• UlyssesT [he/him]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    32
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Sometimes I feel like dae le epic bacon treat defenders have a number of trenches to fall back to, where one dismisses animals’ right to life, another dismisses animal cruelty, another dismisses industrial waste and environmental damage, and the one behind that dismisses inefficient energy use and the waste of land and resources. Ultimately, all of it amounts to “don’t tell me what to do” with layers of decoration on top.

    • PowerCrazy@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      14
      ·
      1 year ago

      It’s ok if people don’t care about animals. No one is going to force you to eat meat. I promise. It’s also ok if we don’t use all land everywhere as efficiently as possible to grow the maximum amount of calories so that the earth can support the largest number of people possible. We can have a wealth of variety in our diets that include animal products and there is absolutely nothing wrong with that.

      • Gosplan14_the_Third [none/use name]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        27
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Have fun trying to stop climate change without reducing meat consumption, not to mention other problems like desertification and soil degradation.

        The earth is an ecosystem with a metabolism, and humans take out of it way more than return, and with capitalism that isn’t going to change anytime soon.

        You can go “sweetie, but meat tastes good!” all you want, not to mention your bizzarre comment on optimizing land usage for population growth. It’s not a question of morality - it’s a question of not being a fool.

        • UlyssesT [he/him]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          18
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          That condescending “it’s okay” tone from that self-absorbed status quo championing treatbrain was Reddit-tier grating, too. disgost

        • zephyreks@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          9
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Not only that, but we’re talking about a country with some of the highest per-capita beef consumption in the world. Beef has an order of magnitude higher impact on emissions as other meats. It’s so fucking inefficient it’s insane.

          I think it’s much easier to shift people to more efficient meats than it is to cut meat out entirely.

          • Gosplan14_the_Third [none/use name]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            1 year ago

            Easier yes, I suppose.

            It’s still a half measure that will at best delay the worst effects of climate change (such as many other mainstream proposals to combat it) and there’s a difference between how radical the changes to society will be and whether climate change will be bad, very bad, very very bad or lead to Medieval death rates

      • UlyssesT [he/him]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        27
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        No one is going to force you to eat meat. I promise.

        Actually, that did happen while I lived with my immediate biological family in my formative years. You don’t speak for me. You don’t speak for anyone outside of your bubble world.

        The planet’s getting cooked with escalating feedback loops that are furthered along by animal factory farming while hundreds of millions are already experiencing a slow gnawing mass starvation from terrible land management. The rain forests of Brazil, for example, are being destroyed methodically largely for the sake of more industrialized meat farming and to grow feed for that industrialized meat farming.

        Meanwhile, bubble worlders like you keep expecting your meat treats in a timely and convenient matter. And with all that in mind, here you are condescendingly smugposting about the current status quo being “okay.” smuglord this-is-fine

        • BeamBrain [he/him]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Actually, that did happen while I lived with my immediate biological family in my formative years.

          To say nothing of the fact that we’re forced to fund the torture and killing of animals in the form of federal beef subsidies. Or that in some cases institutionalized people (in prisons, asylums, etc.) are, in fact, made to eat meat and may very well be force-fed if they refuse to.

          • UlyssesT [he/him]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            8
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            None of that matters if the treatbrain got theirs, thus the “no one is forcing you” condescending tone which is a fucking lie.

            • BeamBrain [he/him]@hexbear.net
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              8
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              And carnists still have the nerve to act like they’re the aggrieved party every time they’re forced to remember we exist, lol. I can only imagine how they’d act if the positions were reversed and we were winning as hard as they are.

              • UlyssesT [he/him]@hexbear.net
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                5
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                The world would be in better shape, there’d be a lot less pollution and suffering to living beings, and they may not even notice the difference because they wouldn’t be as used to shoveling down dae le epic Baconators.

          • UlyssesT [he/him]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            12
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Yes as a child

            You haven’t apparently emotionally developed past that point in any way that I can notice.

            You’re a destructively selfish treatbrain that only wants changes that don’t directly inconvenience you in ways you can immediately conceive.

            In the mean time, government action to stop fossil fuels are the only priority that matters.

            You’re as ignorant as you are selfish.

            https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/sep/13/meat-greenhouses-gases-food-production-study

            • PowerCrazy@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              1 year ago

              These “treats” you keep bringing up, most people call food. If you are against humans eating food, then this is the org for you. https://www.vhemt.org/

              Now let’s get to the meat of the issue. ALL human food production causes non-zero emissions, yes even the food you eat. Yes even if you grow it yourself. According to the link you provided “meat accounts for ~60% of green house gas emissions from food production.” I would say, so what? Humans need to eat food and some food production is going to emit more green house gases then other food. Trying to optimize our diets to reduce our impact on the world at the expense of enjoying that world is something no one actually wants, including you. At the end of the day everyone has to eat food. So you say “But if we just cut meat production, we would reduce the green house gases of food production by 60%!” Well in less then 80years, the population of the earth is projected to be ~11billion. That is ~50% more people and thus 50% more greenhouse gases emitted from food. So now what do you now?

              It’s 2100ad, and we got rid of meat 80years ago, along with 10,000 years of human culinary culture and animal husbandry, and now we are right back where we started as far as green house gases (though probably worse because fossil fuels are still around). So what have you solved? What did destroying a huge part of the essence of human society accomplish? Hundreds and thousands of cultures were told that because burning coal and natural gas is cheaper and certian people will get rich from continuing to do that, those billions of people can’t have certain kinds of food anymore. That’s not a deal anyone will take, nor should they.

              • UlyssesT [he/him]@hexbear.net
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                10
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                These “treats” you keep bringing up, most people call food.

                You’ve already sunk your own argument with your prior “well I don’t want to eat anything but yummy epic le Baconators don’t tell me what to dooooooooo” statements. “Most people” is an empty statement where you apply your own destructive selfishness to the majority of humanity, and even if you were right, that’s contributing to the ongoing ruination of the planet through both industrialized factory meat production pollution and the consequent massive carbon footprint of it all.

                It’s 2100ad, and we got rid of meat 80years ago, along with 10,000 years of human culinary culture and animal husbandry, and now we are right back where we started as far as green house gases (though probably worse because fossil fuels are still around). So what have you solved?

                “Inflicting less suffering and death on living beings and reducing pollution and land depletion. And for what? What would all of that solve? That doesn’t sound like unlimited meat treats to meeeeee!”

                You have a clownishly destructive and selfish take. 🤡

                  • UlyssesT [he/him]@hexbear.net
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    6
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    1 year ago

                    projection

                    This thread is full of attempts to answer the problem and you having nothing to say about them except “no, don’t do that, government bad, what about my treats.”

                    Again, the implication is that you want the status quo to stay exactly the same and you lack the courage to even own up to that.