“But, the phenomenon of animal crackers remains problematic and part of a wider culture of speciesism.”

For my part I find both the mainstreaming of veganism and the rhetoric against it ... symptomatic I suppose and both need a critical reading

I have thought for some time that the people of tomorrow may possibly look back upon our zoos and factory farms with the same degree of saddened horror with which we look back upon numerous instances of our forebears' casual inhumanity towards their fellow humans but I have to say there's an almost entirely nonexistent likelihood that they will view our consumption of animal crackers as a significant factor or symptom of the issue at hand and a bunch of kids will probably laugh a lot at this article when they rediscover it in the year 2136.

the song "animal crackers in my soup" always weirded me out cuz the only animal crackers i've ever encountered have actually been cookies

...And?

I mean, I prefer to dump a handful of Chips Ahoy into my French onion, but to each their own.

https://i.pinimg.com/originals/bb/4b/36/bb4b366abb7c7936a02e3bb48666b91d.jpg

Hypocritical vegans protest animal crackers yet say NOTHING about Count Chocula.

xpost Ha, I just reread that Peanuts collection so I was thinking the same when this thread popped up.

Have to say, the separation of food into permitted and not permitted that is inherent to veganism sort of betrays its deep roots in religious tradition. That and the wanting to live without cruelty, which to me seems like a transcendent desire, one that an actual human can never fulfill in this life.

yeah its often, not always obv, of a piece with a "first do no harm" outlook that ...well ime only pretty well-off ppl or those getting by nicely without jobs can practically manage

On that note. Once upon a time, in the depths of unemployment, I found a purse left on a bus with fifty quid and a phone in it, because yes I did open it. Then I handed it in to the bus driver. Did not take the fifty or the phone. Was left with a lingering sense of shame at having looked in the purse to see if there was anything worth having. You are not supposed to look at other people's stuff and think about nicking it, whatever the context.

I have never quite been able to feel the same genuine, hammering shame over eating food made out of animals. Can certainly see the economic argument about the impact of e.g. cow farming on the environment; but in those cases where veganism says you should feel shame over eating a cheese sandwich ... that's where I start to get suspicious.

On the other hand, people in below the line comments often try to shame vegans for having principles, or for trying to engage with environmental problems, as if these are the worst of follies ... which also incurs my suspicions.

snoopy never struck me as jainist

though he did suffer at the hands of a cat, and hanged out with birds a lot

some ape ex-predators sometimes forget we ourselves were reduced to walking convenience snacks for hundreds of millions of years, it's deep history reparation time and I'm all out of that insipid winter rabbit feed that fucking doesn't taste like bacon.

joeks of course.

but not wrong neither

That and the wanting to live without cruelty, which to me seems like a transcendent desire, one that an actual human can never fulfill in this life.

"telling the truth" and "not being thick" are transcendent desires in this sense. there is a sort of conceited narcissism to ideals and vows but they're useful.

seem to have lost sight of the fact that most people not eating meat will never be as well-off as anyone on ilx, and for lots of ppl a plant-based diet is a necessity rather than a conceit. by 'lots of ppl' I mean humanity as a whole, yeah

The environmental problems that are caused by a human diet that includes animal products shares the same root cause as all other environmental problems, including, but not limited to pollution, extinction, and climate change: it's overpopulation and the accompanying appropriation of natural resources by an ever-growing number of humans. Veganism is at best a second or third order solution that may ameliorate, but cannot solve the problem. That requires a more radical approach.

why improve when you can die? all hail the first order.

I'm planning on dying.

"telling the truth" and "not being thick" are transcendent desires in this sense. there is a sort of conceited narcissism to ideals and vows but they're useful.

Although it's possible to retain an awareness of one's self as a thick liar, whilst attempting to be intelligent and tell the truth; indeed retaining that awareness is arguably crucial to any truth seeking project. I agree with you about the usefulness of ideals, but their usefulness (or even just their inevitability?) doesn't always let them off the hook.

seem to have lost sight of the fact that most people not eating meat will never be as well-off as anyone on ilx, and for lots of ppl a plant-based diet is a necessity rather than a conceit. by 'lots of ppl' I mean humanity as a whole, yeah

Like arranged marriages, high rates of child mortality, and trepanning with rocks? Obviously those are all more or less malignant, whereas a plant based diet can be benign, controversial missing vitamins aside, but they are still necessities at certain levels of poverty and I wonder how much moral glamour necessity has when seen in full.

what hook?

there is no q of glamour, i was just pointing out that not eating meat is not an abnormal phenomenon that requires special consideration

might want to change "forced" for "arranged" there cardamon

Words matter, and as our understanding of social justice evolves, our language evolves along with it. Here’s how to remove speciesism from your daily conversations. pic.twitter.com/o67EbBA7H4

— PETA (@peta) December 4, 2018

haha, perfect

Speciesism is such an absurd concept. Purest sophistry.

Like. You don’t even need “speciesism” as a concept to decide it’s immoral to eat animals! It’s a superfluous concept Peter effin Singer invented so he could trick a few more undergrads into thinking they are racist for eating hot dogs.

Basically I find any suggestion that nonhuman animals are interchangeable with humans as moral subjects to be offensive and also wrong.

so do i but possibly for a different reason, that our framework of moral subjectivity is a form of cruelty we should only inflict on ourselves

i don't really think that just saying stuff.

also i really admire my vegan roommate, he never says anything about anyone else's diet.

Yeah most vegans don’t bc most vegans like most people aren’t intrusive and judgmental

i tend toward both those qualities so i'm sure i'd be an insufferable vegan.

i should start evangelizing about the moral imperative of vasectomies irl

It's weird to actively judge people based on what they decide is the kind of food they prefer to eat. (Well, maybe apart from cannibalism, but that's a very delicate subject.) This weirdness applies equally to judging vegans harshly simply for being vegans and to vegans judging omnivores harshly simply for being omnivores.

Go with God

Well, maybe apart from cannibalism, but that's a very delicate subject.

and a very delicate prep job

HAHA

the best thing about being vegan is i feel no guilt about calling my dogs shitheads to their face bc hey at least im not eating them

now before you precious dog lovers get up in arms about that, just remember that my dogs are shitheads

cats rule dogs drool

cats are also bad

It's weird to actively judge people based on what they decide is the kind of food they prefer to eat.

Unless they crack open a plastic container of something vile-smelling on public transportation. Then you can judge away.

i have a conservative friend who voted for evan mcmullin last election not trump but often we debate trump and the GOP because he argues that trump is neither explicitly, not obviously implicitly, racist and that the left uses idpol to discredit right-wing arguments without examining them on the merits etc aka a guy ilx would really enjoy. He's very bright so it's enjoyable to argue with him. Also, he believes that almost all moral issues are debatable but the one he thinks has the least credibility is the idea that humans can eat animals. He a staunch (tho not generally evangelizing) vegan, no leather, no eggs, etc. Last night we were chatting (bc I sent him that PETA tweet), and I argued that human capacity for morality or philosophy suggested that we're qualitatively different from the animals that we eat. He asked me if that means we can eat very young children. I argued that very young children have the potential to develop into humans who can think morally, but then he argued that fetuses can do the same and I'm pro choice. Anyway the conversation branched from there but I just wanted to introduce you all to my deep thinking hardcore vegan moderate Republican friend. He used to be a progressive when he was younger (he's in his late 40s now), and he says he once went to a liberal campus meeting where they were talking about the issues of the day (apartheid, civil rights, etc) and he raised animal rights and they blew him off and he feels like that's bc it was the one time they were forced to contend with their own oppressiveness. Anyway, I love eating meat it tastes great and the Bible says I can do it so I'm not worrying about it to much from a moral perspective, tho from a climate perspective as mentioned upthread animal farming does concern me. And it seems to be awfully cruel - we should be able to farm animals and not treat them like victims in a Saw flick.

nor* obviously

It's kind of miraculous that human beings are ever able to hold two or more ideas that don't inherently contradict one another. I mean, it doesn't happen often, but it's really something to behold when it does.

reading yr posts i am often struck with amazement that you can hold even one idea

the argument for human exceptionalism is normally based on consciousness rather than any particular intellectual tradition bc they're not v old old and most ppl before and since know little to nothing about them. modern western society has weird hangups and ideas around age, childhood & adulthood but what mordy's friend says abt kids seems obviously true. the sort of humanity ppl think of as being exceptional is transient, mutable and dynamic, ppl achieve and express it in different degrees, inconsistently and sometimes not really at all.

saying that it's only bad for humans to eat animals seems like another form of exceptionalism unless you condemn all carnivores and long for some pre-cambrian, prelapsarian idyll.

-old, ho hum, you get the idea

I'll confirm after I've returned from the hospital but I'm pretty sure that was a third-degree burn u just inflicted on me Mordy.

what I want to know is whether we're still allowed to wax the dolphin any more

he says he once went to a liberal campus meeting where they were talking about the issues of the day (apartheid, civil rights, etc) and he raised animal rights and they blew him off and he feels like that's bc it was the one time they were forced to contend with their own oppressiveness

This is hilarious.

did they even discriminate between animals of difft color/gender or was it all one big "not all hoomanz" handwave

intersectional veganism or bust

do any noninsured e.r. bills get paid though?

^^^

the "I'm a very responsible person" argument completely fails when you realize insurance (in the ideal case, admittedly our insurance system is really broken) is there for the cases where you'd really have no way to pay. like, surprise! you're the one 35 year old in hundreds of thousands who has some weird cancer and treating it costs $$$

or you get hit by a car and no one can find the driver, or... really a million possibilities