• HappycamperNZ@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I would argue we shouldn’t live without it, but it does need to be cut back and less glorified. There are soo many alternatives that are healthier, cheaper, better for environment but you should still be able to have a medium rare steak and some chicken wings when you want it.

      • Cinnamon3431@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        well as of the ethics doing a bad thing once is still having done a bad thing, but I guess sure if you want to decrease animal suffering the fastest realistic way, getting 10 people to reduce their consumption trumps 3 people completely cutting their meat consumption. (yet you’ll still have 10 people exploiting animals for their “products” who should be living without doing just that. vegan btw)

        • rbd22@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          As a vegetarian, we can all tell that you’re vegan. The disclaimer wasn’t necessary.

          This aggressive behavior and labeling isn’t productive if your goal is to persuade people to try something entirely new to them (remove meat from their diet).

          • Helix 🧬@feddit.de
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Yeah they could have left out the whole judgemental thing about animal suffering and be more encouraging. Instead they chose to be an insufferable, smug and arrogant microaggressor.