1213
I love children's sense of humour
(lemmy.dbzer0.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 04 Oct 2024
1213 points (97.5% liked)
Lemmy Shitpost
26755 readers
1819 users here now
Welcome to Lemmy Shitpost. Here you can shitpost to your hearts content.
Anything and everything goes. Memes, Jokes, Vents and Banter. Though we still have to comply with lemmy.world instance rules. So behave!
Rules:
1. Be Respectful
Refrain from using harmful language pertaining to a protected characteristic: e.g. race, gender, sexuality, disability or religion.
Refrain from being argumentative when responding or commenting to posts/replies. Personal attacks are not welcome here.
...
2. No Illegal Content
Content that violates the law. Any post/comment found to be in breach of common law will be removed and given to the authorities if required.
That means:
-No promoting violence/threats against any individuals
-No CSA content or Revenge Porn
-No sharing private/personal information (Doxxing)
...
3. No Spam
Posting the same post, no matter the intent is against the rules.
-If you have posted content, please refrain from re-posting said content within this community.
-Do not spam posts with intent to harass, annoy, bully, advertise, scam or harm this community.
-No posting Scams/Advertisements/Phishing Links/IP Grabbers
-No Bots, Bots will be banned from the community.
...
4. No Porn/Explicit
Content
-Do not post explicit content. Lemmy.World is not the instance for NSFW content.
-Do not post Gore or Shock Content.
...
5. No Enciting Harassment,
Brigading, Doxxing or Witch Hunts
-Do not Brigade other Communities
-No calls to action against other communities/users within Lemmy or outside of Lemmy.
-No Witch Hunts against users/communities.
-No content that harasses members within or outside of the community.
...
6. NSFW should be behind NSFW tags.
-Content that is NSFW should be behind NSFW tags.
-Content that might be distressing should be kept behind NSFW tags.
...
If you see content that is a breach of the rules, please flag and report the comment and a moderator will take action where they can.
Also check out:
Partnered Communities:
1.Memes
10.LinuxMemes (Linux themed memes)
Reach out to
All communities included on the sidebar are to be made in compliance with the instance rules. Striker
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Heheh, this shitpost triggers me.
My mom was forcing us a macrobiotic diet back in the day. We were strictly vegan, although fish is allowed in that diet, some vegetables like patatoes and tomatoes are not. Hardcore vegans…
My school lunch was mostly sushi with a filling of fermented prune called umeboshi, or tempeh and seaweeds, pumpkin or rice balls and sesame seeds. We were underfed, yellow flaky skin because of the overdose of carotene and you see everyone around you in school eating candy, fries, meat and what not while also taking the piss at you for being different and stinking of that diet.
At dinner I use to bury my Iziki seaweed in the plant pot because I just couldn't swallow that shit without gagging. If I did not behave mom would go…”you're behaviour is to yang, next two weeks on a yin diet”. Disgusting.
By the age of 12, me and my sister got into stealing money from our parents real quick to buy normal or fast food, annoying the guy at the snackbar on wheels for free fries, shoplifting and shit. Yeah, good times.
that's why i hate religious restrictions
Yes I agree.
Not only the diet, but the whole cult around it. Faith healers, homeopathy, people chewing on brown riceballs for an hour counting how many chews they had so they can show off how far they are on their macrobiotic spiritual journey. “You gotta chew your seaweed at least a 100 times”. These mf’s should not be around kids or have any (yes I would not exist). I am not on speaking terms and won't open the door for my parents, get fucked.
That is disturbing. Cultish.
Thats cause it is, theres a link between vegan new age bullshit (and I aint talking about your average neo pagan) and cults. Basically back in the 1800s you started seeing new cults form with weird dietary restrictions, the most well known example is Mormons. As time went on you got groups like the Seventh day Adventists and also a sprouting of eugenicists who supported veganism. Then after WW2 a lot of it was repackaged and got mixed in with the holy rollers, new agers, and general woo bullshit by the late 50s going into the sixties.
The current form is a mildly modsrnized versionsof the 1950s BS going into today. There is also some random other shit having to do with prohibition for the 1800s part pf the movement hence Mormons but the links in general are odd.
Also I aint saying this about all vegans, veganism has existed for millenia im only talking about the woo woo bullshit types. Ya know the ones.
What dietary restrictions do Mormons have?
No alcohol, I was using them as an illustration of the trend. It started out with prohibition tendencies back in the 1800s and evolved from there.
Aaah ok. It’s pretty run of the mill compared to (gestures broadly) the rest of their practices and beliefs.
Yeah it was just a patern I recognized, a lot of the cults from the same era juat went farther. First it started with alcohol then it moved on to caffeine, and before ya know it their banning spices and meat.
Don't confuse that with veganism though
Isn't veganism essentially a religious belief? Even if not, it is equally illogical.
No. It seems like you don't know what veganism is. It's a philosophical stance and therefore completely different to any religion. It's based n logical arguments. If you don't like the suffering of animals and when they're harmed without any necessity, it's very likely that your core moral beliefs are the same as of any vegan.
It is logical. That's why nobody can argue with the logic of the core arguments.
I'm curious. how is it illogical for you?
Although I entirely agree with the spirit of your point I'd like to add a long-winded side-note (essentially "and also", not "but"). I guess when treated as a "title" Veganism is an inherently philosophical stance, but many conflate "Veganism" with "Having A Strictly Vegan Diet/Lifestyle" so my comment is for those people. Some who identify with the latter of the two (like myself) may be as such - or at least have become as such - for various other "logical reasons". In the early-90s I inadvertantly became "mostly vegetarian, sometimes pescaterian" due to living with a vegetarian girlfriend. Working in an extremely physically strenuous career, and also coming from a childhood littered with various unexplainable health "issues", I noticed (with hindsight) huge and surprising physiological benefits from that change. Due to that, and reading about how fundamental human classifying parameters are at the very herbivorous end of the spectrum (nails not claws, very long intestines, low-acidity digestive system which struggles to break down harder animal cell-walls in food, sweating through skin not tongue, mostly non-canine teeth, not having predatory close-set eyes, etc), I proceeded within a year to full vegetarianism - this time consciously. It took years to overcome the n00b mistakes (lack of nutritional knowledge, cooking skills, motivation) that usually eventually turn people back off vegetarianism, and at that point as some of the "fog of war" cleared I noticed a few lingering "issues" from my youth. I had researched food intolerances so did a test to find I was moderately intolerant to 3 types of meat and a few other odd things, and more importantly strongly intolerant to milk (and milk products). The followup consultant told me such a strong reaction indicates all animal-milk would be problematic, not just cow's. That prompted going vegan in about 2013, with such a dramatic further health-improvement I had to tell myself not to obsess with "if only I'd known this 30 years ago". Even though I have since become increasingly "philosophically vegan" through a kind of mental osmosis, the point I want to make here is that was really post-hoc, as a side-effect. My original drivers were "purely by accident, then conscious but for functional reasons". These days - nearly 30 years after going vegetarian and more than 10 years after going vegan - I just do some resistance/weight-training each morning yet I'm far more healthy and "built" than I ever was throughout an effectively "acrobatic" career (even when training for that career 45hrs/week and eating half-kilo mincemeat-based meals as a teenager), even though I ended that career years ago. Those are also very "logical reasons" in addition to the usual "logical ethical vegan reasons regarding treatment of animals", as also are the "logical ecological reasons" too (particularly the extreme amount of deforestation that is done to create grazing land for livestock).
It is completly illogical and it tries to impose unnatural limitations - you know, like religions do.
I'm not a vegan - but we are omnivores, we can eat plants. There is nothing unnatural about it. Let alone if you compare it to our modern 'normal' food, which is chock full of extra sugar, extra fat, extra protein, extra artificial additives like preservatives, sweeteners, and what not. It's also factual that you can get more energy out of directly consuming plant material than eating an animal that consumed said plant material. If you take the biggest offenders for that, cows. You need 8 kg of feed for them to produce a kg of meat, this is known as it's feed conversion ratio (source). Other animals (Like chicken and fish) are better, but a ration below 1 is essentially impossible.
I like the taste of meat as much as the next (average) person, but vegans do have a factual basis for their stance. But non-vegans rebuttal to that is realistically just "I don't want to give up meat because I like it" not "the facts aren't on your side." - Lets be honest about that.
Yup, precisely, there is nothing unnatural about omnivores eating plants and meat. It is an attempt to restrict part of this normal for omnivores diet which is unnatural and this is what religions do. Thus my point.
You can eat shit if you want, it won't kill you. There's tribes in Greenland that eat bird poop as a delicacy. So it must be natural! Or how about snails, grasshoppers, worms, crickets? All edible, even good. All things an omnivore can and do consume at time. You should stop being so unnatural and cutting all of these things out of your diet.
Oh, you won't? Guess that makes you a religious believer now. C'mon man, you must be trying to be dense on purpose.
Are you really that dense?
Shame you're not willing to see the unreasonableness in yourself. Now you have to go to the shop to buy some crickets to avoid being seen as a hypocrite.
More religious zealot talk, carry on, it is highly amusing 🤣
Pointing out hypocrisy using logical arguments is religious zealot talk?
I thought appealing to "common sense" or "nature" is what religious zealot do more often.
I appreciate the back up, but with the rare sighting of an organism that is able to consume downvotes and irrationality for a living, I don't think it's worth your (or anyone's) time trying to convince them to change to an 'unnatural' diet ^^
I'm sure they won't change, I'm still interested in this strange creature that seems to form positions based on gut feeling.
Maybe I'll find out they were beaten by an evil vegan step-uncle for most their life or something, never know!
No, sweetheart. Calling eating meat a "murder" and claiming veganism has nothing to do with religious zealousy in one breath is a rare example of either shouting hypocrisy or sheer stupidity. 🤣
Sort of like the sheer stupidity of grouping veganism with another group you already despise, which is apparently religious people.
Throw as much shit as you want, you've done nothing to prove your position, unless you are trying to prove that some people are dumb enough to think vegans are inconsistent.
Or perhaps some vegans are too dumb to understand how their beliefs are similar to religions and how zealous they are 😂
Not a single person here tried to convert you or change your eating habits.
You got extremely triggered at the word vegan, to the point I'm honestly trying to figure what experience you had with veganism that caused this. Were you forced to be a vegetarian as a kid or something?
Or its just shit posting, which I don't mind.
Can you read, sweetheart?
What would you like me to read sugar?
The same comments you are replying to. Slowly.
Want me to go slower for you?
I'm glad you found a natural computer to post with from inside your natural house. Seeing your dogshit opinions is funny.
Appeals to nature are not compelling because all of human progress and civilisation is built upon using technology to surpass nature. Just about everything we interact with in modern society isn't natural, why would we think that your idea of humans natural diet would be the ideal?
Veganism is an ethical stance, not religious. There are plenty of ethical stance that place restrictions on human behaviour that I'm sure you are totally on with, like when society tells you not to steal from or murder people. Are you prepared to argue against ethics as a whole?
Are you a little bit slow? Genuine question.
My question was how it's illogical to you and your answer is "it's completely illogical"?
Like, how hard is it to write down a simple sentence in which you explain why it's illogical!?
I can do you a favour and already unfold it: The vegan argument is that unnecessary harm towards animals should be avoided when it's "possible and practical", like when you live in a modern society, you don't need to buy leather clothes or eat meat, there is no necessity to do so because of the incredible amount of alternatives, where no animal needs to be killed nor harmed.
To say thats illogical therefore means that you see no logic in avoiding unnecessary harm towards animals. So please, just start your response like this:
"I don't see how it's logical that we should avoid unnecessary harm towards animals, because...."
It is illogical to impose limitations on what humans can it, apart from perhaps health reasons (allergies etc.).
Religions do that. You cannot eat pork/beef etc, depending on the religion. Vegans also do that and it is equally moronic.
Well, I made it simple for you and you still totally fail at responding to the point. So you just want to talk about limitations as if the reasons behind it are not relevant? By that logic, why do you limit yourself on eating pets? Why do you limit yourself on eating humans? I assume that the reason of why you don't eat them are relevant? So why don't you read once again which reason was giving for the circumstance that vegans don't consume animal prodcuts
If you fail to adress how the reason behind it is illogical, then I fear you're not educated enough in terms of discussion and in terms of the topic that is discussed here.
One last time: The reason why vegans stop consuming any animal products and why they don't support any other kind of animal exploitation is that it's not necessary, and if you're against animal abuse, then you should ask yourself why you still pay for it.
As I mentioned before, the whole vegan argument is about logic. I fear that your problem is not that you just can't understand logic, it's that you're ignorant. You showed that very clearly by now
It would be hard to make a conclusion that is even more dumb than what you just said. Again, the reason of why vegans refuse to pay for any animal products is because they can easily buy alternatives which don't involve the exploitation and killing of animals. It's therefore not necessary to pay for animals to be harmed and killed. If there is no necessity for an animal to be harmed and killed, then paying for exactly that is in fact immoral.
You don't care about your own immoral actions, which is what many people do, but what makes you extraordinary "special" is how you try to make vegan look bad by preaching that their logic is flawed - while the reason that you state in regard to that are without any logic. The irony.
The sad part is that, people like you are the ones that then claim vegans are bad people while all you do is to spread nonsense about them and leave toxic responses where you fail to discuss the main arguments in a constructive manner.
Now read again. Slowly.
And?
And perhaps you will begin to understand, if you read it slowly. Couple of times.
Sorry but I don't see what you're talking about. I explained in detail how you fail to respond to the core argument. Now you try to be a clown and I don't have time for that. I thought there is a chance that you'd respond to the logic that you call flawed, but I see you won't do that.
It's hard to admit that you're wrong, I know that, but it's better than refusing to listen to the arguments per se and to not learn anything (therefore continue to be stupid)
If you choose the latter, do so, but don't go on my nerves with these infantile responses. Don't bother answering, you're blocked
Read again. Slowly.