Brutal Cow begs slaughterhouse worker not to kill it

[Michinomiya Hirohit]

This is an incel moment.

You may be wondering what an "incel moment" is, well here it is, defined.

-When confronted with interracial relationships, this triggers a primal urge in the incel. Half enraged, half aroused he is reminded by his own loneliness and the high desire to be in a meaningful relationship with a women. Protip, he never will

-When confronted by criticism of race and gender dynamics, wojacks, ad-homs will follow. The incel isn't educated so his immediate reaction is to rage and expose his white fragility

-Though he posts photos and memes about how he hates women, all he wants is to be with a women. The problem is, he's not attractive and never will be. Women avoid him like a plague so he attacks anonymously on the internet (notice how he's a complete coward).

-His response when he has no argument is typical "dilate", "nigger", "cope" "seethe" etc. You know when they post this, you've won and witnessed an incel moment.

-Deep down, they're extremely fragile and insecure. They've never really interacted with people outside of their own family so they've never developed proper intellectual and emotional relationships.

-Typically lean right, MAGA despite not really knowing anything about policy, history or society in general. They're obsessed with SJW's, women, minorities even though they don't know any. Easily brainwashed and indoctrinated. Youtubers like PJW, Milo & Steven Crowder have them changing their worldviews every video they post. They're unable to form coherent arguments but are overly emotional when it comes to issues. Notice phrases like "Political correction is destroying our media!" despite not giving any examples on set topics.

That's it folks, a quick guide to spot incel moments and incel rage. Pass it along.

 

[Deleted member 19079]

 

[Deleted member 6470]

idc how many people call me a soycuck for saying this,

but honestly if i actually ate fruit and vegetables i'd go vegan, i have 100x more empathy for animals than humans

Not me.

 

[Deleted member 19079]

———>

-->

 

[Darkenzo]

At least it wasn't halal that's a little bit worse to watch.

 

[Deleted member 25513]

Vegans are copers. Humans evolved to consume meat

 

[Pixycel]

I will now support animal rights

 

[Deleted member 22685]

I will now support animal rights

 

[Deleted member 25707]

I love meat.

 

[wasted12years]

Vegans are copers. Humans evolved to consume meat

 

[Michinomiya Hirohit]

idc how many people call me a soycuck for saying this,

but honestly if i actually ate fruit and vegetables i'd go vegan, i have 100x more empathy for animals than humans

 

[epillepsy]

The cow doesn't know it's going to be killed.
It just senses something is off; it's not begging not to be killed.
Basically, nothing goes through an animal's mind.
It's dangerous to give too much cognitive credit to animals because you start heading down the path of animal activism.

 

[Lone-Star]

I bet it's delicious

 

[RollD20]

I will destroy pakistan

Over for pakistan when the cowarmy arrives

 

[Cowcel]

Over for pakistan when the cowarmy arrives

 

[Darkenzo]

The cow doesn't know it's going to be killed.
It just senses something is off; it's not begging not to be killed.
Basically, nothing goes through an animal's mind.
It's dangerous to give too much cognitive credit to animals because you start heading down the path of animal activism.

Animals have a survival instinct I think they generally know when they're about to be done in by something. If they didn't know that they wouldn't run from a lion.

 

[epillepsy]

Animals have a survival instinct I think they generally know when they're about to be done in by something. If they didn't know that they wouldn't run from a lion.

Their instincts don't account for death by cattle gun, which isn't found in nature.
Like I said, the cow suspects something is the matter but surely it's not begging not to be killed.

 

[Darkenzo]

Their instincts don't account for death by cattle gun, which isn't found in nature.

Animals always react if you point something at them with intent they can read the body language. The middle finger doesn't exist in nature but animals know it's a hostile action when you give them it.


View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vsjtBbct5Pw&t=79s



View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S8NxAaat-7U

 

[epillepsy]

Animals always react if you point something at them with intent they can read the body language. The middle finger doesn't exist in nature but animals know it's a hostile action when you give them it.


View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vsjtBbct5Pw&t=79s



View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S8NxAaat-7U

But did it think was about to die???
I think nothing goes through animals' brains but pure instinct.
They don't go from reason to reason in their thinking.
Poor cow (I guess), but thinking in that wrong way gets you to banning foods like shark's fin soup, foie gras, and boshintang.
The penalties for animal cruelty are also way too high because people think animals are just little human beings. It is a felony in the US.

 

[Darkenzo]

But did it think was about to die???

Not quite in the same way a human would as they lack a concept of death but they're capable of panicking, that's there survival mechanism in full swing. You can see it went into full panic mode when the gun was pointing at it.

I think nothing goes through animals' brains but pure instinct.

It depends on the animal seeing as humans are animals. Something like an ant would be a basic biochemical controlled automation while a cow would have rudimentary mind going on, they can play fetch with a massive ball and apparently enjoy themselves as a dog would.



View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sx-CxuAeVPo

Poor cow (I guess), but thinking in that wrong way gets you to banning foods like shark's fin soup, foie gras, and boshintang.

Personally I think those should be banned but I wouldn't go vegan or anything.

 

[epillepsy]

Not quite in the same way a human would as they lack a concept of death but they're capable of panicking, that's there survival mechanism in full swing. You can see it went into full panic mode when the gun was pointing at it.

What's the problem, though? Human beings get no disadvantage from animals feeling distress or pain. It's when you start to consider the "emotions" of animals that we stop experimenting on chimpanzees and miss out on medical developments that potentially could have helped humanity. The testing on mice and rats gave us a lot of scientific insights as well, and our modern medicine would be much the worse without it. But PETA is advocating for stopping such things.

It depends on the animal seeing as humans are animals. Something like an ant would be a basic biochemical controlled automation while a cow would have rudimentary mind going on, they can play fetch with a massive ball and apparently enjoy themselves as a dog would.



View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sx-CxuAeVPo

Technically, human beings are animals, yes, but there's been a differentiation between human beings and animals in philosophy and literature. Human beings are so far and away the most intelligent and capable animals (the only ones cursed with reason) that the different categories are essential for serious discussion.
By the way, foids are technically human beings as well by this logic.

Personally I think those should be banned but I wouldn't go vegan or anything.

I don't think so AT ALL.
If the food is delicious and not causing harm to the environment, that pleasure shouldn't be forbidden to humans.
There's a path to banning meat entirely (and this isn't slippery slope). As opinions change bit by bit, many conclusions which seemed ridiculous at first can become reality. Look at the state of abortion laws, for example.

 

[Darkenzo]

What's the problem, though? Human beings get no disadvantage from animals feeling distress or pain. It's when you start to consider the "emotions" of animals that we stop experimenting on chimpanzees and miss out on medical developments that potentially could have helped humanity.

Life saving medical research is fine but testing cosmetic products on animals wouldn't be. Though they have banned that in most countries by now. Animal welfare is a thing.

The testing on mice and rats gave us a lot of scientific insights as well, and our modern medicine would be much the worse without it. But PETA is advocating for stopping such things.

Some people go a little bit further than they should but everyone has a different opinion on things. Most people try to find some kind of general consensus where possible.

Technically, human beings are animals, yes, but there's been a differentiation between human beings and animals in philosophy and literature. Human beings are so far and away the most intelligent and capable animals (the only ones cursed with reason) that the different categories are essential for serious discussion.

It's more a difference of degree than kind, some animals come reasonably close to human intelligence. Dolphins have a brain that's about 80% the size of a human relative to body size and they have something close to a language and they even have different names for each other. They have no limbs so they can't use tools and what have you. Tool use isn't exclusive to humans though, we just refined the art somewhat.

By the way, foids are technically human beings as well by this logic.

They're like men without the testosterone and without that they haven't undergone full 100% physical and mental maturation. That's why their features tend to look more delicate and childlike as well as more childlike mindset. Both of which men tend to find attractive. Though humans in general even tend to have more infantile features compared to the other great apes and our hominid ancestors. A baby chimp has a more rounded human like face than an adult chimp has. Homo erectus had a rougher and readier face compared to modern humans look.

I don't think so AT ALL.
If the food is delicious and not causing harm to the environment, that pleasure shouldn't be forbidden to humans.

Best not to inflict unnecessary suffering on anything capable of suffering if you can help it. I suppose that cow suffered a little bit but it was killed quickly and I assume it was reared in good conditions. I'd avoid anything battery farmed only free range and/or humanely reared. Again some people go a bit further than others, like your bloody vegans. Adolf Hitler was a vegetarian as well as he was apparently very animal welfare conscious. He didn't particularly like humans but there you go, no-ones perfect

There's a path to banning meat entirely (and this isn't slippery slope). As opinions change bit by bit, many conclusions which seemed ridiculous at first can become reality. Look at the state of abortion laws, for example.

There's an issue with abortion we could just bash a newborn baby in the head for instance you have to draw a line somewhere. I agree with the line most secular countries have drawn at about 3 months after conception. Again people are going to disagree and take it further but a majority consensus is good to aim for. Grey areas.

 

[epillepsy]

Life saving medical research is fine but testing cosmetic products on animals wouldn't be. Though they have banned that in most countries by now. Animal welfare is a thing.

Some people go a little bit further than they should but everyone has a different opinion on things. Most people try to find some kind of general consensus where possible.

It's more a difference of degree than kind, some animals come reasonably close to human intelligence. Dolphins have a brain that's about 80% the size of a human relative to body size and they have something close to a language and they even have different names for each other. They have no limbs so they can't use tools and what have you. Tool use isn't exclusive to humans though, we just refined the art somewhat.

They're like men without the testosterone and without that they haven't undergone full 100% physical and mental maturation. That's why their features tend to look more delicate and childlike as well as more childlike mindset. Both of which men tend to find attractive. Though humans in general even tend to have more infantile features compared to the other great apes and our hominid ancestors. A baby chimp has a more rounded human like face than an adult chimp has. Homo erectus had a rougher and readier face compared to modern humans look.

Best not to inflict unnecessary suffering on anything capable of suffering if you can help it. I suppose that cow suffered a little bit but it was killed quickly and I assume it was reared in good conditions. I'd avoid anything battery farmed only free range and/or humanely reared. Again some people go a bit further than others, like your bloody vegans. Adolf Hitler was a vegetarian as well as he was apparently very animal welfare conscious. He didn't particularly like humans but there you go, no-ones perfect

There's an issue with abortion we could just bash a newborn baby in the head for instance you have to draw a line somewhere. I agree with the line most secular countries have drawn at about 3 months after conception. Again people are going to disagree and take it further but a majority consensus is good to aim for. Grey areas.

I'm going to give you a generalized answer of my feelings about animal rights. I can tell we agree on nothing and we will never convince each other of anything. This last post of yours has made me understand this, especially your liberal stances on abortion and humanely raised food.

It's only been relatively recently that the concept of "animal rights" and "women's rights" have taken such purchase on society.

For thousands and thousands of years, people have been hunting, eating, and inflicting pain on animals (just as animals inflict pain on one another) for the sake of survival, technology, and entertainment (bullfighting, etc). People didn't care about how animals were feeling because first, it's immaterial to mankind, second, it's trivial bullshit that has no effect on anything, and third, that's the kind of thing women worry about after they have nothing else to complain about.

Also, women haven't been this powerful and worshiped as they are throughout all of history. It's only recently that certain strange ideas of fake compassion have infested people's minds and begun to influence society.

This matters because I think women's rights and animal rights are intrinsically connected. As one becomes powerful, the other does as well. Caring about animal feelings is just like caring about foid's feelings. How does a foid feel about how she's being looked at by men? If she feels "creeped out," then we should shift the entire world and nature to accomodate her. This is nonsense.

Most animal activists are soyboys or women. Animal welfare is a uniquely female/gay/soy issue. There is a huge overlap between PETA supporters/vegans and male feminists, agecucks, soyboys, etc. Sympathizers with animals also sympathize with foids (especially young foids) and probably even inanimate objects like robots and computers. People who empathize with animals are overempathetic.

---

The problem of social values was solved long ago. The role of women and animals were set in stone many centuries ago and there was no room for advancement. But people think social values are like technology and that social values are supposed to continually advance in the same way technology does. So they keep changing shit until we come to a stupid point like now where foids are gods and animal lives are prized above the lives of ugly men. As technology advances, society is regressing.

 

[Darkenzo]

I'm going to give you a generalized answer of my feelings about animal rights. I can tell we agree on nothing and we will never convince each other of anything. This last post of yours has made me understand this, especially your liberal stances on abortion and humanely raised food.

It's only been relatively recently that the concept of "animal rights" and "women's rights" have taken such purchase on society.

For thousands and thousands of years, people have been hunting, eating, and inflicting pain on animals (just as animals inflict pain on one another) for the sake of survival, technology, and entertainment (bullfighting, etc). People didn't care about how animals were feeling because first, it's immaterial to mankind, second, it's trivial bullshit that has no effect on anything, and third, that's the kind of thing women worry about after they have nothing else to complain about.

People did quite a lot of stuff in the past we wouldn't agree with today like slavery, pedophila was acceptable in some societies there would be death penalties for the most minor of crimes like stealing a loaf of bread, torture and rape was an acceptable thing and so on. So we've advanced onwards a bit over time. Human and animal rights, gay rights and what have you are extensions of this trend forwards. Some people are a little more ahead than others and some nations are more advanced some nations compared to others.

Also, women haven't been this powerful and worshiped as they are throughout all of history. It's only recently that certain strange ideas of fake compassion have infested people's minds and begun to influence society.

It depends on the society Viking women were relatively quite powerful, Roman women were essentially like slaves. In our society it's starting to get a little bit skewed toward female dominance which is going a bit too far. Equality with men fair enough though, we're a bit more advanced than say the Islamic world on gender equality. The Nazi's stopped women from working as well they were a bit of a step backwards.

This matters because I think women's rights and animal rights are intrinsically connected. As one becomes powerful, the other does as well. Caring about animal feelings is just like caring about foid's feelings. How does a foid feel about how she's being looked at by men? If she feels "creeped out," then we should shift the entire world and nature to accomodate her. This is nonsense.

If they were creeped out they would wear all concealing clothes and face covering like Muslim women tend to do. So they want to be looked at to be sure, though preferably by attractive looking men not ourselves, bloody hell no. It's also a power display to other women as well.

Most animal activists are soyboys or women. Animal welfare is a uniquely female/gay/soy issue. There is a huge overlap between PETA supporters/vegans and male feminists, agecucks, soyboys, etc. Sympathizers with animals also sympathize with foids (especially young foids) and probably even inanimate objects like robots and computers. People who empathize with animals are overempathetic.

It depends how far you want to go with it all I have fairly standard normie views on all that stuff myself which is probably about the ideal standard if everyone generally agreed with it. And most people generally do, though again there's a recent trend of going a step or two further along with the SJW carry on though they're a bit nuts/annoying. Though you want to counter all that with being normal not some edgy ultra far alt right nutter kind of thing (like some people on here seem to be) as that just encourages them. It makes it worse.

The problem of social values was solved long ago. The role of women and animals were set in stone many centuries ago

It varied a lot with culture and time nothing was ever set in stone, some cultures held (still hold) animals to be of sacred religious significance for example. Women's rights varied all over the place.

and there was no room for advancement. But people think social values are like technology and that social values are supposed to continually advance in the same way technology does. So they keep changing shit until we come to a stupid point like now where foids are gods and animal lives are prized above the lives of ugly men. As technology advances, society is regressing.

I think there's a sweet spot somewhere of "non-arseholery" in the middle we should generally aim toward. You have people and societies that veer off to an extreme in either direction. I'n Western society has over the years advanced towards the sweet spot though it's starting to veer a little from it in recent decades. It needs just a slight course correction toward the least arseholeness spot. It's a continual thing that has to be kept in some kind of general check, it will never hit the exact spot bang on though.

 

[CaveManSupreme]

If you feel bad for a cow or any animal in a slaughterhouse you probably have low test. Faggot vegans aren't able to deal with life being a bitch for every living creature.

 

[Darkenzo]

If you feel bad for a cow or any animal in a slaughterhouse you probably have low test.

You score low for psychopathy? You can go too far the other way and be like a Jains, they can't even step on any kind of living animal and feel bad for eating even plants.

 

[CaveManSupreme]

You score low for psychopathy?

How do I know?

 

[mNFwTJ3wz9]

NSFW YouTube :: Watch YouTube Videos Without Logging In

NSFWYouTube :: Watch YouTube videos without signing in/up for YouTube account. Bypass registration trick!

nsfwyoutube.com

Found this, but not the one I meant.

Just put embed in the url

 

[Deleted member 27161]