It’s a no win situation. Either you’re a ruthless BigAg megacorp treating a living being like a machine for financial gain, or you’re an independent farmer who’s built a relationship with your cow by looking her in the eye each time you reach down with a slow, firm, gentle hand. One’s cruel, one’s unusual.
or you’re an independent farmer who’s built a relationship with your cow by looking her in the eye each time you reach down with a slow, firm, gentle hand
And take away her calf and send it to the slaughter, since that is the only way you can produce milk for human consumption.
Should I have made the punchline of the shitpost about artificial insemination? Seemed like low-hanging fruit. I assumed that the idea of a dude groping an animal’s mammary glands carried its own implications of weirdness, and that readers were familiar with what triggers lactation. But, as they say, when you assume… Now you and me are both asses.
Conceptually, yeah. But I can’t classify any product that has its roots in seeds/pesticides/herbicides produced for monoculture then processed and packaged by conglomerates that leave the brand name of the farms and small producers they bought out so they could peddle the fiction of “small farm” or “ethical” as a win. It’s a step in the right direction, but like so many things capitalism gets its hands on, it’s also often greenwashed to target buyers who want to feel like their choice is ethical but we’re still buying from shitty companies that profit from your soy milk purchase just as much as from someone else’s whole milk purchase. There’s not a lot of environmentally conscious, sustainably grown, artisanal soy milk made from heirloom seeds being sold at farmer’s markets.
Idk if this is you but it doesn’t follow that because there is no ethical consumption under capitalism therefore I’ll just have cows raped, separated from their babies, and murdered my whole life so I can drink their secretions.
Drinking soy or oat milk is definitely more ethical than cows milk. Im not saying it is saying it is 100% ethically pure just as no consumption under capitalism can be ethically pure.
Harm reduction is the point because there’s no clean win in the system. But the people selling the animal derived products are often also the ones selling conscientious consumers the oat milk. They don’t care about harm reduction, just profits, and as veganism has grown increasingly popular they’ve amped up producing products to supply that demand. At the end of the day, we don’t actually need bovine milk, or soy milk, or oat milk. Whatever form they’re in they’re a want, not a need. If your only challenge to a system designed to profit from exploitation is to indulge your wants but feel good because that want is advertised as better, you’re not challenging the system. Living requires consumption, all living things do it. Sometimes reducing harm to others means deciding to forgo the want for something you don’t really need in the first place.
I use soy milk to help meet my protein needs not wants. It is sold by three trees who only sells organics and only plant based milks.
I became a vegan to reduce my consumption and impact. It was not and still is not a popular decision. It was not advertised to me. It was and continues to be actually quite alienating.
I work to challenge “the system” in many ways other than my veganism, but to be clear veganism is challenging “the system.” It is explicitly about making the choice to not indulge in wants if they cause harm.
Of course capitalists will cash in on any trend. Guilt by association is a fallacy that can be used to incorrectly dismiss anything.
Yes Twig, that’s the point. That it’s either mechanized cruelty or weirdly sexualized is just a punchline used to vent personal critique with the system through cynicism.
It’s a no win situation. Either you’re a ruthless BigAg megacorp treating a living being like a machine for financial gain, or you’re an independent farmer who’s built a relationship with your cow by looking her in the eye each time you reach down with a slow, firm, gentle hand. One’s cruel, one’s unusual.
And take away her calf and send it to the slaughter, since that is the only way you can produce milk for human consumption.
Should I have made the punchline of the shitpost about artificial insemination? Seemed like low-hanging fruit. I assumed that the idea of a dude groping an animal’s mammary glands carried its own implications of weirdness, and that readers were familiar with what triggers lactation. But, as they say, when you assume… Now you and me are both asses.
Soy milk or oat milk is a pretty big W in my book
oat milk has sugar in it, soy just have this wierd taste i cant stand.
Conceptually, yeah. But I can’t classify any product that has its roots in seeds/pesticides/herbicides produced for monoculture then processed and packaged by conglomerates that leave the brand name of the farms and small producers they bought out so they could peddle the fiction of “small farm” or “ethical” as a win. It’s a step in the right direction, but like so many things capitalism gets its hands on, it’s also often greenwashed to target buyers who want to feel like their choice is ethical but we’re still buying from shitty companies that profit from your soy milk purchase just as much as from someone else’s whole milk purchase. There’s not a lot of environmentally conscious, sustainably grown, artisanal soy milk made from heirloom seeds being sold at farmer’s markets.
Idk if this is you but it doesn’t follow that because there is no ethical consumption under capitalism therefore I’ll just have cows raped, separated from their babies, and murdered my whole life so I can drink their secretions.
Drinking soy or oat milk is definitely more ethical than cows milk. Im not saying it is saying it is 100% ethically pure just as no consumption under capitalism can be ethically pure.
Harm reduction is the point because there’s no clean win in the system. But the people selling the animal derived products are often also the ones selling conscientious consumers the oat milk. They don’t care about harm reduction, just profits, and as veganism has grown increasingly popular they’ve amped up producing products to supply that demand. At the end of the day, we don’t actually need bovine milk, or soy milk, or oat milk. Whatever form they’re in they’re a want, not a need. If your only challenge to a system designed to profit from exploitation is to indulge your wants but feel good because that want is advertised as better, you’re not challenging the system. Living requires consumption, all living things do it. Sometimes reducing harm to others means deciding to forgo the want for something you don’t really need in the first place.
I use soy milk to help meet my protein needs not wants. It is sold by three trees who only sells organics and only plant based milks.
I became a vegan to reduce my consumption and impact. It was not and still is not a popular decision. It was not advertised to me. It was and continues to be actually quite alienating.
I work to challenge “the system” in many ways other than my veganism, but to be clear veganism is challenging “the system.” It is explicitly about making the choice to not indulge in wants if they cause harm.
Of course capitalists will cash in on any trend. Guilt by association is a fallacy that can be used to incorrectly dismiss anything.
I guess not abusing an animal is a win situation.
Yes Twig, that’s the point. That it’s either mechanized cruelty or weirdly sexualized is just a punchline used to vent personal critique with the system through cynicism.
No matter what we eat some living thing gets “abused”