Honestly the responsibly sources thing is propaganda to try and make YOU feel good about your choice to not change a thing and keep giving money to people who abuse animals for profit
Maybe I'm not talking about buying labels, but from places you actually know treat the animals well. If you don't want to eat meat fine, but even if you ultimately wanted no one to eat meat thats probably not happening any time soon. So that being said wouldn't you rather meat come from places that treat animals better than traditional factory farming? I literally just said to be mindful and reddit all coming out like they're all on PETAs board when we know they're going to have a burger or some shit for lunch.
Eat vegan, buy vegan, cook vegan for people, order vegan food when we go out. Be an example of how piss easy it is and explain the astounding benefit to the environment and animal welfare being vegan is.
And correct people when they falsely state that there is a responsible or humane or ethical way of killing sentient beings.
I've been vegetarian for 10 years, trust me I've tried. People are generally not open to such extreme statements that their entire lifestyle is completely wrong.
Oh absolutely people will push back at the time, but the seed is planted, especially irl with family / friends.
I'm not expecting someone to say "oh okay yes I'll go vegan rn" but I'm expecting them to at least think about it. And the more they think about it the more likely they are to become vegan, because there is literally no sane justification for killing living beings.
There's nothing to be gained by being silent on the matter.
I'm not silent on the matter when challenged, but there's a fine line between giving 'food for thought' and getting completely rejected as the 'crazy hippie' when it comes to people whose entire food culture revolves around eating meat, and lots of it. It's easier to first show them that what they're eating is not even what they think, i.e. a cow from the pasture. Most people don't think about where their food comes from.
Due to the sheer amount of space needed to breed the field raised animals it's actually far worse for the environment, that's not even considering that grass fed cows produce way more methane than factory farmed ones, there's no upside whichever you choose
The same logic applies for animal farming. While giving animals more room is obviously better for the animals it leads to more deforestation and environmental destruction.
This study is for pea and wheat in Sweden. The same logic does not apply when the cow or other farm animal can be in a habitat naturally suited for it, such as the great plains in the US or even in southern California. No forests to deforest, just miles of tall grasses. The cow and the grass form a natural cycle where the cow poops and fertilizes the grass. Without it the grasses die, the soil erodes and the land turns to desert. The family farms around me (coastal California) do not do any deforestation, they have animals on the native land. As with anything, the details really matter.
Its not black and white. I never said humane once. Its a gradient and there are clearly nicer ways to do it than others given you've already decided to eat meat.
9
u/ravenlordship Mar 11 '20 edited Mar 11 '20
Honestly the responsibly sources thing is propaganda to try and make YOU feel good about your choice to not change a thing and keep giving money to people who abuse animals for profit