All injustice, oppression, domination, violence, hierarchy and inequality are connected. Intersectionalism 101. Whether we're fighting against racism, xenophobia, sexism, misogyny, homophobia, transphobia, ableism, classism, speciesism, or any other oppressive or unjust system and power imbalance or injustice, we're opposing the same kyriarchy (master-rule).

Also, the word cattle comes from chattel as in chattel slavery. The enslavement of humans was literally based on the domestication and exploitation of non-human animals. Humans (particulary white European humans) thought they could tame and sophisticate other races of humans like they had done to non-human animals that they farmed - and they employed them both to pull ploughs on farm and do agricultural work. Slavery was always tied to food and agriculture. But no one wants to think about these things or see the connections and how you've been tricked into repeating history.

It's true that humans who are intending to devalue or oppress other humans often compare them to, or model the treatment of them on, non-human animals. I've acknowledged this multiple times. But you need to understand that this is part of the oppressive culture and mindset of human supremacy and speciesism that we're trying to dismantle. When we compare humans to other animals, we are trying to reclaim that comparison as something positive that allows us to see the similarities between each other rather than focusing on our differences. That reasons to care about humans extend to why we should care about other animals: they feel the same things as us, share very similar life experiences, relationships, etc. Of course we're not trying to insult or devalue humans by comparing them to other animals, even if you have a socially programmed idea of what that comparison must inherently or always imply; offense, devaluation, demeaning language, etc. We're trying to redefine what the human-[non-human] animal relationship can be, into something much more positive and respectful. No, I don't support bestiality.

Furthermore, I said that what you said is the same thing that humans said about human slaves, which it more or less was. Acknowledging that fact isn't something it's rational to criticize or try to twist into misrepresenting me as comparing human slaves to exploited non-human animals (not that we shouldn't make circumstantial analogies like that for the sake of compelling humans to wake up to the injustices committed on non-human animals), or even comparing humans to non-human animals, and especially to knowingly slander me as insinuating that human slaves are less valuable than other humans just because I talked about their treatment or rather the arguments used to justify it in the same context as the treatment of non-human animals and the arguments used to justify their exploitation/harm/killing/etc.

That said, there are very important and powerful comparisons to be made and several parallels you can't ignore between the treatment of non-human animals (who many contend, are experiencing a form of slavery by humans) and the treatment of enslaved humans, as well as the overall cultural attitudes toward them and toward the people and movements seeking to oppose and abolish them.

https://www.amazon.com/Dreaded-Comparison-Human-Animal-Slavery/dp/0962449334

It's understandable that people are so offended by this comparison at first glance because of all the deeply ingrained ideas about non-human animals being in a subservient position and how comparing how they're treated to how human slaves were/are treated is somehow legitimizing the idea that those human slaves (or the usually racist assignment of purposes and discrimination of them) are somehow subservient by nature or something, which obviously isn't the intention at all. I know it's hard to believe, but there are actually people who don't think of other animals as being offensive to be compared to or to have the treatment of humans and justification for human oppression be compared to that of non-human animal oppression. You can keep pretending to be offended or disingenuouslys strawmanning and depicting me as saying or implying something you know I'm not, but it's clear you're just being a troll at this point.

Well I don't know what your point of saying this is, but I largely agree that most people are attached to the status quo and don't want to change or even believe the reality as long as they get to keep doing what they want and bury their heads in the sand. But it's also true that most of us are conditioned to make fallacies especially when we start to use the less rational parts of our minds that come up when we're experiencing cognitive dissonance and feeling the need to defend things that we feel guilty about and know are wrong, but which we feel incapable of changing, causing us to lash out at the messengers who are trying to shed light on the truth and encourage positive evolution. Accusing us of hypocrisy, imperfection, somehow being worse than you in some way (wanting to deny that you're doing anything wrong by painting the other "choice" to respect animals and reduce your harm to the environment (incl. plants) as being impractical, counterproductive, invalid, etc). For example thinking that we're hypocrites even though we're doing the best we can, to reduce harm to animals, plants and the environment and human society, and if the best solution isn't perfect, there's not really anything you can reasonably blame anyone for there - and even if we're not doing the best we can on whatever you think we're hypocritical for, and there's something else we can do (let us know what), that fact that we're hypocritical or imperfect on its own wouldn't mean we're wrong about the message that we should move away from animal exploitation and reduce harm to the environment etc as much as we can. And especially opposing that solution just because it isn't perfect, which ignores that every life matters, every sentient being has a unique perception and experience of the world and they aren't replacable, so reducing harm to them and not harming them unnecessarily means the world to them, as well as is critical for protecting natural plants and the environment.

Poore and Nemecek (which did not misuse LCA data

you are clearly not qualified to participate in this conversation if you think LCA studies can be combined

whatever you think you sent, all I've seen from you is poore-nemecek and studies tainted by their work

https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/search?q=pnas.org&type=All&listingType=All&page=1&sort=New

we press about 85% of the global soy crop for oil. about 7% is fed directly to animals.

you (and indeed, most humans) view non-human animals as being inferior

I have never said any such thing.

Reading comprehension 0 (or you’re just being a troll).

you haven't provided sufficient proof