same. i masturbate and eat steak at the same time.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Does One Require Ignorance or Cognitive Dissonance to Watch Pornography or Eat Meat?
- Thread starter Aizo
- Start date
- Status
same. i masturbate and eat steak at the same time.
I love meat but if you give me meat that tastes even better than real meat I'm totally in.
It's a thought experiment, taking the idea to its logical extreme. It's not grasping at straws, it's intentionally extreme to provoke questions about the fundamental nature of the dilemma.
DeathoftheEndless
Crashing this plane... with no survivors!
There are a lot of products like that, but they are difficult to avoid and we usually only see the end result.
Chocolate, clothes, shoes, toys, electronics, jewelry, etc. You'd have to research everything you buy and live without a lot of popular things in modern society, which most of us are unwilling to do.
Chocolate, clothes, shoes, toys, electronics, jewelry, etc. You'd have to research everything you buy and live without a lot of popular things in modern society, which most of us are unwilling to do.
Nope, I was literally just talking about this with my sister the other day lol (the meat, not porn). I fall under the option of not being self righteous. I think eating meat is pretty immoral but I mean it's not going to stop so I might as well join in, which I admit is terrible. You're kind of ruining porn for me though OP.
Also on the subject of meat, many religious people think that God made us the master organism and we have a license to do whatever we want to lower animals.
Also on the subject of meat, many religious people think that God made us the master organism and we have a license to do whatever we want to lower animals.
Yeah, however many animals and living things don't experience pain (physical or psychological) in the same way we do.
Especially if they're far removed from mammals.
I think you can call the empathy towards animal suffering a projection mechanism of human experiences, still; that's basically what empathy is anyway.
Not that the result is negative or anything, most of the time it is positive.
For what it's worth, it's be hard to do it any other way, since we live all our lives from a singular point of view.
OniBarubary
Banned
Oh wow, that's really neat. I'm not gonna lie and say I have a particular moral issue with the normal types of porn I watch but this is interesting to me in a sex-positive way to examine what aspects and types are generally viewed or produced as being healthy and "feminist approved"
For once I will actually be looking at porn for research purposes
Considering that laws are being created to make it illegal to uncover and expose abuse in factory farming.. Yea I would think so.
We know pigs are as smart as dogs, we know cows build relationships and get sad when their friend goes missing. I'm down to just eating chicken and I realize that I have to be content in ignorance because if I really knew the process I'd have to go full vegetarian.
We know pigs are as smart as dogs, we know cows build relationships and get sad when their friend goes missing. I'm down to just eating chicken and I realize that I have to be content in ignorance because if I really knew the process I'd have to go full vegetarian.
poppabk
Cheeks Spread for Digital Only Future
And what happens to those chickens once people stop eating them? What do you imagine the life of a chicken is like without human intervention?
On the porn side, if people want to work in that industry it's up to them. At some point you have to allow people to do what they want to do when they are an adult. We still have laws that can protect then if they fell abused and want to report it, but saying people are tricked into it is trying to say people have no agency of their own. If a person can't see a mistake, or does and still chooses to do it, that can't be on society to be controlling that persons life after some point. We all have free will, but with it comes the consequences we have to deal with.
dehydratedbabies
Member
I only watch amateur porn. And I only eat amateur meat.
Mr Waluigi
Banned
I don't know how it is like in America, but most people are told that donating to charity helps others and that if we don't stop being retarded with how we get rid of our trash, Earth will stop being the little paradise it is right now.
But most people aren't told about the treatment of animals before they are killed for food. And among those who are, how many do you think simply not care? Pollution concerns people, poverty concerns people, but mistreatment of animals that are used for their properties (food, fur, byproducts...) doesn't concern humans.
And production isn't precise to the point it will be reduced if one or two people stop buying meat. The mall doesn't sell meat because I ask it to. Right?
AntraxSuicide
Banned
This is a big one. If you could snap your fingers and make everyone on the planet a vegan, what happens to the farm animals? They evolved to be walking food. Chickens certainly wouldn't do well in any region with predators, and I can't imagine cows would either without food management (I don't know exactly, but I don't think their grazing is efficient if there are many of them).
I think there's a Saturday Morning Breakfast Cereal comic that jokes about this.
Edit: Yep, http://www.smbc-comics.com/?id=3105
Thought about this thread yesterday while dining meat. I think the same could be same to other circumstances such as using proprietary software with the risk of getting spied, or making a vote for the "least worst" candidate out there.
One thing for sure is that most of times, both confort zone and the anxiety to stick to your guns is pretty high. But in the end you have to make a choice.
One thing for sure is that most of times, both confort zone and the anxiety to stick to your guns is pretty high. But in the end you have to make a choice.
It's the same kind of ignorance that allows me to live a needlessly comfortable existence when I know my money and effort could really help others far less fortunate than me.
It's a situational, wilful ignorance. A 'I alone couldn't change it all anyway, thinking about it is fucking grim' ignorance.
It's a situational, wilful ignorance. A 'I alone couldn't change it all anyway, thinking about it is fucking grim' ignorance.
If you look deeply into the stuff you have and use, you probably will find things that trouble you. Who made your clothes? Who built your house? Who made your phones or electronics? What bad things did a person have to do to gain celebrity so they can star in that show you love? How does Amazon deliver your packages so fast. How does Walmart keep their prices low?
Like everything, not all women are treated poorly in porn, not all animals are abused before cooked, not everything you have has been built on exploitation. But some of it can be. Snd I will never have time to research the details
Consuming product built on exploitation doesn't mean you support the exploitation. It can't, because if it does then we are all fucked
If I know explicitly that someone was harmed when producing A, then I will choose not to consume or support it for my own morality. But I will not feel guilty about not researching everything I choose to consume
Like everything, not all women are treated poorly in porn, not all animals are abused before cooked, not everything you have has been built on exploitation. But some of it can be. Snd I will never have time to research the details
Consuming product built on exploitation doesn't mean you support the exploitation. It can't, because if it does then we are all fucked
If I know explicitly that someone was harmed when producing A, then I will choose not to consume or support it for my own morality. But I will not feel guilty about not researching everything I choose to consume
Wait...that isn't how math works. Hundreds of thousands? More like a couple thousand if the person never ate a chicken in their life and lived to 100.
Gordon Shumway
Banned
😐
beelulzebub
Banned
I would be interested in this as well. Especially now that the OP brought to my attention exploitation in the Japanese porn industry, which is almost exclusively what I've been buying and watching lately.
MotionBlue
Member
This whole thread feels like "I'm 12 and this is deep". Setting up a false dichotomy to inflate a personal sense of self righteousness.
I grew up on a farm. I went to school for related fields. The majority of meat a person eats is ethical. If you're going to make broad sweeping ethical statements about outliers, you need to stop using every modern convenience.
If you're worried about porn actor abuse, find and follow the porn actor of your choosing. All the big name porn actresses are quite active on twitter and social media.
On a personal note, Chickens are the worst animals I've ever had to handle. Cows are better, but equally stupid. I also live in Canada, which has tighter regulations than America.
I grew up on a farm. I went to school for related fields. The majority of meat a person eats is ethical. If you're going to make broad sweeping ethical statements about outliers, you need to stop using every modern convenience.
If you're worried about porn actor abuse, find and follow the porn actor of your choosing. All the big name porn actresses are quite active on twitter and social media.
On a personal note, Chickens are the worst animals I've ever had to handle. Cows are better, but equally stupid. I also live in Canada, which has tighter regulations than America.
cpp_is_king
Member
I would argue that cognitive dissonance is required to *not* eat meat on the grounds that it's unethical. Eating meat is simply being a human.
silvermember
Banned
Once in a while I think about it then I stop caring. Not because I don't care but because if I was to worry about it, then I would have to worry about every single aspect of my life.
The oil I use is partially responsible for the deaths of millions in the middle east and the destruction of people's life. Think Iran before the U.S began meddling and think Iraqi war. The things I used are made by people who are underpaid and companies abuse child labor laws.
As an American, almost every single aspect of my existence has negatively impacted something or someone whether directly or indirectly. The closest I have come to stop eating meat was in 2002, when I gave up porkchops because I felt bad for the pigs. Unfortunately, we were too poor and I couldn't keep it up. My point is that, do I care yes. I would rather pay more for people to make a decent livable wage. And I would prefer if we invested money in the environment and in improving tofu to be more tasty. However, until then I will keep not thinking about it.
The oil I use is partially responsible for the deaths of millions in the middle east and the destruction of people's life. Think Iran before the U.S began meddling and think Iraqi war. The things I used are made by people who are underpaid and companies abuse child labor laws.
As an American, almost every single aspect of my existence has negatively impacted something or someone whether directly or indirectly. The closest I have come to stop eating meat was in 2002, when I gave up porkchops because I felt bad for the pigs. Unfortunately, we were too poor and I couldn't keep it up. My point is that, do I care yes. I would rather pay more for people to make a decent livable wage. And I would prefer if we invested money in the environment and in improving tofu to be more tasty. However, until then I will keep not thinking about it.
Nature is fundamentally vile, tho.
Not really. People are evolved to survive in this world. Cows and chickens aren't -- we've changed their natural systems via breeding to the point that, if we didn't keep growing them to eat, they would literally all die out, except for a few in zoos. Have you seen a chicken? They are not well-adapted to the wild.
cpp_is_king
Member
You can't be "fundamentally" <artificially constructed social concept>. It doesn't make sense. Humans are fundamentally human.
Denying ones instincts and biological traits in order to reach some higher state of enlightenment is bizarre. Doing it while elsewhere simultaneously engaging in the same elements of society you condemn is, in fact, the definition of cognitive dissonance.
GrandHarrier
Member
It comes from living in the real world and not an impossible utopia.
I mean, murder and rape and war and slavery and oppression are fundamentally human as well, throughout history. Are they ethical?
cpp_is_king
Member
Murder is ethically sound when done to protect ones own life.
Rape and slavery, I don't think it really compares. Eating meat is an instinctual trait of human species, and is used to sustain life. Raping and enslaving people are not
SliceSabre
Banned
I only watch the amateur porn stuff and i don't think it applies there.
thecouncil
Banned
phew. you're off the hook on that one.
I'll admit that slavery probably requires too much cognizance to be instinctual, but I'm fairly certain rape is. I'd imagine a majority of animal sex would be defined as rape in human eyes - some animals have evolved specific ways to stop the female from trying to escape during the mating process.
And that's ignoring the fact that most human sex, historically, was probably rape. Capturing women, selling daughters, exchanging dowries - treating women as objects is pretty fundamentally human. "See woman, take woman" was the standard for millennia.
Humans need to procreate; it's our base instinct, same as eating. But to fulfill either instinct without considering the harm it would do to others is immoral for a sentient species.
BennyBlanco
aka IMurRIVAL69
Animals eating animals is the way of the world. The industry is set up to run efficiently as possible to produce meat fresh and inexpensive. It is what it is.
Actors and actresses know what they're getting into with porn, they're getting paid well. (Yes, I've seen Hot Girls Wanted).
If you're a sensitive or impressionable person who watches lots of documentaries I could see these things getting to you. It's not cognitive dissonance or ignorance if they don't.
How is it bizarre? Humans are part of nature, nature is made of elements that are, at their vary base, made of what we consider to be vile, such as violence and general misery.
Whether elevating yourself above that has any absolute value is another story (don't want to get into the religious side of things, especially since I'm atheist) but we fight, mold and even deny our instincts daily, it's what separates our society from chimps'.
And we punish those who fail in doing so, sometimes.
You don't punch someone that cuts you off in traffic, just because you're angry and your instinct tells you to.
Instincts aren't infallible, and they were build on what was basically a more savage life style than what we aspire to today.
Otherwise, culture and society is wouldn't have evolved in the centuries, making us less and less prone to vile acts (culturally, not biologically).
Granted that is also a mechanism of nature, but in the end, there can be conflicting mechanisms, and not eating meat could very well end up being one such thing, as culture evolves.
Doesn't guilt come from a feeling of responsability ?
I know that if I stopped eating meat, as a single individual, it wouldn't mean any saved animal, and same result for porn.
There is guilt when I think about how I don't actively try to make things better ( about those two things and so many other ), because militate could probably have some actual effect.
But simply stopping enjoying something because of some feeling of guilt while knowing that me stopping wouldn't do anything other that make me feel better.. it would feel like hypocrisy to me.
I know that if I stopped eating meat, as a single individual, it wouldn't mean any saved animal, and same result for porn.
There is guilt when I think about how I don't actively try to make things better ( about those two things and so many other ), because militate could probably have some actual effect.
But simply stopping enjoying something because of some feeling of guilt while knowing that me stopping wouldn't do anything other that make me feel better.. it would feel like hypocrisy to me.
I only eat cage-fed range-free chicken and beef that is not more than a year old! I refuse to eat any of that aged stuff, dry or otherwise! How dare they treat those beefs to all that time waiting for it to dry out before they give it to me!
Also, I'm gay. I only watch gay porn. How does that impact the women in my porn that aren't there?
Seriously though - I have a question. So you don't watch porn at all, which, ok cool. But why? I can see not watching professionally done stuff, but I mean, there's such a huge range out there of VERY amateur stuff (I'm not even talking about "Amateur" but XTube and shit). Why would you feel bad that a couple decides they want to fuck around on cam for you to whack off to? Why would you throw out an entire HUGE variety of ways of acquiring fap material just because you learned that even some "amateur" stuff might be bad for the women. Let's say tomorrow I found out that most of the pr0n I like is harmful to the participants. OK, I'd stop. But I'd find alternatives. When you have a field as wide as the internet, you can find anything, including stuff where people actually do consent. Or what about actresses that you see that actually LIKE what they do? The only names that come to mind are Jenna Jameson and Vanessa Del Rio (sorry, I don't know a lot of female porn actresses). They were both VERY into their craft. Why would you avoid their stuff just because there ARE people who are exploited? (And don't get me wrong, you can't tell if someone is exploited just by the video, I get that.)
Regarding meat - Would you feel better about eating meat if you were going to a locally sourced place that you know treated it's animals humanely?
I guess I don't understand your mentality of "I feel guilty about doing ALLL of something because there is a portion (large or small) of said thing is done badly". There are ways to make sure that most of what you want to do can be done without it harming someone else. (You have to harm the animal to kill it to eat it, sorry.)
Also, I'm gay. I only watch gay porn. How does that impact the women in my porn that aren't there?
Kidding. Except about the gay porn. There really are no women in my gay porn.
Seriously though - I have a question. So you don't watch porn at all, which, ok cool. But why? I can see not watching professionally done stuff, but I mean, there's such a huge range out there of VERY amateur stuff (I'm not even talking about "Amateur" but XTube and shit). Why would you feel bad that a couple decides they want to fuck around on cam for you to whack off to? Why would you throw out an entire HUGE variety of ways of acquiring fap material just because you learned that even some "amateur" stuff might be bad for the women. Let's say tomorrow I found out that most of the pr0n I like is harmful to the participants. OK, I'd stop. But I'd find alternatives. When you have a field as wide as the internet, you can find anything, including stuff where people actually do consent. Or what about actresses that you see that actually LIKE what they do? The only names that come to mind are Jenna Jameson and Vanessa Del Rio (sorry, I don't know a lot of female porn actresses). They were both VERY into their craft. Why would you avoid their stuff just because there ARE people who are exploited? (And don't get me wrong, you can't tell if someone is exploited just by the video, I get that.)
Regarding meat - Would you feel better about eating meat if you were going to a locally sourced place that you know treated it's animals humanely?
I guess I don't understand your mentality of "I feel guilty about doing ALLL of something because there is a portion (large or small) of said thing is done badly". There are ways to make sure that most of what you want to do can be done without it harming someone else. (You have to harm the animal to kill it to eat it, sorry.)
Cheesecakebobby
Banned
They would eventually die and not be replaced multiple times in the course of a year, ending the vicious cycle. When the goal is to stop or reduce suffering, that is the logical and most humane option.
Right, ignorance is one of the reasons the treatment if animals is as bad as it is, as I mentioned earlier in a different post. That is why those who want to make a difference often use education, increasing awareness as their primary vehicle for change. For example, an organisation I am involved with in Japan hosts regular anti-fur demonstrations, and every time they do so, there are a few people who are shocked by what they see to the point they say they will never buy fur again. In many cases it is ignorance rather than lack of empathy that is behind the demand, and awareness programs are a good example of how, again, a small number of people can make a difference.
In the same vein, small campaigns often do result in a change of policies. Perhaps a mall won't stop selling meat just because you ask them to. However, they may start selling more vegetarian options because you asked them to. My organisation got a company that makes toys for pets to stop using real fur last week. They have convinced clothes stores not to carry real fur any more. They have also protested against animal testing for cosmetics and had successes there. As for meat, my friend is the head of a project to introduce more veg options in university cafeterias and they have had tremendous success (so much so that she was chosen to interview Paul McCartney about vegetarianism when he visited Japan). All of this was the work of a few people, in some cases one person. Throwing your hands up and saying 'there is nothing I can do to stop this evil so I'm justified in perpetuating it' is unquestionably a kind of cognitive dissonance.
Hundreds OR thousands. When you include fish, the number is already in the hundreds a year. When you include the number of animals killed as a by-product, well, shrimping alone results in 10 times the volume of dead animals for each unit of shrimp successfully fished.
Aizo
Banned
About porn - I mentioned in another reply somewhere that there is another reason I don't watch it anymore, but I didn't want to change the topic. So the first one is because I learned about how many women are exploited for pornography. Secondly, I've always, since a young age, found the concept of masturbating to the images of separate people having sex to be extremely voyeuristic. It seems unnatural to me, and I understand why many like it, but that idea bothers me. The third reason is that I've been in a serious relationship for almost 2 years, and masturbating to thoughts, pictures, or video of other women feels dishonest to me (honesty is a huge part of my personal ideology). If someone masturbates, as has been mentioned in this thread, to stuff they have made with the consent of another person, that kind of thing works for me. Lastly, I don't really need to masturbate with an active sex life.
About meat - Yes, eating meat that comes from the proper channels feels more okay to me. I don't believe that one should just stop eating meat, because it is something that animals do. Although I'd love to have safe, healthy, tasty, nutritious synthetic meat, it isn't really an option yet. It is sad to kill an animal, and I understand why many vegetarians and vegans refuse to eat meat for that reason, but I haven't reached that level yet. I suppose it is possible that I could. I mean, it is pretty selfish that I want to kill something living just because I love cheeseburgers. Just for me, personally, anyway.
In the end, I understand why others like or dislike porn, and I understand why others don't or do eat meat. These are, after all, opinions.
Cheesecakebobby
Banned
It is not a 'big one', it is an abstract thought experiment. The chance of everyone becoming vegan overnight is close to zero. We can and should be phasing out factory farming, and perhaps once that is achieved (and in fact even now) we can focus on removing barriers to veganism, such as encouraging more vegan options in restaurants, developing fake meats, etc etc. Nobody is suggesting this happens overnight.
But just to play along with the silly question, I would endorse the slaughter of all animals currently in factory farms if it meant they would never be replaced.
It definitely makes me think about buying new hardware when I think how much child labour is involved. Same with a lot of clothing companies. I try to stay on the ball on who is reported to be involved in dubious or shitty stuff like that and avoid their products as best as I can. As for meat, I just try to eat as little as I do now which means I'll eat maybe two portions of chicken meat from national farms (where they can run around freely afaik) and not even every week and maybe once in a blue moon some fish. Otherwise I try to opt to seitan (wheat gluten) and veggie alternatives.
As for porn well, I view mostly smutty art or amateur blogs on tumblr. I suppose the artists and bloggers can get some annoying stalkers and other nonsense from day to day but nothing on par with what OP described woman experienced in the porn industry.
As for porn well, I view mostly smutty art or amateur blogs on tumblr. I suppose the artists and bloggers can get some annoying stalkers and other nonsense from day to day but nothing on par with what OP described woman experienced in the porn industry.
L4DANathan
Member
The only real objective thing I can think of is that humans have the capability to one day reach a technology level where killing other species' for food will become completely unnecessary. This would result in the overall suffering long term being relatively nothing.
At the same time however, that is still a fairly arbitrary justification, with the sapient creatures getting more rights simply due to their closeness to humans, not from their own merits. The way I see it, in reality there is no such thing as 'value', that's merely something imposed on the world by people (and in this subject, imposed by our empathy). Without the idea of value, all morality flies entirely out the window, so morality is an entirely man-made thing, I simply feel (duh) that my morality is the best compromise between practicality and empathy.
In response to your first point, "the release of certain chemicals" is what emotions and pain are, and I would argue fear and dread are nearly as much suffering as pain is. In addition, the hierarchy I just spoke of explains why consciousness is kind of irrelevant. As for your metaphor about grass and a kitten....there would be a difference from the suffering-based standpoint. The kitten would only be harming one creature, cutting the grass would be harming many.
The difference there is that we form emotional bonds with animals, which causes us to feel empathy when they suffer or die, so the kitten option seems so much worse. And to preemptively answer the question, yes, I would much rather mow the grass than put a kitten in a blender for the emotional reason just stated above. But that's my point, I feel that the best way to draw the line about animal rights is based upon suffering, and my personal feelings are not applicable to that reality. As for the animals that display no indicators of feeling pain, do you have a list of species? I always knew there were some, but I'm curious if there are enough to, say, supply food to humanity.
Cheesecakebobby
Banned
Emotions and pain may be the result of chemical processes and you may well find materialists who argue that is all that they are, but will you actually find any scientist who believes that plants experience pain and suffering in the same way as humans and other creatures which we generally assume to be sentient? I don't understand what point you are making in regards to my metaphor, can you please explain?
I don't have a list of species, no, because I simply avoid eating all animals. However, a vegan recently recounted an observation that there are insects which will continue to feed even as they themselves are being digested. One can't hear this kind of evidence and suggest such insects are as capable of experiencing pain and other emotions as ourselves and our close relatives in the animal kingdom. So if people cannot be conviced to stop eating animals, it seems a good option to encourage them to eat certain insects.
A lot more research is needed to build a better understanding of the sentience of various species, but I think most of us can agree there is some kind of sliding scale here - we just don't like to think about it, and tell stories to ourselves about why it is not morally acceptable - illegal even - to do to a cat or dog what is done to millions of pigs who may be equally sentient.
Perhaps I skipped over the point as to why a hierarchy in terms of sentience is relevant, but the key thing is that to many people, reducing suffering in the world is a moral endeavour, and it stands to reason that we should focus first on those who we have the most reason to believe are conscious beings (obviously it is hard to argue humans are not at the top of that list - but hopefully nobody is keeping them in factory farms for their flesh).
This video explains how I feel about it: https://youtu.be/rqevO_zrxsA
Mr Fahrenheit
Member
No I'd say most people don't care. With meat most people know what happens at slaughterhouses and don't care because we're top of the food chain and it happens. And with porn there are shady things that happen but it's not like it's every single movie or actress, bad things happen everywhere and it's a shame but I'm not going to swear off such a broad thing because of it.
If those things effect you then that's fine but don't act like if it doesn't bother other people then they're just ignorant or fooling themselves.
If those things effect you then that's fine but don't act like if it doesn't bother other people then they're just ignorant or fooling themselves.
L4DANathan
Member
The reason no scientist says plants experience pain the same way is because there is no way to know for certain due to a communication barrier. The only reason we 'know' animals experience pain similarly is because they can scream in a way we can hear and is distressing to us. While the articles I mentioned initially talked about how plants do something very similar, but with exuding chemicals and screams we can't hear. There is evidence that it is a very real possibility and shouldn't be discounted simply because hurting an animal makes us feel bad but hurting a plant does not. Arguing otherwise is the equivalent to saying just because you can't hear someone scream means they don't feel pain, which is an obvious logic flaw.
In regards to your metaphor, I thought I was fairly clear. Putting a kitten in a blender seems like the worse option to people, because we feel empathy for kittens, they're pets and display emotion audibly. Mowing the grass kills many plants, while the kitten is just one kitten. Along with what I was saying about how plants are on the same level as non-sapient animals, that means mowing the grass is a worse moral crime than putting a kitten in a blender.
Oh, and humans ARE kept in factory farms for their flesh. It's called the US minimum wage. And that's just the obvious/witty answer without going into black market slavery or totalitarian states.
- Status