Anonymous asked: People always ask me "what about dairy cows who HAVE to produce milk?" How would you go about answering that question?

You must be new here. :p

Cows do not HAVE to produce milk. They only produce milk if they were pregnant and have just given birth, which in domesticated cattle is a direct result from farmers forcing the cows into pregnancy. It’s like saying human women HAVE to produce milk. Uh, no, we don’t. If we haven’t recently given birth, our bodies don’t produce milk. Neither do cows, or any other mammal. Cows aren’t magic milk machines that are incessantly spewing out milk, this only happens because humans force them into constant cycles of rape, pregnancy, birth, kidnapping, then taking their milk for human consumption while their stolen babies are killed or turned into veal. They repeat this cycle nonstop for their entire miserable lives.

Once they have given birth and are producing milk, the milk does need to leave their body. But the misconception here is that cows must be milked by humans. That couldn’t be further from true. Cows need to nurse their babies, that’s where the problem lies. That’s the entire reason they are even producing milk in the first place. If humans didn’t deprive their babies of their mother’s company and milk, there wouldn’t be this issue. All of these “problems” of cows supposedly needing us to step in and milk them are man-made and can easily be resolved by humans not taking what isn’t ours. A lot of people will now say “but some cows produce more milk than any baby could handle!” and this is true, but again — only a result from human manipulation. Many farmers inject their cows with ridiculous amounts of hormones to make milk production skyrocket. And, again, the solution is to leave cows and their babies the fuck alone.

If they still don’t understand why this is unethical, show them these: Ohio veal investigation | Texas dairy calf “disposal” methods | Ohio dairy farm footage | Mercy for Animals dairy calf rescue (This last one is significantly less graphic, and it’s a super cute story. It’s really informative though.)

Hope that clears it up for you.

thejrush asked: I agree with is the whole 'milk is unnecessary' argument. Not only are we the only species of mammal to drink milk after the nursing period, we are the only mammal to willingly seek out and intake another mammal's milk. Neither of those things can be healthy.

It’s not even about health though. Yeah, it’s disgusting and terrible for your body and it’s killing the people who drink it, but that’s not my concern. It’s about the kidnapping and rape that goes on in order to produce it. It’s about the cows whose lives are destroyed and who are subjected to so much misery for shit we don’t even need. If someone wants to be unhealthy by eating foods that don’t impact others, go for gold. But if they want to be unhealthy while directly causing extensive suffering and trauma onto others, fuck that. That’s never acceptable under any circumstances.

deathbysharpie asked: Not taking the ethics of veganism into account (I and all vegans know that nothing whatsoever justifies killing sentient beings) what do you have to say about the low digestibility of plants in comparison to flesh and dairy consumption? I'm not entirely sure about this but it seems more logical to go straight to the source (fruits and veggies) rather thsn eating an animal. But then I don't quite know how to phrase my counter-argument to someone who has a complete disregard for animals' sentience

I kind of went into detail here about how eating meat and animal products isn’t natural, all ethics aside. For digestibility especially, I would mention how colon cancer is predominantly caused by meat consumption and osteoporosis is caused by dairy consumption. We have long intestines, unlike natural meat-eaters who have short intestines so that carcass passes through their body quickly and doesn’t linger in the intestines; and since we have longer intestines, meat ends up staying inside of us for far too long and rots in there, thus causing colon cancer. Dairy is also not at all natural for us, and lactose intolerance is our body’s natural reaction to it because our bodies are rejecting it, and rightfully so. Some of us being able to tolerate lactose in our bodies is simply a disorder. 

I just found this article:

“The Truth about Dairy

According to Dr. Willett, who has done many studies and reviewed the research on this topic, there are many reasons to pass up milk, including:

1. Milk doesn’t reduce fractures.(i) Contrary to popular belief, eating dairy products has never been shown to reduce fracture risk. In fact, according to the Nurses’ Health Study dairy may increase risk of fractures by 50 percent!

2. Less dairy, better bones. Countries with lowest rates of dairy and calcium consumption (like those in Africa and Asia) have the lowest rates of osteoporosis.

3. Calcium isn’t as bone-protective as we thought.(ii) Studies of calcium supplementation have shown no benefit in reducing fracture risk. Vitamin D appears to be much more important than calcium in preventing fractures.

4. Calcium may raise cancer risk. Research shows that higher intakes of both calcium and dairy products may increase a man’s risk of prostate cancer by 30 to 50 percent.(iii) Plus, dairy consumption increases the body’s level of insulin-like growth factor-1 (IGF-1) — a known cancer promoter.

5. Calcium has benefits that dairy doesn’t. Calcium supplements, but not dairy products, may reduce the risk of colon cancer.(iv)

6. Not everyone can stomach dairy.(v) About 75 percent of the world’s population is genetically unable to properly digest milk and other dairy products — a problem called lactose intolerance.

Based on such findings, Dr. Willet has come to some important conclusions:

• Everybody needs calcium — but probably not as much as our government’s recommended daily allowance (RDA) and calcium from diet, including greens and beans is better utilized by the body with less risk than calcium supplements.

• Calcium probably doesn’t prevent broken bones. Few people in this country are likely to reduce their fracture risk by getting more calcium.

• Men may not want to take calcium supplements. Supplements of calcium and vitamin D may be reasonable for women.

• Dairy may be unhealthy. Advocating dairy consumption may have negative effects on health.

If all that isn’t enough to swear you off milk, there are a few other scientific findings worth noting. The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) recently asked the UDSA to look into the scientific basis of the claims made in the “milk mustache” ads. Their panel of scientists stated the truth clearly:

• Milk doesn’t benefit sports performance.

• There’s no evidence that dairy is good for your bones or prevents osteoporosis — in fact, the animal protein it contains may help cause bone loss!

• Dairy is linked to prostate cancer.

• It’s full of saturated fat and is linked to heart disease.

• Dairy causes digestive problems for the 75 percent of people with lactose intolerance.

• Dairy aggravates irritable bowel syndrome.

Simply put, the FTC asked the dairy industry, “Got Proof?” — and the answer was NO!

Plus, dairy may contribute to even more health problems, like:

• Allergies (vi)
• Sinus problems
• Ear infections
• Type 1 diabetes (vii)
• Chronic constipation (viii)
• Anemia (in children)”

This article is also a really thorough explanation of how we aren’t naturally designed to eat meat/animal products. It’s definitely much more logical (and environmentally and economically friendly) to go straight to the source and eat plant foods, rather than feeding massive amounts of plant foods to an animal only to get a fraction of the amount of food we put into that animal which ends up killing us anyway. Animal products are quite possibly the most illogical concept ever when you think about it. You know, even if you ignore the fact that they are produced through enslavement, rape, murder, and excessive violence onto so many completely innocent and docile animals.

It sucks there are people who are ignorant and apathetic enough to not give two shits about oppressing those less powerful than themselves, but sometimes you do have to throw this kind of stuff in their face to get them to realize that they are dead fucking wrong no matter which way you look at it.

Anonymous asked: Just read this on a forum - Re: Why is Morrissey not vegan? While the argument that the dairy industry is intrinsically tied to the meat industry is completely true, perhaps Morrissey feels comfortable consuming butter, milk and eggs on an "at one" level. He fights to preserve the lives of the animals and in turn, appreciates the gift they are able to give him of their milk and eggs. It sounds corny but on a quasi-spiritual level it makes sense (1/2)

Nature has equipped a chicked to lay an infertile egg, instead of her labor going to waste, we eat it. Mind you it is not ideal that we pump chickens with hormones to lay MORE eggs, but if you bring it back to the original system nature intended, it’s beyond acceptible to eat natures gifts, so long as that gift isn’t a sacrifice of a life. I hope that makes sense and I realize that by todays effed up standards there are a lot of problems with this argument. Your opinion? (2/2)

You are correct, there are a lot of problems with that argument because it’s ridiculous and completely false. Morrissey is a total dick for not being vegan. You are a total assclown for thinking that he’s right or that he makes any sense. Animal exploitation of any form is the sacrifice of a life. Just because they aren’t dead yet doesn’t mean their lives still aren’t being taken away from them. You can’t claim to care about animals while still believing that they are only here to provide for us.

What he’s saying is “I’ll fight for the right to save them… but my motive is to keep them enslaved and only allow them to live if they reward me with shit I don’t need. I’ll protect their rights, but only as long as I can exploit them and keep them from living a natural life. LOL!”  So you want animals to be able to live, just not able to live free from exploitation and oppression? What the fuck kind of bullshit is that?

Also, there is no such thing as a gift that is taken from someone. Chickens and cows and other animals do not give us anything. We steal it from them. We steal a cow’s babies away from her after she gives birth, so that we can then steal the milk which is meant for her babies. We then kill and/or eat her babies. We confine chickens, and then when they’ve finally laid an egg, we take it from them in our own selfishness. Don’t kid yourself. There is no precious gift exchange going on between humans and non-human animals. It’s nothing but pure exploitation.

Chickens do not exist to serve you or for you to sit back and wait for them to reward you with a “product of their labor.” Chickens produce eggs for their own reasons, and when the eggs aren’t fertilizied, that doesn’t mean they’re now up for grabs by humans. Chickens will eat their own eggs if given the opportunity and they are actually very nutrient dense and beneficial to the hens. There is absolutely nothing natural about exploiting chickens for their eggs. You don’t need them, her eggs are not for you, and there’s absolutely no part of the “original system nature intended” that says humans are supposed to steal and then eat another being’s menstrual secretions.

Don’t even get me started on milk. We rape cows, kidnap their babies, and then steal their milk. There’s also no way to produce milk without slaughter involved. It’s the farthest thing from natural or appreciative. I’ve addressed the issue several times already in depth, so hop on over here if you still for some sick reason think cows should “give” their milk (which is solely intended for their babies) to Morrissey or anyone else: http://quoilecanard.tumblr.com/tagged/dairy

This doesn’t sound corny. This just sounds speciesist as fuck and like you still haven’t grasped the concept that no one else is here on earth to be used at your benefit. Humans and non-humans are all here for themselves, and no one else. The sooner you realize that the better.

Cow’s milk is for baby cows. Not humans. Earthshattering information, huh?

You know what’s incredibly annoying? When I see/hear people complain about lactose intolerance. They start to talk about all of things they are taking to try to overcome it and all the milk products they are now consuming without lactose. And I just want to punch them in the face. Or make them watch this.

Do you ever stop to think that maybe, maybe humans aren’t supposed to be consuming cow’s milk? Lactose intolerance is your body’s way of saying “THIS ISN’T NATURAL, YOU PROBABLY SHOULDN’T BE EATING THIS SHIT, MORON.” If your body has a negative reaction to something, it’s generally not a brilliant idea to try to fool your body into consuming it anyway. Whether you’re taking out one ingredient to trick your body, or constantly taking pills to counteract your body’s reaction to said ingredient, both are absolutely awful for you. But above all, it’s deeming cows to a life of constant agony and contributing to the veal industry all the while.

Given the rampant amount of lactose intolerance today, you’d think more people would stop and look at milk for what it is. It is another species’ breast milk designed for their offspring. It’s the equivalent of, say, a tiger drinking human breast milk for not only its infancy, but for all of its life. That’s not the least bit weird or perverse to you?

Cow’s milk is gross. And it’s fucked up. It’s not for people. It’s designed for baby cows. That’s it. It’s not designed for humans. So stop violently raping cows and stealing their babies just because you want to drink another animal’s mammary gland secretions. You don’t need to keep coming up with alternatives that are still harming cows and you don’t need to be taking pills all your life. All you need to do is go vegan. It’s that simple.