this post was submitted on 31 Jul 2024
311 points (69.6% liked)

Funny

6879 readers
647 users here now

General rules:

Exceptions may be made at the discretion of the mods.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works 2 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (2 children)

You're not being exploited if you consent. Cows can't consent, mothers can. That's the argument.

If we could somehow communicate w/ cows and get their consent, then cows milk could be vegan.

[–] commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 3 months ago (1 children)

You’re not being exploited if you consent.

the definition of exploitation makes no mention of consent, and no clarification about consent is made in the vegan society definition.

[–] sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works 2 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (2 children)

It's strongly implied in the negative sense. If we want to play the definition game, here's Merriam Webster's definition:

exploit (verb)
1: to make productive use of : utilize
exploiting your talents
exploit your opponent's weakness
2: to make use of meanly or unfairly for one's own advantage
exploiting migrant farm workers

Definition 2 is what I'm referring to. A baby consuming is certainly using milk for its own advantage, but the mother also benefits from the exchange. The mother cares about the health and comfort of the baby, and providing her milk can certainly be something she wants to do. Your argument only makes sense if you think children "unfairly" use the parents' labor for their own gain as well (they consume far more than they contribute to family finances), vs parents willingly giving food and gifts to their children because they want to see them be happy and healthy.

The point here is "meanly or unfairly," and a mother willingly giving her milk to her baby goes exactly counter to that.

Now, if the baby snuck into the mother's bed and suckled without any consent or if the husband refused to purchase alternatives and essentially forced the mother to provide milk, I could see your point. But if the mother is choosing to give it, I honestly don't see how that has anything to do with exploitation, at least in the negative sense. In the positive sense, humans absolutely exploit animals (e.g. vegans eat fruit and veggies pollinated by bees; humans are "exploiting" the bees, but the bees are also "exploiting" the flowers for pollen and nectar).

[–] commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 3 months ago

In the positive sense, humans absolutely exploit animals (e.g. vegans eat fruit and veggies pollinated by bees; humans are “exploiting” the bees, but the bees are also “exploiting” the flowers for pollen and nectar).

that's a contradiction for vegans to resolve.

[–] commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 3 months ago

Definition 2 is what I’m referring to.

and i'm referring to definition one, and the vegan society doesn't distinguish at all.

[–] commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 3 months ago

You’re not being exploited if you consent.

i think this is a tenet of so-called "anarcho" capitalism.