I love this so much and agree with everything that you said. This was the best article I've ever seen on this subject. I love your movement and appreciate the hard work that was put into waking up the rest of the world. 🥇
This flows and reads like a charm, Dietz. I felt so lonely at lunchtimes but I would sit in one spot and bury my head in a book. One thing I think though is the nuances within antinatalism like soft and hard.
Hi Dietz, thank you. Sadly my burying my head in a book was a facade. I didnt learn as a result, it was just pretence to appear like I was doing something. I was so miserable, with just a couple of people whom I really liked.
This is such a beautiful article with thoughts that covers it all! I absolutely love this group. I’m old, in my 60’s and have a couple of grown children that I care very much about. Now, I embrace antinatalism in just the way you have described. The scales slowly came off once I left my religion and its dogma.
I’m learning to use my voice as I read and educate myself further. The message is so right. Thank you, Dietz!
Why does this stop at humans why not wish the extinction of all living species? If humans are better off never being born why does that not logic not apply to all animals ? The philosophy will lead to terrible things. We have experienced it already. First it's the limitation of children through contraception, then it's the selective killing of children through abortion, then it's the encouragement to stop ALL (your emphasis, not mine) human being from procreating. The next step will be active annihilation of the living because if it's good for those yet to be born why not those now living? Satan hates all living beings and will do anything to denigrate, destroy, and suck meaning out of God's creatures. These are dark forces that are influencing you. I pray that it won't destroy you.
Thank you for this long form piece explaining your views. I'd like to hear more about your stance on the desire to caretake/parent: you seem to dismiss the idea that you are anti-parenting because folks can simply adopt children and other animals to care for; however, this would only last a generation. It seems pretty straightforward from your repeated "life is suffering" statements that the most ethical world, in your view, is one without life at all (ie one where everyone/thing has slowly died out). Is that correct?
Hi, thank you for reading. I don’t see the need for life, so if life wasn’t here I don’t see that as a bad thing, but for at least a long time there will always be life here and it is what it is. If there are other planets that don’t contain life I don’t see that as a bad or sad thing. I think if anyone wants to parent or take care of someone they should use that desire for existing life. There will always be humans creating new humans as long as we are around and there’ll always be humans caring for existing life as long as humans are around, but the more humans who can care for already existing life over producing life themselves the better. Humans will go extinct at some point no matter what and I support a gentler extinction, not a horrific and violent one which is perhaps what we are headed towards.
I saw a guy holding a sign out on market street that said Stop Having Kids. I was intrigued. At first I thought maybe it was a joke. I thought he might have been satirizing the militant vegetarians that I had encountered one block over.
I grew with your message and many of the things you have said on this web page. I couldn't believe the guy with the sign was serious because I had never considered that there were other people who felt the same way I do about the subject.
I'm interested in your movement, but I'm afraid that we have philosophical differences, that maybe we have similar, but not the exact same reasons for being antinatalist. The reason I am antinatalist is because I resent the fact that I must justify my existence through labor, and by being "successful". If I didn't ask to be alive, why must I justify my existence?
Also, along with working and being "successful" I resent the fact that I am expected to procreate and bring someone else into this prid pro quo existence where he is born indebted to the world for being born and must spend his life working of his debt.
I am 43 years old, and I've told my parents many times that if anything they should have to pay for my existence since they brought me into the world. This isn't because I feel entitled, and it isn't because I am lazy or a mooch. I support myself, unfortunately. I just think for purely idealogical reasons that if you bring someone into this world knowing that the terms of society are that his life must be paid for, then you should be prepared to pay that debt. Otherwise you have cursed him with life, and how could anyone enjoy, let alone celebrate a life that is a curse.
I think your movement is deliciously nihilistic, but I don't agree with your vegan stance. I find the fact that even vegetables aren't vegetarian discourages me from taking up that idealology. In a sense it's impossible to be vegan for that reason, as if you aren't going to eat anything having anything to do with meat, you can't eat vegetables either. So it goes that life feeds on life. The only solution would be... Well, antinatalism would be the solution, but only if it included suicide, and since I didn't ask to be born, I don't feel guilty that I must consume other life to live. I'm not suicidal, death scares the hell out of me, and it's unfortunate that I must end life in order to continue mine, but so it goes. Even if you eat vegetables, you are ending live in order to live..
So you see, we have philosophical differences. But I do wish you the best of luck with your movement, I totally agree.
Apologies for the late response. I saw this comment when you first posted it, but then I totally forgot to respond until now. We have a bit to cover here and we don't have to agree on everything or anything, that's quite okay. You said quite a lot in your comment, so I'll try to respond back in order of when you said things.
I'm glad to hear that the man with the sign intrigued you, that's quite common and shows that we are putting our signs and manpower to good use. You weren't the only one who thought that what we are doing is a joke. I guess because it's so different and unexpected from anything people have seen before they can jump to that assumption pretty quickly.
I thought it was pretty hilarious that you called the people you saw doing AV (Anonymous For The Voiceless) "militant vegetarians." The people there were likely vegans, but what exactly is militant about standing in a public location holding polite signs and holding TV screens that show what animal agriculture entails? The people and companies who exploit and kill animals for their business are never going to be transparent in their marketing or anything else, so one way for people to learn the truth is from outreach events like these. What is so militant or aggressive about that exactly? Just like SHK, people volunteer their time to try to educate people on the realities of needless animal exploitation, something most people choose not to think about or look into. The guy you saw doing SHK does AV activism too and I have as well. I wouldn't call myself standing there holding a sign, having conversations with people, and answering whatever questions they have an act of militancy.
Sorry to hear that you haven't met other people who felt the same way you do about procreation. We've had a lot of people tell us that too when we've done outreach events and also online. There are more of us out there than you think, but the problem is most people are silent on the subject or in some cases maybe pretend to hold opinions other than how they really feel.
People can definitely come to antinatalism for many different reasons. Antinatalism implies that you are against human procreation, so the reasons that can lead to that stance are manifold. Some people consider the harm and suffering that procreation implies for humans while others have a broader stance that extends to how we also impact nature and other animals, which is how many people who are part of the SHK movement feel.
I totally agree with you that it's not right that we are expected to procreate and continue the cycle of injustice that was put onto us - being indebted to the world and having to work off our debt. I also agree that parents should at least have to play a significant role in paying for our lives, we certainly didn't ask for this life and it's a lot of pressure to dump onto us. I feel as though parents should be the safety net for life for whoever they brought into existence and not this silly "only until they're 18" nonsense. What you say makes sense, we should definitely try to support ourselves and not be lazy or a mooch, but given how expensive life is and how it's long-term enormous expense we didn't request, parents should feel more inclined, and at times responsible, to fund the life of who they created. Nobody should have to be required to fully fund the curse of life that they didn't desire or consent to in the first place.
I disagree with you that the movement is nihilistic, but you can hold whatever opinion you want. That's totally fine that you don't agree with the SHK vegan stance. I think it would be hypocritical to have a message of "let's help already existing life that's in need" and then simultaneously be for breeding animals into existence to purely suffer and die and to destroy the hell out of native animals and their habitats, which is what we are doing in the name of producing animal-based foods for people. Maybe we come at this from very different views because I don't carry a strong bias towards the human species, I'm very empathetic, I'm also very educated about what we do to animals for food and other human wants. On top of that, I've personally visited countless animal exploitation facilities, slaughterhouses, and animal sacrifice events to see firsthand what humans do to animals for our habits, beliefs, and traditions. There's nothing I've ever disagreed with in my life as strongly as how we treat other animals (and how we treat many humans too) and personally I want no part in it and same goes for many other antinatalists who I know. I'd be out of my mind if I ever ate anything that came from a needlessly tortured being ever again. Although I'm plant-based, I'd never call my diet and lifestyle cruelty free, because there is still cruelty and destruction involved with many of the foods and things I do too, but it doesn't come close to what kind of harm I'd be complicit in if I were to go back to the diet I used to eat. If you think that it's impossible to be vegan maybe you haven't ever looked at the definition of veganism, so you might not really get it. Here is the definition of veganism:
"Veganism is a philosophy and way of living which seeks to exclude—as far as is possible and practicable—all forms of exploitation of, and cruelty to, animals for food, clothing or any other purpose; and by extension, promotes the development and use of animal-free alternatives for the benefit of animals, humans and the environment."
After reading the definition hopefully you can understand that it's not impossible to be vegan, it's very possible for anyone who cares. Clearly, veganism is not about purity or perfection, it's more about harm mitigation, fairness, and justice - which is what SHK is rooted in. Nowhere does the definition say that vegans don't cause any harm. Not all animals eat other animals, there are quite a lot of species that don't eat any animals at all. In fact, as I type this I'm surrounded by several species at a farmed animal sanctuary who don't eat any other animals, such as cows and horses. Just like we have the ability to procreate, we don't have an obligation to procreate. Now it's also the same thing for eating animals. We have the ability to eat animals (and all of the horrible things that happen to them before the point of them being turned into pieces of flesh), but we don't have an obligation to. Everything we need we can get from plant sources and on top of that we also greatly reduce our chances of some of the top causes of death for humans, such as different types of cancer, diabetes, and heart disease. You can be perfectly healthy and get everything you need on a plant-based diet, but of course it helps to be educated and not just "hope for the best." I've been doing it for 12 years without any issues whatsoever and I feel just as young as when I started, but hey, that's just me.
You are being absolutely silly as hell if you're comparing animals to vegetables, one is sentient and the other isn't. Mangos and chickens are not the same thing, just like humans and potatoes aren't the same thing. Picking an apple isn't the same as slicing the throat of a cow and cutting off their legs and ears while they're still conscious. If you don't want to feel guilty for all the needless suffering and death you contribute to with your diet and maybe whatever else then that's absolutely fine, you don't have to feel guilty. Nobody in SHK or anywhere else is telling you that you need to feel guilty. Realistically, not much of the population of our species does feel guilty for the negative consequences of their life choices. A lot of people like myself did feel guilty and that's what led me to becoming vegan. My vegan food decisions do sometimes make me complicit with harm towards nonhuman animals because I still shop at grocery stores, but my food decisions don't demand the continuous breeding, imprisonment, sexual assault, family separation, mutilation, and slaughter of other animals, so that's how I prefer to eat personally. The biggest killer of native land and air animals is deforestation, which the vast majority is for animal ag, and then the poisoning, trapping, and killing of wild animals by USDA's "wildlife services" which kills millions of animals a year with our tax dollars to protect the profits of non-native animal "livestock" farmers. I'm sure I don't need to tell you what the biggest killer of aquatic animals is. Personally, I want no part in this deliberately cruel system, but if you don't mind then that's fine. At least we've both come to the conclusion that we are not going to perpetuate the human species and that's a good thing.
did not say that holding TVs on Market street was militant. I said the guys holding the TVs are militant. There is a difference.
The reason I think they are militant is because I saw them on another occasion march down market street to picket the ice-cream museum, screaming into bullhorns "Animals have families. You are raping mother cows in from of hei chilex3x12dren Ice cream is murder". Regardless of how absurd their slogans were , all of the screaming and marching and blocking of the museum entrance and scaring the little kids who were going there for a class field trip, that's what I think is militant. To be clear, this wasn't an ordinary protest, There was a main group that was marching an screaming, and the group was flanked on the sides buy guys working the sidewalks, handing out fliers and carrying signs with violent images, and it was impossibly the not be confronted as the group passed. They blocked off the entrance and theyentire block the ice cream museum is on. Do they have a right to do this? I guess so, but to act this way over the ice cream museum simply being there for people to visit, without any logical, achievable agenda , its a little much. Its not a kiddie porn dungeon, its an ice-cream ,museum. So that's what I'm calling militant.
However, the way you are describing the TV thing is underplaying it a bit. They aren't just holding TVs , they are holding TVs with images of graphic violence playing on them, which is not what people expect to see as they are taking a stroll down the street. It didn't offend me, I didn't have a problem with it, but its not exactly the banal , passive affair you are describing. I wouldn't call it militant, Id'd call it passive aggressive.
I'd also call it going after the wrong people. The average person walking down the street cant do anything about the way animals are treated in slaughter houses. If they could, if it was really that easy, then your militant friends could, for all their trying, do something about it. You can't assume everyone who eats meat is complicit in the way animals are treated, when they have no say in how animals are treated at slaughter houses, so there is no reason to make them sick as they walk down the street. Raising awareness is one thing, causing panic attacks and Vietnam war flashbacks is another.Personally, when I see an animal treated that way it not only disgusts me it causes my blood to boil. But so does any situation where there is violence and a lopsided power dynamic. But I can't do anything about any of it. It would be naive to think I can, so I have decided not to waste my life yelling at ice-cream museums and what not. That doesn't make me a party to the mistreatment of cows at slaughter house.
Instead, they should target, I don't know, slaughter houses, maybe. State department of agriculture. Or state congressional representatives./ Write a letter to Jesus, whatever, I just know its not the fault of anyone on that sidewalk, so theirs no reason for the shock videos that look like they came off of Rotten.com
I don't know what you think is silly about the fact that life feeds on life. I think it is silly not to accept that, and to pretend it doesn't matter. Even vegetables eat meat. That is a valid point. It perfectly illustrates the flaw in trying not to eat meat or animal products. There is no way to avoid the fact that life feeds on life, as even at the lowest levels of nature you have plants feeding on animals and animals feeding on plants. You're saying that is irrelevant to your stance? How does that not matter? It is the central tenet of your philosophy. Of course it matters, you are just calling it silly because you don't want to give it consideration. Not only that, but it is worth noting , even if it is besides the main point, that by eating plants, you are eating meat because when you eat something you also eat what it consumes. And what animals do you thing fertilizer comes from? The same ones the animals on farms that eventually go to the slaughter house. Buy buying vegetables you are contributing to the mistreatment of animals.
I think your "don't have kids" cause is intelligent, perhaps even brilliant I think it's unfortunate for me that you arrived at this philosophy based on an argument that I just can't get behind. But that doesn't invalidate the point, the conclusion does not rest on vegetarianism as a premise.
I did't mean to attack you to begin with, I intended to politely disagree .I guess it goes to show how incompatible we are philosophically, which was really what I was trying to say to begin with, that I admire your cause, and I am disappointed that I wont be able to get behind it without ending up offending you or making you feel attacked and what not. But I do wish you the best of luck with your campaign. Just leave the ice cream museum alone, ok? haha.
This was a very brave comment and I hope SHK acknowledges it someday..may take time to gather his thoughts but he seems like a compassionate individual. It's not easy to reveal to others in this movement how your own body happens to run on a different fuel for different and still very valid reasons.. My own philosophies would not be popular with most folks in this space. Reckon that's all just another part of life being a curse. I like and support SHK regardless.
I love this so much and agree with everything that you said. This was the best article I've ever seen on this subject. I love your movement and appreciate the hard work that was put into waking up the rest of the world. 🥇
Thank you so much for all of that, I really appreciate it. Very glad to hear you liked the article so much!
This flows and reads like a charm, Dietz. I felt so lonely at lunchtimes but I would sit in one spot and bury my head in a book. One thing I think though is the nuances within antinatalism like soft and hard.
Thank you Marc! Wish I had been more of a reader in school, that could've been a productive way to pass the time for sure.
Hi Dietz, thank you. Sadly my burying my head in a book was a facade. I didnt learn as a result, it was just pretence to appear like I was doing something. I was so miserable, with just a couple of people whom I really liked.
Totally feel that, thank goodness we are far away from those days.
This is such a beautiful article with thoughts that covers it all! I absolutely love this group. I’m old, in my 60’s and have a couple of grown children that I care very much about. Now, I embrace antinatalism in just the way you have described. The scales slowly came off once I left my religion and its dogma.
I’m learning to use my voice as I read and educate myself further. The message is so right. Thank you, Dietz!
Thank you so much Dana, appreciate your kind words, and yes please do use your voice to help spread the message.
Why does this stop at humans why not wish the extinction of all living species? If humans are better off never being born why does that not logic not apply to all animals ? The philosophy will lead to terrible things. We have experienced it already. First it's the limitation of children through contraception, then it's the selective killing of children through abortion, then it's the encouragement to stop ALL (your emphasis, not mine) human being from procreating. The next step will be active annihilation of the living because if it's good for those yet to be born why not those now living? Satan hates all living beings and will do anything to denigrate, destroy, and suck meaning out of God's creatures. These are dark forces that are influencing you. I pray that it won't destroy you.
Thank you for this long form piece explaining your views. I'd like to hear more about your stance on the desire to caretake/parent: you seem to dismiss the idea that you are anti-parenting because folks can simply adopt children and other animals to care for; however, this would only last a generation. It seems pretty straightforward from your repeated "life is suffering" statements that the most ethical world, in your view, is one without life at all (ie one where everyone/thing has slowly died out). Is that correct?
Hi, thank you for reading. I don’t see the need for life, so if life wasn’t here I don’t see that as a bad thing, but for at least a long time there will always be life here and it is what it is. If there are other planets that don’t contain life I don’t see that as a bad or sad thing. I think if anyone wants to parent or take care of someone they should use that desire for existing life. There will always be humans creating new humans as long as we are around and there’ll always be humans caring for existing life as long as humans are around, but the more humans who can care for already existing life over producing life themselves the better. Humans will go extinct at some point no matter what and I support a gentler extinction, not a horrific and violent one which is perhaps what we are headed towards.
I saw a guy holding a sign out on market street that said Stop Having Kids. I was intrigued. At first I thought maybe it was a joke. I thought he might have been satirizing the militant vegetarians that I had encountered one block over.
I grew with your message and many of the things you have said on this web page. I couldn't believe the guy with the sign was serious because I had never considered that there were other people who felt the same way I do about the subject.
I'm interested in your movement, but I'm afraid that we have philosophical differences, that maybe we have similar, but not the exact same reasons for being antinatalist. The reason I am antinatalist is because I resent the fact that I must justify my existence through labor, and by being "successful". If I didn't ask to be alive, why must I justify my existence?
Also, along with working and being "successful" I resent the fact that I am expected to procreate and bring someone else into this prid pro quo existence where he is born indebted to the world for being born and must spend his life working of his debt.
I am 43 years old, and I've told my parents many times that if anything they should have to pay for my existence since they brought me into the world. This isn't because I feel entitled, and it isn't because I am lazy or a mooch. I support myself, unfortunately. I just think for purely idealogical reasons that if you bring someone into this world knowing that the terms of society are that his life must be paid for, then you should be prepared to pay that debt. Otherwise you have cursed him with life, and how could anyone enjoy, let alone celebrate a life that is a curse.
I think your movement is deliciously nihilistic, but I don't agree with your vegan stance. I find the fact that even vegetables aren't vegetarian discourages me from taking up that idealology. In a sense it's impossible to be vegan for that reason, as if you aren't going to eat anything having anything to do with meat, you can't eat vegetables either. So it goes that life feeds on life. The only solution would be... Well, antinatalism would be the solution, but only if it included suicide, and since I didn't ask to be born, I don't feel guilty that I must consume other life to live. I'm not suicidal, death scares the hell out of me, and it's unfortunate that I must end life in order to continue mine, but so it goes. Even if you eat vegetables, you are ending live in order to live..
So you see, we have philosophical differences. But I do wish you the best of luck with your movement, I totally agree.
Hi Bucky,
Apologies for the late response. I saw this comment when you first posted it, but then I totally forgot to respond until now. We have a bit to cover here and we don't have to agree on everything or anything, that's quite okay. You said quite a lot in your comment, so I'll try to respond back in order of when you said things.
I'm glad to hear that the man with the sign intrigued you, that's quite common and shows that we are putting our signs and manpower to good use. You weren't the only one who thought that what we are doing is a joke. I guess because it's so different and unexpected from anything people have seen before they can jump to that assumption pretty quickly.
I thought it was pretty hilarious that you called the people you saw doing AV (Anonymous For The Voiceless) "militant vegetarians." The people there were likely vegans, but what exactly is militant about standing in a public location holding polite signs and holding TV screens that show what animal agriculture entails? The people and companies who exploit and kill animals for their business are never going to be transparent in their marketing or anything else, so one way for people to learn the truth is from outreach events like these. What is so militant or aggressive about that exactly? Just like SHK, people volunteer their time to try to educate people on the realities of needless animal exploitation, something most people choose not to think about or look into. The guy you saw doing SHK does AV activism too and I have as well. I wouldn't call myself standing there holding a sign, having conversations with people, and answering whatever questions they have an act of militancy.
Sorry to hear that you haven't met other people who felt the same way you do about procreation. We've had a lot of people tell us that too when we've done outreach events and also online. There are more of us out there than you think, but the problem is most people are silent on the subject or in some cases maybe pretend to hold opinions other than how they really feel.
People can definitely come to antinatalism for many different reasons. Antinatalism implies that you are against human procreation, so the reasons that can lead to that stance are manifold. Some people consider the harm and suffering that procreation implies for humans while others have a broader stance that extends to how we also impact nature and other animals, which is how many people who are part of the SHK movement feel.
I totally agree with you that it's not right that we are expected to procreate and continue the cycle of injustice that was put onto us - being indebted to the world and having to work off our debt. I also agree that parents should at least have to play a significant role in paying for our lives, we certainly didn't ask for this life and it's a lot of pressure to dump onto us. I feel as though parents should be the safety net for life for whoever they brought into existence and not this silly "only until they're 18" nonsense. What you say makes sense, we should definitely try to support ourselves and not be lazy or a mooch, but given how expensive life is and how it's long-term enormous expense we didn't request, parents should feel more inclined, and at times responsible, to fund the life of who they created. Nobody should have to be required to fully fund the curse of life that they didn't desire or consent to in the first place.
I disagree with you that the movement is nihilistic, but you can hold whatever opinion you want. That's totally fine that you don't agree with the SHK vegan stance. I think it would be hypocritical to have a message of "let's help already existing life that's in need" and then simultaneously be for breeding animals into existence to purely suffer and die and to destroy the hell out of native animals and their habitats, which is what we are doing in the name of producing animal-based foods for people. Maybe we come at this from very different views because I don't carry a strong bias towards the human species, I'm very empathetic, I'm also very educated about what we do to animals for food and other human wants. On top of that, I've personally visited countless animal exploitation facilities, slaughterhouses, and animal sacrifice events to see firsthand what humans do to animals for our habits, beliefs, and traditions. There's nothing I've ever disagreed with in my life as strongly as how we treat other animals (and how we treat many humans too) and personally I want no part in it and same goes for many other antinatalists who I know. I'd be out of my mind if I ever ate anything that came from a needlessly tortured being ever again. Although I'm plant-based, I'd never call my diet and lifestyle cruelty free, because there is still cruelty and destruction involved with many of the foods and things I do too, but it doesn't come close to what kind of harm I'd be complicit in if I were to go back to the diet I used to eat. If you think that it's impossible to be vegan maybe you haven't ever looked at the definition of veganism, so you might not really get it. Here is the definition of veganism:
"Veganism is a philosophy and way of living which seeks to exclude—as far as is possible and practicable—all forms of exploitation of, and cruelty to, animals for food, clothing or any other purpose; and by extension, promotes the development and use of animal-free alternatives for the benefit of animals, humans and the environment."
After reading the definition hopefully you can understand that it's not impossible to be vegan, it's very possible for anyone who cares. Clearly, veganism is not about purity or perfection, it's more about harm mitigation, fairness, and justice - which is what SHK is rooted in. Nowhere does the definition say that vegans don't cause any harm. Not all animals eat other animals, there are quite a lot of species that don't eat any animals at all. In fact, as I type this I'm surrounded by several species at a farmed animal sanctuary who don't eat any other animals, such as cows and horses. Just like we have the ability to procreate, we don't have an obligation to procreate. Now it's also the same thing for eating animals. We have the ability to eat animals (and all of the horrible things that happen to them before the point of them being turned into pieces of flesh), but we don't have an obligation to. Everything we need we can get from plant sources and on top of that we also greatly reduce our chances of some of the top causes of death for humans, such as different types of cancer, diabetes, and heart disease. You can be perfectly healthy and get everything you need on a plant-based diet, but of course it helps to be educated and not just "hope for the best." I've been doing it for 12 years without any issues whatsoever and I feel just as young as when I started, but hey, that's just me.
You are being absolutely silly as hell if you're comparing animals to vegetables, one is sentient and the other isn't. Mangos and chickens are not the same thing, just like humans and potatoes aren't the same thing. Picking an apple isn't the same as slicing the throat of a cow and cutting off their legs and ears while they're still conscious. If you don't want to feel guilty for all the needless suffering and death you contribute to with your diet and maybe whatever else then that's absolutely fine, you don't have to feel guilty. Nobody in SHK or anywhere else is telling you that you need to feel guilty. Realistically, not much of the population of our species does feel guilty for the negative consequences of their life choices. A lot of people like myself did feel guilty and that's what led me to becoming vegan. My vegan food decisions do sometimes make me complicit with harm towards nonhuman animals because I still shop at grocery stores, but my food decisions don't demand the continuous breeding, imprisonment, sexual assault, family separation, mutilation, and slaughter of other animals, so that's how I prefer to eat personally. The biggest killer of native land and air animals is deforestation, which the vast majority is for animal ag, and then the poisoning, trapping, and killing of wild animals by USDA's "wildlife services" which kills millions of animals a year with our tax dollars to protect the profits of non-native animal "livestock" farmers. I'm sure I don't need to tell you what the biggest killer of aquatic animals is. Personally, I want no part in this deliberately cruel system, but if you don't mind then that's fine. At least we've both come to the conclusion that we are not going to perpetuate the human species and that's a good thing.
did not say that holding TVs on Market street was militant. I said the guys holding the TVs are militant. There is a difference.
The reason I think they are militant is because I saw them on another occasion march down market street to picket the ice-cream museum, screaming into bullhorns "Animals have families. You are raping mother cows in from of hei chilex3x12dren Ice cream is murder". Regardless of how absurd their slogans were , all of the screaming and marching and blocking of the museum entrance and scaring the little kids who were going there for a class field trip, that's what I think is militant. To be clear, this wasn't an ordinary protest, There was a main group that was marching an screaming, and the group was flanked on the sides buy guys working the sidewalks, handing out fliers and carrying signs with violent images, and it was impossibly the not be confronted as the group passed. They blocked off the entrance and theyentire block the ice cream museum is on. Do they have a right to do this? I guess so, but to act this way over the ice cream museum simply being there for people to visit, without any logical, achievable agenda , its a little much. Its not a kiddie porn dungeon, its an ice-cream ,museum. So that's what I'm calling militant.
However, the way you are describing the TV thing is underplaying it a bit. They aren't just holding TVs , they are holding TVs with images of graphic violence playing on them, which is not what people expect to see as they are taking a stroll down the street. It didn't offend me, I didn't have a problem with it, but its not exactly the banal , passive affair you are describing. I wouldn't call it militant, Id'd call it passive aggressive.
I'd also call it going after the wrong people. The average person walking down the street cant do anything about the way animals are treated in slaughter houses. If they could, if it was really that easy, then your militant friends could, for all their trying, do something about it. You can't assume everyone who eats meat is complicit in the way animals are treated, when they have no say in how animals are treated at slaughter houses, so there is no reason to make them sick as they walk down the street. Raising awareness is one thing, causing panic attacks and Vietnam war flashbacks is another.Personally, when I see an animal treated that way it not only disgusts me it causes my blood to boil. But so does any situation where there is violence and a lopsided power dynamic. But I can't do anything about any of it. It would be naive to think I can, so I have decided not to waste my life yelling at ice-cream museums and what not. That doesn't make me a party to the mistreatment of cows at slaughter house.
Instead, they should target, I don't know, slaughter houses, maybe. State department of agriculture. Or state congressional representatives./ Write a letter to Jesus, whatever, I just know its not the fault of anyone on that sidewalk, so theirs no reason for the shock videos that look like they came off of Rotten.com
I don't know what you think is silly about the fact that life feeds on life. I think it is silly not to accept that, and to pretend it doesn't matter. Even vegetables eat meat. That is a valid point. It perfectly illustrates the flaw in trying not to eat meat or animal products. There is no way to avoid the fact that life feeds on life, as even at the lowest levels of nature you have plants feeding on animals and animals feeding on plants. You're saying that is irrelevant to your stance? How does that not matter? It is the central tenet of your philosophy. Of course it matters, you are just calling it silly because you don't want to give it consideration. Not only that, but it is worth noting , even if it is besides the main point, that by eating plants, you are eating meat because when you eat something you also eat what it consumes. And what animals do you thing fertilizer comes from? The same ones the animals on farms that eventually go to the slaughter house. Buy buying vegetables you are contributing to the mistreatment of animals.
I think your "don't have kids" cause is intelligent, perhaps even brilliant I think it's unfortunate for me that you arrived at this philosophy based on an argument that I just can't get behind. But that doesn't invalidate the point, the conclusion does not rest on vegetarianism as a premise.
I did't mean to attack you to begin with, I intended to politely disagree .I guess it goes to show how incompatible we are philosophically, which was really what I was trying to say to begin with, that I admire your cause, and I am disappointed that I wont be able to get behind it without ending up offending you or making you feel attacked and what not. But I do wish you the best of luck with your campaign. Just leave the ice cream museum alone, ok? haha.
This was a very brave comment and I hope SHK acknowledges it someday..may take time to gather his thoughts but he seems like a compassionate individual. It's not easy to reveal to others in this movement how your own body happens to run on a different fuel for different and still very valid reasons.. My own philosophies would not be popular with most folks in this space. Reckon that's all just another part of life being a curse. I like and support SHK regardless.
I saw Bucky's comment when he first posted it and then I totally forgot about it, but I just responded. Anyhow, thanks for the support.