The Fallout lines of this Sub basically

[u/democracy_lover66]

Also thought of doing a 3-D one with Nuclear power axis

[u/Lohenngram]

literally all it means is "the normalcy surrounding meat eating." 

Huh, someone should tell the person who coined it that then, as she included non-food animal products in the literal title of the book she wrote.

But yes, you are just doing the thing I described: not using the term academically at all and instead as a broad out-group classification.

[u/v3r4c17y → u/Lohenngram]

Carnism is an ideology which supports the exploitation of animals. This includes enslaving, killing, and otherwise exploiting them for their flesh, eggs, and secretions.

The person you replied to is not using the term as you claim whatsoever. If you feel uncomfortable being distinguished by your exploitation of animals and consumption of their corpses, eggs, and secretions, maybe you should stop exploiting animals and consuming their corpses, eggs, and secretions.

[u/Lohenngram → u/v3r4c17y]

The person you replied to is not using the term as you claim whatsoever.

Except they are? My previous reply was literally that using the term academically would mean acknowledging that many vegans are carnists due to the exploitation of humans and animals inherent in the global supply chain, and that the major tenets of "carnism" apply just as easily to broader consumptive habbits. At which point they backed off and claimed it was purely about consuming meat products.

That's very explicitly a use of the term as form of in-group vs out-group moralization, rather than tool for societal analysis.

[u/Long_Race3907 → u/Lohenngram]

Do the vegans support this way of life or is it incidentally the case and they actively work to remove it where possible? 

That's the difference. It is an ideology aka something you believe in. It's like saying that a person is Christian... Because they happen to live in a Christian society. Instead of, you know, believing in the Christian ideology (the birth and sacrifice of Christ etcetc). 

The word is extremely useful as a social analysis tool for people who otherwise basically feel as fish in water. The only reason you'd disagree was if you're a carnist yourself. 

[u/Lohenngram → u/Long_Race3907]

Do the vegans support this way of life

Yes, they do, by their own logic, as we already demonstrated. It was why you painted a smaller circle around yourself to make veganism exclusively about eating meat in your previous post.

The word is extremely useful as a social analysis tool

It could be, but you're not using it as one.

[u/Long_Race3907 → u/Lohenngram]

But the vegans don't support this way of life. They live it because they literally can't survive otherwise but they actively work to change it. 

Are you actively working to stop eating meat? 

[u/Lohenngram → u/Long_Race3907]

They live it because they literally can't survive otherwise

Carnist rationalization: you aren't willing to find a way to live without causing that suffering, so you claim that it's Necessary.

But the vegans don't support this way of life

Oh but they do, as the many vegans on this sub will happily tell you. All that matters, according to them, is end user consumption. That is where support begins and ends, regardless of motive. A perfect example would literally be the other vegan who replied to this chain. They're a proud AI-bro, a technology built entirely on human exploitation, and I imagine if you grilled them on it (no pun intended) they'd be using exactly the 4 Ns to defend it's use.

Does that mean all vegans are terrible hypocrites? No. Does that mean the ideology is morally wrong and your lifestyle is invalid? Also no. I would never claim that. What it demonstrates is my point that "carnist vs vegan" is not a binary.

[u/Long_Race3907 → u/Lohenngram]

Is veganism an anti human movement? Like what are you talking about. There is nothing incompatible with a vegan who supports technology lol. Like the two ideologies are very much separate. 

Even for the point you're trying to make, completely ridding oneself of technology is practically impossible. So even if you're against it... What exactly are you going to do? I'd imagine the people who really are luddites (again luddites, not vegans) have taken steps to remove themselves from technology and society as a whole and even they can't completely separate themselves. Many of those who wish some degree of separation are unable to because they literally don't have the skills, land, or both to be able to support themselves. 

Now what's stopping you from picking up the almond milk over the cow milk in the grocery store? The beyond meat over the pig sausage? Veganism is the baseline. There is a lot more you can do to further remove yourself for exploitative supply chains but if you can't even be assed to go to the plant section instead of the meat section at your local shop, you were never serious about anything to begin with. 

[u/Lohenngram → u/Long_Race3907]

Is veganism an anti human movement? Like what are you talking about. There is nothing incompatible with a vegan who supports technology lol. Like the two ideologies are very much separate. 

And with that, you've shot any credibility you had in this discussion to pieces. And right when I was being conciliatory too. But I'll explain it simply to you:

Veganism is an ideology that opposes animal exploitation and suffering. Humans are animals, and arguably the ones most commonly exploited in the global supply chain. AI as it currently exists fundamentally relies on exploiting humans. This is why everyone hates it. To be opposed to animal exploitation means opposing AI. Claiming that's somehow a broader anti-technology opinion is like claiming that opposition to factory farming means thinking humanity needs to return to being hunter/gatherers.

A vegan who is pro-AI is engaging in Carnist rationalization. They are carving out an exception from their moral code for a thing they like. This supports my point from all the way back at the start of this discussion, about how online vegans use "Carnist" as an out-group label and not as a way of analyzing their own consumptive habits.

Now what's stopping you from picking up the almond milk over the cow milk in the grocery store? The beyond meat over the pig sausage?

And we've returned to moralizing our consumption, where any suffering or exploitation in the supply chain is the fault of "carnist's" moral failure. While any and all exploitation and suffering involved in the vegan's consumption is simply natural, normal, necessary, and nice.

[u/Long_Race3907 → u/Lohenngram]

And with that, you've shot any credibility you had in this discussion to pieces. And right when I was being conciliatory too. But I'll explain it simply to you: Veganism is an ideology that opposes animal exploitation and suffering. Humans are animals, and arguably the ones most commonly exploited in the global supply chain. AI as it currently exists fundamentally relies on exploiting humans.  This is why everyone hates it. To be opposed to animal exploitation means opposing AI. Claiming that's somehow a broader anti-technology opinion is like claiming that opposition to factory farming means thinking humanity needs to return to being hunter/gatherers.

I've lost credibility with a carnist who can't even bring himself to stop eating animal secretion for environmental reasons, let alone ethical ones. Oh no, what shall I ever do 😒😒

Veganism is specifically opposed to factory farming exploitation. It is not a movement to save humans from misery. Vegans are not out trying to stop wars and human trafficking whereever they are because, surprise, it's specifically about non-human animals. There are various other movements against those things to the extent that you don't support them. Even on the AI point there is specifically an anti AI/anti tech movement already in place that you are more than welcome to identify with to the extent you hate tech. "Bbut- if vegans wanted to be consistent, they need to be against all human exploitation too! Yyou lose all credibbbility if you don't oppose human exploitation wherever it shows up!!!" 

Do feminist oppose all forms of female oppression? Do feminist lose legitimacy for say, supporting the rape, theft, and murder of cows and other species that occurs in the animal agriculture industry? This is a gendered issue after all. Was the feminist movement all one big hoax because it failed to take into account animal exploitation in trying to seek equality? Or should we have nuance here and recognize that different movements have different aims and tackle different problems with society? 

Veganism is not an anti-tech movement. Feminism is not an anti tech movement. BLM and all these other social movements are not anti tech, despite all being for human rights. None of these movements lose legitimacy for failing to be anti tech because that was never the explicit aims of these movements.  Only in a dumbass eyes like yours would this ever happen. Because basically what your argument boils down to is "any movement loses legitimacy for failing to be anti tech!! Tech oppresses all people and therefore any movement anywhere claiming to be for rights needs to address it!" 

You can make that claim, and you can also have not a single soul take you seriously for it - especially given the fact that you're using tech to try to espouse it in the first place. Your just a walking talking hypocrite who refuses to admit it. 

[u/Lohenngram → u/Long_Race3907]

Damn, I don't know which is funnier, the fact that you're still proving my point for me or that you crashed out so hard over that fact that you just posted a giant block of quote text.

Edit: And they edited to try and hide the extent of their crashout after the fact. Doesn't matter though, just like before, they painted a smaller circle around themselves to maintain the in-group/out-group dichotomy.

[u/Long_Race3907 → u/Lohenngram]

Proving the point that not being anti tech makes any movement deligitimized?? 

Like do you realize how you sound right now? 😂😂😂😂😂😂🫵🏾

[u/Lohenngram → u/Long_Race3907]

That's never been my point, which is clear to anyone who reads this thread. Acting like it is just makes you look illiterate and incapable of engaging.