602
autism milk rule
(lemmy.blahaj.zone)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 02 Dec 2023
602 points (100.0% liked)
196
16548 readers
2031 users here now
Be sure to follow the rule before you head out.
Rule: You must post before you leave.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
The people who want us to give up all meat and even not have pets operate the biggest kill-shelter in the United States. They're constantly preachy, condescending, they lie. Fuck em.
Euthanising animals that have nothing to live for any longer, who are dead-sick and are in agony. Compared to the billions of animals raised for animal ag, slaughtered on the daily, just to be sold for pennies in stores. I don't think they're the villain here, my guy.
Miss me with the "my guy" shit. It's smarmy.
The post we're commenting on they're saying milk causes autism, like out of their ass. Just like they did with vaccines. You say they aren't the villain, but making shit up about people with medical conditions doesn't make you a hero.
I agree with you. I don't think this is a particularly useful spending of their time and resources since there's a plethora of reasons not to consume dairy. However, you did bring up their kill shelters which I responded to.
Again, I am not defending them using their don't-consume-dairy-to-prevent-autism shtick. I don't agree with their outright villainisation in regards to everything else they do, which is definitely heaps more than the average non-vegan does in terms of pro-animal advocacy.
What specifically have they achieved? What is all of this lying and showboating they constantly do getting them? Has there been a major societal shift toward veganism caused by PETA that I missed?
I just wanted to say that regardless of our opinions I was sort of rude in my phrasing. Sorry for that.
No worries. I appreciate you saying that.
What I find shocking is you assumed the "before" image wasn't shopped!
I went looking for evidence it was real and just found a bunch of people claiming it was from 2008, no snopes article (which shocked me) and a bunch of people on reddit saying it was teal but very outdated and to argue about something recent.
But both of y'all saw a post that was edited and treated the "before" as real. Remarkable
Or you could get your head out your ass pretending like it isn't exactly the kind of bullshit peta have been pulling for years, put your bias and urge to jump to their defence for who the hell knows why to one side, and actually click some of the results?
Like the Time article that includes the following quote from peta:
Hey. Put that shit away. I'm not experiencing a "bias" because I tried to confirm something I saw in an image macro before I got into a diatribe.
Are you okay? I've never seen you be this pissy on the fediverse before.
E: And because apparently it bears saying, even though I never indicated otherwise, fuck Peta. Seriously don't know how "please make sure the thing you're arguing about is worth arguing about" made me a Peta apologist. I've literally never met anyone, even online, who liked that organization.
You're right, I didn't verify it. I also didn't email them about it or show my ass about it in public, just the discussion here where it was presented. Sounds like your research was inconclusive but thanks for looking into it.
Remarkable
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/aug/17/peta-sorry-for-taking-girls-dog-putting-it-down
They kidnapped a healthy dog from it's home and euthanized it.
PETA's overtly confrontational approach was likely driven by empathetic people struggling to just live their lives knowing humans are 'passively' responsible for incomprehensible suffering around the world. In this scenario, how could you not feel compelled to wake people up? Unfortunately, as sure as we struggle to transcend our primitive tribal instincts, even the most altruistically motivated groups develop their own identities that need to be fed.
Despite this, and as someone who is on the spectrum, I struggle to relate to the idea of being offended by any of this. Perhaps I am in a weird bubble, but I also find it very difficult to imagine any of the autistic people I know being offended - whether it's real or not. In my experience, autistic people tend to be able to be a bit more detached and able to hold opposing views in simultaneity. Obviously I could be wrong, but to me this supposed anger seems more like defensive NT virtue signalling: PETA makes me so fuckinmad because I am unwilling to work on understanding my actual emotions -> omg PETA is attacking the autists I normally make fun of?-> not on my watch!
It is interesting to me that people can take such a hard-line stance against an organization like PETA, while having unlimited mental gymnastics for countless other organizations - including those with no hint of morally redeeming character - just because they personally find them convenient and/or enjoyable.
Your ideas about euthanasia are dumb.
I have autism and I fucking hate peta for this, I also hate peta for other reasons but I also hate them for this
Neurotypicals always make assumptions about us from misinformation, disinformation and what they think is best for us
I'm surprised that you aren't offended by an organization treating neurodiversity as a handicap that parents want to avoid at all costs. They're saying you're a lesser person.
Sure, but I don't care. Should I?
Yes. You should care when someone dehumanizes you. It's the first step that goes towards rounding you and people like you up. But maybe you like the idea of being put in a death camp?
You're right, of course. I do not agree with the message, nor am I even completely indifferent to it - but at the same time, I find it difficult to care how they or most other organizations express themselves. I suppose it is at least partially a consequence of growing up feeling alienated from society, or more literally an alien to society; I am just too detached to identify with any of this enough to feel anything here. Whether this is another divisive PETA ad that missed its mark, or an unusually clever campaign against PETA ... whatever.
Even politics in general, putting energy into making our communities and consequently our lives better, what could be more important? But does it matter how strongly I feel about a given issue, when the entire system - whether by design or wonderful, serendipitous emergence - is a fucking sham? There is no shortage of the type of selfish behaviour on the individual (i.e. tangible) level to keep it fed and elevate us to the next dimension of cultural horror.
I suppose this might be becoming cliche by now (and I don't know if this is progress?), but I think it is pretty clear that what we've been calling 'democracy' is a symptom; a sham borne out of, sustaining, and masking some rather fundamental deficiencies. Our ability to communicate breaks down almost completely the moment we introduce even superficial and theoretically inconsequential differences: how the fuck can we ever hope to tackle something like the illusory gains of selfishness?
Essentially, I've compartmentalized where I could, and let go where I couldn't. Day to day I don't feel like I have given up, but I suppose to some degree I probably have. And without Camus, or Sartre, or Dostoevsky, I'm really not sure where I'd be. I've always just accepted this for myself, but... if I had to choose between giving my children hope, or acceptance? I mean, don't get me wrong, I want them to have both, but I know one will serve them well.
I do care deeply about people (and animals, of course), and do not want to contribute to the suffering of either - so thank you for reminding me it is all connected. I probably needed that. I need to be mindful that even though I am neither hurt by nor influenced by others' idiotic expressions of insecurity, a lot of people actually do buy into these things, and given our tendency toward majoritarian ideational validation, well...
I do understand where you're coming from and it does make sense to want to compartmentalize on this sort of thing. I react strongly to it when I see it not only because there are people in my family who are neurodivergent (I mentioned my father and brother elsewhere in the thread, but they are not the only ones), but because I come from a traditionally marginalized and dehumanized minority that did end up being put in death camps. And we're seeing so many calls to dehumanize marginalized populations as it is.
They didn't have the understanding of neurodivergence in Nazi Germany that we do now, but I guarantee you that they would have put every non-neurotypical person in a camp if they could have done so along with all the other people they determined to be mentally unfit.
So I don't mean to sound harsh when replying to you. It just scares me to see people from a specific group, be it an ethnic group, a sexual identity, or a group of people united by the consequence having their minds work differently from the "norm," being depicted like there is something wrong with them when there's nothing wrong with them.
So you said a lot things I'm not going to address, but what strikes me as unfortunate is that you assume anyone who is not autistic but expresses concern on their behalf would normally mock you. That seems like a pretty far reach and a pretty lonely way to view the people who only seem to be expressing empathy for you, even if it is misguided. You must be pretty jaded to come to that conclusion so quickly.
I'm glad you and your friends aren't offended. Good for you guys.
Thanks for sharing
Unlike milkautism, when I looked into them killing animals years ago, it sounded essentially defensible. What do you remember about it?
I might’ve looked it up because they took some family pet off a porch or something. Yikes.
—
OK, Newsweek confirms they kill plenty of animals, and includes PETA’s reasoning. They’re not operating a hamburger factory or anything two faced that I can tell.