#as in not getting enough nutrients not as in doctors being stupider than dog shit fatphobes who think gaining weight is unhealthy

[chadepitanga]

I don't want to sound rude but "mentally disabled" is in fact "physically disabled" because a brain is a physical organ....

[feathery-dreamer]

I’ve been told to watch this pathetic excuse of a video during an argument, now I’d like some of my brain cells back. I couldn’t sit through more than fifteen minutes of this shit, it was just too tiring and tedious (I started around 8 and it’s past 11.30pm here right now). I think I made my point anyway, it’s a good prediction that the rest will be as piss-poor as the first quarter.

For clarity’s sake, I’ll be bolding the minutes, “quoting the guy” normally and putting up the “anti-vegan arguments he quotes” in italics.

1) “remains of murdered animals”? The term “murder” refers to unlawful killing of a person, stop using it for shock value.

2) It’s “barbaric insanity” to eat meat? since when? People have been eating meat for thousands, if not millions, of years. Before animal husbandry was a thing, it was from hunts (when successful) and carrion. Civilized and sane people eat meat because it provides a bunch of elements I won’t bother detailing right now.

3) “moral superiority of veganism” ...lol okay, I guess people with iron or cholesterol deficiency are morally inferior.

4) We’re at the one-minute mark and there’s already some shitty chart that puts going vegan on the “reasonable” extreme.

5) "genocide” is killing off people for belonging in a certain group, not to eat their remains (that’d be cannibalism). Once again, a word has been repurposed for the sake of shock value and to make meat-eaters sound like monsters. This bitch just equated animal slaughter with the war crimes committed by the Nazi. Does that sound “reasonable to anybody? because it’s not.

6) “indoctrination” ...oh? You claiming to be superior and misusing words to manipulate the viewer isn’t “indoctrination”, I presume? I’ve heard that from extremists of all types, including the Islamists ruling my own birth country (Turkey).

7) “speciesism”? Literally every single animal prioritizes their own kind over others! Is that so fuckin hard to grasp? no, it isn’t! it’s basic survival instinct. We humans are animals, we aren’t above cows or sheep or chickens when it comes to instinct. We use other species because we’re animals just like them, not because we’re superior in any way.

8) Since we only eat the muscles, it’s completely logical to put the rest to good use. We’ve barely hit the two-minute mark out of 63.5 and I’m already sobbing from the stupidity of it all.

9) “indoctrination” again? Your digestive tract doesn’t give two fucks about your morals or propaganda. It’s adapted to the meat-eating that’s been occurring in your family tree for millions of years. Following tradition that suits your biology isn’t fucking “indoctrination”, it’s being logical.

10) You’re comparing use of animals to human exploitation. I’m not saying the meat industry is all rainbows and singing, but... really?

11) “psychopathic indoctrination” WELP! now you combined a misused word with your compulsive, hypocritical accusation. Two words, each representing an aspect of your inability to be coherent. Good fucking job, mate, keep up that attitude.

12) Since when is there “a taboo against criticism of animal abuse” or criticism of religion? Now I have ample evidence that you’re either delusional or manipulating people. We’re at the three-minute mark and you managed to add paranoia to the list.

13) “plants are sentient” Science says they are, mate. There’s ample evidence that plants have a chemical reaction to getting harmed, and thus “it can feel pain” isn’t a valid excuse to not eat animals.

14) And lol “vegans are condescending”, of course we say that because you very clearly are. Arguing your superiority based on a lifestyle choice you can afford to make; if that’s not condescending, I don’t know what is.

15) “I need animal products to be healthy” is the most valid reason to not go vegan. If you think that’s just a knee-jerk “pathetically weak” argument to hate vegans, you’re a moron (but we already knew that, didn’t we kids?)

16) “dense cluster of pathetically weak argumentation, driven by fear of change and indoctrinated delusion”, “usually deployed in rapid fire, one after another, ad nauseum, until the vegan grows tired and gives up” ...I’m adding projection to the list haha~

17) So we’re at the four-minute mark, and with barely less than a full hour remaining, you’re only now starting to actually counter anything. Oh me, if all your counterarguments are like the previous, this should be goooood~

18) ...aaaaaand you already brought the “holocaust” bullshit and the arrogance back right away. I’d like to remark you still haven’t actually contributed anything to the discussion.

19) Your first argument boils down to: “redefining morality in a certain way doesn’t work because I can redefine it another way”. That’s funny, because you (and morons like you) have been redefining words to your convenience for a long time. There’s no “double standard” or “contradiction”, the definition of a word doesn’t have to include anything other than what’s in the definition. That’s what a definition fucking is, it tells you what is or isn’t covered by that word. Whaddya know, you managed to cram all of this nonsense between four and five minutes.

20) “Morality doesn’t exist” Sounds to me like you’ve been cherry-picking the worst anti-vegan arguments. Too bad your counter is equally weak here - even if morals didn’t exist, we still would hesitate to kill humans because survival of the species means we prioritize humans over animals.

21) Just past six minutes, you’re bringing up concern for the well-being of sentient beings. Does that mean you support people who eat meat because their doctor tells them to? Does that mean you’re against people forcing vegan diets on their dogs, creatures whose diet is mainly meat? I think, with number 15 up above, we already know the answer to that.

22) What you sum up as “self interest” and “arbitrary lines” are the self-preservation I described in number 7, the one you called “speciesism” because somehow it’s discrimination when humans do it.

23) At the seven-minute mark, “logical consistency doesn’t apply to morality” ...you’re the last person to criticize someone for arguing inconsistent logic lol

24) Once again, your “anthroperipheric” definitions fail because, unlike the “anthropocentric” ones, they leave out survival of the species. Morality may be subjective, but that doesn’t mean it’s 100% subjective; the “survival of the speices” aspect sure isn’t. That’s why killing other humans is called “murder” and considered a serious offense, whilst killing animals for consumption isn’t.

25) Oh-kay, now you made a mental leap from “killing X for consumption” to not “caring about X’s well-being”. Just because I eat meat doesn’t mean I don’t care how those animals are treated. Instead of arguing your “moral superiority” and strength, how about you encourage people to buy from a select few, non-abusive places? You had enough time on your hands to compile all this shit instead of doing something to stop the abuse. Something tells me you don’t actually care about those sentient animals’ well-being, as much as your image as a “morally superior” human.

26) We’re at eight minutes, I identified more errors in your logic than you were claiming to present; more are coming. According to that list, you're preparing to dismiss the opinion of a doctor as well as a person’s experience with morals.

27) “...not a single death or health problem attributed to veganism.” There are loads of health problems attributed to veganism. Just because you haven’t looked them up doesn’t mean they don’t exist.

28) You don’t know the diet of those athletes. It’s a good bet they’re taking loads of supplements to compensate for lack of animal foods intake. Unless they just happen to have access to all (and not just some) of the other foods, in enough abundance to compensate. Either way, they’re also being accompanied by personal trainers, medical professionals and a slew of other experts. Last time I checked, the common human being wasn’t as closely monitored; you occasionally visit a doctor you share with dozens of other people.

29) I just made it past nine minutes, not sure I should congratulate myself. You just looked up the general types of nutrient we need, whilst trying to “counter” an argument about specific nutrients. Even if you’d found foods containing the stuff you need, there’s no guarantee there’ll be enough of that thing in your diet. Most people don’t have the time to spend hours eating, they’re too busy running businesses or transporting people or doing surgery etc.

30) Exactly ten minutes of bullshit, we’re encountering the second decent counter of the entire video. I’ve yet to hear the “blood type” argument from meat eaters, to be honest, but I do agree it’s silly. In my knowledge, there’s no real link between the antigens on your red blood cells’ membrane and the types of foods you require. That depends on your ancestors’ diet, which (like I explained in 9) includes animal products for many of us.

31) You really think there are no health issues associated with veganism? <- that link took me five seconds to find. You talk about “burden of proof”, but you refuse to shoulder any of it yourself. You mock people for not having the muscle strength to type a search in Google, yet you won’t do it either.

32) “...none of them actually provide evidence that veganism can’t support their health.” Those arguments... literally ARE the evidence you demand. Are you sure you aren’t really just trying to make yourself look like a total moron? Because you’ve more than succeeded in the first eleven minutes of this video, the remaining 52mins can go home.

33) “vegetables don’t make you sick” no, but eating only vegetables can.

34) "Carcasses” don’t make you sick, eating them in excess does. See? I can reverse your arguments too. But where your counters ignore things that’re convenient to you, mine doesn’t.

35) Does IBS stand for irritable bowel syndrome? because that’s just a blanket term that covers a variety of different symptoms and ailments. I can think of a number of conditions that can make it harder to absorb nutrients from plants, or react more positively when animal proteins are present.

36) “Unless you’re actually in the situation, you can’t appeal to it...” and after twelve minutes: “you can’t appeal to hypothetical situations that you aren’t in...” Does that mean your previous arguments 27, 28, 31, 32 and 35 aren’t valid? I’m sure it does unless “logical consistency doesn’t apply to morality” for you. Also, good job bringing up the misuse of “murder” and “genocide” as buzzwords for your conveniency.

37) We’re controlling animal populations because, well, they reproduce enough to compensate for the losses. We don’t kill off humans because, unlike non-sapient animals, we have birth control. Besides, if we let deer populations grow, they won’t die off quickly and balance themselves; they’ll first eat all of the plants they normally eat (practically to extinction) and then starve to death. Does that sound like a moral alternative to hunting them? what about the well-being of those sentient creatures?

38) At the thirteen-minute mark now, you sure seem to love the words “murder” and holocaust”.

39) The... planet... will be destroyed because we kill animals? The planet has managed itself perfectly, even after meteor impacts and supervolcano eruptions. At this point, you’re treating humans like some sort of almighty demonic force.

40) “this argument could be made for slavery” ...centuries ago, yes; is that the time you’re living in? Because I’m sure I heard you imply, in your introduction, that those times were less complex and ethically inferior.

41) Farm animals had been bred over hundreds of generations to live alongside humans, rely on us to meet their basic needs (food, protection...). It’s perfectly reasonable to expect that, if released, they’ll either seek human company (and overwhelm people in the process) or get quickly killed off by predators in the wild. Even if it happens gradually and they don’t go extinct, there’ll still be suffering.

42) I just reached fourteen minutes, I wish I hadn’t agreed to watching the video. While you’re right that the extremes “animal apocalypse” and “animal extinction” can’t occur at the same time and place, there’s nothing preventing them from occurring in that order, and/or in different places.

43) “Clearly, there are still natural habitats in which our farmed animals can exist” and get killed in by predators. Which could then proliferate to excess, eating more and more prey until it runs out, then starving to death. We’ve already considered this scenario for herbivores in 37, didn’t we children?

44) The harmful practices you’ve brought up have been criticized by researchers, so now there are efforts to regulate and even forbid them. But agriculture itself isn’t to blame, and some of the things you list (such as deforestation and pollution) aren’t limited to animal farming. You even cover this when you mention the need for extra space for plant culture at fifteen minutes, yet you feel compelled to bring it up as a separate argument?

lol I’m so done