If a topic keeps coming up no matter how much you try to censor it, consider that it’s not going away. Some changes are long overdue.
If a topic keeps coming up no matter how much you try to censor it, consider that it’s not going away. Some changes are long overdue.
Something y’all need to realise is that commenting “Abusing animals is literally H*tler and you should be publicly executed for eating a chickenburger” is not going to turn someone vegan. Go look for smarter ways, god damn it.
And something y’all need to realise that 90% of vegans don’t think like that.
Read OP’s comments. OP does think like that which is exactly the problem.
I come here for the memes, not to be berated for being an “animal abuser”. Memes are supposed to be lighthearted.
I have no problem with vegans. I have problems with militant vegans like OP. Just like I have a problem with anyone trying to radically shove their beliefs down my throat, no matter what topic it might involve.
While I agree, I am also not sure why vegans are being singled out for this, since I see memes and post shoving leftist politics down people’s throats constantly, and not just in political channels.
It seems that for most people, the throat shoving is only a problem when they disagree with the content, and there are a lot less vegans on Lemmy than leftists.
90% of the vegans I encounter are the preachy ones making posts online. The vegans that aren’t like that don’t usually shout about being vegan and call for the death of “carnists” (BTW: there already is a word for meat eater so I don’t know why they had to make another one).
I prefer “bloodmouth”
Some animals are carnivores, but they don’t want to draw attention to that. Also, humans aren’t carnivores. We’re omnivores.
The ones that do are really fucking loud and make the rest of you look bad. I’m in the same boat, being an atheist.
I imagine that 90% aren’t getting their memes deleted.
Oh, trust me, I know
deleted by creator
Isnt that what literally happens everywhere all the time in different context? ‘arabs beat their wives they are evil’, ‘indigenous people take halucinogenic drugs they are evil’, ‘russians kill and rape civilians they are evil’. Usually it is the strong that force their beliefs on the minorities, fortunately you cant force people to eat meat by law.
I’ve never understood why vegans, the ones the vast majority agree are doing something at least good (even if you don’t understand it’s a moral obligation), are the ones that have to cater to the genocidal masses.
Stop and think for a second, imagine you live in a wild, wild world where the vegan position is actually correct. Imagine that you’re a vegan, and those around you are actually supporting an unjustified animal holocaust. Then think about how your critique of vegans comes off. It’s the genocidal maniacs complaining about how they’re treated unfairly on the internet because sometimes someone attacks their delicate sensibilities.
It’s not my responsibility to engage with you in such a way that makes you a better person. Your own failings are your own, and my failings are my own. My failings are I sometimes make someone on the internet a bit sad, and yours are participating in a market demanding tens of billions of animal deaths every year, a quantitative level of suffering we’ve never seen before.
Weak argument while standing on your subjective high ground, morality is a compass. Forcing people to follow your values is in most peoples view is immoral. Veganism is cult trying to shame people and scream at them for being wrong. No different than a religion trying to force their morals on you. Also trying to force people to a specific diet is wrong, that is not taking into account individuals health.
It’s more about ethics than morality. You agree that violence is a bad thing? Good. So there is no reason these rules don’t apply to animals, since many of them can feel in a similar way humans do.
I didn’t force anyone to follow anything, but the state does and you view that as a good thing. It should be illegal to abuse and kill dogs & cats, we can agree on that obvious truth. Your inability to see how that translates to pigs/cows/chickens is just irrationality/stupidity, nothing else.
I’ve had a ton of conversations on the nature of normative truths. Rehashing it over and over again with pseudo-expressivists online is annoying, mostly because you all have actually no background in philosophy, so it’s like talking to a bunch of philosophy 101 students who have never given this more than a cursory thought.
You should look into the basis of knowledge, study a bit of epistemology. You’ll find the foundations for all truths, normative or descriptive, are quite similar. They’re all fundamentally based in axioms.
What state is forcing a diet on you?
Also: Long comments filled with malapropisms and in sesquipedalian manner doesn’t give me the best confidence that you actually know wtf you’re talking about.
Feel free to correct me, most (or dare I say all) people aren’t born omniscient, so sometimes we misuse words or phrases. I’m not sorry to admit that I’m sometimes incorrect about things, I used to be a staunch non-vegan for example.
The dog and cat meat trade prohibition act in 2018 in the U.S outlaws the slaughter and trade of dog/cat meat, in effect banning it as a diet.
I’d be more than happy with this exact same legislation being passed, but just for chickens/cows/pigs/etc. too. If you don’t think that this is prohibiting a diet, sure. Let’s just ban the slaughter/trade of cow/pig/chicken meat and say we found a good compromise.
Also I’d go as far to claim malapropisms don’t exist. There is no “incorrect” use of a word. I’m not a prescriptivist. Language is about communicating ideas, and I know everything I’ve said would make sense to a great deal of people I know.
Maybe something doesn’t make sense to you, maybe because we learned different definitions or usages of some word or phrase. Neither of us are wrong, we’ve just hit a language barrier. This is uncommon in English, but actually happens quite regularly in Europe even with two people speaking “the same language”.
Our best example of this is going from American -> British English, but it can happen within the same “dialect” too.
Now there are obviously times where you try to adopt some language someone else has, and misunderstood it, so your usage aligns with essentially nobody else’s (so the word has lost all function). I know that’s not the case with what I’m saying because I’ve had these types of conversations with enough people who have understood me, but I’m fine humoring you, and still interested where the clash/miscommunication happened.
Gibberish, complete incoherent gibberish. Still trying to force your morality on others by belittling them. Udder nonsense from an extremist.
I understand this response, it must be emotionally hard to be challenged in such a concrete and decisive way, with no rational response available to you. I see this most commonly from carnists and religious people. In politics people don’t tend to literally fall into “LALALALA” and plugging their ears like you have, but certain social conditioning (namely church and other forms of normalized structural violence) cause people to go into a defensive panic.
Good luck on learning anything in your life, honestly.
I agree with many of the sentiments of vegans. However living in a city filled with militant vegans has turned me off supporting them, that is an emotional response based on my lived experience. All the gibberish you spouted can go right back at you as your diatribe shows your own bias as well. So keep claiming superiority it won’t sway people with all your superior knowledge. If you know so much try a tactic that is more supportive instead of belittling people.
Knowledge isn’t bad, and I’m aware of where I’m knowledgeable and where my limits are. I tend to be quite a bit more knowledgeable about philosophy than the average person, most people don’t introspect or read about where truth comes from. They often don’t even know or understand what an axiom is, even though they’re foundational to how we live.
If that’s all too much for you, you can literally just disregard my latter two paragraphs before you went into your defensive panic. I don’t (usually) need to get into the idea of normative truths to justify veganism, because ironically we live in a country of “animal lovers”, many of whom would happily literally kill dog abusers. I’ve unironically met non-vegans that advocate for the fucking death penalty for people who abuse dogs.
That amount of dissonance, to advocate for actual death for humans who abuse animals, while themselves literally paying for animal abuse, is sufficient to dismantle people’s entire preconception of animal rights and worth. If we happened to live in a society without massive hypocrites, where people consistently held that abusing and torturing all “lesser” animals was okay, I’d have to get into more nuanced discussion about the nature of truth to help people get to veganism.
Wow, such a superior enlightened being you are!! Empathy for other peoples culture, health, and economic status needs to be taken into account. For all the talk of being knowledgeable and a moral leader, you are blinded by your own bias. Self reflection is important for all, including you
A small sidenote too about your advice, I appreciate you trying to help, but I’m actually happy with how many people I’ve converted and continue to convert to veganism. I’d even bet good money that I’ve converted more people to veganism than you.
If you find a tactic that converts more than a few dozen people per year, let me know, but out of the two of us I probably have more actual real world experience converting people to veganism, given I’m the vegan activist, and you should consider that a vegan activist might know more about vegan activism than a non-vegan.
At least consider it as a possibility, my friend.
Zero interest in converting anyone to vegan. I don’t care what anyone eats, it is their choice. Only interested in reducing waste and the population. Work towards an achievable goal. I will never be vegan due to my health issues, as you have conveniently glossed over. It doesn’t work for everyone, it’s in the same vain as telling everyone the need to eat peanuts.
Just stop and think for a second. We’re talking about posting in meme communities. Meme communities are for lighthearted jokes, not serious discussions and berating people.
I think Christianity does a lot of harm to the world. But posting anti-Christian memes in a generic meme community is in incredibly poor taste, no matter how valid I feel about my views.
Dark humor is a real thing, and it’s fine and even cathartic for a lot of people. Joking about fascists, genocide-enablers, etc. is something some people find in poor taste, while others find it cathartic. Neither is wrong.
Because acting like a self righteous douchebag turns people off and hurts your movement. That’s counterproductive.
It’s more counterproductive to be a non-vegan and try to convince nobody. I’ve had a good deal of success convincing people to go vegan. There are definitely vegans that are more successful than me, but you want to know who is always less successful? Non-vegans who rage online about vegans.
They should be the focus of our criticism, both in their own actions, and even as a broader strategy for enacting change.