So you’re aware, that’s a really fucked up thing to think. Let alone say.
But maybe we disagree only on terminology?
What would you call the act of nonconsensually sticking your dick into your dog, and do you think it’s horrible?
Comment on "Being vegan is unnatural"
theunknownmuncher@lemmy.world 2 weeks agoThat’s correct, yes.
However, my dog is my property, and someone can only artificially inseminate my property with my permission.
So you’re aware, that’s a really fucked up thing to think. Let alone say.
But maybe we disagree only on terminology?
What would you call the act of nonconsensually sticking your dick into your dog, and do you think it’s horrible?
What would you call the act of nonconsensually sticking your dick into your dog, and do you think it’s horrible?
Raping a dog is bad, yes.
Raping a dog is bad, yes.
So a dog is someone and that’s what makes it rape? Where do you draw the line for someone? Is it the act of rape itself that’s bad, or is it the perpetrator getting sexual satisfaction from it? What if they don’t do it for that purpose, but some other more abstract reason? Is it okay then?
You thought you had me. Your argument is invalid and includes logical fallacies, because you’ve swapped the original situation, which was artificial insemination of livestock, for having sex with a pet. These are not comparable.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_equivalence
Whether a dog is “someone” is irrelevant. Forcibly impregnating someone is rape. Artificially inseminating livestock is not rape. Having sex with a pet animal is rape. Having sex with a consenting adult is not rape. Different things actually are, in fact, different.
Ah the tried and tested “it’s ok if it’s my property” which historically(and currently) is a universal guideline for what is and isn’t ok.
Idk there’s two schools of thought on this. One is that you can own another creature with a mind. I find this attitude leads to a lot of very unsettling situations and possibly weird shit.
The other is that you treat them like a child that is in your custody where you can order them what to do and where to go and what to eat but society expects you to follow certain rules while they’re in your custody.
Ah yes, that’s the take I want to side with!
If I own a human slave, me artificially inseminating them without consent isn’t rape?
If I DNA test the slave from earlier and discover they aren’t human, inseminating them without consent wouldn’t be rape?
If I own a human slave
…
If I DNA test the slave from earlier and discover they aren’t human
Uh… what are they, then?
I don’t think these absurd hypotheticals are helping your argument.
They are a nonhuman animal that has sentience, property of mine. Let’s call them hooman.
You know hypotheticals are used to test consistency in someone’s logic and answering these will end up in you admitting absurdities. If I wasn’t interested in the truth, I would avoid answering them as well.
They’re absurd because they’re a false equivalency, which is a logical fallacy. Animal livestock are not comparable to human slaves.
What’s it say when your logic does not work for real life scenarios, so you have to make up nonsense fantasy scenarios to try to force an inconsistency?
toomanypancakes@piefed.world 2 weeks ago
What in the fuck
bearboiblake@pawb.social 2 weeks ago
Anti-vegans will go to any depths of depravity in order to deal with their cognitive dissonance. Once, on Reddit, I got a commenter to agree that he would be fine if someone had a dog in a cage they tortured for entertainment, rather than agree that it’s kinda fucked up that we slaughter animals because their flesh tastes nice.
Senal@programming.dev 2 weeks ago
Real question, what if there is no cognitive dissonance.
Like someone who knows exactly what’s going on and says “fuck it, it’s delicious” ?
bearboiblake@pawb.social 2 weeks ago
I’d ask them to sit down and watch a documentary about the animal agriculture industry (such as Earthlings) to be sure they really do know the truth.
lalo@discuss.tchncs.de 2 weeks ago
“Feels good” is not a valid justification to harm others, imagine how that justification would apply in other cases and it’s pretty easy to see how it falls apart. You can’t be logically consistent with that justification to harm others. The same with apathy, also not a justification to needlessly exploit animals.
toomanypancakes@piefed.world 2 weeks ago
Some people are just sociopathic and don’t have any empathy for others.
FishFace@piefed.social 2 weeks ago
So let me get this straight, you were arguing with someone, tried to lead them to a contradiction, but they actually had a consistent view on it that you didn’t like, and your conclusion is that they have cognitive dissonance?
My friend, I do not think that means what you think it means.
bearboiblake@pawb.social 2 weeks ago
Most people agree that raping dogs is bad. Maybe they genuinely believe that raping dogs is okay, or maybe they’re just saying that to deal with their cognitive dissonance. I would prefer that it’s cognitive dissonance, but if they’re a dog rape apologist, then they’re a piece of shit anyways.
I hope it’s cognitive dissonance and not authentic approval of dog rape.
theunknownmuncher@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
“I lead someone who disagrees with me into saying something stupid once, therefore everyone who disagrees with me must have cognitive dissonance.”
Lol