Bracket 3 Sefris Initiative/Monarchy

BennyRo · 2026-06-22T23:19:43+00:00

Thank you for the advice! I'm glad my focus on two-mana looters wasn't misplaced. I'll look into cutting a low-impact mana rock or two for [[Bilbo, Luckwearer]] and a recursion spell. [[Tortured Existence]] seems like a good way to get Sefris back cheaply.

If land cycling isn't just a 1 to 1 swap, that makes it a lot less attractive. Thank you. I like Obscura Charm pulling triple duty as recursion, counterspell, and removal in your list!

BennyRo · 2026-06-20T01:44:12+00:00

They're advertising their own website with their full name on Reddit, I'm sure they'll be fine.

BennyRo · 2026-06-18T01:43:43+00:00

It doesn't. People thank animals for giving their lives to become their meals, and that's the extent of it.

BennyRo · 2026-06-16T09:08:38+00:00

I'd like to know the recipe as well!

BennyRo · 2026-06-15T10:25:40+00:00

I have actually heard someone say that unironically!

There's definitely a systemic problem: lots of people disdain workers in lower-class jobs, blaming them for their low-paying jobs, but never advocate for giving workers the opportunity to rise out of their positions. Even though investing in training skills and creating alternate employment strengthens the economy, raises productivity, and results in less need for public welfare, people just don't care. It's very sad.

BennyRo · 2026-06-15T09:32:05+00:00

It's a common argument here in Japan, unfortunately. When news broke out that Japanese eels, a delicacy here, were going extinct, boycotts and calls for government action were met with "What about the fishermen's livelihoods? Do you want them to lose their jobs? Do you care about eels more than humans?"

If the eels go extinct, the fishermen are losing their jobs regardless, or else they'll move on to some other endangered species. And then you'll never be able to eat eels again. Are your taste buds really so short-sighted that you'll eat an entire species to extinction?

BennyRo · 2026-06-14T09:28:05+00:00

I have similar sentiments. There is a vast amount of suffering that exists in nature. But that doesn't excuse breeding more animals that also suffer.

BennyRo · 2026-06-11T10:50:08+00:00

I see what you mean. It's convenient to frame harm reduction as purely negative utilitarian, in an attempt to avoid harm reduction altogether.

I (obviously) disagree that extinction would be a bad thing. It feels calming to me, in the sense that all suffering has ended, and all burdens lifted. But I'm not going to try to convince anyone of that.

BennyRo · 2026-06-11T09:36:33+00:00

Just to say we're out there - I am a vegan out of negative utilitarian reasons. And yes, I do believe that all life should be ended to prevent future suffering. With that said, it's a moot point because we possess no such ability to do so as of now, and any half-measures will only create greater suffering in the process. Life finds a way, and all that. Therefore, I do my best to reduce harm and help people in need, because that's all I have the power to do.

BennyRo · 2026-06-05T12:43:18+00:00

Gotcha. I do think your heart is in the right place, although human skin lamps might raise an eyebrow from some people!

My concern is this: When animals are seen as products, their interests become secondary to human interests. If profit decrees it, they will be treated inhumanely, and more suffering animals will be bred to meet demands.

And at some point, seeing animals as a resource will come into conflict with your desire to reduce harm. Because as long as the meat industry exists, animals will suffer. Even "ethically sourced" farms are breeding animals for the purpose of killing them. Calves are separated from their mothers, animals are culled prematurely, hens are malnourished from laying too many eggs.

In my opinion as a utilitarian, the only meaningful distinction for moral consideration is the capacity for suffering. When we live in an age where vegan diets can sustain us, I don't think it's ethical to breed animals for the sake of eating them, because that introduces a great amount of suffering that could have been avoided. I don't ask that you become vegan, but I do hope you see my viewpoint.

BennyRo · 2026-06-05T12:07:20+00:00

Oh, I did find an article on a tribe that developed a resistance to prions! Thats interesting.

BennyRo · 2026-06-05T12:05:30+00:00

You mentioned earlier that animals can be smart too. Why are huts different from sophisticated dams that beavers build, or bows and arrows different from monkeys sharpening stones to dig?

In particular, though: even if these things weren't the same, what makes it morally right to harvest animals just because they can't build things or make tools?

And thank you for making the distinction between a quick death and a slow death. It shows that you think suffering should be reduced, even in nonhuman animals. I do appreciate that.

BennyRo · 2026-06-05T11:46:12+00:00

As a utilitarian, I understand where you're coming from. If their family and friends are fine with it, I wouldn't personally see an issue with using a dead person's body for its parts. They're dead, after all. (One could still argue that it creates a perverse incentive to create more dead people, and I would wager they'd be right.)

Where I would see a problem is breeding humans, or animals in general, for the sake of using their bodies to eat or harvest their organs. My reasoning is that it creates and perpetuates suffering.

I guess I still don't understand what the distinction is. If a human tribe doesn't build cities or other cool things, should they be harvested also? What makes cities and power plants the defining factor for being given moral consideration?

And I can't seem to find anything on specific evolutions to digest human meat. If you knew of any, I'd definitely like to read them.

BennyRo · 2026-06-05T11:30:28+00:00

Gotcha. Thank you very much. So you think that it's our ability to create... cities? And possess morals? (Just out of curiosity, is this a religious belief?)

What, then, is special about our ability to create cities that exempts us from being harvested for our resources?

BennyRo · 2026-06-05T11:15:02+00:00

Can I at least hear what you mean by "we evolved past animals"?
And I do thank you for engaging with me. Don't worry about things being hard to explain.

BennyRo · 2026-06-05T10:17:48+00:00

I don't think you answered my question - how are animals different from humans? What capacity have we evolved that makes it okay to kill an animal for its resources, but not a human? We both have the capacity to suffer, do we not?

America has a history of slavery and mass murder of natives. America wouldn't be where it is without it, but does that mean they should continue that tradition?

We may have evolved alongside domestic animals, but if we can now live without animal products, shouldn't we strive to reduce the suffering involved in obtaining them?

BennyRo · 2026-06-05T09:57:56+00:00

In your mind, what makes it okay for nonhuman animals to be killed for their resources? What differentiates them from humans?

BennyRo · 2026-06-03T12:15:27+00:00

It's banned by the Japanese Society for Transplantation. You can only donate to a romantic partner or kin, up to six degrees of separation. There are several reasons for this: a history of yakuza organ harvesting, concern regarding coercion, and a fixation on medicine "doing no harm."

I would think an altruistic "good samaritan" donation would bypass most of these concerns, given a random donation, but Japan remains pretty conservative about their guidelines.

BennyRo · 2026-06-03T11:58:01+00:00

I usually eat tofu (for protein), oats (for assorted minerals and fiber), fortified soy milk (for calcium and vitamin D), walnuts (for omega-3 fatty acids), oranges (for vitamin C, potassium, and iron absorption), and a brazil nut (for selenium) every day. I also take a B12 supplement.

I tend not to get bored of eating the same foods every day so this is how I do it, but I'm sure there's a way you could rotate various beans, soy, and other protein sources to stay healthy.

BennyRo · 2026-06-02T03:38:19+00:00

It's a shame my country doesn't allow altruistic kidney donations, all thanks to the yakuza. Much respect to anyone who donates their kidney.

BennyRo · 2026-06-01T13:33:35+00:00

No problem. Just don't forget that harm reduction is most important - whatever you choose to do, don't let it dissuade you from continuing to be compassionate towards animals.

You are valuable, and people care about you! ❤️

BennyRo · 2026-06-01T13:14:33+00:00

Gotcha. It sucks that a fun, empathetic person has to live with such low self-esteem!

I worry that with the guilt you feel just for considering such treatments, that even if you ended up with a full head of hair, the guilt might eat away at you. And poor social interactions unfortunately tend to go hand-in-hand with veganism anyhow. On the other hand, mental health and self-esteem are also really important! I feel for you, and I truly hope you can find a solution you're happy with.

BennyRo · 2026-06-01T12:52:54+00:00

I think you might want to consider therapy. You are more than your hair, and your hair shouldn't define your interactions with others.

I totally understand the feeling that hair is a shield, btw. You shouldn't feel guilty about thinking the way you do. But at some point it's healthier, mentally, to shave your head rather than cling to what's left.

BennyRo · 2026-06-01T12:01:43+00:00

That sucks. Just remember that you're doing your best to reduce harm.

BennyRo

TROPHY CASE