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.

  • @Nachorella
    link
    English
    913 days ago

    I’m curious, does this person not eat cows because historically they’ve never posed a threat to people? Or is it cannibalism to eat fish because we evolved from them at some point?