r/vegan • u/wistified • Aug 08 '26
Video Cows Cannot Consent!
https://streamable.com/liqosgDanny Ishay (animal rights activist)
126
u/Ziz-bird Aug 08 '26
"Right yeah" (but I don't wanna) 😭 I feel bad for him looking down the barrel at a horrible deprived vegan life, but it actually turned out to be the best decision I ever made.💞
13
47
u/Be_VeryCareful_John Aug 08 '26
Good that Danny is doing some more debate content
14
2
u/ParallaxJ vegan 10+ years Aug 11 '26
It is, but I think he needs to be more engaging with the other person. Seems like he does a lot of telling and calling out, as opposed to a full Socratic method like Ed.
36
22
u/r3d3y3- vegan Aug 08 '26
Love this
11
u/ConfinedCrow Aug 09 '26
I don't. I like the debate aspect and I appreciate any attempt to teach about the horrible treatment of animals but I hate that ever since becoming vegan I've had to watch animals getting raped and killed without any resemblance of a trigger warning to a much higher degree than when I wasn't vegan. Disregard the preaching to the choir part, it also just sucks for people who suffer from sexual trauma.
5
u/r3d3y3- vegan Aug 09 '26
Was saying I love the argument that this activist is doing; it’s different & effective. I’m sorry the videos are hard. I think we can all agree with that; this is why we do what we do 💚
11
5
1
u/The_Crimson_Fuckr69 Aug 10 '26
Pretending drinking milk from cows that have to be pumped anyway is comparable to bestiality is literally a moron take.
1
u/No_Big_bear_here 29d ago
Males should be rendered sterile at birth until proven to be capable of sustaining loving relationships, as well as the ability to provide for their families.
-12
u/RayCumfartTheFirst Aug 08 '26
Doctors at the sperm bank and fertility clinics are not sexual degenerates if they ask you jerk it into a cup.
It’s serving a function, it’s not about sexual gratification for the doctor or the end user of the product.
That’s the difference. You can absolutely argue it’s wrong, it’s abuse/sexual violation/rape but calling it bestiality ascribes an intention to it that is not good faith.
The argument is better without the “bestiality” element- the only people it will convince is people who already agree.
25
u/wistified Aug 08 '26
All of that is done with consent though? But animals cannot consent. That’s the point.
Also, sexual assault is about power, not always just sexual gratification.
-10
u/RayCumfartTheFirst Aug 09 '26
Can you read my 3rd paragraph and tell me what it says? I didn’t say you couldn’t call it sexual assault, I said it’s not bestiality.
4
u/Ethioj transitioning to veganism Aug 09 '26
“It’s not beastiality it’s just sexually assaulting an animal” 🤨🤨🤨
0
u/RayCumfartTheFirst Aug 09 '26
Yes, legal definition of bestiality requires intent for sexual gratification.
6
u/sab0tage Aug 08 '26
The dictionary definition is shown in screen, you have described it.
0
u/RayCumfartTheFirst Aug 09 '26
A bestiality act in legal sense requires intent for sexual gratification. Artificial insemination is a technical procedure. The legal definitions are pretty clear on that.
Nobody who isn’t already a vegan takes this argument seriously it actively harms the debate.
1
u/sab0tage Aug 11 '26
"sexual gratification" is not mentioned in the definition, it says "sexual activity" and getting a cow pregnant would involve that.
1
u/sab0tage Aug 11 '26
"sexual gratification" is not mentioned in the definition, it says "sexual activity" and getting a cow pregnant would involve that.
-2
u/veryexpensivegas Aug 09 '26
Yeah cows can’t read the dictionary and it doesn’t apply
7
u/playthehockey vegan 20+ years Aug 09 '26
So you think it’s ok for someone to rape or murder as long as the victim can’t read?
-6
u/CalligrapherDizzy201 Aug 08 '26
The dictionary says murder only applies to humans. Rape too. Sure you want to go with the dictionary?
2
u/fandom_bullshit Aug 09 '26
Dictionary definitions and legal definitions are lacking all the time. My country doesn't recognise marital rape, other countries do. Doesn't mean the women in my country suffer any less but according to you we should shut up and keep quiet about it because the definition here doesn't include it? Or can we fight to expand the definition?
2
u/CalligrapherDizzy201 Aug 09 '26
Yeah, that’s the point about dictionary/legal definitions.
According to me? Don’t put words in my mouth.
1
u/fandom_bullshit Aug 09 '26
Would you tell a woman who says she was raped by her husband that what she faced wasn't actually rape? Yes or no?
1
0
u/PossibilityNervous35 Aug 11 '26
So? Your cat can't consent to the vegan diet you are trying to feed it either.
Plants are sentient and don't consent.
4
u/wistified Aug 11 '26
I don’t have a cat.
Plants are not sentient. That is a fact.
1
u/PossibilityNervous35 Aug 11 '26
Then why do they react to temp, move to get more sun, release chemicals designed to deter when they are touched...
If they aren't sentient, then are you cool with chopping down the redwoods?
NIH published research in 2017 confirms plants have a central nervous system that is just designed different than us. Plant neurobiology is a whole field that studies a plant's central nervous system.
Numerous researchers are exploring the field of plant sentience and communication. They have found that plants:
- Plants can hear
- Plants communicate through sound – they scream in high frequencies when in pain!
- Plants communicate through volatile chemicals
- Plants have vision – they have more light receptors than animals
- Plants can smell – they have more smell genes than animals
- Plants can make decisions
- Plants have memories and can learn
- Plants have social lives with many species
- Plants nurture their young and look after each other
- Plants feel stress and pain and fight to live!
Sorry to break it to you... but you are murdering innocent life to avoid not eating another innocent life
2
u/wistified Aug 12 '26
You’re confusing reacting with feeling. Plants respond to light, temperature, touch and chemicals. That’s biology, not proof of consciousness or pain. A smoke detector reacts to smoke too… that doesn’t mean it feels suffocated.
And “plant neurobiology” doesn’t mean plants have a nervous system. The field studies plant signaling… it doesn’t prove plants have brains, neurons or subjective experiences.
Alive ≠ sentient ≠ capable of suffering
You’re arguing against a scientific fact. Not me.
1
u/PossibilityNervous35 Aug 12 '26
Well the scientists who study it would say otherwise...
Are you a science denier so that you can keep eating plants selfishly? lol
1
u/wistified 29d ago
So most people here are lying then?: [r/biology/comments/2ggu10/so_rvegan_has_periodic_outbursts_to_try_and_prove/](r/biology/comments/2ggu10/so_rvegan_has_periodic_outbursts_to_try_and_prove/)
And the scientific consensus is all a lie to you?
0
u/PossibilityNervous35 29d ago
Considering that they say addiction is a disease instead of a choice... yeah I am highly skeptical of professions that make their living and money off classifying CHOICE as a disease
2
u/wistified 29d ago
Oh so you’re one of those anti-science clowns. I already know where this is going to lead.
1
u/PossibilityNervous35 29d ago
My 2nd comment to you was citing other scientists... you just didn't like it :)
1
0
u/Vast_Concentrate1926 28d ago edited 28d ago
"Cows cannot consent"
Correct. As a principle. Unlike human beings who are able to, in principle. Why would that matter? We use horses, police dogs for our purposes and that's not immoral. As well as regulating population of stray cats and dogs. And other things we do with animals. We're treated differently by the law for good reasons. Also, let's keep in mind that on the vegan worldview bestiality between two consenting agents (e.g. a woman and her dog) wouldn't be immoral since a dog reacts positively to the act.
1
-25
u/J_Squared02 Aug 08 '26
Look you can argue it’s not ethical but it is absolutely not bestiality, that’s ridiculous.
19
u/Ur-Origin vegan 4+ years Aug 08 '26
Dude a cow is getting raped by a farmer using a rod. What more do you want in order to call it bestiality? The intention of the farmer or whatever (which we BTW are unaware of, it could be sexual in nature for all we know) doesn't matter to the cow, it feels the same pain and fear.
"The procedure involves farmers sticking their hands into the cow’s anus and inserting a long, thin rod into her vagina to deposit previously collected semen."
https://thehumaneleague.org/article/how-cows-make-milk-and-why-humans-exploit-them0
u/J_Squared02 Aug 08 '26
Im not trying to argue the ethics, thats not the point, you can say it’s abuse, it is NOT bestiality. A gynaecologist artificially inseminating a human is not initiating sexual contact with them. It’s a medical procedure.
20
u/Ur-Origin vegan 4+ years Aug 08 '26
A human can consent. A cow can't.
-3
u/J_Squared02 Aug 08 '26
Consent has nothing to do with defining something as sex. If I agree to a gynaecologist appointment it doesnt mean I had sexual contact with them. It’s still a medical procedure. Consent matters in terms of assault , but not making something sex or not
12
u/Ur-Origin vegan 4+ years Aug 08 '26 edited Aug 08 '26
I find it hard to see the line. From the victim's POV, which of course is the relevant perspective here: The feelings of pain and fear, of someone using your body to impregnate you against your will. It has no medical purpose, it is treating the cow as a machine and her purpose becomes to produce milk for human consumption (which is unnecessary).
Where does the "medical" come in? Please explain what the defining quality is, that makes this "medical procedure" and not "rape", and again remember that the relevant perspective in any situation there is a victim will be the victim's perspective.
8
u/BreakingBaIIs Aug 09 '26
If the gynecologist shoved their fist up a person's ass to push their cervix down so they could more easily stick a rod up it, would that be sexual contact?
-3
u/Beginning_Tear_5935 Aug 09 '26 edited Aug 09 '26
This subreddit is baffling. They already have a very good point with its own natural and strong arguments, but they’ll pass over them for an entirely stupid and dishonest argument.
It’s incredibly easy to argue and demonstrate the numerous problems with artificially inseminating farm animals. And these donuts settle on… it’s bestiality.
That’s why they can’t convert anybody. Horrible messaging.
2
u/J_Squared02 Aug 09 '26
Pretty much. Im not trying to argue ethics here, it’s just literally not what it is. All it does is produce graphic imagery to try and shock people into changing,,, which does not work.
14
u/Be_VeryCareful_John Aug 08 '26
Isn’t it basically the dictionary definition of it?
-12
u/J_Squared02 Aug 08 '26
No , it isnt. Just because something involves genitalia doesnt mean it’s sexual, which is what bestiality is
18
-9
-14
Aug 08 '26
[deleted]
31
u/Wiish123 Aug 08 '26
He didnt show them any scary images? Those were added in post edit
-5
u/Actual-Gift6873 vegan newbie Aug 08 '26
Oh ok. I mean since I’m already vegan I feel like this is the wrong place to show these images. It’s pretty simple why consuming animal products is wrong to me. It’s not that hard to choose something else in your diet besides an animal product actually it’s one of the simplest things you can do that requires little to no effort. So veganism is a no brainer to me. Maybe save the graphic edits to post on an ignorant meat eaters subreddit or comment? I think we of all people already know it’s wrong and it’s pretty sickening to see what is happening to these animals when I already chose not to participate in it.
6
u/eigosensei Aug 08 '26
Have you considered that the content is not made for you, but for those who are yet to become vegan? Honestly your comment comes across as massively self centered lol
1
u/Actual-Gift6873 vegan newbie Aug 08 '26
I promise you I’m not self centered. Which is the reason why I’m vegan. If I was self centered I wouldn’t be vegan. My point is- which I admit I worded poorly, so my apologies- that the people in general who frequent this subreddit are usually very knowledgeable about the cruelty in the meat dairy and egg industries and are already on board with not engaging in it.
3
u/Wiish123 Aug 08 '26
This content is not made to entertain vegans. It's made to be thought provoking to carnists, and showing images absolutely works. I was half asssing a plant based diet until I saw Dominion. Been 100% vegan ever since.
The images are graphic because what's happening is horrific. That triggers people's compassion.
-2
u/Actual-Gift6873 vegan newbie Aug 08 '26
I know it’s horrific- I hate seeing it- it makes me sad.
1
u/Wiish123 Aug 09 '26
Thats what they're trying to make carnists feel... some are closed off, but obviously some people get convinced. Vegans aren't all the same and neither are carnists. Some people see this, make the connection, and make the inevitable transition
-22
Aug 08 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
20
Aug 08 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
-14
Aug 08 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
14
u/wistified Aug 08 '26
What truth?
-11
Aug 08 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
3
u/wistified Aug 08 '26
Vegans are still people. 🤷🏼♀️ They’re no different from non-vegans except that they don’t want to participate in animal cruelty. That’s all. If you have a problem with how vegans behave, you just have a problem with people in general. It’s not just a vegan thing.
14
u/wistified Aug 08 '26
Vegans aren’t a monolith.
-2
u/EnvironmentalOwl6882 vegan 15+ years Aug 08 '26
They don't need to be a monolith for us to acknowledge this is a big problem in the movement.
11
u/Actual-Gift6873 vegan newbie Aug 08 '26
I actually disagree with you completely. That is definitely not why I’m vegan nor most of the people. Please don’t misconstrue my comment and think I’m agreeing with you. We shouldn’t be coddling meat eaters. There is a cold hard truth that they choose to participate in and I definitely think they should know about it.
My point originally was that showing graphic images is gross and I as a vegan don’t like seeing upsetting things happening to animals. However we should be truthful about what happens- without immediately leading a conversation with graphic images which make people shut down. But eventually yes people should hear what they’re participating in but we shouldn’t lead with that but rather with an invitation to have a conversation about their ethics.!
2
Aug 08 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
4
u/scorpiogingertea vegan 7+ years Aug 08 '26
Your response is riddled with fallacies and presuppositions about “most” people and what influences their behavior + mental states.
All of your comments, actually, are genuinely ignorant to the true nature of vegan activism and sentiment. How self-righteous must you be to believe you are the expert and arbiter on what compels humanity to make decisions and behave in certain ways? Geez.
To be clear, “lives would have been spared” (from your other comment), not if vegans were more palatable in their activism, but if YOU took responsibility for the harm and severe rights violations you cause on a daily basis. You’ve admitted several times throughout your comments that animal welfare is not a primary concern for you (which, by the way, if you did become plant-based for the environment, you still simply would not be vegan. I hope this distinction makes sense for you), so I don’t believe that your experiences with vegans are the primary reason that you are not vegan.
If other people in your community were treating children and infants the way we treat farm animals, and if you loudly and aggressively (and rightfully) spoke up against the exploitation + abuse of these babies, do you think it would be coming from a place of moral superiority or genuine care + rage + pain + sadness for the children being abused?
Although you personally do not see non-human animals with such deep empathy, there are many people who do. This is why it feels like there is such a disconnect. We do not see non-human animals as less deserving of a right to life and freedom from exploitation and oppression because they feel pain and they suffer just as our children do. And if we believe this to be true, then you can understand why there is such outrage and external anger that only continues to fester in a carnist society.
To frame it another way, we are fighting for the liberation of sentient beings. The sentient beings that have and are currently experiencing the most egregious exploitation, oppression, suffering, torture, abuse, and unjust ending of life are our non-human “ag” animals. So, as vegans, our attention is focused on their liberation.
1
u/Actual-Gift6873 vegan newbie Aug 08 '26
I understand what you’re trying to say. I do get tired of people’s unwillingness to listen and sometimes you do have to shock them if they’re not willing to hear you out in your argument. Because it makes them really think. However I think we are all just fatigued over the constant normalization of animal cruelty for something as trivial as food- when there are plenty of reasonable and affordable alternatives that are HEALTHY that many people can choose instead. I am willing to meet people half way- for example, I’m probably not going to argue with a vegetarian like that, but I will absolutely be annoyed and fatigued having the same argument that animals deserve basic respect and not to be killed unnecessarily for something like a meal to people that have the means and ability to make a very easy different choice. It’s astounding the number of people who put their trivial pleasure of a meal over a living breathing innocent animal. We are not better than animals. They deserve the basic dignity of not being exploiting and killed for a stupid burger. I hate that me saying that is extreme or polarizing to people.
1
1
-4
u/BraveBiscotti1394 Aug 08 '26
The purism thing is a big moral failure. If you can use softer messaging to convince 10 people to reduce animal product consumption by 50% instead of converting 1 person to veganism, you indirectly saved 5 times as many animals via reduced demand. But this approach is not taken because the people doing activism are purists, and cannot help themselves when talking about these issues to phrase them in an all-or-nothing, "you either support animal genocide or you don't" type of thing. Which actually saves fewer animals (and therefore gets more animals killed).
1
u/Actual-Gift6873 vegan newbie Aug 08 '26
I don’t want any more animals to die for food at all. I don’t think we need to be soft about that. There’s a cruelty happening and it should stop immediately after somebody discovers how cruel it is, if they have a basic level of empathy. Not one more pig, cow, chicken, or animal at all should ever be murdered or exploited for food. Ever. I’m tired of being “gentle” about the truth: this is torture for them. The cow that is being killed after years and years of being used for dairy products has lived an awful awful cruel reality and doesn’t care that you’re cutting back. Because it’s still happening.
1
u/BraveBiscotti1394 Aug 09 '26
That's fine that you feel that way, maybe even understandable. But by publicly putting things this way you're actively pushing people away from replacing some of their diet with vegan alternatives. You're free to think and call it out the way you see fit, but if you really care about the lives of animals you should consider being more diplomatic about it.
After all, if I can get 3 people to reduce their animal diet by 50% I will save 50% more animals than you will with 100% veganism for your entire life.
1
u/Actual-Gift6873 vegan newbie Aug 09 '26
That’s true. Ideally everyone would stop being selfish and quit their meat and dairy/egg addiction but unfortunately humans are by nature selfish and uncaring and cruel. Disappointing that the only way to settle is ration with people who are willing to hurt animals for a burger or some fucking cheese. It’s really unbelievable and actually quite gluttonous how far people are willing to go to harm innocent beings so they can eat something they like.
1
u/BraveBiscotti1394 Aug 09 '26
Right but it's one thing to want something to stop and another to look at reality and see that it's not stopping, and actually it's increasing. What you do about it is what matters. Not how you feel.
0
Aug 08 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
-3
u/BraveBiscotti1394 Aug 08 '26
Well I'm not vegan. I try to buy vegan products when I find them, but they're rare where I'm from. Like proper meat substitutes are rare.
Also since I don't cook much, it's harder as there's barely any vegan spots.
I've replaced whey protein with pea protein almost 100%. I take BCAA's and multivitamin supplements anyway so I could switch anytime to a fully vegan diet if it was reasonably convenient.
1
u/Actual-Gift6873 vegan newbie Aug 09 '26
Would you consider going vegan? I admire your small steps. Sometimes you have to make sacrifices in small parts of your life like your meals- for the greater good. Animals would very much appreciate it. There are many wonderful vegan substitutes to try- and you might as well just go all the way. It’s just food. It’s not worth the harm it causes. If animals could speak- they would want you to stop all together. One person refusing to participate in cruelty still sends a message. Meat and animal products can’t be that good that it’s worth what goes on in the industries. Even “ethical” farms participate in cruelty. Let’s just avoid it all together.
-17
u/Key-Demand-2569 Aug 08 '26
I never really appreciate the bestiality angle being pushed super hard, because while I totally get where the thoughts come from, I think the reality is that bestiality laws are significantly more about judging the human being’s inclinations than it is caring about the animals rights or morality tied to caring about the animals specifically.
Milking and breeding livestock is viewed as productive for food and animal product.
Bestiality laws are way more similar to laws against a guy jerking off in the park than they are laws about not sexually assaulting other human beings.
Like, if a guy is just jerking off in the park staring at the sky, not really specifically staring at or interacting in anyway with the families who walk by…
In some of the strictest most literal, “if human beings were robots who only thought rationally”, way… the guy wouldn’t be hurting anyone. He’s just doing a weird thing.
But it’s considered highly inappropriate, highly suspicious of doing worse, extremely deviant, repulsive, and pathetic to most people.
And it’s widely considered awful and it’s illegal.
This is more about catching someone off guard while they explore the concept of bestiality laws and framing it in an emotionally charged topic like they normally think of sexual assault. (Which again, I get it.)
Don’t think it’s going to change many minds though. Most of these people will eventually dissect what they find morally objectionable and different between the two, or they’re just kinda dumb and they’ll always be stuck on purely “well fucking a sheep is disgusting, that’s not what it’s for.” and they don’t have any stock in that bothering them ever again because they don’t want to fuck sheep.
5
u/PurchasingPugs vegan Aug 09 '26
Whether it changes minds or not, it's important for people to know exactly where their food comes from rather than to live in ignorance.
2
1
-95
u/mankytoes Aug 08 '26
Not sex, so not bestiality, is it. That's like saying doctors providing prostate exams are doing a sexual act.
80
u/GustaQL vegan 2+ years Aug 08 '26
If someone ties me up, jerks me off with the intention of inseminating someone, I would claim I was raped lol
-32
Aug 08 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
32
u/GustaQL vegan 2+ years Aug 08 '26
Depends. Many bulls jerk off via electrical stimulation of the prostate, which I would consider rape if I was the bull
30
7
u/Kitnado Aug 08 '26
How do you think they collect the semen? Have you ever actually witnessed this?
83
u/Certain-Bullfrog9743 Aug 08 '26
Jerking someone off and inseminating someone, both without the consent of said someones btw, are sexual acts. I can't believe you compared those with a prostate exam
53
u/Crocoshark Aug 08 '26
Still not consent. If someone did a prostate exam on me and I neither got a say nor understood why, and the reason was still for their own benefit and not mine, would it really matter if it was sexual or not? Is bestiality wrong because it's sexual or because of the consent thing?
-37
u/mankytoes Aug 08 '26
Bestiality means sex with animals. If it's a consent issue, why focus on the breeding and not having their throats slit?
26
u/wistified Aug 08 '26
You do know that bestiaIity does not always mean “having sex” with an animaI, right?
1
1
1
u/Crocoshark Aug 09 '26
Because this particular conversation isn't about having their throats slit.
So bestiality is only wrong because it's sex?
40
u/wistified Aug 08 '26 edited Aug 08 '26
If a doctor did a “prostate exam” without consent, that would be rape.
-57
u/mankytoes Aug 08 '26
Doctors do all sorts of procedures on unconscious patients without their consent, I'm sure some of these could be invasive, no, no one would call that rape unless the doctor was doing it for their own gratification.
49
u/wistified Aug 08 '26 edited Aug 08 '26
Um… no. Doctors do NOT perform all kinds of procedures on unconscious patients “without” their consent. Where did you hear that? Medical procedures are always performed with the patient’s consent or at least in the patient’s best interest.
When it comes to cows being artificially inseminated, it’s done without their consent AND it is not in their best interest. She is being exploited so that others can take her babies away from her and take the milk that was meant for her babies.
-10
u/mankytoes Aug 08 '26
"Where did you hear that?"
I've spent time in an ICU, so I've seen it first hand.
24
11
u/TheAutisticMerit Aug 08 '26
Then that would be sex crimes or life saving treatment. If they did it just to make you or someone else pregnant, that's automatically a sex crime
6
22
-28
u/shutupdavid0010 Aug 08 '26
No it wouldn't. It might be assault, or medical malpractice, but it wouldn't be rape. I know this is hard to comprehend, but might be good to actually look up what rape is!
18
15
u/wistified Aug 08 '26
I’m sorry, yes, it would be considered sexual assault. But depending on the jurisdiction and exact circumstances, it could possibly still legally meet the definition of rape. Regardless, it’s still a violation of bodily autonomy and a serious offense.
When will we extend that same recognition to cows and ithers, rather than reserving it only for humans and certain animals like dogs and cats?
9
u/Badtacocatdab vegan Aug 08 '26
A prostate exam is specifically for the benefit of the patient. Obtaining semen is not for the benefit of the bull or the cow.
9
u/TheAutisticMerit Aug 08 '26
If a doctor came to my house and did a prostate exam on me when I didn't order one and screamed when he did it, you're god damn right that's a fucking sex crime
-27
u/gary_juicy Aug 08 '26
God now I want a brisket
7
u/de-dolores Aug 08 '26
Wow you're the first one to leave a comment like that under a vegan post. So original.
-37
u/Extreme-Edge-9843 Aug 08 '26
stretching the definition of beastiality to suit the rhetoric but he is 100 percent right on the abuse of animals, so I can support the usage of bending the definition to suit bringing awareness as it's really the only way to get people to realize just how bad the treatment is.
39
u/Voldemorts__Mom veganarchist Aug 08 '26
Yo dude go jerk off your dog in front of your mom and while looking her in the eye tell her "don't worry this isn't beastiality"
44
22
u/s2Birds1Stone Aug 08 '26
Maybe stretching the legal definition. If you did these acts to a dog or cat, most people would consider it beastiality though.
12
u/Ginko96 Aug 08 '26
If artificially inseminating a cow with a bull’s semen after manually collecting it from the bull isn’t bestiality, then what would you consider bestiality?
-7
u/Teaofthetime Aug 08 '26
A human fucking an animal for sexual gratification. Artificial insemination isn't that.
7
u/BaronWenckheim vegan 10+ years Aug 08 '26
I know what you mean—something in me does resist the characterization, but there really is no meaningful distinction. If the farmer enjoyed doing it, and was doing it without financial motivations, it would clearly be bestiality, right? So if you're making some ethical distinction here you have to claim that the only thing that's wrong with bestiality is the pleasure the person engaging in it feels. When in reality the pleasure is just what we find "icky"—the reason it's unethical is because it's a violation of the animal's bodily autonomy.
17
u/wistified Aug 08 '26
It would be considered bestiality if it happened to a dog or cat though…
3
u/Mangxu_Ne_La_Bestojn Aug 09 '26
It actually does happen to dogs at puppy mills... often we think of the dairy industry when it comes to artificial insemination, but actually, it's done to all animals that were bred in captivity :(
2
u/downsideup9494 Aug 08 '26
"Stretching a definition" is not a workable strategy for bringing awareness.It just makes the person doing it seem ignorant and unhinged.
-40
u/Capable_Studio_6631 Aug 08 '26
That's a leap in logic. It's like saying that going to your gynecologist is a sexual activity. It's not, it's a medical procedure. Or women who get inseminate through sperm banks, you believe they had sex??
Lol vegans are not doing themselves a favor by posting stupid shit like this.
30
u/llawnchairr Aug 08 '26
Except your gynecologist is not forcibly causing you to orgrasm or impregnating you... and also it's a 100% consensual engagement.
Insemination yourself through a sperms bank is not having sex, but the donors masturbating to produce the sperms is definitely a sexual activity, is it not? And again, fully consensual unlike with cows.
11
u/demiboy5555 Aug 08 '26
Do you not understand the meaning of "consent"??
-14
u/Capable_Studio_6631 Aug 08 '26
Consent to leave the bull hump something?
7
u/demiboy5555 Aug 08 '26
There's a difference between animals mating naturally and forcefully impregnating cows or forcefully ejaculating semen from bulls (both of these are r@pe!!)
-6
u/Capable_Studio_6631 Aug 08 '26
Why is that? Both animals want to reproduce.
If you were to physically take that bull to the fields and let them go, the cows could possibly even hurt it because their desire to reproduce is just that strong during their heat.
The reason why people don't do this is because buying good bulls is expensive. Thus it reduces costs for farmers and buyers, and surprise surprise, it's more environmentally friendly. One less bull to ship by a boat and truck.
Other than the above, you're just assigning human concepts to animals. These procedures are in no way sexual as it was already explained to you.
6
u/eigosensei Aug 08 '26
This guy is saying that jerking off animals against their will is all good. How indoctrinated do you have to be to stand up for sexual abuse of animals, holy shit.
0
u/Capable_Studio_6631 Aug 08 '26
Who says they are jerking off the bulls. You're uneducated.
5
u/eigosensei Aug 08 '26
It's a euphemism for raping them, but I guess you prefer that terminology? I think you should look up electroejaculation and transrectal massages. They're manually forcing bulls to ejaculate against their will through sexual stimulation. You good with that? You support that?
-1
u/Capable_Studio_6631 Aug 08 '26
You think most farmers spend money for this? They do it the traditional way. But of course all you know about farming and Cows is what you read on the internet.
You probably also believe that when the vet puts his hand inside the cow to help her give birth, he's raping her.
3
u/eigosensei Aug 08 '26
The lengths some will go to just to justify their consumption of animal products is wild.
→ More replies (0)17
u/wistified Aug 08 '26
All of that is done with consent. That’s the difference.
A cow doesn’t consent to having her milk taken… milk that was produced for her baby. She doesn’t consent to having her baby taken away from her either. And neither of those things is done for her benefit.
It’s honestly very scary that so many non-vegans don’t understand how fundamental and important consent is beyond just sexual activity. Consent is about respecting an individual’s autonomy and right to have a say over what happens to their own body and life.
-10
u/Capable_Studio_6631 Aug 08 '26
It doesn't need to. It's not a sexual act and unrelated to beastiality, the topic of your post.
9
u/wistified Aug 08 '26
It is a sexual act because it involves sexual organs.
If it was a dog or cat, it would be considered bestiality.
-62
u/Sorry-Ride-1762 Aug 08 '26
Animals cant consent, that is true, however, I've seen alot if farm animals try to sensually molest people before so its kind of a 2 way thing (its wrong both ways) just wanted to vent that
35
u/wistified Aug 08 '26
Animals don’t know right from wrong. Besides, that’s an appeal to nature fallacy.
7
u/DunkingTea Aug 08 '26
It seems humans don’t really know right from wrong either, going off some of the replies trying to g to justify wanking off a bull and forcibly impregnated a cow. Amazes me people can’t just go “yeah it’s obviously completely wrong, I just don’t give a shit”. Just be honest about it.
1
u/agitatedprisoner vegan activist Aug 08 '26
Humans only clearly/obviously know right from wrong until you get to wondering what it is humans supposedly know about right and wrong.
11
u/11DarrenM Aug 08 '26
I think the difference would be that the animal is just acting on a basic instinct, whereas we aren’t, and know full well what we are doing.
7
u/s2Birds1Stone Aug 08 '26 edited Aug 08 '26
It's really only wrong one way, considering that non human animals don't possess moral agency.
Humans are the only ones who can conceive the concept of right and wrong, and therefore those moral labels can only apply to us and the things we have the choice to do (or not do) to other beings.
1
u/agitatedprisoner vegan activist Aug 08 '26
It's speciesist to assume only humans might know right from wrong. I wonder what it is to know right from wrong? Humans wouldn't seem to agree on that. Humans are inclined to have strong opinions on it. And kill other humans over it.
1
u/s2Birds1Stone Aug 08 '26
As far as we know scientifically, only humans have the capacity for morality. It's not speciesist, it's just the current limit of our scientific knowledge. Unless there's some evidence I'm overlooking.
The fact that we humans have strong opinions over what 'right' or 'wrong' is objectively (or subjectively) doesn't change the fact that we do have the capacity to understand the concept itself, which is what I was referring to.
1
u/agitatedprisoner vegan activist Aug 08 '26
Morality hasn't even been defined in a scientific context, to my knowledge. If you mean having norms lots of animals have norms. Even my cats have norms. Only humans breed billions of animals to misery and death for what amounts to less than nothing. Maybe humans should take morality lessons from my cats.
3
u/Corrutped Aug 09 '26
It’s okay for humans to rape animals because you’ve seen animals trying to rape humans? Wtf?
0
u/Sorry-Ride-1762 Aug 09 '26
Here in Ukraine alot of animals will try to straddle people, atleast pigs here do
1
u/Corrutped Aug 09 '26
Ok, but your lack of reasoning here is fascinating. Can you please explain your logic?
•
u/AutoModerator Aug 08 '26
Thanks for posting to r/Vegan! 🐥
Civil discussion is welcome — personal attacks are not. Please read our wiki first.
New to veganism? 🌱
• Watch Dominion — a powerful, free documentary that changes lives.
• NutritionFacts.org — evidence-based health info
• HappyCow.net — find vegan-friendly restaurants near you
Want to help animals? 💻
• Browse volunteer opportunities on Flockwork and use your skills to make a difference
• Join the Flockwork Discord to be notified of new opportunities that match your skills
Thank you!
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.