does anyone else find it worrying that people now have more sympathy for animals than children?

Soynic Hedgehog said:
not really unless you are looking at really large mammals.
Click to expand...
neutralplier.png

Also a problem is that a lot of them are native and or pretty exotic so you can’t really have much of a market, and yes a lot of small mammals can kill you (badgers, ant eaters)
 
Aedra said:
I can. She was a whore who cheated on my father. I have no love for my mother. I was raised by my father while she was out there riding other men's dicks. So yes, if my mother asked me today, I would tell her without hesitation that she is a whore.
Click to expand...
aedra aegyptia, if this is true then that's a horrible place
 
Hey, fellow 'jakkers'! I was just dropping by to tell you that pets are really, -really-, really cute!
I mean, don't you think that maybe you're not prepared to have kids? Geez, imagine changing diapers all day, and not having free time to spend on the internet or doing "epic gooning"!
Just don't think about having kids for a while and get yourself a pet with whom to 'bingewatch' some 'Ongezellig'. Don't think about having kids, after all, immigrants bring theirs!
You should also tell your friends to just postpone the whole kids thing, y'know? Just imagine a big childless life!

​

 
Yes I do don't start spamming animal gore like a foodist because of it
 
It's not normal at all. Millions of people can die and people won't bat an eye but the moment a HECKING PUPPY gets hurt irl soyboys start experiencing male menstruation and start crying. I don't understand, animals are obviously lower than humans, we rule over them; we are superior.
It's probably the jews fault.
 
Thebes said:
It's not normal at all. Millions of people can die and people won't bat an eye but the moment a HECKING PUPPY gets hurt irl soyboys start experiencing male menstruation and start crying. I don't understand, animals are obviously lower than humans, we rule over them; we are superior.
It's probably the jews fault.
Click to expand...
Declining birth rate fault and decay of family structure fault and leftist outgroup morality fault acshually. There are three reasons people generally keep pets that I am aware of.

The first is for an actual service the animal does for you, but still a pet and not just livestock to be slaughtered. Backyard chicken culture is a good example of this. Lots of non farmer people keep backyard chickens because they want pet birds just as much as they want eggs. Farm dogs are also under this. They are there to do an important job but they are also family pets.

The second is for collection or menagerie purposes. Fish, amphibians, reptiles, less personable birds and inverts fall under this usually, the main driver is owning cool and unique animals, the challenge of caring for their unique needs, and the satisfaction of showing off the products of the work one does to keep these animals.

The third is the child replacement/family member. Domestic animals, mammals, and personable birds like parrots and corvids fall under this. However over time, likely due to the birth rate economic and social issues we have, people have begun to make child replacements out of other animals, often out of not being able to handle or afford a cat or dog or other mammal.

The outgroup based morality
1742588698793.png
that we have been conditioned into by 50+ years of cultural marxist and critical theory influence and our relatively comfortable lifestyles (compared to backbreaking physical labor and factory jobs of the past) means we allocate most of our empathetic resources towards the downtrodden or weak. Animals are weaker and more downtrodden than any human group, so our culture infantalizes them, which ties in to the whole child replacment thing. In its extreme it manifests as misanthropy as is the case with OP as because they can't think like humans can, they cannot do evil for the most part so people revere them as moral exemplars, which is retarded because if they were smart they would be evil as fuck, as seen in chimps and dolphins, which are the closest to our intellect. Most animals are amoral instinct followers and the few with cognition we respect have a propensity towards doing things we would see as evil.

I myself have tons of empathy for animals and am a hardcore animal person. Being good to animals is good, but I believe the level of empathy we are getting for them, to the point where animal rights/welfare groups are becoming massive and powerful lobbies trying to cripple and optimally eliminate hunting and the pet trade and cut humans off from interacting with the wild is dangerous and too far. Man was made to use and take natural resources, its our natural instinct. Man runs off of the exploitation and killing of animals for food. While we should be nice to animals and take good care of them, we should not see them as we see humans, and we should have less empathy for them than we do people.
 
Soynic Hedgehog said:
Declining birth rate fault and decay of family structure fault and leftist outgroup morality fault acshually. There are three reasons people generally keep pets that I am aware of.

The first is for an actual service the animal does for you, but still a pet and not just livestock to be slaughtered. Backyard chicken culture is a good example of this. Lots of non farmer people keep backyard chickens because they want pet birds just as much as they want eggs. Farm dogs are also under this. They are there to do an important job but they are also family pets.

The second is for collection or menagerie purposes. Fish, amphibians, reptiles, less personable birds and inverts fall under this usually, the main driver is owning cool and unique animals, the challenge of caring for their unique needs, and the satisfaction of showing off the products of the work one does to keep these animals.

The third is the child replacement/family member. Domestic animals, mammals, and personable birds like parrots and corvids fall under this. However over time, likely due to the birth rate economic and social issues we have, people have begun to make child replacements out of other animals, often out of not being able to handle or afford a cat or dog or other mammal.

The outgroup based morality View attachment 168320 that we have been conditioned into by 50+ years of cultural marxist and critical theory influence and our relatively comfortable lifestyles (compared to backbreaking physical labor and factory jobs of the past) means we allocate most of our empathetic resources towards the downtrodden or weak. Animals are weaker and more downtrodden than any human group, so our culture infantalizes them, which ties in to the whole child replacment thing. In its extreme it manifests as misanthropy as is the case with OP as because they can't think like humans can, they cannot do evil for the most part so people revere them as moral exemplars, which is retarded because if they were smart they would be evil as fuck, as seen in chimps and dolphins, which are the closest to our intellect. Most animals are amoral instinct followers and the few with cognition we respect have a propensity towards doing things we would see as evil.

I myself have tons of empathy for animals and am a hardcore animal person. Being good to animals is good, but I believe the level of empathy we are getting for them, to the point where animal rights/welfare groups are becoming massive and powerful lobbies trying to cripple and optimally eliminate hunting and the pet trade and cut humans off from interacting with the wild is dangerous and too far. Man was made to use and take natural resources, its our natural instinct. Man runs off of the exploitation and killing of animals for food. While we should be nice to animals and take good care of them, we should not see them as we see humans, and we should have less empathy for them than we do people.
Click to expand...
Didnt read but trvthnuke
 
Soynic Hedgehog said:
Declining birth rate fault and decay of family structure fault and leftist outgroup morality fault acshually. There are three reasons people generally keep pets that I am aware of.

The first is for an actual service the animal does for you, but still a pet and not just livestock to be slaughtered. Backyard chicken culture is a good example of this. Lots of non farmer people keep backyard chickens because they want pet birds just as much as they want eggs. Farm dogs are also under this. They are there to do an important job but they are also family pets.

The second is for collection or menagerie purposes. Fish, amphibians, reptiles, less personable birds and inverts fall under this usually, the main driver is owning cool and unique animals, the challenge of caring for their unique needs, and the satisfaction of showing off the products of the work one does to keep these animals.

The third is the child replacement/family member. Domestic animals, mammals, and personable birds like parrots and corvids fall under this. However over time, likely due to the birth rate economic and social issues we have, people have begun to make child replacements out of other animals, often out of not being able to handle or afford a cat or dog or other mammal.

The outgroup based morality View attachment 168320 that we have been conditioned into by 50+ years of cultural marxist and critical theory influence and our relatively comfortable lifestyles (compared to backbreaking physical labor and factory jobs of the past) means we allocate most of our empathetic resources towards the downtrodden or weak. Animals are weaker and more downtrodden than any human group, so our culture infantalizes them, which ties in to the whole child replacment thing. In its extreme it manifests as misanthropy as is the case with OP as because they can't think like humans can, they cannot do evil for the most part so people revere them as moral exemplars, which is retarded because if they were smart they would be evil as fuck, as seen in chimps and dolphins, which are the closest to our intellect. Most animals are amoral instinct followers and the few with cognition we respect have a propensity towards doing things we would see as evil.

I myself have tons of empathy for animals and am a hardcore animal person. Being good to animals is good, but I believe the level of empathy we are getting for them, to the point where animal rights/welfare groups are becoming massive and powerful lobbies trying to cripple and optimally eliminate hunting and the pet trade and cut humans off from interacting with the wild is dangerous and too far. Man was made to use and take natural resources, its our natural instinct. Man runs off of the exploitation and killing of animals for food. While we should be nice to animals and take good care of them, we should not see them as we see humans, and we should have less empathy for them than we do people.
Click to expand...
Long trvke
 
I'm guilty of this myself, for me it's mainly because a baby crying makes me irrationally angry
Dog whining doesnt have the same effect, also people see animals as "innocent" relative to kids
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

π— π—žπ—–
Autism does anyone else refer to yourself as "we" in your head
2
Replies
26
Views
396
Gigafly
Gigafly
DonutHole
Does anyone else like the smell of their own BO?
Replies
13
Views
184
cobbycov
greg
Discussion Does anyone else have a hard time distinguishing fantasy from reality
2
Replies
22
Views
378
Ytsuken
Ytsuken
π— π—žπ—–
Autism Does anyone else like boring shit
2
Replies
27
Views
392
SINO_II
SINO_II
General Niggnin
Discussion Does anyone else get insane confidence from drinking monster?
2
Replies
38
Views
493
SINO_II
SINO_II
Back
Top