks of ensuring basic survival easier they made more time to socialise and develop culture and also intelligence.

You can say that it is a more beneficial diet for many of us modern humans to go vegan but to try and argue that historically our evolutionary development has never been aided by or supported meat eating is a bit of a stretch.

Anyway as to what effect on ourselves our diets have you've made little mention of how processed the harmful foods are that we eat. If I pointed you to a netflix documentary of my own, Cooked, you'd hear a nutritionist saying that yes you can stay reasonably healthy by eating whatever you want as long as you make it yourself because you will inevitably use less ingredients than the food industry will use, and the foods will be less processed.

There is something really important to be said for the way the food industries of the world destroy the health benefits of many of our basic foods like bread by making the recipies more efficient for profit. However that does not mean the food itself if prepared well cannot be reasonably healthy.

Also talking about Asian dishes of any kind there are a huge arrays of meat and animal products within them. The Western diet of heavily processed foods is unhealthy, the side effects can be best seen within communities that don't have the exposure like pacific cultures or asian cultures. This is true for alcohol and milk as well.
Yet it's a joke to pretend that their own cuisine is not also already familiar to meat and animal products.
Many of their cultures have not adapted culturally and physiologically to our diet which means that they may also have more pronounced effects of it. Its a more harmful diet, this western one, to be sure, however a key point of its harmfulness is gained from its exposure to harmful business practices used in our mainstream food industry.

Also lets not forget that at this point people are fairly certain that we gain our gut microbial community handed to us from our parents so people born outside our countries and then naturalised to our diet by eating it for many years may still have health problems given their still relatively recent exposure.
Mawd
Appearing to Disappear; Community Ambassador
 
First name: Max
Posts: 7357
Likes received: 111
Joined: 6th March, 2011, 5:37 am
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Country: New Zealand (nz)

Re: Oppression of Animals

Unread postby GaycrazyBoi » 4th February, 2017, 10:05 pm

Ω wrote:This is literally veganism thread 2.0 someone merge them.
Anyways again we see why vegans are commonly disliked, you can eat whatever you want if you believe you're saving the animals etc (y'all better not wear leather shoes) but you shouldn't try to demonise meat eaters at every opportunity, we don't set out every day with an agenda to oppress the animals.


For once, I agree with Ethan and Jesse. I am pleasantly surprised.
GaycrazyBoi
Member
 
First name: Nate
Posts: 467
Likes received: 45
Joined: 4th March, 2016, 11:42 pm

Re: Veganism/Oppression of Animals (merged)

Unread postby Example » 4th February, 2017, 10:07 pm

arent our wisdom teeth to help us chew meat but our jaws are too small now rawr
Image
User avatar
Example
Moderator
 
First name: Kyler
Posts: 2730
Likes received: 420
Joined: 25th April, 2011, 10:25 pm
Location: vancouver
Country: Canada (ca)

Re: Oppression of Animals

Unread postby GaycrazyBoi » 4th February, 2017, 10:13 pm

JonathanT88 wrote:
GaycrazyBoi wrote:In all seriousness, obesity isn't just because of meat. It's also because of the over-saturating of our food products with sugar. Nor is eating meat inherently bad for you. And cows produce a lot of methane, which isn't healthy for the environment... So we eat them to cut down methane emission. We slow the climate change, reduce the amount of living things competing for food, preventing overpopulation among animals which would ultimately cause extinction.


But there are only so many cows because we breed them for food.


Then, since you can't let me have that argument, we don't kill off the natural population because we breed them.

Mawd- You said it all.
GaycrazyBoi
Member
 
First name: Nate
Posts: 467
Likes received: 45
Joined: 4th March, 2016, 11:42 pm

Re: Veganism/Oppression of Animals (merged)

Unread postby Mawd » 4th February, 2017, 10:26 pm

Going back to what I originally said I Do believe we'd all be better off reducing our meat production and consumption.
I'd also be happy with exploring alternate sources of proteins like incorporating more insect products into our food.

The problems I have in this thread are with some of the wider agruments that PHmed is using to justify not eating meat that I find weak and unconvincing.

Also seeing as modern agriculture still relies on animal products for a wide variety of reasons, some animals would still need to be around even if total meat production for consumption were to cease.
For example animal products have crucial use in some of the testing processes used to detect plant pathogens. This is a practice that is absolutely crucial to any industrial scale agricultural practice.
Other animal by products made by the food industry also have wider scientific applications.
An easy example would be blood agar.
Mawd
Appearing to Disappear; Community Ambassador
 
First name: Max
Posts: 7357
Likes received: 111
Joined: 6th March, 2011, 5:37 am
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Country: New Zealand (nz)

Re: Oppression of Animals

Unread postby PHMED » 5th February, 2017, 2:11 am

JonathanT88 wrote:I accepted all of these things, but the study I linked suggested that meat consumption is what gave us the developmental boost needed to develop beyond monkeys and apes. It may be that when our tongue's protein/fat receptors, oral cavities and stomachs were developed we were herbivores, but that our unnatural move onto meat allowed our brains to develop. I don't know. Nevertheless, that's what the study I linked argued- it might be bullshit, but you've not disproven it.

I'm going to take a page out of your book here.

http://www.livescience.com/5540-human-brains-big.html

The same website, which you have chosen to present an argument seems to have published the opinions of other scientists who believe brain development (to a modern human brain) was caused by climate and/or social interactions, none of which have any correlation with the consumption of meat. So, I wouldn't trust that website because they do not appear to have a definitive answer to what you are trying to explore. Furthermore, it is such a long shot for any scientist to conclude that meat consumption was needed for our brain development when there are various fields of psychology, neuroscience, cognitive science, etc. that will tell you otherwise. I am not saying the study is bullshit, but it is not at all definitive. Also, the LiveScience website doesn't even give you a link to the original study, which makes me question where all this information is even coming from on their behalf.
JonathanT88 wrote:I know- it's how all of academia works. I wasn't suggesting otherwise. However, I didn't want to simply accept what you said because you're at the "2nd best public science school."


I didn't say you had to accept what I was saying, I said your approach to the situation was hard-fast, and didn't seem accepting to any information because you didn't even ask questions. If you were truly trying to understand where I was coming from, I believe you would have asked me, "Well what studies suggest this", rather than posting an article about the consumption of meat in relation to brain development--this wasn't even the direction I was going in for you to come out with that kind of study, which is why I say ten minutes of research is not sufficient for such a broad topic.

And I never said anything about the number 2 public science school, I simpley said the number 2 public university--although we do excel in the sciences.

JonathanT88 wrote:I'm arguing that meat consumption is unnecessary today but has played a crucial role in our development as a species, and therefore against your suggestion that meat eating is an 'intellectual curiosity' which has not been advantageous. I agree with a lot of the other things you're saying, as I have said.

I disagree with this, and I don't need to find a study that contradicts this claim, that's not at all necessary in a debate (in most cases). Either way, I have provided you with a link and several examples of differing arguments on ho the brain was developed, so it's not conclusive to say meat is important in that aspect. No offense, but it seems to me like you're trying to make the evidence suit your ideas instead of your ideas suiting the evidence. Don't cherry pick your facts, accept them as they are, all of them. I just think your entire approach is inverted. It sounds more like you're trying to win a debate, and not learn something from it. Don't look for facts to boost your already formed opinions, adapt your opinions if you realize you've stumbled. I'm not saying either one of us is wrong, but accept the evidence against your claims just as much as you do the ones you're searching for to solidify them.

JonathanT88 wrote:Convenient in that: most of the food you buy in the supermarkets contains meat/dairy, veganism can be quite expensive, most restaurants have few to no vegan options.

What? All restaurants are expensive, not just vegan restaurants. Restaurants are expensive whether they sell meat or not. In fact, fruits and vegetables are some of the cheapest items in the grocery store. If you purchase produce and cook from scratch, especially plant-based meals, you will find it to actually be affordable.

JonathanT88 wrote:I'm willing to admit that these are highly selfish motives, but I don't think you can get angry at people for simply eating what they were raised to eat and not going out of their way to stop eating foods that are easy to access and which are highly enjoyable.

I am sorry if I come off as angry, I am just very passionate about veganism (it's activism, forgive me). But I disagree on having to turn my back on people who are stuck to a particular culture of eating. I was born and raised in a meat eating family, but that doesn't make it acceptable for me to hold on to those traditions for my own selfishness. And you speak of vegan food as if it is not

JonathanT88 wrote:If you want to persuade people to go vegan/vegetarian, you are not going about it in the right way, because it reeks of superiority (even if this is not the reality, nor your intention).

So, are you calling me morally superior still or egotistically superior? Again, I don't feel superior to anyone, I went vegan because I don't feel superior to others, and that includes the animals. I am not here to persuade anyone here to go vegan, but to provide them with a different perspective on these issues that are harming our bodies, the planet and the animals. The hope is that someone would go vegan not for me or any vegan for that matter, but for the planet and everyone on it because eating meat does not have only one victim.
Also, I don't currently have the power.

JonathanT88 wrote:I live at home with my parents and eat what I'm given. I might consider going vegetarian if I were cooking for myself, which I'm not.

I understand, it is hard as a child to advocate for yourself, I completely agree that you should eat what is given to you (in most circumstances), but maybe have a talk with your parents and see how they feel about it. You never know.
Last edited by PHMED on 5th February, 2017, 11:09 am, edited 2 times in total.
PHMED
Member
 
Posts: 101
Likes received: 4
Joined: 15th November, 2016, 9:32 pm
Location: Westwood, CA
Country: United States (us)

Re: Oppression of Animals

Unread postby JonathanT88 » 5th February, 2017, 8:48 am

PHMED wrote:I disagree with this, and I don't need to find a study that contradicts this claim, that's not at all necessary in a debate (in most cases). Either way, I have provided you with a link and several examples of differing arguments on ho the brain was developed, so it's not conclusive to say meat is important in that aspect. No offense, but it seems to me like you're trying to make the evidence suit your ideas instead of your ideas suiting the evidence. Don't cherry pick your facts, accept them as they are, all of them. I just think your entire approach is inverted. It sounds more like you're trying to win a debate, and not learn something from it. Don't look for facts to boost your already formed opinions, adapt your opinions if you realize you've stumbled. I'm not saying either one of us is wrong, but accept the evidence against your claims just as much as you do the ones you're searching for to solidify them.


Eh, not really. I just found a study which contradicted one of your major claims and thought I would bring it up. Now I am more convinced by your argument, so I have adapted my opinions. And, wrongly or otherwise, I tend to challenge new ideas until I have been convinced of their superiority. When my teachers tell me stuff I argue with them until they've shown convincingly that they're right, and (perhaps lazily) put the burden of truth on the person making the case for something new. If you want to change my mind, it's your job to do so. :P

(And don't worry, I do also take the initiative when looking for new opinions because I don't always have other people to challenge. I'm just used to arguing about history/english/politics, which are a heck of a lot easier than science :) )

So, are you calling me morally superior still or egotistically superior? Again, I don't feel superior to anyone, I went vegan because I don't feel superior to others, and that includes the animals. I am not here to persuade anyone here to go vegan, but to provide them with a different perspective on these issues that are harming our bodies, the planet and the animals. The hope is that someone would go vegan not for me or any vegan for that matter, but for the planet and everyone on it because eating meat does not have only one victim.

I understand, it is hard as a child to advocate for yourself, I completely agree that you should eat what is given to you (in most circumstances), but maybe have a talk with your parents and see how they feel about it. You never know.


No, I'm saying that veganism is objectively morally superior but that your anger doesn't do anything to make people want to change their lifestyles. I don't mean to suggest you're coming across as an egomaniac. I get angry about stuff too, but (from experience) the best way to persuade people is calmly, particularly when you're attacking something which plays a central role in our lives, like diet.

And unfortunately, despite my recognition of the validity of your arguments, I lack the emotional drive to become vegetarian/vegan, so there seems to be some disconnect between 'the facts' and my psychological reaction to them. Sorry if that frustrates you, but that's just how I am. Perhaps it's the fact that I feel my individual act is unlikely to have any impact, but I've got a strong belief in voting so I'm being somewhat hypocritical.

I know people who are vegetarian during the week and omnivorous at the weekend. I'd consider that, if I were cooking for myself.
Gudrun wrote:

"How many times have I told you? Homosexuality is only to be used for revolutionary purposes!"

Image ImageImage

ImageImageImage
User avatar
JonathanT88
Horny Jonathan of the Homosexual Intifada
 
First name: Jonathan (duh.)
Posts: 4877
Likes received: 393
Joined: 1st June, 2013, 1:19 pm
Location: Scottish Highlands
Country: United Kingdom (gb)

PreviousNext

Recently active
Users browsing this forum: CommonCrawl [Bot], Linkdex [Bot] and 12 guests