Pickman's model
Starry Wisdom
It's a pity after all the films he's directed that he's still just an actor
Opinion: "The End of Meat Is Here" - NY Times
- Thread starter editor
- Start date
It's a pity after all the films he's directed that he's still just an actor
editor
hiraethified
It's such a filthy fucking industry:
www.theguardian.com
UK retailers blocking moves to end the killing of day-old male chicks
While France and Germany have introduced bans, Britain continues to slaughter 29 million unwanted chicks every year
Karl Masks
Birds Angel Delight
And for those people that struggle with their health on a vegan diet?
ddraig
kicking against the pricks...
What whattaboutery is this?
Karl Masks
Birds Angel Delight
From what? I don't think anyone disputes that we have a deeply problematic food industry. If he wants peeps to go vegan, he's going to need to answer that question because many people do not do well after cutting animal products from their lives entirely.
editor
hiraethified
I fear it's the best he can manage.
editor
hiraethified
Who wants "peeps to go vegan"?
ddraig
kicking against the pricks...
It's an opinion article, and why do you think you get to call the shots?
There are plenty of people who do very well and are healthier going vegan.
As well as many many many people who eat meat who do not do well at all
How about asking yourself why you are so bothered by vegans and veganism
souljacker
innit
Does that even happen? What are they missing from their diet that they can't get elsewhere?
Karl Masks
Birds Angel Delight
So they say. Some will certainly be poor diet, others will be lying, but I don't believe it's a suitable choice for everyone which, I assume, is the goal of vegan activists.
Funky_monks
Neo-Rustic
I'm not bothered by veganism - I dunno if the other chap is.
If you don't want to eat animals, its fine by me - I've grown crops as well as animals and certainly don't see arable/horticulture as "the enemy".
What I will argue against is bullshit made up to make people feel better about themselves such as "being vegan is intrinsically better for the environment", "veganism is cruelty free" - those things (especially the latter) could only be invented by people who had absolutely no knowledge of food and farming whatsoever.
And therein likes the crux of it - I want people to be engaged with where their food comes from/how it is produced - I've said on this thread several times that people should visit farms (arable and livestock, lots are mixed), and that Ive been in abattoirs and other people should too.
Food is so massively important and it worries me how many people just aren't engaged with it and therefore how big processors can manipulate them in to thinking stuff is healthy/natural (and this goes for meat products as well as processed meat substitutes.
I also find it baffling how the vegan/vege perspective is sold as being wholesale "left wing" (being somebody at odds with lots of farmers for being so) when quite clearly there's a lot of very right wing people promoting some of the above tropes - Lord Deben has been mentioned in this thread, people like to quote the Goldsmiths, George Monbiot, although proclaiming to be leftish, is very privelidged/public school/Tory MP/counsellor parents.
Its part of the reason that I attempted to bring Vandana Shiva in to the conversation - very much pro peasant farmers, award winning environmentalist, has a perspective from the indian subcontinent etc. Yet, these (and other) people seem to be scoffed at.
If you don't want to eat animals, its fine by me - I've grown crops as well as animals and certainly don't see arable/horticulture as "the enemy".
What I will argue against is bullshit made up to make people feel better about themselves such as "being vegan is intrinsically better for the environment", "veganism is cruelty free" - those things (especially the latter) could only be invented by people who had absolutely no knowledge of food and farming whatsoever.
And therein likes the crux of it - I want people to be engaged with where their food comes from/how it is produced - I've said on this thread several times that people should visit farms (arable and livestock, lots are mixed), and that Ive been in abattoirs and other people should too.
Food is so massively important and it worries me how many people just aren't engaged with it and therefore how big processors can manipulate them in to thinking stuff is healthy/natural (and this goes for meat products as well as processed meat substitutes.
I also find it baffling how the vegan/vege perspective is sold as being wholesale "left wing" (being somebody at odds with lots of farmers for being so) when quite clearly there's a lot of very right wing people promoting some of the above tropes - Lord Deben has been mentioned in this thread, people like to quote the Goldsmiths, George Monbiot, although proclaiming to be leftish, is very privelidged/public school/Tory MP/counsellor parents.
Its part of the reason that I attempted to bring Vandana Shiva in to the conversation - very much pro peasant farmers, award winning environmentalist, has a perspective from the indian subcontinent etc. Yet, these (and other) people seem to be scoffed at.
Karl Masks
Birds Angel Delight
I think if anyone's 'bothered' it'd be you given your attitude thus far. But what bothers me isn't the choice. I'm happy for people to have the choice. I object to the macho bullying of vegans that happens, all reinforced by clowns like Jordan Petersen and his grifting offspring.
However to answer your question I am bothered by my choices being curtailed by people that believe they know best for my diet. While I object to bullying of vegans, I also object to vegans that themselves engage in bullying having been on the receiving end of it myself. I did not care for it, found it deeply unpleasant and it demonstrated to me that tthere is never going to be any genuine compromise.
beesonthewhatnow
going deaf for a living
I don’t think they’ve been dismissed on a whim at all. Funky_monks appears to have gone to great lengths to try and get across a key point - it’s complicated with no easy one size fits all solution.
“Eat less meat”. I don’t think anyone is really disputing that. What you/others seem to be dismissing are the hugely difficult implications of that.
ddraig
kicking against the pricks...
In what way are your "choices being curtailed"??? Some proper fragility showing there
I'm sorry change threatens you and your comfy world so much, get with it or blinker it out I guess!
Oh and it doesn't matter if you're happy for people to be vegan
HTH
Karl Masks
Birds Angel Delight
My choices aren't curtailed currently. They would be, by definition, if vegans were able to effect the change they claim to want. Do you disagree?
In what way are your "choices being curtailed"??? Some proper fragility showing there
I'm sorry change threatens you and your comfy world so much, get with it or blinker it out I guess!
Oh and it doesn't matter if you're happy for people to be vegan
HTH
Why do you engage in intellectual dishonesty? I was referring to a very specific instance of change, and you reframe that to be insulting.
It should matter that I'm happy for people to be vegan in that it should matter, if you're a vegan, that your way of life, which is what veganism is, is deemed acceptable. Would you rather I was unhappy about it?
souljacker
innit
Why not? There's a few reasons, IMO, to shun a vegan diet but 'it will make you ill' isn't one. Especially when you consider the many ways a meat based diet can be problematic for the body.
ddraig
kicking against the pricks...
So you're happy for people to be vegan but not too many people as your poor selfish choices will be curtailed, gotcha! ace logic there
You are clearly unhappy about it from your posts so why pretend otherwise?!
I don't give a fuck whether you are happy or unhappy if i'm vegan, I do give a fuck when you and others are doing down my choices and looking for any tiny thing to attack
JimW
支那暗杀团
Wait til you see how rampant climate chaos restricts your choices.
SpookyFrank
A cheap source of teeth for aquarium gravel
But some people need meat to be healthy for some unspecified reason.
- OK, but are you in that category? Or are you using those people as an excuse to keep eating meat because that's what you want to do.
But some people rely on fishing to make a living.
- OK, but do you rely on fishing to make a living? Or are you using those people as an excuse to keep eating fish because that's what you want to do. Do you give a shit about the fact many people who fish for a living will be out of business for good in years, not decades unless fishing is made more sustainable?
But growing plants also involves harm to animals.
- OK, but does growing plants require the slaughter of 30 million newborn chicks in the UK alone?
Any more for any more?
- OK, but are you in that category? Or are you using those people as an excuse to keep eating meat because that's what you want to do.
But some people rely on fishing to make a living.
- OK, but do you rely on fishing to make a living? Or are you using those people as an excuse to keep eating fish because that's what you want to do. Do you give a shit about the fact many people who fish for a living will be out of business for good in years, not decades unless fishing is made more sustainable?
But growing plants also involves harm to animals.
- OK, but does growing plants require the slaughter of 30 million newborn chicks in the UK alone?
Any more for any more?
Funky_monks
Neo-Rustic
No, growing plants involves the poisoning of billions of organisms, including rodents and insects,
Growing plants involves macerating them in combines, slicing them with ploughs etc etc.
Also, growing plants intrinsically takes fertility away from the soil - two things can put it back, manure and petrochemical fert (slightly aided by legumes/rotations)
Karl Masks
Birds Angel Delight
What a fragile little ego
ddraig
kicking against the pricks...
Well done for admitting it, now you can begin to work on it, good luck
SpookyFrank
A cheap source of teeth for aquarium gravel
Well this is just wrong. If it were true, plants would have gone extinct half a billion years before we even got here. Which we would never have done, on account of animals going extinct, on account of there not being any plants.
Funky_monks
Neo-Rustic
eh?
We aren't growing prehistoric plants;
also;
You know symbiosis, right?
You can't just keep farming soil, growing crops and expect to retain fertility. You can literally measure your indices pre drilling and post harvest to measure the amount of NP and K your crop has taken up.
This is why I despair at the lack of knowledge of food and farming that the public has. It could only take someone who is utterly removed from crop production to say that kind of thing.
Cid
Proper break this time
Come on, think that through. Ecosystems evolve over time, every biome will have different feedback mechanisms that keep it sustainable. You disrupt that, you fuck it up... So e.g the great plains were stable as sparsely grazed grassland, they did not function as intensively cultivated cropland. Plants use nutrients from the soil; if that soil is shallow and nutrient poor, planting crops with high nutrient needs will quickly deplete it.
Would be interested to see where you get this factoid from?
Funky_monks
Neo-Rustic
SpookyFrank
A cheap source of teeth for aquarium gravel
If there were, as you say, no way for plants to continue growing in the same soil indefinitely, then all plants would be dead by now and all soil barren. For ninety-nine point all the nines you like percent of earth's history there were no artificial fertilisers, and yet plants continued existing.
You did not say growing crops, or growing monocultures, you said growing plants intrinsically depletes soil fertilify. That statement was false. And not just because that's not what 'intrinsically' means.
I was once like you. I understood how agriculture worked, and I used this to make excuses for continuing to eat meat. It wasn't valid then and it's not valid now. For all sorts of reasons, but the main one being thermodynamics. Anything bad about growing crops is the same but ten times worse if you're talking about meat production because, and stop me if I'm going too fast for you here, you have to grow crops to feed animals. So more potassium, more nitrates, more water, more everything. Because most of what you put into an animal gets shat out the back of it long before you can get the grill warmed up.
SpookyFrank
A cheap source of teeth for aquarium gravel
Which one, the fact that plants exist?
SpookyFrank
A cheap source of teeth for aquarium gravel
Oh yeah, and this is also (pun intended) bullshit.
Industrial monoculture crop production, yeah maybe that doesn't work without chopping up a few field mice. But industrial monoculture crop production and 'growing plants' are two very different things.
Similar threads
