• stoicmaverick@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 months ago

      I really don’t think it’s hate, in the classic sense. I think most of it is sort of a hamarotic response that’s made possible by the fact that these forums show up in everybody’s feed, and given that vegans typically have negative views on the eating practices of the rest of the world, can be seen referring to those people as they do in private. As you seem to be insinuating, it feels-bad-man to have your lifestyle casually attacked, and nearly always elicits retaliation because humans.

      I feel like a lot of it is a matter of terminology. For instance, using the word “omnivore” instead of “carnist”, or “Bovine Matchmaker”, instead of “Animal Rapist”.

      • MagicShel@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        5 months ago

        All of this. I just blocked the sub. It’s not in my interest to raise my blood pressure over what a bunch of chuckle fucks think of my choices. It’s fucking weird the pejoratives they invent. Carnist? That’s cool, like an artist. Whatever. They can live in their world and I’ll stay out of it. They aren’t affecting me.

    • redisdead@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 months ago

      Allegedly carnist

      So, someone sane.

      If you think a cat can be vegan, please never own a cat.

            • commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              5 months ago

              your version of the story leaves out some important facts like it doesn’t matter whether you put it in your cart because it’s already dead, and the person who killed it was already paid by somebody who wasn’t you.

              • Floey@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                5 months ago

                That is pretty irrelevant. You purchasing the product signals a certain demand for it, that demand will help determine how much product is requested in the future, there is a cascading effect all the way up the supply chain. Sure an additional chicken might not be bred just because you purchased a chicken, it’s way more abstract than that. Maybe if a hundred more chickens are bought then a hundred more chickens will be bred as replacements plus extra to account for growth and failed product (dead or sick chickens). And if you were one of the hundred people who purchased a chicken you can be seen as one hundredth responsible for at least a hundred chickens which is the same as being responsible for the 1+ chicken. Do you think if nobody purchased chickens that they would just keep stocking the shelves?

                • commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  5 months ago

                  Do you think if nobody purchased chickens that they would just keep stocking the shelves?

                  do you have a plan to get no one to purchase chickens?

                  • Floey@lemm.ee
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    0
                    ·
                    5 months ago

                    That’s not important. I was illustrating that clearly if nobody ate chicken nobody would harvest chickens for food. Unless you think that the same amount of chickens will be harvested until the very last human gives up chicken then you have to acknowledge that the individual consumer does make a difference.