Comment on [deleted]
commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 month agoyou are absolved of responsibility for animal abuse completely just because you are paying someone to do it
no one is paying someone to abuse animals
Comment on [deleted]
commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 month agoyou are absolved of responsibility for animal abuse completely just because you are paying someone to do it
no one is paying someone to abuse animals
Dashi@lemmy.world 1 month ago
But you are when you buy the animal products. You are paying them as indirectly as you are supporting the animal abuse indirectly.
You pay the store for the milk, the store pays the wholesaler and the wholesaler pays the farmer who is committing “animal abuse/ rape”.
At least that is the logic flow they are using. I personally agree that there is no problem with this as long as it is done as humanely as possibly.
Rekorse@sh.itjust.works 1 month ago
They main problem is that its currently as humane as is commercially viable. Which sorta means profits come first, animal welfare second.
Also people need to talk about the people who work in that industry and the effects it has on their mental health. If you care about people then you wouldnt want anyone exposed to such a workplace.
commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 month ago
no, you’re not. if someone is abusing livestock, they are paid by someone who isn’t me and long before I walk into the grocery store.
Dashi@lemmy.world 1 month ago
That isn’t how supply/demand works. If you are creating a demand, which you are when buying the product, you are incentivizing someone to create a supply.
If enough people didn’t buy the product then there wouldn’t be a demand and the person that pays the “milker” wouldn’t pay them anymore.
I believe that’s in the laws of macroeconomics (?)
tomi000@lemmy.world 1 month ago
Dont waste your time on trolls…
commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 month ago
we made milk before we had money. there is no reason to believe it will ever stop
commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 month ago
supply and demand is a price seeking theory. you are misapplying the term to use it this way
commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 month ago
but I’m not paying the store to pay the farmer. I’m paying for a product.
further, artificial insemination is a veterinary procedure. it is not rape.
Dashi@lemmy.world 1 month ago
Buying the product increases the demand for the product making the store want to provide the product so they purchase it from the farmer. If nobody bought cow milk from the store then the store wouldn’t buy from the farmer and then the cows wouldn’t be milked.
And I believe the “rape of animals” vegans refer to is taking their milk without consent. I’m not an expert on either side of the argument so I may be wrong.
roguetrick@lemmy.world 1 month ago
Nah they’re referring to the insemination of the cows. Gotta keep getting the cow pregnant and take away it’s babies to get milk. That’s a basic factor of dairy farming you can’t get away from no matter how you try.
commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 month ago
milking isn’t rape, either.
Waraugh@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 month ago
I stopped consuming animal products for three years waiting for this utopia everyone parrots but every time I went to the grocery store the shelves were stocked exactly as they were before I stopped before waking up and realizing it was a pointless escapade of dealing with a situation akin to burying your head in the sand about global warming because you ‘recycle’.
commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 month ago
the. store makes their own decisions. I don’t decide for them