Be civil and follow principle of charity in the comments.

  • Lettuce eat lettuce@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    2 hours ago

    Most people don’t use critical reasoning to make their decisions, hence why most people live their lives in a state of constant contradictions.

    My old philosophy professor once told us that the most effective way to expose somebody’s lack of critical reasoning about an issue is to just respond with, “who says?”

    Basically the Socratic method, ask them to justify the statements they make, and see how they respond. The vast majority of the time, you’ll quickly find out that they don’t have any good reasons to support their statements. They haven’t given them much thought at all, nor much thought to differing views/positions. They live their lives in ways that feel generally “correct” or pleasurable to them, and that’s it.

    Why do they think it’s alright to eat factory farmed meat? Because they like the taste, the thought of billions of animals living short, miserable lives, then being slaughtered and processed for us to consume doesn’t horrify or disgust them, so they keep doing it.

    Most people when challenged on it will put up some vague attempt to support their actions, “Other animals do it to each other, so why not us?” “Animals don’t have sophisticated minds, so it doesn’t actually cause them real suffering.” “Humans need animal protein to be healthy.” etc. All terribly weak arguments that are easily refuted. But most people don’t care, because most societies normalize meat consumption and factory farming. They grew up eating meat with other people eating meat all around them, and they never gave it any thought.

    Hence why most pet owners who eat meat would be absolutely horrified and disgusted if their dog or cat had a litter and somebody bought all of the puppies/kittens, only to torture, slaughter, and eat them. A completely inconsistent reaction given the fact that the pet owner happily eats other animals that are treated in the same way. But again, they didn’t reason themselves into their viewpoint, so they don’t worry about being consistent.

    This is further confirmed by anecdotes from vegetarians/vegans, who will tell you about all the awkward, unprompted reactions from meat-eaters when they find out they don’t eat meat. Many people get very defensive, often making snide or accusatory remarks about vegetarianism/veganism. They don’t like the idea that eating factory meat is morally wrong, because they like the taste and don’t want to make to effort to change their lifestyle to confirm with that moral principle. So they mock, tease, or try to “expose” inconsistencies in the vegetarian/vegan’s own worldview as a defense mechanism.

    If they can make the vegetarian/vegan look foolish, then that feels like a win psychologically to them, which provides mental and emotional comfort and allows them to slip back into their lifestyle without needing to confront their own moral failings.

    • Victoria Antoinette @lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      2 hours ago

      “Other animals do it to each other, so why not us?” “Animals don’t have sophisticated minds, so it doesn’t actually cause them real suffering.” “Humans need animal protein to be healthy.” etc. All terribly weak arguments that are easily refuted.

      if you care to articulate these refutations, i’d be fascinated to see how strong your arguments are.

  • Mulligrubs@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    2 hours ago

    It’s like how soldier rapists are bad, but soldier murderers get a medal.

    Humans are fundamentally absurd, no exceptions

  • communism@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    5 hours ago

    Because they benefit from eating animals (they enjoy eating them) whereas they don’t benefit from having sex with animals (they don’t enjoy having sex with animals).

  • Cam@scribe.disroot.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    6 hours ago

    If you need for survival to hunt and eat an animal you are just part of the ecosystem, a predator.
    Do you need to have sex with another species? In the wild it happens and even rape is natural, but the question could be “would you like to live in a human society like that?”.

    That said, animal farming is unethical and completely unnecessary nowadays. Most people would agree that killing an animal just for pleasure would be ethically wrong, but then we as a society rape to breed, grow in terrible conditions and kill in nightmarish ways farm animals just because “meat is good”.

  • Art3mis@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    21
    ·
    11 hours ago

    This is exactly why many indigenous cultures put an emphasis on thanking the animal for their meat.

  • graphene@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    22
    ·
    11 hours ago

    There is no logical consistency except what allows the continued survival and flourishing of life and the human race.

    Having sex with animals could get you sick and cause all sorts of problems. Eating animals on the other hand can extend your life beyond a few days and perhaps even into years after you can no longer drink your mother’s milk and has very few downsides, especially with the invention of cooking. Sure, we don’t need the source of sustenance that is meat today when we have several times more food than is necessary to feed the whole globe and then throw a lot of it away, but this wasn’t true for the vast majority of our history. People only a few hundred years ago had to scrape for every protein they could find.

    There’s no special moral reason because we didn’t decide. It’s just an instinct, though one that we can examine and ignore if we want.

  • teyrnon@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    15
    ·
    11 hours ago

    A number of US states agree with op here, some it’s legal to have sex with animals within limits, anything over 20 pounds rings a bell for one, alabama maybe. They might have changed those laws because they were getting made fun of idk.

    • CultLeader4Hire@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 hours ago

      Most of the states that were ok with it changed after Washington State, which use to have the most permissive laws about this for whatever reason, really buckled down after that guy “Mr Hands” died from a horse

    • LwL@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      8 hours ago

      Artificial semination is key to commercial animal agriculture, and that too would be unambiguously rape in human standards. Not to mention the horrific living conditions of most animals farmed for meat.

      It’s really just because one has always been normal, and the other hasn’t, aka it’s cultural. It’s not rational. Though there’s also arguably far more benefit in killing for meat vs. having sex with dubious consent, so that can be a consideration that isn’t purely cultural.

  • myszka@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    15
    ·
    12 hours ago

    While klling an animal for food is sure destructive for the animal, it is constructive for the humanity. It allows us to get all those proteins “for free” instead of producing them ourselves from plants like herbivores do and invest the saved energy in our intelligence to create beautiful and complex things. Whereas copulating with an animal is pure destruction. It harms the living being and leads to no babies and no emotional bond strengthening (contrary to human sex).

    Eating animal is still a contradiction, because destruction is there. So I think this problem does need to be somehow overcome. But at least it’s outweighed by its positive effects, unlike zoophilia.

    • pineapple@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 hour ago

      We literally grow food to feed to animals. And then we have to spend time hearding the animals moving. Slaughtering is a decently evolved process (I think). They don’t give us the meet for free, we have to put effort to take it.

    • SpongyAneurysm@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      8 hours ago

      producing them ourselves from plants like herbivores do

      This bit is nonsense. I’ll give you a point for meat consumption being an easy source of protein that allowed for some developments during the evolution of humans, that are unlikely to have happened without it. But that is more a question of availability than nutritious properties. In todays surplus society, where we have industrialized agriculture and optimized crops, there is abundant access to plant protein.
      And meat is not a unique source of protein either. First of all, you don’t even have to eat meat to obtain animal protein. Eggs and dairy have it too. And when it comes to the constitution of protein, eggs were even considered the gold standard for a long time.

      Read the following wikipedia article to learn more: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protein_digestibility_corrected_amino_acid_score

      The listed examples should be interesting to you.

      While meats are indeed easily digestable and contain useful protein for the human body, so do many plant sources. Soy protein is even on par with eggs, while meats don’t reach the same score.
      And of course we usually don’t eat a single source of protein, and combining different sources, their amino acid profiles can complement each other to form a complete source of protein.

      This might’ve been a bit of a ramble on a side-note when it comes to discussing the ethics of fucking animals, but I’m sure the discussion benefits from getting the facts straight.

  • Pacrana@mujico.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    11 hours ago

    It’s simple, actually.

    The number of people who like to eat animals is larger than the number people who like to, that.

    • mortemtyrannis@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 hours ago

      On a significant level this is basically it.

      I don’t believe moral facts exist and so every permissible behaviour ultimately is affected by societal expectations as well as individual inclination.

      People clutch pearls over anything and everything but it’s interesting to observe how what was a pearl clutching behaviour previously (I.e. showing some ankle in Victorian era England) is now not even a concern.

  • Fleppensteyn@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    15 hours ago

    People raping and killing for their own enjoyment is sick. Someone else doing the dirty work for our enjoyment (i.e. eating meat), well that’s different. If somehow zoophilia were proven to enhance meat flavor, we’d probably be OK with it

    • when@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      14 hours ago

      Thanks for taking this question in purely analytical manner and questioning the conflicting social values. There are many comments here which tries to answer the question but get engaged into sense of social shame and prejudice rather than focusing into the logical consistency with given premise.

    • when@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      15 hours ago

      Thanks for acknowledging the inconsistencies within social values and showing optimism for the ideal outcome.