Removed by mod
Create /c/omnivore, rename /c/food to /c/veganfood
Removed by mod/c/food is basically /c/veganfood at this point, and is all but being moderated as such with meat posts requiring NSFW tags* and pinned threads pushing veganism. /c/omnivore (or something along those lines) would be an explicitly non-vegan food community so there just doesn't have to be interaction between vegans and non-vegans wrt food posts.
* Despite members of the community expressing multiple times that we didn't want that. And the thread announcing it was locked immediately.
Sorry this borders on /c/strugglesession, but this is still the right comm for this. We shouldn't struggle session about the merits of veganism here; just discuss whether there should be an explicitly omnivore community.
You must log in or register to comment.
I feel like using NSFW tags for anything that's not actually NSFW sets a bad precedent. We don't want people browsing the website to think that NSFW stuff is all just jokes or barbecue pics and then they click one and get a :Hoggers:
I agree. It seems adding a content warning because of food containing meat does a disservice to the intended purpose. Basically implies being vegan is equivalent to being a survivor of assault.
A somewhat (I guess) more apt comparison to veganism is being in recovery. Alcohol and tobacco addicts attempting to quit have a more visceral response to posts about those substances than vegans do to meat posts.
I just think it looks gross. Like if your food browsing was also full of gore pics
I don't view it as equivalent to something intended for survivors of assault, but it is literally a corpse and many vegans do not want to see pictures of corpses when they're expecting to see food. I know that probably sounds overdramatic but this is how I view it and it is based in reality (again, it's literally a corpse). It's not just a joke / censorship thing, and it shouldn't be viewed as undermining "actual" content warnings that have been "officially" deemed to be necessary.
So is demanding someone torture living beings for you but none of yall want to stop doing that
and is all but being moderated as such with meat posts requiring NSFW tags
I thought you were joking, who made that a rule? Wasn't that pretty resoundly mocked when brought up last time?
Wasn’t that pretty resoundly mocked when brought up last time?
Yes, it was. quartz made it a rule during the recent struggle session.
It's both humorous to the omnis and actually useful for the vegans. Good rule.
meat posts requiring NSFW tags
Lol, for real? That's dumb as fuck.
You know, I'm starting to think that maybe putting really aggressive vegans in charge of everything here might actually alienate a ton of people.
That was me. I got banned for no reason. Mods here care more about being vegan than about wrecking and racism, it seems.
Tone policing leftists on a leftist site with the reasoning of "you'll never convince anyone that way!"
Nice
Tone policing is when I, a real leftist, criticize how mean the other leftists are being when they ask me not to pay for animal torture.
Instead they should be more civil, so that I can continue to ignore them.
Tone policing is when you point out that it's alienating to prospective socialists for your socialist website to call all non-vegans animal torturers and bloodmouths and to demand that they attach NSFW warnings to every picture of pepperoni.
Why should it be avoided to speak truth to issues we care about? Isn't that the entire point of this site and why we come here.
edit: Great edit, definitely doesn't change the words you typed to make my response look different. Great novelty account created only to antagonize the vegans here too, bad faith and all.
Why should it be avoided to speak truth to issues we care about? Isn’t that the entire point of this site and why we come here.
Actually no, it's not. It's for communist propaganda and shitposting.
edit: Great edit, definitely doesn’t change the words you typed to make my response look different.
"Tone policing is when you point out that it’s alienating to prospective socialists for your socialist website to call all non-vegans animal torturers."
Correct.
Great novelty account created only to antagonize the vegans here too, bad faith and all.
Fascinating interpretation. It's actually based on the idea of growing cultured human meat in bioreactors, which I think is amusing.
It says a lot about the mods of this site that this user has not been banned. AlexisOhanian has consistently been a shit-stirrer and definitely falls under "debatebroisms" constantly.
We're in a discussion thread about veganism and you're angry I'm on topic?
So what? For the sake of the quality of the content we should be alienating more dorks, not less.
Despite members of the community expressing multiple times that we didn’t want that.
This seems to be a common trend on the site recently.
Really not understanding why the mods here have such an issue with, like... democracy. People tend to like it when they actually have a say in how their community is managed.
Meat is violence and people should be reminded of that every step of the way.
You can't want to create a safe space for a form of opression and not have people who want to end that opression not speak up. Not on a leftist website.
My intent to to draw a line from the violence to the meat. If you feel shame for participating in violence that is your own concious.
Animals feel pain. Inflicting pain is wrong. Humans aren't special.
Shaming people almost never works, and you see meat literally everywhere when you leave your house.
Yeah and it's shitty and gross and a constant reminder of systemic animal slaughter.
Yes, but does shaming the people who eat meat have any measurable impact towards your goal of eradicating meat consumption, or is it just something to make you feel good? I've lived with two vegans and they never once bothered to shame me because it doesn't work.
vegans and they never once bothered to shame me because it doesn’t work.
so they should have shamed you then. fucking shame on you dude
Vegans exist in a vacuum where they haven't ever shamed anyone in the past until they've met me.
I'm not shaming anyone I'm stating a fact you need to commit violence to get meat. I also see capitalism everytime I leave my house should we ignore the violence behind that as well since it's everywhere already?
I also see capitalism everytime I leave my house should we ignore the violence behind that as well since it’s everywhere already?
We don't NSFW tag capitalism, nor should we. Pretending like that's not shaming someone is being purposefully obtuse.
Do you drink coffee or eat almonds? The production of coffee is violence, and only enforced through violence.
Do you like bananas? The production of bananas greatly weakens the global ecosystem due to monocropping, to the point of risking crop failure and potentially localized ecological collapse...
I'm vegetarian, but I can still understand that the violence against workers who harvest the food we eat is at least as important as the violence done to vegans because they accidentally saw a chicken breast on /c/food.
Nope I have cut out all petite bourgiousie luxuries that were only made available through colonisation. No chocolate, no tea, no cashews, no coconut. I do use sugar but it's from beets grown in my country. I do not think my personal choice has any effect but I got to live authentically to my beliefs.
No corn, no tomatoes, no peppers....those are all New World crops, and if you eat them you are engaging in colonialism. So I hope you hold true to that, too.
There is a difference between crops that were brought back and made into staples 400 years before I was born and buying crops from countries that are exploited and causing ecological damage currently.
I don't care much about this drama but this argument is incredibly frustrating for me to read. Yes, all consumption is unethical and is tied to exploitation in a capitalist system, though with this line of reasoning why try improving anything at all?
I'm just meming lol, but in my honest opinion I'm a vegetarian but I don't see the reason to split the food comm in two when for the most part a lot of comms on this site still aren't big enough
Fish make awful friends.
You ever tried to befriend a fish? They just swim around ignoring you. And when they do pay attention, it's just because they want you to feed them.
Never understood fish tank people.
You can hardly call them pets if you can't pet them and the whole keeping them in a tiny tank part seems crueler than if you were to just kill and eat them.
Because the moderators realized that made no sense and shaming people is why half of this site was pushed further and further left.
Go vegan.
The core difference between us is that we understand there is exploitation and cruelty of a being similar to yourself and you stop at 'non-vegan food'.
But that's never something you're willing to engage with, just "let me do bad things in peace, despite constantly interjecting into discussions about it." That's confusing, just ignore the threads then.
Or put it in a community that explicitly will have that thing, then people upset by it can just... not go there.
Globally speaking, the vast majority of leftists are not vegans.
If it's a generic food community, the default assumption should be that it has all kinds of food, including meat.
Either way, what I'm saying is by making a /c/omnivore people who don't want to see pictures of meat can just... not look at /c/omnivore.
This has become a struggle session so I'm going to lock it. If you want to create a new thread there go for it.
to be fair everyone who can be persuaded to become a vegan by being told to is a vegan
How does this make sense to you to the point that you typed it in full and posted it?
