Showerthoughts

33087 readers

602 users here now

A "Showerthought" is a simple term used to describe the thoughts that pop into your head while you're doing everyday things like taking a shower, driving, or just daydreaming. The most popular seem to be lighthearted clever little truths, hidden in daily life.

Here are some examples to inspire your own showerthoughts:

Rules

All posts must be showerthoughts
The entire showerthought must be in the title
No politics
- If your topic is in a grey area, please phrase it to emphasize the fascinating aspects, not the dramatic aspects. You can do this by avoiding overly politicized terms such as "capitalism" and "communism". If you must make comparisons, you can say something is different without saying something is better/worse.
- A good place for politics is c/politicaldiscussion
Posts must be original/unique
Adhere to Lemmy's Code of Conduct and the TOS

If you made it this far, showerthoughts is accepting new mods. This community is generally tame so its not a lot of work, but having a few more mods would help reports get addressed a little sooner.

Whats it like to be a mod? Reports just show up as messages in your Lemmy inbox, and if a different mod has already addressed the report, the message goes away and you never worry about it.

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

Veganism is pro fossil fuel (lemmy.dbzer0.com)

submitted 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

23 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Before tractors, almost the entire food chain involved animal slavery, since farms used draft animals. For that matter, even transportation was based on animal slavery (horses). Many of the sustainable and high performance fabrics like wool, silk, and leather are now replaced by synthetic fossil-derived plastics. But petroleum is also an animal product.

To be vegan, is to choose fossilized animal products and services over fresh.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 5 points 5 months ago

I would choose dying in the wilderness. A few solid years in freedom and then a potentially horrid death sounds like a much better deal to me than a few weeks/months in purgatory before a less horrid death.
I am writing "purgatory", because at this point, I do assume that mistreatment is involved.

Ultimately, I just find that simple rule ...simpler.
Is it a capitalistic thing with animals involved? Then the default assumption should be that the animals get mistreated, because treating animals well doesn't generally pay out.
I just don't care enough about honey to get into the gritty details of whether this doesn't involve animal mistreatment.

I would also bet a lot of money that it does involve questionable treatment at some point. For example, I've heard that beekeepers get live honeybees in the mail, and not in some fancy transport box.
But you've got other moral aspects, too, like honeybees killing local ecosystems by taking food away from better pollinators.

I could think about all that and try to work out the exact details of when eating honey is coolio, or I could just not bother.
I don't need a perfect moral framework, I just want to steer clear from immoral shit.