A guy on my Steam friends list told me "I'm okay with eating chickens because they descended from dinosaurs, and dinosaurs would kill me if I were alive during their time period."
This is such an embarrassing excuse that it would actually be much more honorable for this guy to simply say shit like "I just don't give a shit about animals dying" or "Yeah, it's wrong to eat animals, but I'm a self-admitted hypocrite." Why do some people feel the need to go out of their way to justify carnism instead of... just being a carnist? It's not like I or anyone else can force this guy to stop eating chickens if he isn't to supply a justification for why he does it.
As far as the argument itself goes, for a simple deconstruction of such an absurd take: if you want to make the claim that the behavior of one's ancestors can dictate what is an ethical way to treat an individual as a descendant, by this logic, a good person who has a father that's a murderer would be ethical to kill for "self defense." Obviously, this bozo wouldn't believe that, but his absurd take here isn't supposed to be logical; it's just another pathetic grasping at straws that's a part of this unfortunate, never-ending cycle in which carnists say whatever they want to say to pretend that they're not a part of the problem. That's it.
I literally prefer those chuds too, especially since I'm a black vegan. The most I get from your average chud is them making memes about soyboys and shit and the occasional appeal to tradition or "God made animals for us to eat " shit. Hearing leftists give anti-vegan takes is a whole new level of mental gymnastics that frustrates me because it's always fucking wrong yet people think it's solid argumentation. I constantly hear "Veganism is a privilege," "Veganism is racist," and "Veganism is ableist" being lauded by anti-vegan leftists who think these are groundbreaking sociopolitical concerns about veganism that truly and adequately justify their support for animal exploitation when it couldn't be further from the truth.