Hear me out: I don't think his argument here is entirely wrong. I'm a vegan so I obviously come at this from a different angle, but when he says its hypocritical to kill, forcibly inseminate, imprison, and abuse animals but draw the line at beastilaity, I think that's true. We already sexually violate cows to produce milk on a mass level and very few people seem to have a problem with it. I find all of it rather horrifying honestly, but if you're not a vegan, chances are your diet involves harming animals on a much worse/larger scale.
I mean, look up the methods used for artificial insemination. It's uncomfortable, non-consensual penetration of a cow, and used in the production of 99.99% of milk made for human consumption. I feel like that fits pretty much any definition of sexual violation. I'm not gonna argue about whether or not that's OK, because that's a whole other can of worms, but at least call it what it is.
Well, the way that we extract milk from cows involves artificial insemination. So, while it is possible to get it otherwise (still a non-consensual act, which is the argument people always make about beastiality), if you're drinking milk in a first world country, you're drinking milk produced through a process that involves artificial insemination. That's just how it's produced, even on small farms. You can find videos of it on Youtube; it involves inserting a whole human hand and a chilled metal rod into a cow's genitalia. If that were to be done on any human without their express consent, we would consider it sexual violation. If you want to draw a different line than me on animal ethics, so be it, but it should be a consistent line.
And to your last point, animals also have non-consensual sex with other animals, but clearly, we don't include that in what's "natural" and therefore acceptable.
4
u/MaelMothersbaugh Feb 18 '18
here's the video i was talking about