20:52 minutes... I listened to it while playing a game, I didn't give it too much attention, but I didn't hear anything new. The reason it's relevant is that she's a popular youtuber (148,815 subscribers) who makes videos about veganism.
It really is some kind of echo chamber where even the slightest deviation isn't allowed. I find this comment amusing that starts with
Emily, I got an impression of your possibly agreeing somewhat with Singer's "Heavy Petting," and I do hope I'm wrong. Please clarify your own position much better.
Like it doesn't even occur to people that if Peter Singer said something it may be worth taking a closer look.
As can be expected the video is focused on the anti side and when it finally comes to the arguments... she reads some bits from Pierce Beirne's opinion piece. I.e. just the assertions "they can't consent, just like children". Kinda sad.
WarCanineLove knows no boundaries between species or gender 7 points on 2017-01-28 23:57:48
Yeah, the Youtube comment section never fails to disappoint me.
Hell, basically anything related to Youtube.
Or even any antis at all.
They'll come up with anything these days.
I seriously won't be surprised if they call animals moving plants without brains and call us zoos evil wizards from space or something.
Even though I'm bothered by it, I secretly love how all these comments are actual shit and these people are attracted to it like flies.
Y'know what they say, you are what you eat. ^literally
Skgrsgpf 4 points on 2017-01-29 00:57:21
So is this video an anti-zoo video? (Haven't watched it yet but will).
Edit: just watched it; most of the video is good in that is discusses the horrors of factory farming, and the fact that doing sexual things to them in that context is legal and accepted, but zoosex is not, due to speciesism (hypocrisy). The problem with the video is the final few minutes, in which the person who made the video accepts several fallacies, such as the "interspecies sexual assault" fallacy.
WarCanineLove knows no boundaries between species or gender 2 points on 2017-01-29 01:44:34
Haven't watched it much myself as I mostly try to avoid zoo topics. (It's not really worth it, it's just the same BS like always.)
I just skipped to a few parts and from what I got from it, yes, it's an anti video.
Just not a very aggressive one, but it's a bit sad.
Like /u/fuzzyfurry said, it's nothing really new.
Just like every anti-zoo bullshit, I have to hear it again and again and again and fucking again.
''Animals don't understand the situation and cannot give consent.''
''It's like having sex with a child.''
''It's wrong because almost always force is involved.''
That's what I got from skipping trough the mess that it is. (At the end, mostly)
I also saw some examples where animals were used for farming and were abused by getting shocked anally and their balls crushed.
I wonder if spaying/neutering was mentioned in some way? Because that would make sense too. But if anyone actually wanted to go trough this mess would you kindly tell me?
It's funny how the comments just straight up ruin the video for me.
I could just not look at them, but it's like a magnet.
I can't say if it's funny that they're so dumb or that it's depressing that they think they're right and are basically stronger because of their number.
Swibblestein 3 points on 2017-01-29 07:40:30
You mean I'm... not an evil space wizard?
But then... Oh god. Oh god!
I need some time to process this.
Sheppsoldier 1 point on 2017-01-29 01:17:42
Has anyone ever considered that maybe the antis are the ones into children and they're unjustly applying their own stigma for use against zoos?
These antis do have childish views concerning animals, and it would make sense that children would be attracted to other children.
There's just something unusually childish about people who would stigmatize against a person having sex with animals. Coincidentally, these people also target children with their advertisements and propaganda. Ironic right?
WarCanineLove knows no boundaries between species or gender 7 points on 2017-01-29 02:07:00
Stop.
Just stop.
You believe that the majority of humanity actually is attracted to children?
Good job mate, you've embarrassed us just now.
Hey outsiders, we actually aren't like th- fuck it, that won't work...
Their views (and mostly their behavior too) may be childish, but what has that to do with their attraction? Lmao.
They actually believe it is wrong because they lack certain knowledge about animals and their behavior.
The reason they compare animals to children is because of these problems: Intelligence and not being aware of their actions.
And many more reasons like religion, scientists that claim that animals are like 3 year olds, etc. (All sheepy reasons.)
While any of that isn't true, you get the idea. It doesn't have to do with their ''secret attractions'' or whatever you're trying to say.
Look man, I know their mentality is extremely confusing and you're trying to find a reason behind it, but this is not how you do it.
Sheppsoldier 1 point on 2017-01-29 03:23:55
I never said the majority of humanity is into children, and the majority of humanity is not against zoophilia. There are some very outspoken minorities that you might be mistaking for a majority. They have their reasons and I wouldn't go so far to just simply turn a blind eye to the possibility of a distraction, or a "package deal" setup.
Everybody has secrets.
Oh of course they lack certain knowledge. That's known as "naivety" which is a trait of children. Maybe they're just pretending to be naive for nefarious reasons.
See here... If they can persuade society to label child lovers and animal lovers as part of a "set", then they put us in a double bind situation where we would have to decriminalize pedophilia as part of the "package deal" if sex with animals is decriminalized. You know, like what happened in Lawrence vs. Texas? The whole package was released after that.
Claiming that we are outnumbered is discouraging. It's a weakening tactic. Why would you even bother trying to discredit me, and why would you bother discouraging zoos? Why do such a thing? Why make them feel outnumbered with no chances?
I know there's zoos out there with "alternative" motivations, because people change. They got bored of animals. There's also plenty of fakes. Don't let that be you. I wouldn't be surprised if this place is infested with them.
Seriously, it looks like you're defending and "empowering" the antis. Perhaps you should be more careful?
Truly, a motivational speaker for the people who want us locked up and executed.
I've spoken to users on both BeastForum and Zoophilesforum who were like that. If theyre standing up and speaking for the guys that want us dead, they might as well swallow that cyanide pill now.
WarCanineLove knows no boundaries between species or gender 3 points on 2017-01-29 04:22:04
I never said the majority of humanity is into children, and the majority of humanity is not against zoophilia. There are some very outspoken minorities that you might be mistaking for a majority. They have their reasons and I wouldn't go so far to just simply turn a blind eye to the possibility of a distraction, or a "package deal" setup.
Ah yes, we've got SO MUCH people on our side huh?
Look at the laws.
Look at the amount of hate. Anywhere.
Look at anything related to zoophilia.
I dare you, talk to anyone about zoophilia.
Online or even in real life. Do it.
Everybody has secrets.
So what?
You're accusing them of something you don't have evidence of.
Oh of course they lack certain knowledge. That's known as "naivety" which is a trait of children. Maybe they're just pretending to be naive for nefarious reasons. See here... If they can persuade society to label child lovers and animal lovers as part of a "set", then they put us in a double bind situation where we would have to decriminalize pedophilia as part of the "package deal" if sex with animals is decriminalized. You know, like what happened in Lawrence vs. Texas? The whole package was released after that.
That's fucking dumb and unbelievable.
That would be an extremely dumb tactic, even for them.
Still no evidence for what you've accused them of.
Claiming that we are outnumbered is discouraging. It's a weakening tactic. Why would you even bother trying to discredit me, and why would you bother discouraging zoos? Why do such a thing? Why make them feel outnumbered with no chances?
Maybe because I prefer truth over lying?
Lying isn't going to get us anywhere.
We have to face the cold hard truth.
You can't just tell people bad shit don't happen and that you're going to live for eternity.
What the fuck kind of mentality is that even?
I know there's zoos out there with "alternative" motivations, because people change. They got bored of animals.
''bored'' of animals?
You mean the people who are desperate for a sex slave or the people going trough phases?
There's also plenty of fakes. Don't let that be you. I wouldn't be surprised if this place is infested with them. Seriously, it looks like you're defending and "empowering" the antis. Perhaps you should be more careful? Truly, a motivational speaker for the people who want us locked up and executed.
So I guess all the times I have defended zoophilia I was just bullshitting, right?
Now, I make even a slightly different move and BOOM!
And now I'm being accused of being a spy for the second time.
Don't worry man, it's obvious that you're calling me that.
Funny how these two accusers give off the same disgusting vibe.
ure right tho, all this timee ive been a copp police trying to get youre ''seekrit intelgens''!!!
got ur IP noaw and its time 2 report yu a lot discusting animel fukor heyahehaeha!!!
No, just no.
You're wearing an impressive tin foil hat today.
You've even beat my record of being too paranoid about shit like this.
Look at this account, now if I am someone trying to catch zoophiles that's some fucking dedication I tell ya.
How am I on the anti's side if I just am against the idea of them having attractions of children?
I'm not even the slightest on their side.
I prefer truth over lies.
Are you seriously lying to yourself to make yourself feel better or as revenge?
Wake up from your dream, or nightmare whatever you want to call it.
You know what the saddest part is?
Just from this comment I know that you aren't aware what reality is.
Under the impression that every anti has brain problems or weird attractions themselves...
Under the impression that I'm some sort of spy.
Under the impression that zoophilia isn't hated by the majority of humans.
I find it saddening.
But like I said longer ago, I don't usually sympathize with humans unless you're for some reason important to me.
Enjoy your own dream land, where your direction is entirely yours.
^^Don't ^^get ^^lost ^^now.
Sheppsoldier 0 points on 2017-01-29 15:12:09
Dont try so hard. Obviously, all you're efforts are poised to help them. Way too much sympathy, too much support, and empowerment for the bad guys.
What kind of person would dislike what I say so much, that they would use or create a desperate situation, sacrificing zoos to discredit me?
That's no better than those people who use Ken Pinyans death, they use dead people and animals to justify their anti-zoo agendas.
Since the zoo community taught people to deny the truth, and you are denying, it is no secret that people who deny as defense are in fact harboring secrets. How could you possibly favor the truth if you're main defense is to hide from it? In that case, your denial is the biggest lie.
WarCanineLove knows no boundaries between species or gender 3 points on 2017-01-29 16:24:23
Obviously, all you're efforts are poised to help them.
Do you have any evidence that I've defended antis?
I'd like to see some comments from another thread, too.
too much support and empowerment for the bad guys.
I'd like some evidence for that.
I don't support antis in any way.
Lies to comfort yourself < Truth
What kind of person would dislike what I say so much, that they would use or create a desperate situation, sacrificing zoos to discredit me?
What now?
You've been going on an adventure where I clearly didn't take part in.
Since the zoo community taught people to deny the truth, and you are denying, it is no secret that people who deny as defense are in fact harboring secrets.
''taught'' people to deny the truth?
Stop living in your own world man.
I'm not denying any truth by the way.
Unless you're talking about the fact that I don't agree with me being a spy.
Well in that case, I can use the same logic on you.
You are a mentally unstable person who is sick in his head and also a spy.
You cannot tell me otherwise, because then you would be denying the truth and you're keeping it a secret.
How could you possibly favor the truth if you're main defense is to hide from it? In that case, your denial is the biggest lie.
I still haven't got the evidence that I am denying the truth.
Look at your negative comment karma, man.
Yeah, us zoos are definitely on your side. Truly!
I really feel bad that a person like you exists.
I hope that you're secretly a troll, because a person like you might make people want to kill themselves.
You're an embarrassment to us. Good job.
Well, you're still arguing with and trying to discredit what I'm saying. If you weren't defending them you wouldn't be struggling so hard against the waves I've created. You wouldn't have jumped in the water with the sharks to begin with.
You want proof? See above. Rather, don't look and lets play make believe that you did because if it works for you that's all that matters.
Am I not being "fair" to the anti-zoos? I don't understand what the problem is. We're supposedly "outnumbered" but it hurts your feelings that I'm so cruel to them? You're embarrassed? Damned well better be.
Nice derailment btw, but this isn't about grammar. This isn't middle schooll or whatever popularity competition you're using as an excuse to change the subject. That's childish...and you remember what I said earlier about childish people intimately relating to children, right?
However, I'm not the one defending the antis, so there's no way you can reverse logic you're way out of this one. Don't be their hero. Don't be a hero for the kiddie fondlers. If you were smart you wouldn't say anything at all.
OK, I'm not very concerned about reddit karma. There's ways around it because it's not real karma. There's a shortage of real things around here and it's no secret that unreal people would favor and intimately relate to other fakes. That's called "circle jerking"
Am I afraid of reddit karma, where I would shut up to avoid it? No. Am I afraid of the anti-zoos, where I would stick up for them to save myself? No. Am I afraid of being banned? No.
Am I afraid of not being socially accepted? No.
I'm not that insecure.
Im not afraid of fakes, half-truth fact checkers, or clique fiends. They're all walking on crutches, hiding behind curtains, gobbling each other's flobbers and nothing comes of it. They're all just sharing and passing someone else's stale jizz amongst the circle.
Grow some nuts and push back against this "overwhelming" opposition, instead of pushing at something you're supposed to be familiar with but still couldn't figure out.
WarCanineLove knows no boundaries between species or gender 3 points on 2017-01-30 07:42:51
Well, you're still arguing with and trying to discredit what I'm saying. If you weren't defending them you wouldn't be struggling so hard against the waves I've created. You wouldn't have jumped in the water with the sharks to begin with. You want proof? See above. Rather, don't look and lets play make believe that you did because if it works for you that's all that matters.
So only this thread is proof?
Well, why won't we take a look at the other threads where I've posted?
Ouch, that's a fucking lot of comments where I'm pro-zoo and totally anti-anti.
This ''if-you-defend-them-you-are-them'' mentality needs to stop.
According to your logic, AmoreBestia is also a zoo.
I'd 'defend' anyone if there's lies flying around about them.
It doesn't matter what group you're part of. Man, even ISIS.
Nice derailment btw, but this isn't about grammar. This isn't middle schooll or whatever popularity competition you're using as an excuse to change the subject. That's childish...and you remember what I said earlier about childish people intimately relating to children, right?
It's not a derailment.
What I said was literally one sentence hidden at the end of my message.
If I was derailing, I would have talked about it way more than I did and would have ignored the rest of your message.
The subject wasn't changed since I covered your weird and unnecessary assumptions.
I was just applauding you for the fact that you're misusing ''you're'' every time.
Funny how children are the ones that usually make that mistake, huh?
And being childish does not mean you are attracted to children.
However, I'm not the one defending the antis, so there's no way you can reverse logic you're way out of this one. Don't be their hero. Don't be a hero for the kiddie fondlers. If you were smart you wouldn't say anything at all.
According to your logic, yes I can.
I won't be their hero as they're not even on my side.
OK, I'm not very concerned about reddit karma. There's ways around it because it's not real karma. There's a shortage of real things around here and it's no secret that unreal people would favor and intimately relate to other fakes. That's called "circle jerking"
Now you're blaming it on circle jerking, again with no evidence.
You're talking about the zoos who roam around here, you know?
Am I afraid of reddit karma, where I would shut up to avoid it? No. Am I afraid of the anti-zoos, where I would stick up for them to save myself? No. Am I afraid of being banned? No. Am I afraid of not being socially accepted? No. I'm not that insecure. Im not afraid of fakes, half-truth fact checkers, or clique fiends.
Wow, big boy!
I bet you punched their jaws out, made 'em wet their pants and kicked their guts in!
Truly a person to watch out for.
They're all walking on crutches, hiding behind curtains, gobbling each other's flobbers and nothing comes of it. They're all just sharing and passing someone else's stale jizz amongst the circle.
The antis? Yes. The zoos disagreeing with you? No.
Grow some nuts and push back against this "overwhelming" opposition, instead of pushing at something you're supposed to be familiar with but still couldn't figure out.
If you wake up from you never ending dream, then I will.
But that's likely never going to happen as you're very delusional.
No wonder people use the damn word so much against us, look at this booby hatch escapee!
Your logic is so sad.
You know I'm right and then you call me one of them.
Also, you are accusing them of being attracted to children just because you are childish yourself.
If somebody told me that nazis flew around in a spaceship I would also 'defend' them.
Does that make me a nazi or even support them? Obviously not.
This is a common thing that people do, you cannot accept the facts and start assuming things.
And if you actually read all my previous posts you would know I'm a real zoo, sadly.
Sheppsoldier 1 point on 2017-01-30 11:12:26
Uh no. Everybody makes mistakes. My mistake was believing that a childish being like yourself would understand complex ideas and hypothesis. Whatever you like to call a conspiracy theory is just the half-ass unwillingness to understand and "expand" on new concepts. It's isn't wise to defend against these concepts, the facts that you don't agree with, especially if you refused to investigate them.
If you could not understand your mistakes then I'm sorry youre not perfect. Must be my fault. Everybody needs a scapegoat for their misunderstandings right?
I'm just saying, if they agree with childish concepts then they obviously get along better with them. Children are their peers. It's not like theyre going to get intimate with the adults they can't relate to and can't stand being around. That's common sense.
Another mistake. Don't add fluff to you're arguments if you're not going to apply it, and don't apply concepts (like that whole ISIS thing) unless you're going to do it right. Elaborate more. Increase you're capacity for facts. Another thing, don't even attempt to gaslight if you're not in control of the light. You refuse to obtain new facts to increase the luminosity. In other words, youre not affecting me at all. You're severely limited to a box that grows ever smaller because you thought it was a good idea to empower those people outside of the box, meanwhile you're filling your box with fluff. Running short on versatility?
If you're more concerned with discrediting me instead of discrediting the antis, then you cannot be a real zoo. You might just be using the lifestyle as some kind of abstract status symbol. Like a metro-sexual who appears to be gay, dresses like a gay but really isn't. They just copied the trend, and it's no different if you've been copying trends too. Doesn't matter how many posts you have if it's all for show. Meant to look pretty like everyone else.
I prefer not to go to those lengths. I don't stroke egos to avoid bias or narcissistic injuries.
I'm so so sorry that I made your "shoes" look bad!
In reality, I wouldn't be able to make zoos look bad or embarrass them if they were being true to themselves. Viewing me or zoophilia as an extension of yourselves, in such a way, is very unhealthy. It's the symptom of a personality disorder.
Yes, could be sad indeed. Not as an insult but as an actual emotion.
Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
I never said you are antizoo. Get the facts straight.
I said you're enabling antizoos because they give you attention for the "zoo jeans" you're wearing. If I'm beating on the anti-zoos, theres a chance they won't give you attention and that must threaten your narcissistic supply which in turn causes narcissistic injury. Who cares about other zoos, when everybody supposed to be watching "your zoo" right? It's no wonder you would defend the anti-zoos.
I claimed that you're flaunting zoo merely as an asthetically applied decoration. Like a pretty hat. That's your tinfoil hat. Honestly I'd rather see people using real tinfoil, instead of using zoophilia as the tinfoil.
If Im making your zoo look bad, then you're obviously concerned about its trendyness as apparel and not an actual state of being. Therefore, you are "wearing" zoo and not actually "being" zoo.
Maybe it's time for you to recognize that "posing" is not the same as "being?" Do you know the difference or is that just another fact you would like to repress under the cover of a dimming light?
WarCanineLove knows no boundaries between species or gender 5 points on 2017-01-30 16:49:14
Uh no. Everybody makes mistakes. My mistake was believing that a childish being like yourself would understand complex ideas and hypothesis.
Do you know how ironic this is?
Reread our comments and see for yourself.
I doubt a person like you can see it because of your limited vision.
Whatever you like to call a conspiracy theory is just the half-ass unwillingness to understand and "expand" on new concepts. It's isn't wise to defend against these concepts, the facts that you don't agree with, especially if you refused to investigate them.
And where did you get that from?
Just because I don't agree with you doesn't mean I 'refuse' to 'investigate' your lies.
If you could not understand your mistakes then I'm sorry youre not perfect. Must be my fault. Everybody needs a scapegoat for their misunderstandings right?
I understand my mistake, and that is talking to you in the first place.
The best we could do to scum like you is straight up ignore the bullshit flowing out of your mouth.
I remember /u/30-30 giving me advice about this sort of thing, but I can't really blame myself here because I didn't know you were just like your mentally unstable twin doppelganger who I shall not name.
I'm just saying, if they agree with childish concepts then they obviously get along better with them. Children are their peers. It's not like theyre going to get intimate with the adults they can't relate to and can't stand being around. That's common sense.
Yeah you're ''just saying'' that but you're only making yourself look like a fool.
How does agreeing with childish concepts make people get along with children? What you’ve just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard.
Also, nice ''common sense'' sticker you put on your argument.
Unfortunately for you, that's not how it works.
Remember: Your arguments have to make sense, a sticker won't do shit.
Another mistake. Don't add fluff to you're arguments if you're not going to apply it, and don't apply concepts (like that whole ISIS thing) unless you're going to do it right. Elaborate more. Increase you're capacity for facts. Another thing, don't even attempt to gaslight if you're not in control of the light.
Oh look, a wishlist!
I don't have to do anything, what I said is enough for any normal rational person to understand.
If you can't, then you clearly have a problem.
You refuse to obtain new facts to increase the luminosity. In other words, youre not affecting me at all.
Actually I do, I listened to what you had to say and called it bullshit because it is.
It was pretty obvious I wasn't affecting you at all.
You go way farther than you look.
I hope your future will be bright.
Let's just hope it's not too bright for you, because it might affect your vision, which is already at stake.
You're severely limited to a box that grows ever smaller because you thought it was a good idea to empower those people outside of the box, meanwhile you're filling your box with fluff. Running short on versatility?
Not really, I'm willing to learn new things.
First they'd have to make sense, so that does not include your arguments.
This box grows bigger every day.
Even though I have a giant hatred for humanity, I still learn about new kinds of humans.
You're a very special kind, I tell you.
''empower those people''
Here we go again: I'm not defending them.
I'm defending reason, which is not you calling them things that they aren't.
As I said, I'd defend anything if they're wrongly accused.
If you're more concerned with discrediting me instead of discrediting the antis
I'm not doing this to 'discredit' you.
As I said: I'm defending reason.
I don't do this for the antis, I do this because I have to correct you so your bubble might be popped some day. ZZZzzzzZZZZZZZzzzZZZzz
then you cannot be a real zoo. You might just be using the lifestyle as some kind of abstract status symbol. Like a metro-sexual who appears to be gay, dresses like a gay but really isn't. They just copied the trend, and it's no different if you've been copying trends too. Doesn't matter how many posts you have if it's all for show. Meant to look pretty like everyone else. I prefer not to go to those lengths.
I guess all your posts are all for show too, then.
If you actually looked at my posts, you would know what I would give serious advice and opinions about zoophilia.
You cannot tell someone that he isn't what he is.
Especially with an attraction that cannot be chosen.
I don't stroke egos to avoid bias or narcissistic injuries.
That's because you only believe shit like this because of bias.
You don't like the outsiders, and for that reason you wanted to make fun of them, but even there you horribly and hilariously failed.
I'm so so sorry that I made your "shoes" look bad! In reality, I wouldn't be able to make zoos look bad or embarrass them if they were being true to themselves.
In your reality? Yes.
But in actual reality? No.
If you think so, why don't you ask all the other zoos here?
Viewing me or zoophilia as an extension of yourselves, in such a way, is very unhealthy. It's the symptom of a personality disorder.
Irrelevant since not anyone does that here.
I never said you are antizoo.
Make it more clearer next time then.
I guess it's hard say to what you actually want to say if your mouth is full of shit, huh?
I said you're enabling antizoos because they give you attention for the "zoo jeans" you're wearing. If I'm beating on the anti-zoos, theres a chance they won't give you attention and that must threaten your narcissistic supply which in turn causes narcissistic injury.
Not really, but okay.
Besides, there's no anti-zoo anywhere around here.
They're lurkers and don't speak.
I guess I can tell you the same thing since you're so obsessed with them calling kiddie fondlers.
Who cares about other zoos, when everybody supposed to be watching "your zoo" right?
I don't get your logic, but now I don't get your message at all.
I claimed that you're flaunting zoo merely as an asthetically applied decoration. Like a pretty hat. If I can make your zoo look bad, then you're obviously concerned about its trendyness as apparel and not an actual state of being. Therefore, you are "wearing" zoo and not actually "being" zoo.
As I said, you can't tell someone what he is and isn't. Especially if it's something you can't choose, like a sexual orientation.
I'd also like some evidence where my behavior clearly shows signs of me being a ''fake zoo.''
Maybe it's time for you to recognize that "posing" is not the same as "being?"
I know the difference since long ago, no thanks.
Glad I don't pose as anything or anyone, there is no good reason to.
TokenHorseGuy 2 points on 2017-02-01 02:44:17
Please confront the subject, not the person.
Nearly every sentence in this response is some kind of personal jab, or is the setup for one, and it seems to me like it is (successfully) egging War on to respond in kind.
Calling someone a "childish being" - or "scum like you" as in War's response - is not necessary to get your point across.
30-30amator equae 2 points on 2017-01-30 12:17:52
"Anyone not agreeing with me has to be part of the "anti zoo
conspiracy". Oh, nevermind facts like we´re outnumbered by far , mentioning reality also is proof that you´re part of the conspiracy."
Wow, lots of tinfoil in use...let´s play a game, WarCanine...Can you spot him first...? ;)
I never said you are antizoo. Get the facts straight.
I said you're enabling antizoos because they give you attention for the "zoo jeans" you're wearing. If I'm beating them down theres a chance they won't give you attention, and that threatens your narcissistic supply which in turn causes narcissistic injury. Who cares about other zoos, when everybody supposed to be watching your zoo right? It's no wonder you would defend them.
I claimed that you're flaunting zoo merely as an asthetically applied decoration.
If I can make you look bad by being zoo, then you're obviously concerned about its trendyness as apparel and not an actual state of being. Therefore, you are "wearing" zoo and not actually "being" zoo.
Maybe it's time for you to recognize that "posing" is not the same as "being?"
Sheppsoldier 0 points on 2017-01-30 14:51:40
I never said you are antizoo. Get the facts straight.
I said you're enabling antizoos because they give you attention for the "zoo jeans" you're wearing. If I'm beating on the anti-zoos, theres a chance they won't give you attention and that must threaten your narcissistic supply which in turn causes narcissistic injury. Who cares about other zoos, when everybody supposed to be watching "your zoo" right? It's no wonder you would defend them.
I claimed that you're flaunting zoo merely as an asthetically applied decoration. Like a pretty hat.
If I can make your zoo look bad, then you're obviously concerned about its trendyness as apparel and not an actual state of being. Therefore, you are "wearing" zoo and not actually "being" zoo.
Maybe it's time for you to recognize that "posing" is not the same as "being?" Do you know the difference or is that another fact you would like to repress under the darkness of a dimming light?
Sheppsoldier 0 points on 2017-01-30 15:23:11
Rather see people using actual tinfoil, instead of using zoophilia as the tinfoil.
wright-oneursidae canidae pantherinae 1 point on 2017-01-30 07:56:31
agreeing with /u/Skgrsgpf ..
i didn't watch the video but read the article ( thanks to /u/fuzzyfurry ). great article up until the end. HOW .. after citing the example of the pig farmer who had to treat each boar differently to get them to cum, and after talking about how female pigs have to be properly stimulated to become pregnant .. does that not show that animals can enjoy sex .. can she just blindly accept the statement from piers beirne - "Bestiality involves sexual coercion because animals are incapable of saying yes or no to humans in forms that humans can readily understand…" clearly that pig farmer can understand ...
ZooIam 1 point on 2017-01-30 16:25:53
Seems that she wasn't honestly asking wether or not bestiaity is 'bad', rather, she was forming an argument that leverages the average persons repulsion to bestiality and attributing the same standard of 'bad' to the meat industry.
It's more anti-meat than pro zoo, which is why the consent argument was used as the conclusion.
KynophileDog lover 1 point on 2017-01-30 18:32:55
I have to say, this is the best reasoned anti-zoo video I've ever seen. It largely focuses on the hypocrisy of common disgust given how much worse common agricultural practices arguably are. Granted, it is an attempt to leverage that disgust into disgust at industrial farming, but that's more noble than the disgust it replaces.
Is it biased? Yes. This is a vegan activist, using other animal rights activists as sources. Piers Beirne is used a few times, unsurprisingly, considering he is one of a handful of writers on the subject.
But I obviously still find the same flaws in these arguments as when Beirne used them: the potential for harm combined with a few egregious cases (in this case, related to meat and milk production entirely) are supposed to justify outrage over the quiet farmer lovingly worshipping his mare's rear end, or the woman presenting to her dog and enjoying the ride. But even accepting their arguments about animal sentience and oppression, I find it difficult to justify this stance if the goal is improving the well being of animals.
CantThinkOfAName2017Prefers humans, but likes female dogs and mares 2 points on 2017-01-31 01:11:33
I don't know what it is about vegans, but most of them are pretty insane.
fuzzyfurry 3 points on 2017-01-31 09:49:44
As a vegan, I can confirm, am pretty insane.
WarCanineLove knows no boundaries between species or gender 2 points on 2017-01-31 20:25:36
C'mon, every group has their vocal local idiot.
Although I don't think it has anything to do with the group they are in, but species instead.
/r/zoophilia archive
20:52 minutes... I listened to it while playing a game, I didn't give it too much attention, but I didn't hear anything new. The reason it's relevant is that she's a popular youtuber (148,815 subscribers) who makes videos about veganism.
It really is some kind of echo chamber where even the slightest deviation isn't allowed. I find this comment amusing that starts with
Like it doesn't even occur to people that if Peter Singer said something it may be worth taking a closer look.
As can be expected the video is focused on the anti side and when it finally comes to the arguments... she reads some bits from Pierce Beirne's opinion piece. I.e. just the assertions "they can't consent, just like children". Kinda sad.
Yeah, the Youtube comment section never fails to disappoint me.
Hell, basically anything related to Youtube.
Or even any antis at all.
They'll come up with anything these days.
I seriously won't be surprised if they call animals moving plants without brains and call us zoos evil wizards from space or something.
Even though I'm bothered by it, I secretly love how all these comments are actual shit and these people are attracted to it like flies.
Y'know what they say, you are what you eat. ^literally
So is this video an anti-zoo video? (Haven't watched it yet but will).
Edit: just watched it; most of the video is good in that is discusses the horrors of factory farming, and the fact that doing sexual things to them in that context is legal and accepted, but zoosex is not, due to speciesism (hypocrisy). The problem with the video is the final few minutes, in which the person who made the video accepts several fallacies, such as the "interspecies sexual assault" fallacy.
Haven't watched it much myself as I mostly try to avoid zoo topics. (It's not really worth it, it's just the same BS like always.)
I just skipped to a few parts and from what I got from it, yes, it's an anti video.
Just not a very aggressive one, but it's a bit sad.
Like /u/fuzzyfurry said, it's nothing really new.
Just like every anti-zoo bullshit, I have to hear it again and again and again and fucking again.
''Animals don't understand the situation and cannot give consent.''
''It's like having sex with a child.''
''It's wrong because almost always force is involved.''
That's what I got from skipping trough the mess that it is. (At the end, mostly)
I also saw some examples where animals were used for farming and were abused by getting shocked anally and their balls crushed.
I wonder if spaying/neutering was mentioned in some way? Because that would make sense too. But if anyone actually wanted to go trough this mess would you kindly tell me?
It's funny how the comments just straight up ruin the video for me.
I could just not look at them, but it's like a magnet.
I can't say if it's funny that they're so dumb or that it's depressing that they think they're right and are basically stronger because of their number.
You mean I'm... not an evil space wizard?
But then... Oh god. Oh god!
I need some time to process this.
Has anyone ever considered that maybe the antis are the ones into children and they're unjustly applying their own stigma for use against zoos? These antis do have childish views concerning animals, and it would make sense that children would be attracted to other children.
There's just something unusually childish about people who would stigmatize against a person having sex with animals. Coincidentally, these people also target children with their advertisements and propaganda. Ironic right?
Stop.
Just stop.
You believe that the majority of humanity actually is attracted to children?
Good job mate, you've embarrassed us just now.
Hey outsiders, we actually aren't like th- fuck it, that won't work...
Their views (and mostly their behavior too) may be childish, but what has that to do with their attraction? Lmao.
They actually believe it is wrong because they lack certain knowledge about animals and their behavior.
The reason they compare animals to children is because of these problems: Intelligence and not being aware of their actions.
And many more reasons like religion, scientists that claim that animals are like 3 year olds, etc. (All sheepy reasons.)
While any of that isn't true, you get the idea. It doesn't have to do with their ''secret attractions'' or whatever you're trying to say.
Look man, I know their mentality is extremely confusing and you're trying to find a reason behind it, but this is not how you do it.
I never said the majority of humanity is into children, and the majority of humanity is not against zoophilia. There are some very outspoken minorities that you might be mistaking for a majority. They have their reasons and I wouldn't go so far to just simply turn a blind eye to the possibility of a distraction, or a "package deal" setup.
Everybody has secrets.
Oh of course they lack certain knowledge. That's known as "naivety" which is a trait of children. Maybe they're just pretending to be naive for nefarious reasons. See here... If they can persuade society to label child lovers and animal lovers as part of a "set", then they put us in a double bind situation where we would have to decriminalize pedophilia as part of the "package deal" if sex with animals is decriminalized. You know, like what happened in Lawrence vs. Texas? The whole package was released after that.
Claiming that we are outnumbered is discouraging. It's a weakening tactic. Why would you even bother trying to discredit me, and why would you bother discouraging zoos? Why do such a thing? Why make them feel outnumbered with no chances?
I know there's zoos out there with "alternative" motivations, because people change. They got bored of animals. There's also plenty of fakes. Don't let that be you. I wouldn't be surprised if this place is infested with them. Seriously, it looks like you're defending and "empowering" the antis. Perhaps you should be more careful? Truly, a motivational speaker for the people who want us locked up and executed.
I've spoken to users on both BeastForum and Zoophilesforum who were like that. If theyre standing up and speaking for the guys that want us dead, they might as well swallow that cyanide pill now.
Ah yes, we've got SO MUCH people on our side huh?
Look at the laws.
Look at the amount of hate. Anywhere.
Look at anything related to zoophilia.
I dare you, talk to anyone about zoophilia.
Online or even in real life. Do it.
So what?
You're accusing them of something you don't have evidence of.
That's fucking dumb and unbelievable.
That would be an extremely dumb tactic, even for them.
Still no evidence for what you've accused them of.
Maybe because I prefer truth over lying?
Lying isn't going to get us anywhere.
We have to face the cold hard truth.
You can't just tell people bad shit don't happen and that you're going to live for eternity.
What the fuck kind of mentality is that even?
''bored'' of animals?
You mean the people who are desperate for a sex slave or the people going trough phases?
So I guess all the times I have defended zoophilia I was just bullshitting, right?
Now, I make even a slightly different move and BOOM!
And now I'm being accused of being a spy for the second time.
Don't worry man, it's obvious that you're calling me that.
Funny how these two accusers give off the same disgusting vibe.
ure right tho, all this timee ive been a copp police trying to get youre ''seekrit intelgens''!!!
got ur IP noaw and its time 2 report yu a lot discusting animel fukor heyahehaeha!!!
No, just no.
You're wearing an impressive tin foil hat today.
You've even beat my record of being too paranoid about shit like this.
Look at this account, now if I am someone trying to catch zoophiles that's some fucking dedication I tell ya.
How am I on the anti's side if I just am against the idea of them having attractions of children?
I'm not even the slightest on their side.
I prefer truth over lies.
Are you seriously lying to yourself to make yourself feel better or as revenge?
Wake up from your dream, or nightmare whatever you want to call it.
You know what the saddest part is?
Just from this comment I know that you aren't aware what reality is.
Under the impression that every anti has brain problems or weird attractions themselves...
Under the impression that I'm some sort of spy.
Under the impression that zoophilia isn't hated by the majority of humans.
I find it saddening.
But like I said longer ago, I don't usually sympathize with humans unless you're for some reason important to me.
Enjoy your own dream land, where your direction is entirely yours.
^^Don't ^^get ^^lost ^^now.
Dont try so hard. Obviously, all you're efforts are poised to help them. Way too much sympathy, too much support, and empowerment for the bad guys. What kind of person would dislike what I say so much, that they would use or create a desperate situation, sacrificing zoos to discredit me? That's no better than those people who use Ken Pinyans death, they use dead people and animals to justify their anti-zoo agendas.
Since the zoo community taught people to deny the truth, and you are denying, it is no secret that people who deny as defense are in fact harboring secrets. How could you possibly favor the truth if you're main defense is to hide from it? In that case, your denial is the biggest lie.
Do you have any evidence that I've defended antis?
I'd like to see some comments from another thread, too.
https://www.reddit.com/r/zoophilia/comments/5q9mv6/ummm_sorry/dcxm2qs/
Of course.
I'd like some evidence for that.
I don't support antis in any way.
Lies to comfort yourself < Truth
What now?
You've been going on an adventure where I clearly didn't take part in.
''taught'' people to deny the truth?
Stop living in your own world man.
I'm not denying any truth by the way.
Unless you're talking about the fact that I don't agree with me being a spy.
Well in that case, I can use the same logic on you.
You are a mentally unstable person who is sick in his head and also a spy.
You cannot tell me otherwise, because then you would be denying the truth and you're keeping it a secret.
I still haven't got the evidence that I am denying the truth.
Look at your negative comment karma, man.
Yeah, us zoos are definitely on your side. Truly!
I really feel bad that a person like you exists.
I hope that you're secretly a troll, because a person like you might make people want to kill themselves.
You're an embarrassment to us. Good job.
^^Nice ^^you-must-agree-with-me-or-you-are-a-spy ^^mentality.
^^Nice ^^grammar ^^too, ^^by ^^the ^^way!
Well, you're still arguing with and trying to discredit what I'm saying. If you weren't defending them you wouldn't be struggling so hard against the waves I've created. You wouldn't have jumped in the water with the sharks to begin with. You want proof? See above. Rather, don't look and lets play make believe that you did because if it works for you that's all that matters.
Am I not being "fair" to the anti-zoos? I don't understand what the problem is. We're supposedly "outnumbered" but it hurts your feelings that I'm so cruel to them? You're embarrassed? Damned well better be.
Nice derailment btw, but this isn't about grammar. This isn't middle schooll or whatever popularity competition you're using as an excuse to change the subject. That's childish...and you remember what I said earlier about childish people intimately relating to children, right?
However, I'm not the one defending the antis, so there's no way you can reverse logic you're way out of this one. Don't be their hero. Don't be a hero for the kiddie fondlers. If you were smart you wouldn't say anything at all.
OK, I'm not very concerned about reddit karma. There's ways around it because it's not real karma. There's a shortage of real things around here and it's no secret that unreal people would favor and intimately relate to other fakes. That's called "circle jerking"
Am I afraid of reddit karma, where I would shut up to avoid it? No. Am I afraid of the anti-zoos, where I would stick up for them to save myself? No. Am I afraid of being banned? No. Am I afraid of not being socially accepted? No. I'm not that insecure. Im not afraid of fakes, half-truth fact checkers, or clique fiends. They're all walking on crutches, hiding behind curtains, gobbling each other's flobbers and nothing comes of it. They're all just sharing and passing someone else's stale jizz amongst the circle.
Grow some nuts and push back against this "overwhelming" opposition, instead of pushing at something you're supposed to be familiar with but still couldn't figure out.
So only this thread is proof?
Well, why won't we take a look at the other threads where I've posted?
Ouch, that's a fucking lot of comments where I'm pro-zoo and totally anti-anti.
This ''if-you-defend-them-you-are-them'' mentality needs to stop.
According to your logic, AmoreBestia is also a zoo.
I'd 'defend' anyone if there's lies flying around about them.
It doesn't matter what group you're part of. Man, even ISIS.
It's not a derailment.
What I said was literally one sentence hidden at the end of my message.
If I was derailing, I would have talked about it way more than I did and would have ignored the rest of your message.
The subject wasn't changed since I covered your weird and unnecessary assumptions.
I was just applauding you for the fact that you're misusing ''you're'' every time.
Funny how children are the ones that usually make that mistake, huh?
And being childish does not mean you are attracted to children.
According to your logic, yes I can.
I won't be their hero as they're not even on my side.
Now you're blaming it on circle jerking, again with no evidence.
You're talking about the zoos who roam around here, you know?
Wow, big boy!
I bet you punched their jaws out, made 'em wet their pants and kicked their guts in!
Truly a person to watch out for.
The antis? Yes. The zoos disagreeing with you? No.
If you wake up from you never ending dream, then I will.
But that's likely never going to happen as you're very delusional.
No wonder people use the damn word so much against us, look at this booby hatch escapee!
Your logic is so sad.
You know I'm right and then you call me one of them.
Also, you are accusing them of being attracted to children just because you are childish yourself.
If somebody told me that nazis flew around in a spaceship I would also 'defend' them.
Does that make me a nazi or even support them? Obviously not.
This is a common thing that people do, you cannot accept the facts and start assuming things.
And if you actually read all my previous posts you would know I'm a real zoo, sadly.
Uh no. Everybody makes mistakes. My mistake was believing that a childish being like yourself would understand complex ideas and hypothesis. Whatever you like to call a conspiracy theory is just the half-ass unwillingness to understand and "expand" on new concepts. It's isn't wise to defend against these concepts, the facts that you don't agree with, especially if you refused to investigate them.
If you could not understand your mistakes then I'm sorry youre not perfect. Must be my fault. Everybody needs a scapegoat for their misunderstandings right?
I'm just saying, if they agree with childish concepts then they obviously get along better with them. Children are their peers. It's not like theyre going to get intimate with the adults they can't relate to and can't stand being around. That's common sense.
Another mistake. Don't add fluff to you're arguments if you're not going to apply it, and don't apply concepts (like that whole ISIS thing) unless you're going to do it right. Elaborate more. Increase you're capacity for facts. Another thing, don't even attempt to gaslight if you're not in control of the light. You refuse to obtain new facts to increase the luminosity. In other words, youre not affecting me at all. You're severely limited to a box that grows ever smaller because you thought it was a good idea to empower those people outside of the box, meanwhile you're filling your box with fluff. Running short on versatility?
If you're more concerned with discrediting me instead of discrediting the antis, then you cannot be a real zoo. You might just be using the lifestyle as some kind of abstract status symbol. Like a metro-sexual who appears to be gay, dresses like a gay but really isn't. They just copied the trend, and it's no different if you've been copying trends too. Doesn't matter how many posts you have if it's all for show. Meant to look pretty like everyone else. I prefer not to go to those lengths. I don't stroke egos to avoid bias or narcissistic injuries.
I'm so so sorry that I made your "shoes" look bad! In reality, I wouldn't be able to make zoos look bad or embarrass them if they were being true to themselves. Viewing me or zoophilia as an extension of yourselves, in such a way, is very unhealthy. It's the symptom of a personality disorder.
Yes, could be sad indeed. Not as an insult but as an actual emotion.
Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
I never said you are antizoo. Get the facts straight.
I said you're enabling antizoos because they give you attention for the "zoo jeans" you're wearing. If I'm beating on the anti-zoos, theres a chance they won't give you attention and that must threaten your narcissistic supply which in turn causes narcissistic injury. Who cares about other zoos, when everybody supposed to be watching "your zoo" right? It's no wonder you would defend the anti-zoos.
I claimed that you're flaunting zoo merely as an asthetically applied decoration. Like a pretty hat. That's your tinfoil hat. Honestly I'd rather see people using real tinfoil, instead of using zoophilia as the tinfoil. If Im making your zoo look bad, then you're obviously concerned about its trendyness as apparel and not an actual state of being. Therefore, you are "wearing" zoo and not actually "being" zoo.
Maybe it's time for you to recognize that "posing" is not the same as "being?" Do you know the difference or is that just another fact you would like to repress under the cover of a dimming light?
Do you know how ironic this is?
Reread our comments and see for yourself.
I doubt a person like you can see it because of your limited vision.
And where did you get that from?
Just because I don't agree with you doesn't mean I 'refuse' to 'investigate' your lies.
I understand my mistake, and that is talking to you in the first place.
The best we could do to scum like you is straight up ignore the bullshit flowing out of your mouth.
I remember /u/30-30 giving me advice about this sort of thing, but I can't really blame myself here because I didn't know you were just like your mentally unstable twin doppelganger who I shall not name.
Yeah you're ''just saying'' that but you're only making yourself look like a fool.
How does agreeing with childish concepts make people get along with children? What you’ve just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard.
Also, nice ''common sense'' sticker you put on your argument.
Unfortunately for you, that's not how it works.
Remember: Your arguments have to make sense, a sticker won't do shit.
Oh look, a wishlist!
I don't have to do anything, what I said is enough for any normal rational person to understand.
If you can't, then you clearly have a problem.
Actually I do, I listened to what you had to say and called it bullshit because it is.
It was pretty obvious I wasn't affecting you at all.
You go way farther than you look.
I hope your future will be bright.
Let's just hope it's not too bright for you, because it might affect your vision, which is already at stake.
Not really, I'm willing to learn new things.
First they'd have to make sense, so that does not include your arguments.
This box grows bigger every day.
Even though I have a giant hatred for humanity, I still learn about new kinds of humans.
You're a very special kind, I tell you.
''empower those people''
Here we go again: I'm not defending them.
I'm defending reason, which is not you calling them things that they aren't.
As I said, I'd defend anything if they're wrongly accused.
I'm not doing this to 'discredit' you.
As I said: I'm defending reason.
I don't do this for the antis, I do this because I have to correct you so your bubble might be popped some day.
ZZZzzzzZZZZZZZzzzZZZzz
I guess all your posts are all for show too, then.
If you actually looked at my posts, you would know what I would give serious advice and opinions about zoophilia.
You cannot tell someone that he isn't what he is.
Especially with an attraction that cannot be chosen.
That's because you only believe shit like this because of bias.
You don't like the outsiders, and for that reason you wanted to make fun of them, but even there you horribly and hilariously failed.
In your reality? Yes.
But in actual reality? No.
If you think so, why don't you ask all the other zoos here?
Irrelevant since not anyone does that here.
Make it more clearer next time then.
I guess it's hard say to what you actually want to say if your mouth is full of shit, huh?
Not really, but okay.
Besides, there's no anti-zoo anywhere around here.
They're lurkers and don't speak.
I guess I can tell you the same thing since you're so obsessed with them calling kiddie fondlers.
I don't get your logic, but now I don't get your message at all.
As I said, you can't tell someone what he is and isn't. Especially if it's something you can't choose, like a sexual orientation.
I'd also like some evidence where my behavior clearly shows signs of me being a ''fake zoo.''
I know the difference since long ago, no thanks.
Glad I don't pose as anything or anyone, there is no good reason to.
Please confront the subject, not the person.
Nearly every sentence in this response is some kind of personal jab, or is the setup for one, and it seems to me like it is (successfully) egging War on to respond in kind.
Calling someone a "childish being" - or "scum like you" as in War's response - is not necessary to get your point across.
"Anyone not agreeing with me has to be part of the "anti zoo conspiracy". Oh, nevermind facts like we´re outnumbered by far , mentioning reality also is proof that you´re part of the conspiracy."
Wow, lots of tinfoil in use...let´s play a game, WarCanine...Can you spot him first...? ;)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z_Nq3xuHkgE
I never said you are antizoo. Get the facts straight.
I said you're enabling antizoos because they give you attention for the "zoo jeans" you're wearing. If I'm beating them down theres a chance they won't give you attention, and that threatens your narcissistic supply which in turn causes narcissistic injury. Who cares about other zoos, when everybody supposed to be watching your zoo right? It's no wonder you would defend them.
I claimed that you're flaunting zoo merely as an asthetically applied decoration. If I can make you look bad by being zoo, then you're obviously concerned about its trendyness as apparel and not an actual state of being. Therefore, you are "wearing" zoo and not actually "being" zoo.
Maybe it's time for you to recognize that "posing" is not the same as "being?"
I never said you are antizoo. Get the facts straight.
I said you're enabling antizoos because they give you attention for the "zoo jeans" you're wearing. If I'm beating on the anti-zoos, theres a chance they won't give you attention and that must threaten your narcissistic supply which in turn causes narcissistic injury. Who cares about other zoos, when everybody supposed to be watching "your zoo" right? It's no wonder you would defend them.
I claimed that you're flaunting zoo merely as an asthetically applied decoration. Like a pretty hat. If I can make your zoo look bad, then you're obviously concerned about its trendyness as apparel and not an actual state of being. Therefore, you are "wearing" zoo and not actually "being" zoo.
Maybe it's time for you to recognize that "posing" is not the same as "being?" Do you know the difference or is that another fact you would like to repress under the darkness of a dimming light?
Rather see people using actual tinfoil, instead of using zoophilia as the tinfoil.
[deleted]
In text form: http://bitesizevegan.com/ethics-and-morality/sex-with-animals-the-blurred-lines-of-bestiality/
agreeing with /u/Skgrsgpf .. i didn't watch the video but read the article ( thanks to /u/fuzzyfurry ). great article up until the end. HOW .. after citing the example of the pig farmer who had to treat each boar differently to get them to cum, and after talking about how female pigs have to be properly stimulated to become pregnant .. does that not show that animals can enjoy sex .. can she just blindly accept the statement from piers beirne - "Bestiality involves sexual coercion because animals are incapable of saying yes or no to humans in forms that humans can readily understand…" clearly that pig farmer can understand ...
Seems that she wasn't honestly asking wether or not bestiaity is 'bad', rather, she was forming an argument that leverages the average persons repulsion to bestiality and attributing the same standard of 'bad' to the meat industry.
It's more anti-meat than pro zoo, which is why the consent argument was used as the conclusion.
I have to say, this is the best reasoned anti-zoo video I've ever seen. It largely focuses on the hypocrisy of common disgust given how much worse common agricultural practices arguably are. Granted, it is an attempt to leverage that disgust into disgust at industrial farming, but that's more noble than the disgust it replaces.
Is it biased? Yes. This is a vegan activist, using other animal rights activists as sources. Piers Beirne is used a few times, unsurprisingly, considering he is one of a handful of writers on the subject.
But I obviously still find the same flaws in these arguments as when Beirne used them: the potential for harm combined with a few egregious cases (in this case, related to meat and milk production entirely) are supposed to justify outrage over the quiet farmer lovingly worshipping his mare's rear end, or the woman presenting to her dog and enjoying the ride. But even accepting their arguments about animal sentience and oppression, I find it difficult to justify this stance if the goal is improving the well being of animals.
I don't know what it is about vegans, but most of them are pretty insane.
As a vegan, I can confirm, am pretty insane.
C'mon, every group has their vocal local idiot.
Although I don't think it has anything to do with the group they are in, but species instead.