Im plenty critical of militant vegans, but thats a bit unfair. Industrial ranching is a big contributor to climate change, theres a well-reasoned argument I see alot
Yes, but such arguments are misplaced. Their issue is then not with the meat industry but with the current state of the world as a whole. But because animals have a central nervous system, and people love being activists without actually doing anything, they become vegan.
Concrete, the creation of it, and the transportation of it, is probably one of the biggest contributors to climate change. Smart devices, sneakers, t-shirts, and toys, amongst many other things, are created by what is essentially the modern day equivalent to slavery. Many exotic “superfoods” come from third world countries where the local natives can no longer afford to eat it because costs have been driven up, because it all needs to be exported so some blond chick can have it on her toast. Lithium is probably the most important resource right now, yet it’s production of it is highly destructive to the environment. Traditional farming is causing soil fatigue, contamination of ground water, and the destruction of complex ecosystems in place of monocultures, but people hate on GMOs, “chemicals”, and vertical farming.
These are problems that effect our society and our environment that even the most militant vegans make use of on a daily basis. The lifestyle vegans have (the ones we hear about in the news and see in the Internet, not the far flung tribes or humble Buddhist monks) cannot exist without modern society. So militant vegans are hypocrites.
I mean the difference is that concrete has a function and is largely irreplaceable. The argument most vegans make is that animals are not functionally needed in order to fulfill the “food” requirement of living. Concrete is, by large, used for houses and structures which provide shelter, and there are no viable alternatives.
Not for concrete itself, but certainly how it’s produced. The largest contributing factor to the production of concrete is energy and fossil fuels.
As for how functionality applies to meat; meat is incredibly nutrient dense, with certain vitamins, such as B12 or A, being in high quantity compared to other sources, or having certain nutrients simply not found anywhere else, such as taurine, creatine, or carnitine.
To reduce the environmental impact of food, which applies to all food and not just meat, we need to accept the idea of not having excess of everything. We don’t need 5 different cuts of meat from 3 different brands. We don’t need 5 different kinds of apples. We don’t need a whole shopping isle filled with… Goodness knows how many different kinds of cereal.
For sure, but that applies to literally everything - decarbonization of the energy grid/moving away from gas is a huge factor for literally every aspect of life, particularly farming and red meat. The energy involved in creating meat is significantly higher than any other foods, which is why I disagreed with your point. We have an alternative for meat, but there isnt one for concrete. Using it as a comparison is a poor argument.
Arguing that conditionally essential amino acids are not found elsewhere is a misleading argument. In addition to the fact that all of those three can be created by your body, Taurine is found in lentils, a staple of many vegan diets, seaweed can contain creatine, and carnitine can be found in trace amounts in most foods. None of them are as dense as meat, for sure, but there are numerous sources, plus supplements.
To reduce the environmental impact of food, which applies to all food and not just meat, we need to accept the idea of not having excess of everything. We don’t need 5 different cuts of meat from 3 different brands. We don’t need 5 different kinds of apples. We don’t need a whole shopping isle filled with… Goodness knows how many different kinds of cereal.
Definitely agree with this, but its probably just as hard a sell, and much less feasible to do on an individual level.
The problem there is people in cities could not do it, in many cities it’s illegal or not feasible to raise chickens or goats, or to hunt or even trap.
I don’t think most of those people are going to go for that rule, you’d likely have black market agriculture happening, and that hasn’t been working so well for drugs these days. Gonna get turkey laced with fent and shit lol. Good luck with that though!
Well that’s the thing, you’d rather it be willy nilly and the government doesn’t allow that currently. Can’t hunt in cities, can only hunt X amount of deer for conservation purposes, etc. If you’re fine with hunting/butchering (as long as it’s not sold) and think otherwise meat consumption should be illegal that means you think more people should hunt or butcher their own food. This would more aptly be described as “willy nilly” than the much smaller number of current butchers and hunters that people are able to buy from. Frankly it seems less “willy nilly” to have only a small number of farms as big as factories producing all the food for everyone.
Humans don’t feature any of the materials we need to consume as they’re already inside of us, hence we consume the materials from other lifeforms (Yes, that includes plants) who produce the things we lack.
So cannibalism isn’t good. Neither is eating a carnivore.
… What? Humans are made of meat. As far a I’ve read, they’re fairly delicious, too. Eating carnivores is also fine.
Now, if you’re trying to only eat the safest, most energy efficient forms of meat, don’t eat people or carnivores. But just in terms of the nutrients contained within, meat is meat.
Food. A basic necessity. And humans are omnivores.
Your opinions are entirely based on your personal emotional problems and have no rational bearing.
Im plenty critical of militant vegans, but thats a bit unfair. Industrial ranching is a big contributor to climate change, theres a well-reasoned argument I see alot
Yes, but such arguments are misplaced. Their issue is then not with the meat industry but with the current state of the world as a whole. But because animals have a central nervous system, and people love being activists without actually doing anything, they become vegan.
Concrete, the creation of it, and the transportation of it, is probably one of the biggest contributors to climate change. Smart devices, sneakers, t-shirts, and toys, amongst many other things, are created by what is essentially the modern day equivalent to slavery. Many exotic “superfoods” come from third world countries where the local natives can no longer afford to eat it because costs have been driven up, because it all needs to be exported so some blond chick can have it on her toast. Lithium is probably the most important resource right now, yet it’s production of it is highly destructive to the environment. Traditional farming is causing soil fatigue, contamination of ground water, and the destruction of complex ecosystems in place of monocultures, but people hate on GMOs, “chemicals”, and vertical farming.
These are problems that effect our society and our environment that even the most militant vegans make use of on a daily basis. The lifestyle vegans have (the ones we hear about in the news and see in the Internet, not the far flung tribes or humble Buddhist monks) cannot exist without modern society. So militant vegans are hypocrites.
I mean the difference is that concrete has a function and is largely irreplaceable. The argument most vegans make is that animals are not functionally needed in order to fulfill the “food” requirement of living. Concrete is, by large, used for houses and structures which provide shelter, and there are no viable alternatives.
Not for concrete itself, but certainly how it’s produced. The largest contributing factor to the production of concrete is energy and fossil fuels.
As for how functionality applies to meat; meat is incredibly nutrient dense, with certain vitamins, such as B12 or A, being in high quantity compared to other sources, or having certain nutrients simply not found anywhere else, such as taurine, creatine, or carnitine.
To reduce the environmental impact of food, which applies to all food and not just meat, we need to accept the idea of not having excess of everything. We don’t need 5 different cuts of meat from 3 different brands. We don’t need 5 different kinds of apples. We don’t need a whole shopping isle filled with… Goodness knows how many different kinds of cereal.
For sure, but that applies to literally everything - decarbonization of the energy grid/moving away from gas is a huge factor for literally every aspect of life, particularly farming and red meat. The energy involved in creating meat is significantly higher than any other foods, which is why I disagreed with your point. We have an alternative for meat, but there isnt one for concrete. Using it as a comparison is a poor argument.
Arguing that conditionally essential amino acids are not found elsewhere is a misleading argument. In addition to the fact that all of those three can be created by your body, Taurine is found in lentils, a staple of many vegan diets, seaweed can contain creatine, and carnitine can be found in trace amounts in most foods. None of them are as dense as meat, for sure, but there are numerous sources, plus supplements.
Definitely agree with this, but its probably just as hard a sell, and much less feasible to do on an individual level.
Fair point>
They said: anyone
That’s very different from a specific complaint about factory farming and industrial ranching
Humans need their factory meat. Even back in the stone ages
So you’re fine with hunting and small scale agriculture I take it?
I’d be fine with there being a rule that you can only kill/eat what you’ve raised yourself. No selling.
I think that would make a lot of people think twice, if the taste is worth the effort.
The problem there is people in cities could not do it, in many cities it’s illegal or not feasible to raise chickens or goats, or to hunt or even trap.
No one is forcing them to live in a concrete prison.
I mean I agree, I prefer rural. I’m told however that nobody else does and that is why cities exist.
fair
Exactly.
I don’t think most of those people are going to go for that rule, you’d likely have black market agriculture happening, and that hasn’t been working so well for drugs these days. Gonna get turkey laced with fent and shit lol. Good luck with that though!
It could easily be law. I can definitely see governments “revoking” people’s “freedom” to kill animals willy-nilly.
Well that’s the thing, you’d rather it be willy nilly and the government doesn’t allow that currently. Can’t hunt in cities, can only hunt X amount of deer for conservation purposes, etc. If you’re fine with hunting/butchering (as long as it’s not sold) and think otherwise meat consumption should be illegal that means you think more people should hunt or butcher their own food. This would more aptly be described as “willy nilly” than the much smaller number of current butchers and hunters that people are able to buy from. Frankly it seems less “willy nilly” to have only a small number of farms as big as factories producing all the food for everyone.
To each their own I guess.
I agree. The sooner we switch to a partial cannibalistic diet the sooner we can settle this. There, I’ve confused everyone.
No, you’ve just said something else nonsensical:
Humans don’t feature any of the materials we need to consume as they’re already inside of us, hence we consume the materials from other lifeforms (Yes, that includes plants) who produce the things we lack.
So cannibalism isn’t good. Neither is eating a carnivore.
Fuck I love having materials from other lifeforms inside of me
Same
… What? Humans are made of meat. As far a I’ve read, they’re fairly delicious, too. Eating carnivores is also fine.
Now, if you’re trying to only eat the safest, most energy efficient forms of meat, don’t eat people or carnivores. But just in terms of the nutrients contained within, meat is meat.