Why men are afraid of plant based meat

Status
Not open for further replies.

beancounter

The Fire That Burns Within
Joined
Jun 3, 2012
Messages
4,426
Reaction score
1,979
Location
In the Church of the Poisoned Mind
VeggieBoards went defunct because it tolerated trollery like this.

Is this a LGBT-welcoming forum, or is it not?

I don't come here to read anti-gay rants.
VeggieBoards is still around. It went defunct in its original format because Michael sold it.

You know, I just checked. You posted on VB fairly recently.... How can you claim it's defunct?
 

David3

Active Member
Joined
May 19, 2016
Messages
148
Reaction score
268
Age
50
Location
California, USA
Lifestyle
Vegan
So if one doesn't agree with your opinion, one is a troll? You may consider opposition to your opinion "trollery" and "ranting", but at the same time have you considered that individuals who don't agree with your opinion may not "come here to read pro-gay(or insert here any view on which divisive opinions exist) rants"?

Difference: I can handle opinions different than mine, even if they might be the majority opinion of the group. You appear to not be able to, so resort to group bullying based on an assumed agreement among readers, members and non-members alike.
LOL.

Nope nope nope.

Your words are transparently those of a troll, like many I've seen before.

I am not bullying anyone. I am insisting on civility.

If a person were to insistently criticize inter-ethnic marriage, while attending a party with inter-ethnic couples, that person would be asked to leave. Is this bullying? It this an unfair refusal to hear differing opinions? No. It is civility, informed by 21st century sensibilities.

In the United States, 83% of people ages 18-29 approve of gay marriage: https://news.gallup.com/poll/257705/support-gay-marriage-stable.aspx. My co-workers include several people in their 20s - most straight, a few gay. These kids socialize with complete comfort. The "gay" thing is not even an issue with them. Your anti-gay sentiments are the sad relics of previous decades.

If you are a participant in MGTOW culture, then I say this: I'm sorry that you had the misfortune of dealing with an abusive mother, wife, or sister. Your anger at them is natural, but your generalized rage is not acceptable.

If you are against gay people, then I say this: I'm sorry that you had the misfortune of running into a psychotic, abusive man. However, it's not fair to resent the entire gay community.

The focus of this forum is veganism. You, however, are trying to cause a shitstorm by attracting attention and resentment. This can't be allowed to continue. I trust that the moderators know this.
 

David3

Active Member
Joined
May 19, 2016
Messages
148
Reaction score
268
Age
50
Location
California, USA
Lifestyle
Vegan
VeggieBoards is still around. It went defunct in its original format because Michael sold it.

You know, I just checked. You posted on VB fairly recently.... How can you claim it's defunct?
Because its volume of posts is 90% lower than it used to be. I have 3000+ posts on VeggieBoards.
.
 
  • ✅
Reactions: silva

beancounter

The Fire That Burns Within
Joined
Jun 3, 2012
Messages
4,426
Reaction score
1,979
Location
In the Church of the Poisoned Mind
Because its volume of posts is 90% lower than it used to be. I have 3000+ posts on VeggieBoards.
.
A lot of the activity on the old VB was troll post and people reacting to troll post. When Michael sold it, many people left because they didn't care for the new owner. I also suspect, a lot of the trolls moved on with Michael.

Also...
 

Nekodaiden

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 2, 2017
Messages
1,283
Reaction score
844
Age
46
Lifestyle
Vegan
Your words are transparently those of a troll, like many I've seen before.

I am not bullying anyone. I am insisting on civility.
The focus of this forum is veganism. You, however, are trying to cause a shitstorm by attracting attention and resentment. This can't be allowed to continue. I trust that the moderators know this.
:) No, you're not bullying anyone in your mind, because it's apparent you can live with obvious contradictions like the above. Merely by expressing my views you assume ulterior motives, you call me a troll, and you are basically asking for me to be banned. But you're not bullying anyone. LOL.

If a person were to insistently criticize inter-ethnic marriage, while attending a party with inter-ethnic couples, that person would be asked to leave. Is this bullying? It this an unfair refusal to hear differing opinions? No. It is civility, informed by 21st century sensibilities.
False equivalence. This is a vegan forum where veganism is promoted. It is not a gay vegan forum, or a heterosexual vegan forum, or an ethnic vegan forum, or a Republican vegan forum, or a Liberal vegan forum, or a Democratic vegan forum. It is not a Communist Vegan forum, or a Capitalist Vegan forum or a Vegan forum for National Socialists. It is not a Jewish Vegan forum, or a Christian Vegan forum, or an Atheist Vegan forum, or a Buddhist Vegan forum or a Deist Vegan forum. But any one of these people may be present, a member, or reading this forum.

In the United States, 83% of people ages 18-29 approve of gay marriage: https://news.gallup.com/poll/257705/support-gay-marriage-stable.aspx. My co-workers include several people in their 20s - most straight, a few gay. These kids socialize with complete comfort. The "gay" thing is not even an issue with them. Your anti-gay sentiments are the sad relics of previous decades.
Hate to break it to ya, but this is not a United States Vegan forum either. Also, it doesn't matter if a certain percentage /age group holds some opinion within a certain region of the world. That doesn't make it either moral or true. Your reasoning so reflects the fact that many people cannot handle that the internet is an INTERNATIONAL medium, and we don't necessarily give a **** about what some people in your country think. I suggest you turn it off and go back to your CNN/Fox news programming if you can't handle it.


If you are a participant in MGTOW culture, then I say this: I'm sorry that you had the misfortune of dealing with an abusive mother, wife, or sister. Your anger at them is natural, but your generalized rage is not acceptable.
I was married to a good and kind hearted woman (now deceased), I have no sisters, my mother is not abusive, nor do I have significant abusive females in the past. I am not MGTOW, but on many levels I do understand where they are coming from. Oh, and I'm not full of rage. However it's clear to me that you are a manipulator and rely on generalizations and assumptions to make your points.

If you are against gay people, then I say this: I'm sorry that you had the misfortune of running into a psychotic, abusive man. However, it's not fair to resent the entire gay community.
Wrong again. There are no psychotic, abusive men in my past. I've never been raped, or even abused by men. This sounds like you projecting to me while trying to use it to paint the picture of me you want - a reflection of YOUR rage and hatred.
 

Mischief

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 15, 2013
Messages
4,429
Reaction score
5,392
Location
U.S.A.
The idea of an inborn, or "born with" trait of homosexual attraction is about as proven as an inborn trait of trying to shove vegetables into my armpit in order to receive sustenance.
I guess the same is true of heterosexual attraction. It's just your choice.



In some ways it's very much like antisemitism. Criticize Israel and you'll be labeled as an anti-semite by some. Also, pointing out the fact that corporate media is largely jew owned will also earn one the label, even though it is true. You may be a Nazi wishing for the holocaust reborn simply for holding these views.
I've never heard the phrase "jew owned" from anyone who isn't a raging anti-Semite.

In a similar manner, because of the media frenzy on heterosexual to homosexual violence (and the focus on it in national media and programs, along with the minimization of the opposite), saying one doesn't agree with homosexuality (either as a lifestyle or inborn trait) elicits an assumption among many that one is prone to violence against them due to hatred.
Let me be clear about your position: Are you saying that you don't "agree with homosexuality (either as a lifestyle or inborn trait) "?

It is further pushed (in the US at least) in government schools. Young children are indoctrinated with programs aimed at promoting homosexuality as normal. This was completely absent when I went to government school. However it is now part of the agenda.
I gather it's your position that homosexuality is "abnormal"? Come on, come right out and say what you believe, or are you ashamed to do so?

Holding gay pride parades is considered normal, but if one wants to hold a heterosexual pride parade this is considered 'homophobic' or 'racist' or 'hateful'. Yes, this has happened.
Ah, you probably also think it's awful that white pride parades are considered racist.

In media such as television shows, how often do we get a picture of what is in fact a reality for many people who engage in homosexual acts? Statistically these persons have many more partners over a shorter period than the average heterosexual, and yet in media they always seem to be the monogamous oppressed ones, beaten up or threatened by the violent heterosexual bigot.
Your sense of victimization is really astonishing and fantasy fueled.

Church - now, I do not attend any more, but I used to when I lived in the USA. The church I went to (a Lutheran one) was actually ORDERED from the higher ups in the church hierarchy to start promoting homosexuality and gay marriage. The pastor of said church even got defrocked because of the issue, because he refused. However, he was re-instated by the congregation and the church as far as I am aware had to break away from the higher organization to which it belonged.
Now this is really a crock of excrement. I was raised in the Evangelical Lutheran Church of America (ELCA), which is the most liberal of the Lutheran denominations in America, and the only one which allows ordination of women. The ELCA only recently (within the past decade) voted to allow the ordination of gay clergy and the sanctification of same sex marriages. (Neither of which, btw, constitutes "promoting" homosexuality. )

So yes, considering all these things and others that don't immediately come to mind, it is my view that homosexuality is in fact pushed, especially in the USA, and this drive trickles down to other nations like the one I'm in now. Without the push in the USA, for example, Australia is unlikely to have followed suit in area of same sex marriage.




It's different because heterosexuality is not only the historical norm, it is the basis on which we pro-create and survive as a species. On this latter basis, it is the base norm. It is a social norm primarily on this basis also. One can argue that homosexuality may need to be "normalized" because of the violence by some individuals against others, or because one believes it is inborn or whatever, but it is in point of fact encroaching on the base norm, not just a social norm.
Ah, a variant on the old "same sex marriage endangers heterosexual marriage" complaint, which no one has ever adequately explained. How does couple A's marriage in any way endanger couple B's marriage? How does the fact that your neighbor is homosexual encroach on your heterosexuality?


I might add that historically, it is used to demoralize nations, as it was used pre WW2 to demoralize Germany prior to the Nazi rise to power.
What in holy hell are you talking about here?! I was born in Germany, almost all my family still live there, my mother was born in 1919 and lived there through the war, and I can assure you that none of them were demoralized by the existence of homosexuality. (My mother didn't even know it existed until my sister was college aged and explained it to her.)

I have things to do and frankly am sickened by your viewpoints, so I will leave addressing the rest of your post until later.


Indian Summer and/or any mods who may look at this thread:

I hope you will have the decency to not delete these posts. If anything were to be deleted, it should have been done when these hateful viewpoints were first posted. Since no action was taken, I'ved spent time responding, and those responses should stand.
 
  • 👍
Reactions: silva and Andy_T

Nekodaiden

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 2, 2017
Messages
1,283
Reaction score
844
Age
46
Lifestyle
Vegan
Indian Summer and/or any mods who may look at this thread:

I hope you will have the decency to not delete these posts. If anything were to be deleted, it should have been done when these hateful viewpoints were first posted. Since no action was taken, I'ved spent time responding, and those responses should stand.
I also hope this. I stand by my viewpoints, my position does not come from hatred, although I do understand that part of the indoctrination demands that it be so. I have also recorded this thread as evidence that if I am banned because of the bullying going on here, it will be known that if one comes to veganforums.org, you will be subject to dismissal on the grounds that your social/political/religious/philosophical views that have nothing to do with veganism are nontheless subject here, and you will conform, be forced to leave or pushed out.
 
Joined
Feb 2, 2020
Messages
11
Reaction score
8
Age
46
Location
New York
Lifestyle
Vegan Newbie
I stand by my viewpoints, my position does not come from hatred, although I do understand that part of the indoctrination demands that it be so.
I don't have a carrot in this fight, but that sounds a little insincere. The fact that you have any strong view means that the subject somehow bothers you. In this case, you'd have a position you were gay (justifiably so) or you dislike gay people for some reason (which it certainly appears like to my uneducated eye).

Anyway, let's figure out the connection to the subject. For example, I have invested in an early stage vegan-meat startup, will that make me gay?
 

Nekodaiden

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 2, 2017
Messages
1,283
Reaction score
844
Age
46
Lifestyle
Vegan
I don't have a carrot in this fight, but that sounds a little insincere. The fact that you have any strong view means that the subject somehow bothers you. In this case, you'd have a position you were gay (justifiably so) or you dislike gay people for some reason (which it certainly appears like to my uneducated eye).
I don't dislike people who chose to have homosexual relations. If it's between consenting adults, as far as I'm concerned, that's their business. That doesn't change my view on the naturalness/morality of the act, and how it may impact on larger society, especially as it grows. Since I do not believe that it is an inborn trait (like eye color, skin color, etc), and that it is primarily a psychological phenomenon (that is to say, the attraction) that has a whole host of factors (including, but not limited to, abusive/domineering father figures or mothers, sexual abuse as a child, a very bad relationship with the opposite gender etc)...I do not think it is moral to hoist it upon impressionable children to condition them to think it is normal and natural, and that to disagree with these positions automatically makes one a hateful bigot out to bash gays. However, this is so often how it is presented in media focus. I alluded to this earlier in this thread. Matthew Shepherd media coverage vs Jesse Dirkhising media coverage https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_Jesse_Dirkhising#Media_coverage . The media bias is clear and just as clear to me is that people are affected by that bias.

Anyway, let's figure out the connection to the subject. For example, I have invested in an early stage vegan-meat startup, will that make me gay?
Seriously? This question sounds insincere. Of course not.
 

Mischief

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 15, 2013
Messages
4,429
Reaction score
5,392
Location
U.S.A.
You mean statistically? I don't have the research at hand, or am aware of any such research, which may or may not exist. But sure, I'll tell you one from my own 'bias'. Matthew Shepherd. Huge story in the national news. Made all sorts of headlines. Around the same time the violence against Shepherd happened, the story of a pre-teen boy was seduced, raped and chocked to death with his own underwear by 2 homosexual men. This story didn't get any national coverage. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_Jesse_Dirkhising#Media_coverage
In the year between the date Matthew Shepherd was murdered and the date Jesse Dirkhising was murdered, how many rape/murders were committed by heterosexual men? I bet you never even wondered about that, did you? I also bet you can't name even one of the girls and women murdered by their rapists that year, because (a) their murders didn't make the national media and (b) they are irrelevant to you. I further bet yoy never decried the lack of national media attention to those murders, because the issue never has been about the disparity of media attention given to Matthew Shepherd's case versus that of Jesse; the point has been to portray homosexual men as dangerous deviants whose violence is ignored by the media. You don't give a flying fig when the violent deviance of heterosexual men is ignored by the same media.



I believe this is a false equivalence and have already alluded to that in an earlier response.
Because you "believe" that homosexuality is a choice and not an inborn trait?

So, please instruct the class why homosexuality is a choice but heterosexuality isn't.



Uh, I didn't state that Michelle is a man, although it's possible.
Why does this statement not surprise me. (Don't bother to answer; that was a rhetorical question.

This is a straw man.
Actually, it was a putdown of your assertion that Obama is responsible for the increased acceptance of trans individuals. I could have asked you for any evidence for your assertion, but you wouldn't have been able to provide any.

My objection is similar to my objection to homosexuality. I reject the idea it is natural/normal and that it should be pushed because we have been taught to believe that not doing so results in violence.
Where are you finding all these people pushing you to become homosexual?!?! I've never encountered a single one, and I suspect I've spent more years on this planet than you have.

Sometimes it does result in violence, and I do not condone that. That being said, in prison a large amount of hate and violence is exercised against convicted child molesters by other prisoners. Perhaps on this basis we should normalize pedophilia? I think the argument here is much the same and relies on a strictly emotional response that is pushed by pro-homosexual groups just like the pro-Israel groups bring up the holocaust.
I'm having a bit difficulty in trying to decipher your thinking here, but I think what you 're trying to say is that the only reason a heterosexual person would accept homosexuality as just as "normal" and nondeviant as heterosexuality is to avoid violence being perpetrated against homosexuals. Is that right?

Well, that's a novel way of trying to justify your bigotry in light of others' acceptance.

Speaking just for myself, I don't care what other consenting adults do with each other in the privacy of their homes. It's no skin off my nose. Their relationships don't affect my relationships. It would be weird to think they did.

I really am at a loss to understand why you are so invested in other people's sexuality. Have you ever questioned that about yourself? (Again, rhetorical question. I have no interest in exploring the deep dark corners of your psyche.)





No they aren't, but I'm not going to go into a long list here. Men's rights groups (talking here from within heterosexual marriage and divorce) would not exist if they were equitable as you claim.
Actually, maintenance and child support are determined pursuant to established formulas based on the divorcing parties'respective incomes and expenses, w/o adjustment for the sex of each party. Likewise, property divisions are made based on statutory guidelines that don't factor in sex. But don't take my word for it; look it up. It's not as though I was a practicing attorney and knew anything about this stuff.

Men's rights groups exist because when someone has advantages over others, when their advantages are suddenly replaced by equality with those same others, the formerly advantaged feel as though they are being treated unfairly. It's a human enough reaction. Many are able to see that equality does not equal disadvantage; others choose to be whiny two-year-olds about it.
 
Last edited:
  • 👍
Reactions: Andy_T

Nekodaiden

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 2, 2017
Messages
1,283
Reaction score
844
Age
46
Lifestyle
Vegan
In the year between the date Matthew Shepherd was murdered and the date Jesse Dirkhising was murdered, how many rape/murders were committed by heterosexual men? I bet you never even wondered about that, did you? I also bet you can't name even one of the girls and women murdered by their rapists that year, because (a) their murders didn't make the national media and (b) they are irrelevant to you. I further bet yoy never decried the lack of national media attention to those murders, because the issue never has been about the disparity of media attention given to Matthew Shepherd's case versus that of Jesse; the point has been to portray homosexual men as dangerous deviants whose violence is ignored by the media. You don't give a flying fig when the violent deviance of heterosexual men is ignored by the same media.
I think this is the only quote I find worthy of responding to.

Nope, I never wondered because murder is common. It happens every day, somewhere. Nope, I never decried the lack of (national) media attention on a common occurrence, why should I?

The Matthew Shepherd case vs Jesse Dirkhising case however, is a striking example of media focus - particularly of national media, to promote one view over the other. Why should the Matthew Shepherd case get a media frenzy and the Jesse Dirkhising case get near media silence and 0 national attention?

The answer is obvious: A clear agenda to promote the idea that people who do not agree with homosexuality as normal/inborn/natural/just about love etc as the kind of people who would murder the likes of Matthew Shepherd. To promote anger to those people, and to promote sympathy for gay victims (while ignoring the victims OF gays, like Jesse), and on a very non-specific and general level having to do with associated attitudes, not on a case by case basis. This is why Jesse's story got near media silence and 0 National attention. It simply didn't fit their agenda.

And I might add that it has worked beautifully. If one hears the words "gay (or homosexual)" and "violence" what does the average person think of? Naturally, violence against homosexuals. Not violence by homosexuals against other homosexuals, or violence by homosexuals against heterosexuals, or abuse by homosexuals of children - no no - they think of violence by heterosexuals against homosexuals.

All because of media focus (not just news media, but much of popular media as well).

Too hard to comprehend?

Now, I'm done responding to you in this thread. So type away. I might respond to others, but not you.
 
Last edited:

wonderfularizona

Active Member
Joined
May 4, 2019
Messages
171
Reaction score
169
Age
52
Location
Phoenix
Lifestyle
Vegan Newbie
The modern emphasis on political correctness conversation makes me nervous because I am anything but politically correct. I can not help it because I am a little autistic. Even the term Social Justice Warrior would seem like a compliment to me.

I have been accused of being a racist and a sexist many times throughout my life. These terms usually seem like a cheap power play to me. The problem is that everything is offensive to someone. Here are some examples:

I am a racist because I talk too much about animal rights and not enough about human rights.
I am sexist because I said that boys do not seem to like to play with dolls.
I am also sexist because I never introduced my sons to dolls when they were growing up.
I was insensitive when I said, "Global warming may or may not be real. But, based on our consumption patterns in the United States, nobody seems to care."
I was called a conservative extremist because I talked about the value of learning to work hard when we are young.

Nekodaiden made some controversial statements. Still, we should not dismiss him as being a racist or a sexist. That seems like the easy way out. We should instead seek to understand him.

Everybody deserves a little compassion. If I offended someone, then I am sorry.
 
  • 👍
Reactions: Nekodaiden

Mischief

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 15, 2013
Messages
4,429
Reaction score
5,392
Location
U.S.A.
The modern emphasis on political correctness conversation makes me nervous because I am anything but politically correct. I can not help it because I am a little autistic. Even the term Social Justice Warrior would seem like a compliment to me.

I have been accused of being a racist and a sexist many times throughout my life. These terms usually seem like a cheap power play to me. The problem is that everything is offensive to someone. Here are some examples:

I am a racist because I talk too much about animal rights and not enough about human rights.
I am sexist because I said that boys do not seem to like to play with dolls.
I am also sexist because I never introduced my sons to dolls when they were growing up.
I was insensitive when I said, "Global warming may or may not be real. But, based on our consumption patterns in the United States, nobody seems to care."
I was called a conservative extremist because I talked about the value of learning to work hard when we are young.

Nekodaiden made some controversial statements. Still, we should not dismiss him as being a racist or a sexist. That seems like the easy way out. We should instead seek to understand him.

Everybody deserves a little compassion. If I offended someone, then I am sorry.
If you think anyone called him a racist or a sexist in this thread, you didn't read the thread.
 
  • 👍
Reactions: wonderfularizona
Status
Not open for further replies.