/int/ - International

>>16378 >Mr. Goalpostmover. My original statement was exclusively about morality you stupid idiot >>16356 >muh seed oils there is no hard evidence that seed oils are bad. This was some social media fad >amount of -cides If this was problematic you couldn't eat anything that you didn't grew yourself anymore, which is inpractical. But I would agree that not eating meat because of antibiotics is probably as weak as this argument. >Everything else is just your starved ideology-damaged brain. Lel, I eat meat as well. But I replaced half of my meat consumption with vegan alternatives this year. Primarily because it is cheaper than organic meat and I don't want to eat ultra cheap meat anymore.

I wouldn't be able to live without cheese tbh

>>16383 Vegan cheese also exists, you know?

>>16384 Not really. While the texture and flavour of meat can somehow be replicated with those replacement products and are okayish to eat for me, the vegan cheese substitutes are absolutely pig disgusting.

>>16382 >My original statement was ...yet you gleefully jumped into this argument. How curious. Anyway, what an awful long post to just say >yeah I need to justify eating this trash somehow I mean, I won't prevent you from doing it, but you can't prevent me from looking down on you for being such a weak-willed cretin that you need to eat that trash because you're not able to just eat vegetables. Do you like zucchini? That's already half of what you need for even a vegan diet, everything else is just a bit of willpower, and you don't need to eat shit made to look like not shit.

>>16386 Fully agree. I don't taste much difference between a vegan burger and a beef burger with the recent patties. But all vegan cheese I've tried was pig disgusting.

>>16383 You, me and us both brother. Already decided to get into hobbyist cheese making, once enough time is at hand.

>>16384 verboten by the EU. you can't call vegan sausage a sausage anymore.

>>16396 EU trying to not be retarded for 0.07 seconds impossible challenge.

I think it's a modern solution for modern people who don't have enough real problems.

>>16399 It actually depends on where you live. Here in Europe you certainly have a point, but for example in tropical regions there's a lot more ways to maintain a proper vegan diet even without spending billions of tons of carbon dioxide to ferry everything around the globe to be available 24/7, and India for example has the largest share of people who don't eat meat, and that is not entirely because they can't "afford" any, but because they have such a rich vegetable-based cuisine.

>>16387 Half of your now rewritten post is that some of the ingredients listed in my post can also be expressed as E-numbers which is no argument for anything. Your statement was that vegan meat alternatives are trash and you failed completely to produce any evidence. Creating meat replacements is easy from a macro perspective. Just combine some plant protein powder with oil, water, and spices. The problem with making this at home is that is lacks a pleasant texture. But this should be easy in a factory without adding any trash. When you accept that most people don't eat meat for the specific animal taste because they flavor it with sauce anyway, then vegan meat alternatives are superior. They can be produced cheaper and don't produce animal suffering. There is no argument against eating them. >just a bit of willpower Why should I suffer when there is a healthy and readily available alternative? When you want to eat a high protein diet without blowing your gut with eating tons of legumes it is the way to go.

>>16401 >Your statement was that vegan meat alternatives are trash and you failed completely to produce any evidence. Uhm, no honey, you claimed that your vegan substitute trash was healthier than meat, for which YOU failed to provide any proof whatsoever. In fact you claim that your highly processed pseudo-food is healthier than a regular cut of meat, but as we already established, any kind of "le antibiotics/le pesticides" argument falls flat on its ass, so please, feel free to explain to me how your vegan stubstitute trash is indeed in any way healthier than regular meat. >Why should I suffer when there is a healthy and readily available alternative? Why would you suffer? You would suffer from not eating convenience food? >healthy lol, lmao, see above, still waiting for that proof I bet five years ago you were claiming that vaping is totally not bad bro

>>16403 >you claimed that your vegan substitute trash was healthier than meat I didn't claim that anywhere. >Why would you suffer? You started with the 'willpower' thing which implies that you suffer without it. So you tell me. You should stop being a stupid nigger by trying to build strawmen.

Most vegans I've met are low energy people, sickly, sleepy.

Vegetarians and meat-minimalists are fine, since they've already made ethical compromises (fish, leather, etc). But every vegan I've ever met was a sanctimonious arse. I have a vegan cousin who tried to raise 3 kids on vegan diets (imagine being a kid and getting dried kelp chips as a fun snack). Eventually child welfare got involved, because kids can't grow on just nut proteins. t. meat-minimalist

>>16396 >>16397 Why should you be allowed to market products as something they're not?

>>16473 They're not marketed as pork sausages, they're marketed as vegan sausages. Sausage is a shape, not an ingredient. See for example https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Finite_sphere_packing I'd oppose them marketing vegan stuff as specific things. If it's marketed as "St. Galler Bratwurst*", then I'd fully agree with a ban. It's not a St. Galler Bratwurst. It's a vegan sausage that looks like a St. Galler Bratwurst.

>>16475 >Sausage is a shape Nope. A banana isn't a sausage.

>>16473 Not that Bernd but the term Wurst doesn't necessarily mean meat, it simply means something has been pressed into a casing. They also can't call it peanut butter anymore because it doesn't contain butter, or almond milk (which has been around here since the middle ages).

>>16477 I don't know about German words but a sausage is a meat product. It's not a shape (sausages can be of any shape) or "something pressed into a casing" (like a bullet isn't a sausage).

>>16479 >It's not a shape It is the process of pressing a mashed substance into a flexible casing for preservation. There were various types of non-meat sausages throughout history.

>>16479 I linked you an English article where the sausage shape is used in mathematics. In German, it's the same. Although rather uncommon in Swiss German, I have heard of long-ish pieces of shit being referred to as (poop) sausages. Maybe, in Finnish, the word for sausage is reserved for only meat products, which brings us to my original comment on the EU being retarded. Why should a Finnish problem ban Germans and Austrians from using a word that describes the shape of certain vegan products? What's next? Fleischkäse* doesn't contain cheese, so it must be called something different? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leberk%C3%A4se

>>16481 >It is the process of pressing a mashed substance into a flexible casing for preservation. Still no. It's a meat product and has always been. I don't get it why it's so important to you to be allowed to try to fool people into thinking the vegetable substance is sausage. Why do you have to insist on calling it with the name of a meat product when you clearly don't want it to be meat? This is what I've never understood about vegans. Why is it impossible to just eat the vegetables as what they are? Why the constant need to imitate meat to the point of trying to trick other people into thinking they're buying meat?

>>16486 Are you the "ScheiBe in my Lederhosen" Finn trying new ways to look retarded? If so, it's working.

>>16486 I'm not vegan, but it seems trying to explain words to you is a futile task.

>>16488 Swissball to Swissball: I'm going to make coffee with milk drink now it only contains 2.5% fat and cannot legally be called milk because our milk lobby is extremely powerful

>>16489 It's really stupid imo

>>16492 I didn't want to start the "almond milk cannot be called milk" discussion but point out that low-fat milk cannot be called milk here. Also, I lied, I ran out, that's why I have to use a picture from the internet.

>>16493 Lmao, I didn't even know of that

>>16488 You argue like a vegan so I think you are. You're not explaining anything because I know the meaning of the word sausage and it isn't what you're trying to explain to me. What you're trying to do is change the definition of the word but it is futile like you said because it won't change just because you want it to.

>>16495 I wasn't arguing at all. But I guess with your first uneducated post ITT you already demonstrated that you are really emotionally invested in this. Where did the evil vegans touch you?

>>16495 Maybe that's the case in Finnish, but neither in English, nor in German. See above. Why should Finnish nuances regulate what products are called in Austria, Germany, Ireland or Malta? I don't know any other languages well enough to understand if their word for sausage explicitly means a meat product or the general shape of a product. Maybe, this ban makes sense in Czechia and Denmark as well.

>>16356 While vegan doesn't eat meat or cheese himself, his diet makes him so numb and unproductive, unable of physical or intellectual labour, that he as a burden for society still needs meat-eaters to provide his existence. Therefore there isn't any moral gain here. On the other hand, meat eater can be productive member of society and his efforts are bringing us (maybe indirectly) closer to the moment when humanity will invent synthetic meat, which will be as tasty and nutritious as real, but won't require killing animals. Meat-eaters are more moral people than vegans.

>>16328 I don't mind them if they are careful not to cause trouble for meatarians. All of the... OK, I only know vegetarians... that I know don't make a fuss. They are not the type that refuses to eat food that was touched by things that also touched meat and such. Some of them even occasionally participate in meat consumption, especially to try something that I'm eating. Also, cute fat pigger in OP post

>>16489 >cannot legally be called milk because our milk lobby is extremely powerful That's nice By the way, 3.5% "full fat" is not actually full fat. According to Wikipedia, milk straight from the cow has about 4.2% on average, and somewhere else I found a range of 3.5-5%. Maybe 3.5% was the average before today's "high performance cows", in which case it would have some legitimacy. t. full fat milk enjoyer

>>16504 3.9% is common here, but 3.5% also exists. Why can't they just state that? If you want 3.9% milk, buy 3.9%, if you want 3.5% milk, buy it, if you want 2.5%, why should you buy "Drink" instead? Call it 2.5% milk.

>>16505 Back in the day it was just called Milch Drink and the normal version Vollmilch. I wasn't aware they dropped the Milch entirely.

>>16502 > On the other hand, meat eater can be productive member of society and his efforts are bringing us (maybe indirectly) closer to the moment when humanity will invent synthetic meat, which will be as tasty and nutritious as real, but won't require killing animals. Sam Altman of openai makes a similar argument about the costs of AI. Huge, environmentally wasteful datacenters must be built all over the world (and maybe even in space) to fulfill his dream of super-AI. Huge costs and waste. He says all that will be fixed by the solutions the AI comes up with - his main example is that AI will invent cold fusion, thus solving the problem forever. So cost is worth it. I understand AI very well so I know he's utterly full of shit. I can't tell the difference if your statement is Russian humor or you're serious

>>16514 > I understand AI very well so I know he's utterly full of shit Could you tell more? I know AI a bit (took couple of machine learning courses in university), but I don't know if it will make a revolution or if it will reach its limit around current level of technology. Anyway, about veganism. If humanity won't ever invent synthetic meat, vegans are still unethical. Because: 1. They need to meat-eaters to maintain them functioning, therefore animals are still dying. 2. Their lifestyle makes them fully dependent on others people labour.

>>16514 They call it """Long-termism""". Just let us tech overlords rule, it's for the best of everyone, we swears!

>>16528 Do you think you need to eat pork to plant wheat or why do you keep repeating that vegans depend on omnis? Living in a society means we rely on a lot of people. None of the food in my give except a cabbage I got from a friend was made without global trade. Can I spin an insane argument that non-maoists rely on maoists who run the rare earth mine that produces materials for some computer chip in a tractor that harvested the carrots in my fridge? Sure. Is it restarted? Very much. Or am I completely missing your point? Why do you think that vegans rely on omnis?

>>16529 Just one more data centre, bro. AGI is right around the corner.

>>16532 > Do you think you need to eat pork to plant wheat or why do you keep repeating that vegans depend on omnis Yes, I think so. This woman is a vegan politician from your country. Can you imagine her being a farmer? People who make her existence possible (farmers, doctors, scientists, construction workers, even lorry drivers to deliver her tofu) can't afford being vegans, their professions require certain physical or cognitive capabilities. If you have met actual vegans, you could notice them being half-zombies.

>>16564 >Can you imagine her being a farmer? There's honestly not a lot of politicians I could imagine as farmers.

Usually malnourished sissies

>>16564 This is a non-vegan politician. Can you imagine her being a farmer?

In guys: probably a psycho (self-hating, neurotic, something of the type) In girls: she might still be ok, probably the kind of girl who thinks about the results of her actions so in some sense a green flag.

>>16529 Long-termism is fundamentally the idea that this civilization might be around in 100 or 1000 years but we ought to get our ship in order for that to happen. It's popular with the tech right because those are the guys both dissatisfied with the current order (ruled by MBAs, lawyers and politicians) and with a good shot at actually replacing it.

>>16589 I can imagine her being on a farm with the other pigs.