#consbio

obviously you can do whatever you want forever. i personally still do not eat red meat for a variety of reasons

but if you’re vegetarian purely because you do not want animals to suffer or die your worldview is so, so alien to me

i think there is a very specific first world (and specifically American) disconnect from death as a natural part of life. killing an animal for food is a neutral act. there is no morality associated with it. there are some situations in which it is more ethical to kill an animal than not to kill it (ie white tailed deer)

but the idea that you are reducing suffering simply by not eating meat is such a strange one to me, and it highlights such a specific perspective on suffering- that death must be the ultimate suffering, the act of killing is the ultimate immoral act. the life of a cow matters more than the quality of life of a worker, or the environmental toll taken by shipping your bananas across the country.

you are not eliminating death by not eating meat, you are putting a layer of separation between you and the death. your consumption will always take something from the world.

veganism, especially the debate on if honey is vegan, adds another layer of it to me- because insects are still being bred, transported, killed, and kept in captivity in order to produce the fruit that you use as a honey substitute. you would not be able to produce oranges in america without the help of the Australian Ladybug, which is specially bred explicitly for the purpose of pest control and used all over the world. how is this different than raising and breeding bees in order to produce honey?

A rather detritus covered dragonfly nymph from a recent river survey- the detritus is just plants, it’s not harming the nymph at all. Dragonflies are an indicator of a reasonably healthy river, they can tolerate very low levels of pollution, and aren’t as sensitive to pH and temperature changes as super sensitive species like mayflies and caddisflies.