this post was submitted on 23 Apr 2025
177 points (90.8% liked)
Climate - truthful information about climate, related activism and politics.
6440 readers
608 users here now
Discussion of climate, how it is changing, activism around that, the politics, and the energy systems change we need in order to stabilize things.
As a starting point, the burning of fossil fuels, and to a lesser extent deforestation and release of methane are responsible for the warming in recent decades:
How much each change to the atmosphere has warmed the world:
Recommended actions to cut greenhouse gas emissions in the near future:
Anti-science, inactivism, and unsupported conspiracy theories are not ok here.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Meh. I wouldn’t eat chicken these days either. You should see how it’s made. Corporate farming is abhorrent.
i literally only have meat on special occasions because of this, the entire meat industry is horrible for animals, for your health (red meat) and for the environment.
nothing helps me enjoy a truly special occasion like a little cruelty, violence, atrocity, and self-harm.
what are you going to do, I'm not immune to social pressure, still a step in the right direction if you ask me
I'm kinda in this camp as well. Barely eat any meat and the meat I do buy is from small local producers where I can meet (hihi) and greet the animals.
How does that work? Do you never eat meat when you go out?
There aren't a ton of places in the world with a good supply of vegetarian/vegan food AND enough of an ag industry you can go around petting your meat.
Going out I have lots of vegan options so that isn't an issue generally. And am not rigid in my principles, being a bit moderate makes me less of an obnoxious cunt. Easier to cook for, take along on outings etc.
If I hold hard on any principle it is that to not let perfect stand in the way of good. Being able to do 90% ethical consumption I find to be much better than failing to be 100% pure.
Dafuq?
So when you buy meat you try to buy local. but when you are not being an obnoxious cunt outside you just eat any old meat?
A majority of restaurants where I live offer at least one vegetarian option on their menu, and commonly also a vegan option (they might be the same)
Just like everyone else on the Internet when the topic of animal ethics comes up.
You'll eat beef but not chickens? You consider cows to be treated differently to how chickens are treated?
Yes, not good, but better. I've worked in industrial chicken and been fairly close to industrial beef, industrial cows are treated mildly better because it is literally impossible for a cow to survive in the conditions chickens are kept in.
Also, their comment said that they wouldn't eat chicken either, not that they wouldn't eat chicken but would eat beef.
You seem to be talking about material conditions. What concerns me more are the psychological conditions and I don't believe there to be any difference in that respect.
Do you believe that the beef which enters a person's body will be in some way less harmful, all else being equal, than chicken? Solely because of the absolute difference in the material conditions?
No, but the beef which enters a person's body won't be harmful to them (the person) at all.
I may be misunderstanding you. Are you talking about the harm caused in its production? As in pound for pound the harm caused by the production process? Because I would like to emphasize that I don't think beef production is less harmful, the additional harm caused to the planet in industrial grade beef far outweighs the difference in animal welfare. It seems slightly weird to me to talk about the meat itself being harmful as it enters the person's body when the harm is in the production.
I also don't understand what you mean by separating "material" vs "psychological" conditions. If you're talking about the psychological state the animals are in while they are alive, as far as I know, the statement stands, industrial cattle live slightly better lives (more space and such,) which results as far as I know, in a better psychological state*.
That's not to say that beef is ok while chicken is not, if chicken is off the table for you, beef definitely should be as well.
*Though it is now occurring to me that comparing the psychological states of chickens and cows may not be an activity with a point.
I differ completely.
Well there's no psychological state when they're dead :-)
Cows having more absolute space than chickens doesn't imply that cows will have a better psychological state. What matters is how much space the animals have relative to how much space the animals need. I would expect farms to give animals precisely as little space as the farm can get away with, meaning the degree of suffering will be exactly at the point of maximum suffering while still surviving, for cows and chickens.
Regardless, I think there's likely more harm to meat eaters due to the psychological impact of being slaughtered.
Generally, there's no data on these issues so it's all just opinion either way. Suffice it to say that to me, your position seems naive.
Ok, I'm going to leave the rest of this alone, because as you said, it seems like mostly opinion either way, but still don't understand how you think meat eaters are being harmed by the poor psychological state of the animals while they were alive.