Jonathan Ball > wrote:
> ataxia wrote:

> > It's strange, watching the reactions of people who hear you've started
> > along The Cow-Free Path. Why do people become automatically
> > defensive?
>
> They aren't defensive. They're ****ed off at the
> unmistakable sneering condescension of the "vegans".

I don't know; when somebody offers me a hamburger at a cookout, and I
have to offer a brief explanation of why I won't be eating one, I'm
not sneering, being condescending, or judgmental...but I still get the
look. When I ask a waiter if there's cheese in the salad dressing,
I'm not telling him he'll burn in hell, I just want to know; so why do
I get the eye-roll?

Apparently we know different people.


> Judgmentalism is part and parcel of "veganism".

I haven't found that to be any more true of veganism than any other
lifestyle, habit, or opinion. Most folks just want to eat.



> > (Man, I'm trying to get through this post without using the word
> > "meme," but it's awfully hard.)
>
> Try harder. That's pure pop psychobabble.

I wish it weren't so pop, because it's an interesting notion. But I
also like to apply Darwin to corporations red in tooth and claw, so.

-smax

"rick etter" > wrote:
> "ataxia" > wrote:

Just a couple of points:

> > How many animals died for my diet and lifestyle today?
> ======================
> You tell me. Vegans make the claim that they automatically kill fewer
> animals. If they make that claim, you'd think that have measured the before
> and after deaths from a dietary change. Have you? The vegans here would
> love to have those numbers. Not a single one here has ever been able to
> back up the claim that their diet causes less.

A USDA survey (unfortunately a few years old now) suggests the average
American eats about 25 grams of beef per day. That seems like a
reasonable number to me, given my prior eating habits, and the habits
of folks I know. Ms. Cow weighs about 453592 grams (on the low side,
and let's pretend she's boneless). So I am saving--here it comes--ONE
COW EVERY FORTY-NINE POINT SEVEN YEARS!!!!

So, by the time I'm 82, I'll have saved one cow of my very own.

(You see, this is why I don't claim I'm individually saving herds of
cattle with every bite of tasty gluten.)



> ==================
> Then why? Why are you even in this post, snipping out parts of my post and
> then replying to what is not there anymore? The convention is to at least
> annotate when you do make the snips, unless of course the idea is to change
> the meaning of your reply because the readers doesn't have the side you're
> replying to.

I don't always put snip marks, because I trust the reader to have
access to the post I'm replying to. And I'm not aware of any
compelling convention to put them there.


> BTW, did you check out the rant just before this? Perfect example of loony
> hatred and stupidity.

Ah, for a threaded newsreader....

-anaphylax

ataxia wrote:

> Jonathan Ball > wrote:
>
>>ataxia wrote:
>
>
>>>It's strange, watching the reactions of people who hear you've started
>>>along The Cow-Free Path. Why do people become automatically
>>>defensive?
>>
>>They aren't defensive. They're ****ed off at the
>>unmistakable sneering condescension of the "vegans".
>
>
> I don't know; when somebody offers me a hamburger at a cookout, and I
> have to offer a brief explanation of why I won't be eating one, I'm
> not sneering, being condescending, or judgmental...but I still get the
> look. When I ask a waiter if there's cheese in the salad dressing,

Why the **** would you do that? Why don't you simply
figure some 2 or 3 grams of cheese don't matter, and
you're not eating cheese at home, and just eat the
****ing cheese? Ah, yes, I remember now: it' the
Search for Micrograms (of animal parts). I'll repost
something really good I've written before on the
irrational Search for Micrograms, and what that tells
us about "vegans" and their beliefs.

> I'm not telling him he'll burn in hell, I just want to know; so why do
> I get the eye-roll?

Here's what I wrote earlier on something related to the
eye-roll, except it's from "vegans" directed at
omnivores (that is, at normal people):

<repost>

Exactly the problem [broadcasting one's condescension].
Even those who are (just barely) wise enough not to
display an overtly visible symbol like that still often
exude that smarmy sanctimony.

Here's an example of that, one that doesn't stem from
"veganism" per se, but from something closely related.
There was a small health-food chain here in L.A.
called Mrs. Gooches, which was later bought out by
Whole Foods (I and others called them Mrs. Gouges, as
the prices were astronomical.) I went into one of them
one time to look for something a visiting German friend
wanted, called "grape sugar" (the stuff he wanted, not
the name of my friend.) I found one of those
irritating overweight tangle-haired hairy-legged "earth
mother" types - you *know* what I'm talking about - and
asked her if they carried grape sugar. Her literal
reply, seen in writing, would be considered
inoffensive: "We don't carry any sugar." But the look
in her eyes, and the way she emphasized "any", all
shrieked "CONDESCENSION!" She didn't literally have to
say "We at Mrs. Gouges are morally superior, so we
don't carry any sugar"; way she said what she said
conveyed that anyway.

That's what almost all "vegans" do. In my opinion, the
very word "vegan" is intended to convey that haughty,
arrogant, condescending sense.

</repost>

>
> Apparently we know different people.
>
>
>
>>Judgmentalism is part and parcel of "veganism".
>
>
> I haven't found that to be any more true of veganism than any other
> lifestyle, habit, or opinion.

I have.

> Most folks just want to eat.

Those people are called omnivores.

>
>
>
>
>>>(Man, I'm trying to get through this post without using the word
>>>"meme," but it's awfully hard.)
>>
>>Try harder. That's pure pop psychobabble.
>
>
> I wish it weren't so pop, because it's an interesting notion.

It is interesting, but I'm afraid it's pop psychobabble.

"ataxia" > wrote in message
om...
> "rick etter" > wrote:
> > "ataxia" > wrote:
>
> Just a couple of points:
>
> > > How many animals died for my diet and lifestyle today?
> > ======================
> > You tell me. Vegans make the claim that they automatically kill fewer
> > animals. If they make that claim, you'd think that have measured the
before
> > and after deaths from a dietary change. Have you? The vegans here
would
> > love to have those numbers. Not a single one here has ever been able to
> > back up the claim that their diet causes less.
>
> A USDA survey (unfortunately a few years old now) suggests the average
> American eats about 25 grams of beef per day. That seems like a
> reasonable number to me, given my prior eating habits, and the habits
> of folks I know. Ms. Cow weighs about 453592 grams (on the low side,
> and let's pretend she's boneless). So I am saving--here it comes--ONE
> COW EVERY FORTY-NINE POINT SEVEN YEARS!!!!
======================
Again, all you concentrate on is the death of a cow. Why is that? But I'll
play along. So, you take that ione cow, one death, and use it to replace
100s of 1000s of calories you'd eat in veggies instead. That one cow, by
your own calculations will last you some time. How many cans of green beans
do those calories replace? How many pound of potatoes do the calories
replace? How many pounds of tofu meat substitues do those calories replace?
Now, the big question.
How many other animals are saved by replacing those calories with the death
of that one cow?

>
> So, by the time I'm 82, I'll have saved one cow of my very own.
====================
And killed how many other animals in it's place? Why is it so morally great
to have saved that one cow, and killed 10s, 100s, 1000s of others?


>
> (You see, this is why I don't claim I'm individually saving herds of
> cattle with every bite of tasty gluten.)
====================
The problem is, you should be showing how many other animals you 'save' by
not eating meat. Or are you trying to claim that other animals don't die
for the foods you eat? All you continue to do is focus on what others
eat, somehow always ignoring what you eat and it's impact.


>
>
>
> > ==================
> > Then why? Why are you even in this post, snipping out parts of my post
and
> > then replying to what is not there anymore? The convention is to at
least
> > annotate when you do make the snips, unless of course the idea is to
change
> > the meaning of your reply because the readers doesn't have the side
you're
> > replying to.
>
> I don't always put snip marks, because I trust the reader to have
> access to the post I'm replying to. And I'm not aware of any
> compelling convention to put them there.
================
The convention is that you leave in what you reply to. Not snip it out and
reply like it was never there.


>
>
> > BTW, did you check out the rant just before this? Perfect example of
loony
> > hatred and stupidity.
>
> Ah, for a threaded newsreader....
================
So, your excuse for snipping without annotation was just an excuse? If you
can't see posts in-line in this thread, why would you automatically assume
that every one can see them all, and then be able to understand your
snipping?
Look up rusty lipbalm 2/21 at 10:38.


>
> -anaphylax

asphyxia wrote:
> Just a couple of points:
>
>
>>>How many animals died for my diet and lifestyle today?
>>
>>======================
>>You tell me. Vegans make the claim that they automatically kill fewer
>>animals. If they make that claim, you'd think that have measured the before
>>and after deaths from a dietary change. Have you? The vegans here would
>>love to have those numbers. Not a single one here has ever been able to
>>back up the claim that their diet causes less.
>
> A USDA survey (unfortunately a few years old now) suggests the average
> American eats about 25 grams of beef per day. That seems like a
> reasonable number to me, given my prior eating habits, and the habits
> of folks I know. Ms. Cow weighs about 453592 grams (on the low side,
> and let's pretend she's boneless). So I am saving--here it comes--ONE
> COW EVERY FORTY-NINE POINT SEVEN YEARS!!!!

No, you are not.

> So, by the time I'm 82, I'll have saved one cow of my very own.

And instead, you will have killed millions of rats, mice, snakes, birds,
rabbits, squirrels, frogs, and other small animals to make your vegan
meat substitute.

> (You see, this is why I don't claim I'm individually saving herds of
> cattle with every bite of tasty gluten.)

Consider what I posted yesterday:
---
Let's compare sirloin steak to a "fake meat" like seitan (wheat gluten).
Before one ends up with edible seitan, whole wheat has to be milled into
flour and then gluten is extracted by "washing" the starch out of dough.
Gluten makes up a small portion of wheat flour, so seitan is a very
inefficient use of wheat flour. It takes six to eight pounds of flour to
make one pound of seitan -- how much corn does it take to add a pound to
a steer on a finishing diet? The resulting protein in the seitan isn't
even complete, meaning it lacks certain essential amino acids.

The same is true with tofu. The finished product doesn't equate to a
pound-for-pound use of soybeans. Soybeans are boiled, milled, and
strained to make soy milk; the pulp, often called okara, can be consumed
in other products, but many tofu makers discard it (including to meat
producers). A coagulant is added to the soy milk. The curdle is pressed.
The water remaining from the coagulation and pressing is discarded. It's
a wasteful process. Tofu, like seitan, lacks certain essential amino
acids. The yield is similar to that of feed given to finish beef.
---

Why do you want to kill millions of animals you'll never eat? The
agricultural practices used to raise wheat to make your gluten
intentionally and accidentally kill animals. You're causing more deaths
and injuries to animals by eating grain products -- and especially
something as inefficient as gluten -- than you would if you were to eat
a grazed ruminant like a grass-fed steer or wild game.