What the fuck is the 'authentic experience' of a chicken nugget that seitan is incapable of replicating, anyways? Also the burger patties I ate in school as a cringe baby carnist were 60% TVP soy to begin with, so if anything I'm being even more honest with my frozen slabs now
I don't eat animals because it's wrong. They tasted great to me on the day I stopped. It's true that my taste has changed as a consequence of not eating animals - after a restaurant miscommunication I discovered that butter tastes weird now - but focusing on that is counterproductive for external messaging. Carnists eat flesh and think it tastes good. You can't convince them that it tastes gross and trying to do that will have you dismissed as a picky eater.
what fucking external messaging this is !vegan@hexbear.net, an explicitly vegan forum where carnists aren't allowed to post on a website where being anti-vegan is explicitly against the rules. this is internal chatter, not external messaging. we're not talking to carnists, we're talking to each other. stop jumping down people's throats for speaking as though carnist brain is not the default
The reason I'm vegan is to get other people to do it. This comm isn't invite-only; carnists see it on Hexbear and in federated servers, and carnists come in and comment all the time. It's fine that you personally are disgusted by the taste of flesh, but that has no moral weight. Transpose it slightly: a lot of tomatoes are picked by slaves. If we were trying to organize a tomato boycott we wouldn't want "tomatoes taste like shit" to be widely agreed on by boycotters. In fact we would want to discourage that talk, to prevent people from saying "you guys don't care about slavery you just don't like tomatoes". And it would be frustrating for boycotters to constantly hear others in the movement go on about how tomatoes are disgusting and how could anyone include that garbage in their meals to begin with, while they're busy trying to make some pathetic bell pepper red sauce.
Idk I mostly want to uncouple the correct moral outrage at production from how stuff actually tastes. When carnists ask me if I miss meat, that's an opportunity to say "sure, but it's really important to not eat it" not "nah I never liked it anyway". Maybe I'll feel differently in a few more years; right now when I hear someone say they're viscerally disgusted by like, seitan because it's sort of vaguely like meat, I find it hard to believe.
No one said it did. In fact I explicitly said it doesn't. Who in the world are you talking to?
I'm talking to you and your defense of this original comment:
This is obviously a moral claim. They're not saying imitation baby would be gross because baby flesh tastes gross. I'm sure it doesn't; veal is eaten across the world. They're saying it'd be gross because you're not supposed to eat babies. Similar arguments are made against BDSM play that simulates harming others. To defend it, you wrote:
The obvious answer is it tastes good; these are the foodways we were brought up with.
If the taste of meat has no moral weight, why bring up your "visceral disgust" for it? Why would /u/worldonaturtle compare it to baby flesh? If it has no moral weight, then who cares? I don't like lion's mane mushrooms, if somebody was promoting a lion's mane sub to reduce lion's mane farming deforestation* I simply wouldn't have anything to say. Good on them, wasn't my problem to begin with. Nobody gives a shit whether I happen to like the mushrooms, especially those people who are working on a substitute, and going on about how I think it's viscerally disgusting would be needlessly antagonizing.
*I assume this is not a real problem
Actually a funnier example is music. Meat is Murder was a good album but Morrissey sucks and they're making a lab grown Morrissey. You think Morrissey sucks but you only listen to folk punk anyway? Well fuck off lol, who cares