baw posted:

question for a friend are pubes vegan

baw posted:

question for a friend are pubes vegan

Trabisnikof posted:

the fake chicken nuggies and paddies are tasty af

actionjackson posted:

I add the salt to my lentils that I do in the slow cooker

but only with some lentils, the stores only have the lovely green ones now and I find those need salt. yellow and red not so much.

endlessmonotony posted:

That's almost all vegans though.

Once you put insects onto the "do not kill" list you end up in a situation where you're either murdering wild animals and converting their habitats on a scale that's bad even compared to now, or just killing a whole lot of humans.

Herrings are one of the go-to questions as well because they're clearly fish, and yet they're filter feeders and we have trouble converting brackish water to any kind of farming and otherwise we're not recollecting the nutrients going in without entirely ruining natural ecosystems. Which causes algal blooms and oxygen depletion if unaddressed.

The funnier question is bullshit, because it turns out we need both the perennial plants and the bullshit for soil maintenance. We could replace the cows with fermentation vats, but that would be a massive undertaking very vulnerable to Great Leaping our way to a massive famine. So we'd be risking a massive amount of wildlife to avoid that specific animal byproduct.

No moral high ground available, I'm afraid. And for the people who are just uncomfortable with hurting animals, they're still hurting animals, because it turns out all that food needed to be grown and we have seven billion hungry mouths and nowhere near the planet to feed them without highly efficient farming.

I know, I know, vertical farming, replace all the soil with water, genetically engineer better plants for that, fuel it all using solar concentration power. I'm not against that infrastructure project. It'll take decades at the very least.

Reducing meat consumption, introducing easy nutritionally complete replacement for meat-containing products, fighting against food waste (especially at the retailer spot) - all good ideas that can be done now.

Veganism? Eh. Yes, lesser environmental impact than most people today. But not optimal for animal life. Life's gross and cruel like that sometimes. All part of the cycle.

I mean, I just got a bee in my bonnet from one too many "then you should die" when I reveal I depend on animal-sourced medical treatments to stay alive, but I've put in my work.

matti posted:

i know you have a real excuse bud

just that text ticked me off the wrong way, whole lot of paragraphs rationalizing taking lives

endlessmonotony posted:

Then tell me, what's wrong with eating bugs?

endlessmonotony posted:

endlessmonotony posted:

lol you know just as well as I do going without killing animals isn't gonna happen in the forests. What would I wear?

More seriously, other people survive just fine but those people can cook. And walk medium distances. And usually drive.

... I'm not deep enough in the forests that I'd lack access to anything if I could drive and cook.

Also the only time I ended up killing animals even while I lived deeper was when we got goddamn fur animals loose. And then that rear end in a top hat of a farmer (fur farmers are assholes, whodathunk) got the insurance payments and we were back to where we were.

Goatson posted:

Are you sure you're not confusing veganism with Jainism? While Jains are vegan, not all vegans are Jains. The line between conscious actions you take and the unwarranted consequences of you living your life isn't the topic here. Perhaps you have sometimes accidentally swallowed a bug? It happens. Not the issue here. The issue is, that we, human animals, maintain and support a massive global industry that is built solely on abuse and murder of other animals. We do it knowingly, even if it's not being necessary for our survival (and actually being harmful for our planet), In terms of land and water management it's wasteful and destructive. And this is not taking into the ethical considerations. Sure, the existing nations states could limit this excessive consumption, but as capitalism shows again and again, those who profit are the real power holders and no structural changes get done. No, the responsibility falls on individuals to start the change.

The moment you start eating bugs knowingly, someone somewhere will turn it into an industry. And that industry in turn will need land and water and more food just to feed one you; it's same as with any animal product. It's wasteful.

If your life depends on animal production, its ok. No-one should be denied their survival. However, the rest of us still need to tackle with the system that we created, one meal at a time.

DEEP STATE PLOT posted:

all i know is morningstar vegetarian hot dogs are pretty good and while i'm not a vegetarian let alone vegan i switched to them primarily to get away from the horror that is biting into a nice plump hotdog and getting a disgusting chunk of gristle

endlessmonotony posted:

there's plenty of animals out there that aren't capable of suffering.

endlessmonotony posted:

You're very confused over multiple subjects here.

Such as what "ethical considerations" means (literally everything you listed is an ethical consideration), the environmental impact of eating (some) insects and filter feeders, how our agricultural cycles work, how well humans absorb nutrition from different sources, the inevitable waste products of producing vegetables and grains, the logistics of feeding this many humans...

Veganism is refusing consumption of animal parts or byproducts. To make it a moral choice, you have to argue that killing any animal is wrong, which I don't agree with, because there's plenty of animals out there that aren't capable of suffering. If you define it just by "life", then plants are very much alive. If you define it by having a negative reaction to injury, again, plants do that too.

If we go by preserving the planet, then it's rather simply not pure veganism and won't be until we're quite a bit further along in genetic engineering, doubly so if you consider animal labor as a problem as well.

I have no moral qualms whatsoever over killing animals too simple to suffer. And won't. Living is killing. If you take it to sustain yourself, something else needed it to live. You've got to draw the line somewhere, and I fundamentally disagree drawing it at just "animals", because that's a category with far too much inside it to be meaningful.

Uncle Boogeyman posted:

The moment someone brings �some plants show negative response to being harmed� into a conversation about veganism is when you know it�s about to get real stupid

endlessmonotony posted:

To make it a moral choice, you have to argue that killing any animal is wrong, which I don't agree with, because there's plenty of animals out there that aren't capable of suffering.

quote:

Furthermore, neural circuits supporting behavioral/electrophysiological states of attentiveness, sleep and decision making appear to have arisen in evolution as early as the invertebrate radiation, being evident in insects and cephalopod mollusks (e.g., octopus)

baw posted:

anyone know any good vegan blood substitutes, i miss chugging bottles of fresh blood

Bot 02 posted:

you shouldn't eat animals

miniscule12 posted:

there is no such thing as ethical consumption under capitalism

vegans should try to trick americans into supporting the downsizing of the meat industry through public policy, I have no idea how you can do that so good luck

Mayor Dave posted:

Insects are compatible with veganism, which is good since I don't think there's a processed food on the planet that doesn't contain insect parts in some measure

Do it ironically posted:

I�m vegan, haven�t missed animal products in a long time, I only pass out three or four times a day because of my b12