Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Do angry vegans turn you against going vegan?

Unseasoned, unadulterated meat "doesn't taste good" and apparently this is proved by the fact that a plate of plain boiled chicken or beef would be pretty rank. Boiling is arguably the worst way to cook most foods (maybe not eggs, rice or noodles) ... So why boiled? Did early humans first cook meat by boiling it? I bet they didn't, I bet they cooked it on a fire.

Also as mentioned, lifelong lactase production tells us we may choose to adopt a vegan diet but it's not technically natural for anyone who isn't lactose intolerant. A huge swathe of humanity has quite naturally evolved to digest milk as adults. We can only pretend this isn't the case
 
gentlegreen said:
And enjoy the fat and cholesterol baggage that goes with it.

Why would you want to drink milk from a nutritional point of view ?
Click to expand...
The point is, from my pov, that appeals to evolution are useless. There are enough evolved adaptations to meat/dairy eating to show that humans have evolved to be adaptable in our diets. We are not obligate omnivores but we are omnivores.

Also evolution is a funny, often messy, thing, because it can only work to change things from where they are - if you looked at the guts of a panda bear, you would be convinced it was mostly a carnivore. But no, it eats almost entirely bamboo shoots and leaves, most of which it fails to digest. Does that mean it's not a 'natural bamboo eater'? Not a bit of it - it even has an extra 'thumb' to hold bamboo with, and it has found for itself a niche with a low-energy lifestyle that allowed it to sit all day munching bamboo. Until humans came along and started chopping the bamboo down...
 
Of course the bottom line with evolution is that it only needs to get us to reproductive age + child nurturing.
Personally I want to be healthy into my 90s.
 
littlebabyjesus said:
As for not salivating at the prospect of a kill, I also don't salivate upon seeing a field of wheat. Doesn't stop me enjoying a slice of toast.
Click to expand...

If you put butter , dairy spread , cheese or even honey on that slice of toast ...much less dip it in an egg..you're complicit in a holocaust and have no right to live according to some of these people . Such as this intolerant vegan head the ball , taken down brilliantly by the flippin brilliant Maxim Bady . There are vegan activists out there who believe even their own family members deserve to be put to death for not joining in with this tiny dietary fad . It's insane !!


Eta..couple of pics of animal cruelty in that one so be advised .

 
Last edited:
Spymaster said:
It's amusing but he has managed to find the biggest fucktwat of a vegan on the planet, tbf.
Click to expand...
It contains a theme that is common to a lot of this, though. If you eat meat, it must mean you haven't thought about this properly - again and again on these threads both you and I are accused of not having thought it through, or we're accused by the likes of ddraig of shitstirring or vegan-baiting, something I never do. The truth is rather the opposite - we turn up on these threads precisely because we do care about animal welfare, we just don't care about it in the correct way.

So, if you have thought about things properly and still eat meat, then you are evil. That's a common thread even to JeffRobinson's attitude - if you care about animals you should be vegan, implying that if you eat meat and are aware of the circumstances, then you don't care about animals. It's an absolute moral category, and carrying that category to its logical conclusion takes you to this place, where you think 99 per cent of your fellow humans are either ignorant or evil. It's fundamentalism.
 
littlebabyjesus said:
It contains a theme that is common to a lot of this, though. If you eat meat, it must mean you haven't thought about this properly - again and again on these threads both you and I are accused of not having thought it through, or we're accused by the likes of ddraig of shitstirring or vegan-baiting, something I never do. The truth is rather the opposite - we turn up on these threads precisely because we do care about animal welfare, we just don't care about it in the correct way.
Click to expand...
Pah, ddraig doesn't count, he's just a blowhard sheep. I don't think I've ever seen him post anything actually worth reading relating to veganism or animal welfare. He's just a sideline sniper. Always has been. Truth be told, I have wound him up on occasions but there's also been worthwhile debate with one or two of the others but I tend to lose interest in sensible discussion and start taking the piss when they wheel out the hyperbole; murdering animals, secretion consuming, and shit like that. :facepalm:

And of course, none of them, ever, have been able to explain what's morally bankrupt about eating animals.
 
Last edited:
There's a big old debate to be had, for sure, regarding human impact on the planet. Setting aside the 'murder' of individual animals, we're wiping out whole species by the thousand at the moment. Reducing meat consumption and changing meat production processes needs to be a part of that discussion. Do animal rights fundamentalists help the process or hinder it? Given that we need broad agreement to make the system changes needed, my judgement is that they hinder it, with their refusal to even contemplate making common cause with meat-eaters who want to change things.
 
I think it's just unrealistic to expect this conversation to ever be rational and logical really. Unless you are working from a resources and land use kind of perspective, if you're motivated by concern for the suffering of animals, its going to be more emotion than logic every time isn't it. Me for instance I won't eat octopuses since I happened to meet one and was really impressed, not going to pretend that makes sense though.
 
bimble said:
I think it's just unrealistic to expect this conversation to ever be rational and logical really. Unless you are working from a resources and land use kind of perspective, if you're motivated by concern for the suffering of animals, its going to be more emotion than logic every time isn't it. Me for instance I won't eat octopuses since I happened to meet one and was really impressed, not going to pretend that makes sense though.
Click to expand...

Where were you when you met Mr Pus?
 
bimble said:
I learned to dive last year ( in Bali). It was not like I just saw the octopus it really was a meeting of two creatures feeling, - it looked right back at me, went on for ages. Then it moved off really slow and I followed it, as it changed colour and shape and texture. Bloody amazing things, they are.
Click to expand...

:cool:


They'll wrap themselves around your arm if you hold it out to them.
 
littlebabyjesus said:
There's a big old debate to be had, for sure, regarding human impact on the planet. Setting aside the 'murder' of individual animals, we're wiping out whole species by the thousand at the moment. Reducing meat consumption and changing meat production processes needs to be a part of that discussion. Do animal rights fundamentalists help the process or hinder it? Given that we need broad agreement to make the system changes needed, my judgement is that they hinder it, with their refusal to even contemplate making common cause with meat-eaters who want to change things.
Click to expand...
Of course they hinder it because they don't allow for it. Meat is "murder". The end.
 
Last edited:
bimble said:
I think it's just unrealistic to expect this conversation to ever be rational and logical really. Unless you are working from a resources and land use kind of perspective, if you're motivated by concern for the suffering of animals, its going to be more emotion than logic every time isn't it. Me for instance I won't eat octopuses since I happened to meet one and was really impressed, not going to pretend that makes sense though.
Click to expand...
I agree, although we can't even agree on what is suffering. I think that's a big part of the problem. If an animal lives a decent life then one day has a bolt fired through its brain that knocks out its consciousness instantly, probably before it can even feel anything at all, did it suffer? My answer would be 'no', but those who would grant it a right to life would say 'yes' because it has had its life ended.
 
looks at all the experts!!
happy that you've shut this down with your pathetic postings??
like misogynists on feminist threads
 
mojo pixy said:
Re. Octopuses, I don't think relative intelligence shouldn't even be an issue wrt animal rights. It's sentience that matters, ability to suffer. Discriminating by intelligence is a step down a very dodgy road.
Click to expand...
I dunno about that. A fair few neuroscientists today don't dismiss the idea that insects are conscious. There seems little reason to think they're not and some reasons to think that they may be. The ability to suffer may very well be rather widespread.

I do think this is a tricky subject, and my position is as illogical as any - I wouldn't eat a whale or an elephant, for instance, not that I've ever had the chance - but I'm not sure drawing a moral equivalence between all animals that can suffer is possible either.
 
Fffs

It's octopi .

Murdering all these animals is no justification for murdering the Queens whilst one is at it .

Eta

Just checked it and I'm wrong and you were right .

As you were .
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

hash tag
Veganism going out of fashion
2 3
Replies
70
Views
3K
Mrs Miggins
Mrs Miggins
ElizabethofYork
Men’s violence against women and girls is a national emergency
34 35 36 37 38
Replies
1K
Views
39K
Dystopiary
Dystopiary
WhyLikeThis
James Cleverly’s unpleasant turn of phrase
3 4 5 6 7
Replies
200
Views
15K
Silas Loom
Silas Loom
savoloysam
  • Poll
The creeping roll out of facial recognition. Are you for or against?
2
Replies
55
Views
2K
8ball
8ball
hash tag
Sainsbury's are going down the pan
2 3
Replies
60
Views
3K
cesare
cesare
Back
Top Bottom