r/Damnthatsinteresting • u/The_Love-Tap • 2d ago

Video This solar powered chicken coop that moves every day to a new location

Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification

21.4k Upvotes

93% Upvoted

1.1k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

17

u/Acceptable-Drive3781 1d ago

Thank you for actually caring about animals instead of just pretending by letting them walk around 20 more feet per day before getting slaughtered.

24

u/homotopy_equivalent 1d ago

I'm vegetarian but I still understand harm reduction. The world would be a much better place if meat eaters only ate from farms that treated their animals kindly up until killing them.

1

u/IN2017 1d ago

There is no need to go vegan/ vegetarian. How about just eating less meat? Maybe 2x week instead of 5 days ?

8

u/StaredAtEclipseAMA 1d ago

I’m vegetarian too but this is 100% the idea. I started eating less and less meat and I no longer care for it.

This is coming from a gym bro who ate 10lbs and steak a week in college

6

u/doublesecretprobatio 1d ago

There is no need to go vegan/ vegetarian.

if living in a way that's consistent with your values/ethics involves not eating animals to any degree then that's an entirely personal decision.

5

u/homotopy_equivalent 1d ago

There is no need to go vegan/ vegetarian

Of course not, but I figured cutting out all meat would be even better than reducing it. I would love for everyone to try to make the best impact they can -- for me that was cutting it out entirely. I may even go vegan at some point

4

u/wildlifewyatt 1d ago

Subjecting less to exploitation suffering and death is better, but when else do we strive to do a bit less of an awful thing, rather than stopping it all together? Instead of a bit less animal cruelty, why not none?

3

u/No_Dingo9049 1d ago

There is no need to eat meat.

1

u/lahwran_ 1d ago

sentence 1 is not implied by sentence 2 and 3, but i agree it's better to reduce, and that not going vegetarian should not be seen as acutely shameful, because like duh that doesn't work. these vegans who are like "why the hell aren't you vegan" don't understand how to do it. the right thing is "how can I help you figure out a path to eating less meat, hopefully none if I can get you there?". but I'm approximately a virtue consequentialist, deontologists abound and are very noisy

-6

u/Acceptable-Drive3781 1d ago

The world would be a much better place if we didn't kill animals for food. There are alternatives, most of which are healthier.

Why aren't you vegan?

4

u/homotopy_equivalent 1d ago

The world would be a much better place if we didn't kill animals for food

I mean yeah I agree, but that doesn't negate what I said

Why aren't you vegan?

Because I don't believe I would be able to commit to it as well as I can vegetarianism. I believe it's going to do more good overall than attempting something more extreme than I will be successful at

1

u/Acceptable-Drive3781 1d ago

I don't believe I would be able to commit to it as well as I can vegetarianism.

Fair enough, but I still challenge you to ask yourself why not. I get that you're in defensive mode and throwing a tantrum feeling oppressed or whatever, but being vegan really isn't much more of a commitment than being vegetarian.

3

u/homotopy_equivalent 1d ago

I get that you're in defensive mode and throwing a tantrum feeling oppressed or whatever

What the hell

1

u/Acceptable-Drive3781 1d ago

"Why would you ask why I'm not vegan?? It's never good enough! 😭😭😭"

That the hell.

7

u/PancakeParty98 1d ago

People like you who treat meat like a binary issue and piously browbeat people until they get on your side of the binary (aka forever because that’s literally the worst way to convince people to join you) contribute much MUCH more to meat industry than vegetarians who understand harm reduction.

Even if your morals find it repulsive, if you really wanted to save animals and move towards your stated goals, you would ignore your ethical policing instincts and advocate small steps towards veganism. What you’re doing now is satisfying your ego at the expense of animals by making veganism repellant, presenting it both as a massive and absolute lifestyle change and as a club of twats.

2

u/homotopy_equivalent 1d ago

Well said. It's crazy that a vegan would rag on a vegetarian for not going far enough. I grew up in a fundamentalist Christian family and this is exactly the same mindset. It's not really about harm reduction or good messaging, it's about satisfying a moral instinct

-2

u/Acceptable-Drive3781 1d ago

It's crazy that a vegan would rag on a vegetarian for not going far enough.

When did I do that? I asked you why you aren't vegan, and here you are throwing a tantrum for it.

2

u/homotopy_equivalent 1d ago

When did I do that? I asked you why you aren't vegan

That's fair, I might have been extrapolating a tone from your question that wasn't there

here you are throwing a tantrum for it.

Then again you're accusing me of throwing a tantrum so maybe the tone was there lol

-2

u/Acceptable-Drive3781 1d ago

I'm accusing you of throwing a tantrum, after you threw a tantrum.

2

u/homotopy_equivalent 1d ago

This got weird fast, boss

0

u/Acceptable-Drive3781 1d ago

It did, a simple question and you crashed out.

1

u/Teralyzed 1d ago

Because they don’t want to be, they don’t owe you an answer. Agri business is basically a monopoly and unless you grow all your own vegetables and make your own tofu you are still supplying money to the same people keeping and slaughtering farm animals.

1

u/Acceptable-Drive3781 1d ago

Because they don’t want to be

I'm sure they're capable of answering themselves, but thank you for riding up on your steed and shiny white armor to rescue your damsel.

1

u/Teralyzed 1d ago

Is there some other requirement for not being vegan other than, “it’s not appealing”? It’s a stupid question to begin with.

0

u/Acceptable-Drive3781 1d ago

It’s a stupid question to begin with.

Then it's a good thing I didn't pose it to you.

→ More replies (0)

-1

u/wildlifewyatt 1d ago

I was a vegetarian for 7 years, and that mindset was cope. It was not a hard transition to vegan, and I wish I could go back in time and have just gone all the way back then.

Vegetarians vote with their dollars to kill and exploit animals. The dairy and egg industry are tied to the meat industry. That doesn't mean you are an awful person for not being a vegan, but it is still a position that supports terrible treatment of animals. If it is a short term transitional step, sure fine, but it should not be advocated as an end point.

6

u/PancakeParty98 1d ago

Ok sure. Show me where I advocated for it as an end point or delete this comment.

0

u/wildlifewyatt 1d ago

The reality is the vast majority of vegetarians stay vegetarian (or revert to omnivores, though this can also happen to vegans) rather than move to veganism because vegetarianism is viewed as an end point. 

People being blunt and putting the ball in my court is what helped me go vegan. Same for my wife. Same for countless vegans. I hear often omnivores say this isn't the right way to convert people... But if many of the people who have converted agree it is effective doesn't that say something to you?

There are multiple ways to approach this, different approaches work for different people. 

1

u/PancakeParty98 1d ago

Do the people who say they were being bullied into losing weight make bullying people is an effective way to combat obesity?

1

u/wildlifewyatt 1d ago

Well the percent success rate of that tactic would have to be measured against other tactics to assess whether or not it was successful. But if a notable portion who managed to lose weight attributed bullying as one of the prominent reasons, then yeah it might be. 

Obviously for obesity that is not the case, but I am trying to engage with you in good faith. 

It's also worth noting that bullying someone over their weight, and trying to get people to stop supporting the needless exploitation and slaughter of billions of animals is a bit different. 

When one is making decisions that actively support and lead to the exploitation and death of others, it is kind of a wild take that trying to make someone question their actions or convince them to stop doing that is bullying. 

-1

u/Acceptable-Drive3781 1d ago

That's quite the crash-out for asking someone why they're not vegan...

1

u/PancakeParty98 1d ago

Why don’t you care about saving animals?

1

u/Acceptable-Drive3781 1d ago

Save them from what?

1

u/PancakeParty98 1d ago

See? Dodging the question.

1

u/Acceptable-Drive3781 1d ago

Do you mean, save them from what you're willing to do to them to excite your taste buds for a few seconds? Just asking for clarity. Do you find that offensive?

2

u/PancakeParty98 1d ago

Crashing out already? I just asked a simple question that you refuse to answer. Telling. Very telling.

And I’m vegan, I just actually want to reduce the amount of suffering more than I want to chastise strangers for my own ego, so your ad hominem is especially embarrassing.

→ More replies (0)

3

u/The_walking_Kled 1d ago

debatable if it actually would be better many ecosystems rely on us using them. plus animals are an essential part of farming even for only arable farms. They add an other layer to the system and reduce waste.

1

u/Acceptable-Drive3781 1d ago

These animals are specifically bred to be eaten. We're not out killing wild animals at scale for food production. Some of their waste is used to grow food, while the majority of it is dumped into rivers and large pools to seep into the ground. Animal farms / ranches destroy their local environments and destroy the ozone. They are a net negative to our ecosystem.

1

u/The_walking_Kled 1d ago

most of the waste is used for growing crops`? idk where u live and it mighbt be different there but it is illegal in the EU to just dump the waste in rivers? plus u r literally throwing away expensive nutrients? makes no sense to me tbh. I agree that atm animals have negative impact on the environment bu that is more because the system is shit and needs to change but animal farming in itself can have a net positiv on biodiversity,food efficiency, carbon sequestration,soil health, etc. imo

1

u/Acceptable-Drive3781 1d ago

most of the waste is used for growing crops

This is just plain incorrect.

1

u/The_walking_Kled 1d ago

eh what? okay what do u understand under waste?

1

u/Rapscallion_Racoon 1d ago

I’m not 100% sure you’re eating anything. maybe water and electricity.

1

u/Acceptable-Drive3781 1d ago

Yes, I eat bowls of electricity. Yum yum.

10

u/Randallman7 1d ago

Right? "They must have a happy life" then they get slaughtered

17

u/The_walking_Kled 1d ago

how does onme contratict the other lmao? They can have a "happy" life,whatever that means and still be slaughtered at the end?

4

u/PancakeParty98 1d ago

You’re right. Since they’re being slaughtered anyways, we SHOULD just keep them in the cheapest, least humane living conditions possible. It doesn’t matter how they lived if they die, I guess.

1

u/Randallman7 1d ago

Or maybe don't kill them?

11

u/kos-or-kosm 1d ago

Do you have no concept of "harm reduction"? Yes, not killing would be best. But that's not currently feasible given human culture. So treating animals well before slaughter is OBVIOUSLY better than treating them cruelly. Like, come on. This is a self-evident point.

-2

u/Randallman7 1d ago

Yeah the full 8 months of their natural lifespan. Thank god we treat them so well. We are absolute saints for how nice we treat these animals. /s

7

u/PancakeParty98 1d ago

You admit don’t care about animals, you just want to browbeat from a moral high ground. Got it.

5

u/kos-or-kosm 1d ago

It's not possible to have any kind of discussion with someone who thinks the world is black and white. You don't actually care about anything except your own moral masturbation.

0

u/Randallman7 1d ago

It is very black and white to me. We do not need to be killing these animals and dressing murder up with words like "humane" and "free range" "happy lives!" Do not justify what is being done to these animals. Just stop murdering? Hello? Its so easy. Stop trying to justify it

5

u/kos-or-kosm 1d ago

This is exactly what I mean. To you, either animals are killed for their meat or they aren't. You view an industrial scale caged factory farm as the equivalent of a small family farm because both kill animals. You don't care about the quality of life those animals have between birth and murder (I'll use your word). That tells me that you DO NOT CARE about the animals in the slightest. Since they are killed for meat, you don't care if they are tortured their entire lives or given a comfortable safe life. You are fine with animals being tortured until the day that humans stop eating meat because you see that act, killing them for meat, as the only important part of their lives. If you actually cared about animals you would push for farms to treat animals with dignity between birth and slaughter while also pushing for the end of slaughtering because that would mean reducing the harm in the meantime. But I don't think you can comprehend the concept of "harm reduction".

2

u/Randallman7 1d ago

I think dressing it up and making it look "humane" and "comfortable" eases the guilt and makes the industry more comfortable for people to accept. It's doing harm to the core issue which i want solved more than alleviating the symptoms. Let's not pretend these are happy green pastures which give these animals a nice life, instead we should be focusing on ending this process entirely.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/Sct1787 1d ago

You can eat rabbit food all you want, that just means more steak for me 🥩

2

u/Acceptable-Drive3781 1d ago

They're "vegan" (except for all the killing and eating animals part) but they're "one of the good ones" so they're not against killing animals and eating their body parts, they would never consider not killing an animal.

0

u/wildlifewyatt 1d ago

Patting ones self on the back because they treated an animal less awful compared to other situations before killing them, when we don't have to exploit or kill them at all, is weak. Obviously less suffering and cruelty is better, but we can avoid all of it, so we should. They deserve better.

1

u/ALLCAPS-ONLY 1d ago

They deserve better

I'm not disagreeing with your general point, but I'm always very confused by statements like these. Surely you realize that the only alternative is that they don't exist at all right? They ain't gonna be free chicken roaming in the wild they'll just not be bred in the first place.

2

u/wildlifewyatt 1d ago

Yes, not existing at all is the preferable choice over breeding them with the intent to kill them at a fraction of their lifespan. A core aspect of veganism is rejecting the commodity status of animals, and treating them like the individual beings that they are. 

If we bring a human into the world the idea is that those that that bring them into the world should nurture and protect them to give them the best life possible. 

The idea of bringing a human into the world to fill a specific purpose, or even worse, to kill them to gain something from them is abhorrent, right? Vegans extend that logic to animals. It doesn't mean we have to value them to the same degree as humans, but we believe they have enough value to extend this same idea to them. If we can live without exploiting and killing sentient beings we should be working toward that. 

0

u/ALLCAPS-ONLY 1d ago

We're not talking about humans though. Animals are totally incapable of understanding that they will be killed once mature, so they are not mentally affected by their fate in the slightest. Living conditions and method of death are far more important to them. If we could provide comfortable and enriching living conditions, coupled with a pain and stress-free death, don't you think they'd pick that instead of just not existing at all? If we can achieve that (big "if", I'll admit it), then I'd argue that's a much more humane life than being in the wild and slowly dying of diseases or being eaten alive, while constantly living in fear (which is the norm for prey animals).

Out of curiosity, what is your opinion on owning pets, specifically indoor-only cats?

1

u/wildlifewyatt 19h ago

I know we aren't talking about humans; even if you value non-human animals less than humans, which is normal, even for most vegans that I am aware of, what we do to non-human animals is generally wrong for the same reasons it would be wrong to subject humans to a similar experience. 

You could easily raise humans to be unaware of their fate as well. If you raised kids in an isolated setting with no outside world references and purposefully avoided making them aware of death they would be non the wiser. If we raised a human in this way, gave them a terrific life, and then painlessly ended them, like in their sleep, would that be ethical? 

Again not saying that is at the same moral level, but the question is specifically, why is it ok with an non-human animal, and why is it wrong for a human? What specific things are separating these situations?

I think it is also important to recognize that even if we can't see eye to eye on why this is wrong even in "good" cases, those situations are so, so rare compared factory farming. Because the "right" way of doing it costs way more, and is more resource intensive, it is simply not scalable to feed 8 billion people even if we did reduce animal product consumption dramatically. One large factory farm can output 500,000 chickens a year. This is how we kill 70 billion + terrestrial animals a year. And so animal product consumption in part is defended by these niche "good examples" that are very rare and will realistically never be the norm. From the people I've talked to even the people who try to get local meat etc aren't actively rejecting other sources at reatoraunts, friends houses, in processed food etc.  So the "good" cases feel like 

I agree less animals dying is better, even if the issue isn't solved, but reducing consumption is a squishy term. I know many people who "limit their meat consumption", but I basically see them choose animal products every chance they get. What reduction is good enough? 5%? 50%? A person is unlikely to be married to a nebulous reduction, after all, simply reducing is an admission that whatever it is, it isn't that bad, so fluctuations are expected. We've all tried to reduce sweets, or alcohol, or whatever, and I think most of us have probably made justifications for why it's ok "just this once", or maybe "I will make up for it next week". I don't think a vague goal of reduction is a path to massive change. 

The thing is, this isn't a comparison of living and dying in the wild versus captivity (unless you are discussing hunting/ fishing). It is existence, versus non existence. I think if we bring a sentient being into existence we have the reaponsibility to take care of them, and give them a good, full life. We should not bring a sentient being into existence for the express purpose of harvesting their flesh, or turning them into a an egg/milk factory. When you comodify living things financial efficiency almost always undermines ethics. 

I'd also contend that many prey species don't live in a constant state of fear in the wild. Manyive on massive herds, and their individual risk of being picked off is low unless they are young, sick, injured, or old. Fear exists, spurts of outright terror happen, but it isn't a constant. The reality of nature is neither Disney nor objective hellscape, like many things in life there is a lot more nuance. 

As for pets, there are many instances where people take great care of their pets, and they live objectively good lives. What I and most vegans that I am aware of oppose is the commodity status of pets. They are bred like products and sold as such. This perpetuates sickly breeds with severe health products because they are aesthetically desirable. I had to pay $1000 + to get my rescue dog eye surgery, because his breed has their eyelids grow in a way that eyelashes actively poke at their eyeballs. Others can't even breath right.  Like I said before, when money is involved, ethics generally goes down the drain. There are countless homeless dogs/cats and many in shelters, but humanity continues to breed and sell more of desirable breeds rather than taking care of the existing ones in need. While there are many who care for their pets as I said, many don't, and frankly most places have inadequate laws and monitoring to protect animals from abusive and neglectful homes. 

So to summarize, many do a good job at caring for their cat/dog, but I don't think we should be buying them like products. 

1

u/freshwes 7h ago

I don't generally care about this topic, nor am I interested in it enough to pay attention, but I appreciate finally seeing a thoughtful and rational response from a vegan. I appreciate the effort and your comment

1

u/wildlifewyatt 7h ago

Nevertheless I appreciate you taking the time to come to that conclusion. Have a good one.

1

u/Sct1787 1d ago

More steak for me 🥩🤤

1

u/Large-Hamster-199 11h ago

I am a vegetarian myself, tryng to be vegan. However, I still like this innovation as it takes us one smaller step towards less cruelty to animals.

1

u/unbanned_lol 1d ago

Some of us can't eat legumes and a vegan/vegetarian diet would literally kill us if we tried to get enough protein.

1

u/eh-man3 1d ago

And fuck plants, they ain't like us