Comment on "Being vegan is unnatural"

• toomanypancakes@piefed.world ⁨6⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

  What in the fuck

  source

  • bearboiblake@pawb.social ⁨6⁩ ⁨hours⁩ 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.

    source

    • FishFace@piefed.social ⁨3⁩ ⁨hours⁩ 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.

      source

      • bearboiblake@pawb.social ⁨3⁩ ⁨hours⁩ 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.

        source

        • -> View More Comments
    • Senal@programming.dev ⁨5⁩ ⁨hours⁩ 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” ?

      source

      • bearboiblake@pawb.social ⁨5⁩ ⁨hours⁩ 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.

        source

        • -> View More Comments
      • toomanypancakes@piefed.world ⁨5⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

        Some people are just sociopathic and don’t have any empathy for others.

        source

        • -> View More Comments
    • theunknownmuncher@lemmy.world ⁨5⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

      “I lead someone who disagrees with me into saying something stupid once, therefore everyone who disagrees with me must have cognitive dissonance.”

      Lol

      source
• surewhynotlem@lemmy.world ⁨5⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

  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?

  source

  • theunknownmuncher@lemmy.world ⁨5⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

    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.

    source

    • Dojan@pawb.social ⁨2⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

      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?

      source

      • theunknownmuncher@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

        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.

        source

        • -> View More Comments
• Senal@programming.dev ⁨5⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

  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.

  source