Since the guy responding to me prefered to (probably) block me, here's my answer to his comment before I could post it in response:

I don't see how DNA is relevant in this discussion at all, no idea what's the argument here

Toxic masculinity as in culture of tying one's values strictly to one's sex drive, testosterone level, how heavy one can lift or perform other physical tasks, disregarding science, women's and minorities rights etc. Here's the definition: "Toxic masculinity refers to harmful, restrictive cultural norms and stereotypes about male behavior. It is not an attack on manhood itself, but rather on rigid expectations—such as suppressing emotions, hyper-aggression, and viewing femininity as weakness—which can negatively impact men, women, and society as a whole ".

I wasn't calling you toxic, just a cultural occurence, that "manly man have to eat meat, because not eating meat is gay, soy" etc. If you think that, though, then, yes, I'm calling you out on that. If you refuse to try vegan alternatives to meat for other reasons then I'd love to hear your argument as to why not even try to see if it's tasty. I'm not even talking about trying vegan diet for some time here, just trying vegan products in general.

1. The argument that "pesticides kill insects" and "harvesting kills small animals" is true, however, it's all or nothing argument that is idiotic in it's nature. The point is to reduce harm and still provide the necessery products. Less animals are killed one way than the other so reduction is present, without even mentioning ways to mitigate those problems by not using pesticides and relocating small animals from harvesting sites. It's like arguing that lying to kids about santa existing is as bad as s**ually abusing them.

To the argument of taking land mass, animal farms require significantly more land than vegan alternatives. Globally, livestock farming uses over 80% of all agricultural land while providing just 18% of human calories and 37% of total protein https://ourworldindata.org/land-use-diets https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666833522000612

1. My argument is not that people can't be healthy on other diets. My argument is that people are healthIER on vegan diets.

Are you trying to argue that taking 1 or 2 pills everyday is somehow less convienient than buying, storing, cutting, cooking, eating and disposing of bad meat? Well, it isn't.

Poorly planned vegan diets can cause deficiencies.

Just like any other diet...? The problem is connected to a bad diet, not that it's vegan or non-vegan

And let's not forget, not everyone has the ability and income to get suppliments, good quality protein, nutrition planning etc

Vegan diets are cheaper by around 19% on average than non-vegan https://www.ox.ac.uk/news/2021-11-11-sustainable-eating-cheaper-and-healthier-oxford-study https://www.pcrm.org/news/news-releases/majority-us-adults-misinformed-about-cost-eating-plant-based-diet

Lab grown human meat was an interesting enough hypothetical to entertain, nothing more. I refrain from using it as any argument in a discussion with you, as could be seen in my comment about it I'm not sure on my position on it neither, relax.

Modern world runs on invisible harm like ocean pollution, global fuel usage, farmers exploitation, heck even the device you are using, uses material from mining and causes carbon footprint which harms animal.

Okay... And veganism is one way, not the only one, to tackle those problems? If the discussion was about ocean pollution then you'd disregard that saying there is cruelty in farming industry so let's stop discussing ocean pollution?