HOME | DD
Pupaveg β #202: Extreme
by-nc-nd
Published: 2017-07-19 12:55:38 +0000 UTC; Views: 1656; Favourites: 16; Downloads: 4
Redirect to original
Description
Another one finished. Apparently my followers on Facebook like this art style more because it's less girly than my previous works. I am going to try to finish 1 comic a day, but I can't promise I'll always make it. Thanks for reading!Art
Related content
Comments: 50
I have many words for you, but I don't want to sound rude.Β
I'll just say this: Why does Plausibell value her diet over her relationship with her brother?
But seriously, there's a reason why you form an unholy trifecta alongside Christin Weston Chandler and Dakari-King-Mykan. ππππππππππππππππππππ
π: 0 β©: 1
Veganism is not a diet though, it's an ethical stance. If a choice has victims, people are going to speak up for them. That's just how morality works.
π: 0 β©: 1
That still doesn't change the fact that Plausibell refuses to respect Shawn's own ethical choices. I, an omnivore, would be willing to respect your choices if you didn't resort to violence and insults to make your point.Β
π: 0 β©: 1
But that's the point: non-vegan choices are not ethical choices, because they have victims and pretty much define violence. Claiming to care about a group of victims (whether they're animals or humans) while respecting other people's choice to oppress and kill those victims is extremely contradicting. No one who takes morality seriously does this. If your choices torture and kill others, you can't demand respect for it. Especially not from people who care about your victims.
π: 0 β©: 1
Animals are not sapient beings capable of understanding human morality, therefore holding them up to the same standards as humans is nigh-impossible. Even if you did, you'd have to elevate carnivorous animals to the same status. How would you call eating meat barbaric in the face of creatures that absolutely need to consume meat in order to survive?Β
π: 0 β©: 1
Wild animals kill to survive. They must kill to eat, otherwise they would die. Whether they kill on instinct or are aware of their predicament is irrelevant, we are not in their situation. If you live in modern society and have access to crops, vegetables, fruit, grains etc, then you have no obligation or need for animal products. Also, wild animals exhibit all kinds of behaviour that you would seek to avoid, for instance, violent territorial disputes, and infanticide. Wild animals are not good ethical role models.
Sapience is irrelevant to the question of whether or not someone deserves to be harmed. The only thing relevant to this question is whether or not the victim can experience pain and possesses emotions related to it (fear, sadness, depression etc.) which we all know that all sentient beings possess. If anything, sapience (being able to grasp the concept of morality) gives us the moral responsibility to not inflict harm upon others unnecessarily. Sapience is the very reason why we call out those who oppress and kill others - no matter who the victim is.
π: 0 β©: 1
In many cultures, insects are considered a delicacy. Do you posses similar feelings for that considering the amount of insects we kill every day?
π: 0 β©: 1
I never understood people who would kill bees, butterflies or other insects for their pleasure. So how is this different? Why would you do such a thing if you don't have to?
π: 0 β©: 1
Because it is necessary to kill insects in order to protect the crops that you say all humans should survive on. And if you want more, people do not eat bees or butterflies, beetles and grasshoppers are the ones that are considered a delicacy.
π: 0 β©: 1
Right, so your solution to the problem of animals and insects dying in crop harvesting is to consume a diet that causes TEN* times the amount of crop deaths veganism does, due to all the crops used to raise livestock , and ON TOP OF THAT support a holocaust of 150 billion animals a year (generously low estimate) systematically bred into captivity and abuse in the meat, dairy, egg, leather, wool, fish, etc. industries?Β
Well damn, the solution was staring me right there in the face the whole time. Who needs reductional harm when you can just cause the maximum harm possible to animals and to the entire planet?
* (generously low estimate given the amount of pesticides used on those crops as well, plus any animals and insects killed through mass habitat destruction/deforestation from animal ag, which is the main driver of both)
π: 0 β©: 1
Farmers do not grow crops to feed animals. Cattle and similar livestock simply eat grass in areas where crops cannot be planted. Even if, god forbid I buy into your bullshizz(that's both shit and jizz), let me remind you that soy is one of the most common allergies in the world.Β
π: 0 β©: 1
First of all, do you live in an area with zero plants in the store and also no wifi to order online? Because if you don't then this argument is entirely irrelevant to your situation.
Secondly, hi desert-dude who is still reading this without using the internet somehow!
Thirdly, the whole argument being made here is that animals eat only grass.Β The argument ignores the fact that it's pretty ridiculous to suggest that you'd just be eating grass-fed beef and nothing else. Chickens, turkeys, pigs etc are fed on grains, not on grass, so you'd be just eating grass-fed beef and no other animal products, and you'd not be eating plants. Nobody does this in reality, so the claim falls flat. You can eat anything else, it doesn't have to be beef.
A severeΒ allergic reactionΒ (anaphylaxis) isΒ rareΒ with aΒ soy allergy. It's more likely to occur in people who also have asthma or who areΒ allergicΒ to other foods besidesΒ soy, such as peanuts. But then again, this is pretty irrelevant. After all, no one needs soy to be vegan. There are plenty of other things to eat.
π: 0 β©: 1
No matter how many Bullshit points you make, I still refuse to tolerate someone who not only thinks anyone who consumes any kind of animal asked product deserves to die horribly, but advocates that doing so is entirely justified. If a person is not threatening your life in any way, killing another person is NEVER okay, no matter what they've done. On that note, SterkΒ is a dangerous psychopath who desperately needs to be locked up for life.Β
π: 0 β©: 1
Honest question: how in the world do you translate "enslaving and killing animals is wrong" to "I want all omnivores to die horribly"?
No, seriously, how?Β
Sterk is fiction. Made up. A piece of art on paper. A cartoon character villain from a fantasy novel. What a cartoon character does or doesn't do is no reason for you to copy them.
π: 0 β©: 1
You literally have countless people in your comic killed horribly(the farmer whose family was killed comes to mind)and treat it as karma simply because of their diet.
π: 0 β©: 1
"Because of their diet".
First of all: veganism is not a diet. It's an ethical stance. These comics speak out against the systematic oppression and mass-killing of innocent sentient beings.
Second: the specific comics you are referring to is a comic type called "mirroring". The message in these is CLEARLY "we would not want to be treated like this, so we shouldn't treat them that way". Not "we should treat others like that".
Third: If innocents are being oppressed and killed, people are going to speak up for the victims. That's just how morality works. That's how every other injustice throughout history came to an end. You can't expect people to be silent if you spill blood.
Last but not least: it's actually pretty sad to see that you are concerned about the lives of fictional cartoon characters, but will take the lives of REAL LIVING SENTIENT BEINGS in real life without a second thought. Do you really not see the irony in this?
π: 0 β©: 1
I am not taking value in the lives of comic characters, I simply find it disturbing that you present actions like that as justifiable. Killing an animal for consumption is not a crime on any level whatsoever, while killing another person for no justifiable reason is abominable. Animals have always eaten each other. Humans are just animals that have learned how to do it more efficiently. If anything, many animals treat each other worse than we treat them, from bears and apes who will kill any other bear or ape for intruding on their territory, even if it happens to be their own child, to chimpanzees and crocodiles who have been observed playing with their prey before eating it, to the countless insects that devour their own mates. Humans are not the only animals who kill each other, we are just the only ones who can feel regret for it. Humans are simply another type of animal that just happen to be on top of the food chain. Eating meat is nature, it's just that human have evolved to do it more efficiently.
π: 0 β©: 1
All the oppressions throughout history were fully legal, and it is still legal today to do things in many cultures such as beat your wife, execute people for adultery, and so on. See appeal to legalityΒ fallacy.Β And no one said killing people is okay. If you think mirroring comics' purpose is to encourage killing people, you have completely missed the point. Again: mirroring is used to show the absurdity of an argument by using it consistently. E.g: Someone says that they treat the animals they kill "like family". But they would never treat their real family that way, which proves their claim about the treatment of their animals false. That's the point. How is that not obvious?
Wild animals kill to survive. They must kill to eat, otherwise they would die. Whether they kill on instinct or are aware of their predicament is irrelevant, we are not in their situation. If you live in modern society and have access to crops, vegetables, fruit, grains etc, then you have no obligation or need for animal products. Also, wild exhibit all kinds of behavior that you would seek to avoid, for instance, violent territorial disputes, infanticide, dominating females, etc. Wild animals are not good ethical role models. (I have a comic on this:Β #640: Wild animals do it (3) Β
As for the "food chain" nonsense:Β I am not really sure what this means but I will try to cover it - if the suggestion is that "you live you die, therefore killing is fine" then this would justify killing companion animals and also humans. If the suggestion is "we kill an animal so that we can live" then this is false. Animals are killed for the enjoyment of eating their dead bodies. It is not a matter of survival, as proven by all the hundreds of millions of vegans in the world. Farming animals actually messes up the food chain in nature, because it is the leading cause of deforestation, species extinction, ocean dead zones and pollution.
"IT'S NATURAL TO EAT ANIMALS"
As with the "animals eat other animals" justification, people only ever seem to be interested in justifying something on the basis that it's 'natural' when it comes to murdering animals. Rather conveniently, no one seems to be interested in ditching their smartphone, squatting over a hole in the ground to go to the toilet (as opposed to using unnatural man-made sewage systems), allowing their partner to abstain from showering and brushing their teeth, and so on. The truth is that humans utterly despise 'natural', and why wouldn't theyβnatural is often horrible!Β In any case, there is nothing at all 'natural' about eating animal products in this day and age anyway, as the definition of 'natural' means something that is not man-made. Given that the animals we eat are a.) forcefully and systematically bred into existence, b.) domesticated and not wild animals (so essentially are a human creation), and c.) are routinely fed antibiotics and other completely unnatural things, it makes absolutely no sense that anyone could say that eating meat or animal products now is natural at all.Β See Milton R MIlls MD's graph here from his paper, 'The Comparative Anatomy of Eating' and decide for yourself how closely humans resemble bears, pigs, foxes, and other omnivores.
π: 0 β©: 1
My mother doesn't approve of me doing this, so I'm not going to dignify this garbage with a response. And don't you dare reply again.
π: 0 β©: 1
Hey, you came here on my page and wrote to me, remember?
π: 0 β©: 1
ππππππππππππππππππππππππππππππππππππππππππππππππππππ
π: 0 β©: 1
Many meat producing videos on youtube (whenever pro, anti or neutral) have no age verification needed to watch them though so why do you spread incorrect info?
Then again you spout often incorrect info and act intolerant against everyone who doesnt share your beliefs so its no surprise really so if you read it and then try to paint me as a monster then try it.
btw it may shock you but many Vegans whom i showed your comics and posts dont agree with your behaviour and your often wrong information, and trying to paint meat eaters as strawmans just so you could call them horrible. (and youoverlook that whether if your vegan or meat eater your just a human and can be good or bad regardless of your eating manners)
some examples for your poor research is that animals which are killed for meat production are killed nowadays as quick and painless as possible with a captive bolt gun (which doesnt hurt someone and yes i tested it myself and merely stuns animals) and that a meat eating lifestyle and a vegan lifestyle as well have both issues, and that you ignore the issues of the vegan lifestyle in your comics anf comments, just to strawman meat eaters and portray veganism as this perfect thing, which it just isnt (and neither is a meat eating lifestsyle as well, both have issues and their positives)
So take your poor research and intolerant views and stop acting like that. and why should someone tolerate veganism Β aka another lifestyle if you cant tolerate other people who are different from you (it doesnt stop me from respecting and tolerating a vegan lifestyle especially because i have some friends like that as i mentioned so you acting as a fanatic doesnt stop me but your logic is pretty poor if its only onesided like that)
Thats my thoughts on the matter and your general posts and comics. i look forward to see how you try to demonize me or take paragraphs of mine out of context to portray me as straw man.
Good day to you and hope you and some others on the comments here can learn to respect other people one day and properly research.
Btw if you want other examples of your poor research here:Β tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.phpβ¦
π: 0 β©: 0
I think people who call Vegans extreme probably do so while mentally comparing them to Vegetarians; who are basically the same except they can survive without pills
π: 0 β©: 1
I don't take pills. Why do you assume we need pills? What for?
π: 0 β©: 1
B12? You know? YouΒ΄ve drawn them in a different comic?
π: 0 β©: 1
Cattle are fed B12 supplements, which end up in their milk and eggs, so saying that vegetarians survive without pills still make no sense: they still take them indirectly by consuming dairy and egg products.
π: 0 β©: 1
Of course, I forgot that vegetarians got B12 supplements by eating poisoned cow eggs. How silly of me.
π: 0 β©: 1
I suggest you read the artist description of my post about B12 to learn about where we got B12 before tools and cooking:Β
π: 0 β©: 1
So let me get this right
-Meat eaters get B12 from Meat
-Vegetarians get B12 from Cow Eggs
-Vegans get B12 from Bacteria puddlesΒ
Β
Β
π: 0 β©: 0
I like both artworks, as long as you draw more. This is great.
π: 0 β©: 1
I guess not slitting a cows throat and taking it babies away is "extreme".
Absolutely ridiculous.
π: 0 β©: 1
In about a few days, a carnist will come say"Veganism is extreame because humans are ment to eat animals.
Which is absolute lies.
I imagine people saying, "OMG Pupa, I like meat too much, despite the fact I know I'm contributing to senseless slaughter of innocent beings, and I only eat it for the taste, despite if it weren't seasoned and cooked I would get sick.
π: 0 β©: 1
Carnists are free to comment on my page. They might learn a thing or two. I used to be ignorant, too, but now I know the truth. The least I can do is lessen that same ignorance in others.
π: 0 β©: 1
Yeah, but the ones who refuse to listen are the one I'm talking about. Even when you show them the massive truck loads of evidence saying eating animals is bad.
π: 0 β©: 1
Sure, you'll always have brick walls amongst them, but that was also the case with other forms of oppression. I suggest you ignore the walls and focus on the openminded.
π: 0 β©: 1
Yeah, at least we can convince them.
π: 0 β©: 1
Raising awareness is the only thing that will, and always has, end forms of injustice.
π: 0 β©: 0
I like this style as well ^^ Good job, well said!Β
π: 0 β©: 1
Very true, people should know the reality of their choices from the beginning in my opinion.Β
π: 0 β©: 1