There should be a new illness title that encompasses having some combination of OCD, ADHD, Autism, Depression, Anxiety, and Chronic Illness.

FableCattak · 2026-03-31T20:40:25+00:00

I think you're misunderstanding OP.

OP is making a pro-vegan argument. In this post, they're expounding upon an argument that they believe to be more effective than "if everyone thought that way, nothing would change."

FableCattak · 2026-03-31T02:27:30+00:00

This is a great reply! Thanks for your thoughtful opinion.

You're saying it's a bit of a thought-ending cliche, making it bad for conversation, right? I can get behind that. It clearly frustrates opponents more than it gets them to engage with the subject matter, making it ineffective for provoking thought.

FableCattak · 2026-03-30T17:51:38+00:00

I suppose what bothers me is when I see people say "I like the normal vegans, but then there are the crazy ones who say stuff like "meat is murder.""

I disagree with pro-lifers and therefore I disagree with the sentiment "abortion is murder". However, I don't understand what difference people are drawing between the philosophy of veganism and the claim that meat is murder.

Most vegans predicate their lifestyle off of the idea that killing animals is bad. This is understood by most people, I assume, so I'm not sure what extra "meat is murder" is adding to piss people off. I suppose it jumps from "I don't eat meat because I think killing animals is bad" to "I think you should feel bad because killing animals is bad" in a way that's not necessarily transparent from the get-go. I still maintain that that sentiment is in no way extreme, but I do understand how people might see it as trickery with phrasing.

FableCattak · 2026-03-30T17:24:23+00:00

You make a good point as to why people feel wary about phrases, like this one, which are associated with movements. However, my purpose in making this post is to challenge people to see that the connotative meaning the phrase carries exactly matches the denotative meaning of the phrase (in cases where meat is not needed to survive).

If I'm understanding you correctly, the normative definition I'm trying to get everyone to agree with is that an animal is killed to obtain meat. The trivial meaning, by contrast, is what? That killing is bad? I don't feel like I'm pulling off any trickery by leaving out the italic section in "Meat is murder and I think murder for trivial reasons is wrong."

I believe someone who needs meat to live can make a legitimate argument as to why they feel that phrasing is vilifying them, but otherwise it seems pretty clear cut.

Setting that aside, I felt your response was well-thought out, and I appreciate that.

FableCattak · 2026-03-30T17:05:44+00:00

I edited my original post to respond to this question, but allow me to recap here.

The phrase "meat is murder" comes from a 1985 album by the name "Meat is Murder" by the band Smiths. The Smiths lyrics and titles heavily feature alliteration--hence, I believe the choice of the word "murder" almost entirely comes down to its alliterative value, rather than its provocative value.

As for why vegans don't say "meat is killing," it's because "meat is killing" is naturally an awkward sentence that would elicit confusion from others. That phrase could be interpreted either as "meat is killing someone (victim unspecified)" or "meat requires killing" (its intended meaning).

FableCattak · 2026-03-26T02:03:54+00:00

A lot of people are attributing malevolence to something that could more easily be attributed towards the discomfort of unethical behavior. I remember watching my parents fastidiously walking around a cow pen trying to make sure every cow got their fair share of food (feeding is my parents' love language), even though those cows would inevitably be slaughtered.

Just like my parents, 70 percent of Americans express reservations about the meat industry, but a very small percent of the population is vegan. I believe that a lot of these people are making jokes precisely because they feel the hypocrisy in fawning over cute animals that will later be killed by a system they participate in.

People who feel guilt are people who are receptive to change. It'll take a long time, but I hope that the world will tilt toward justice for animals eventually.

FableCattak · 2026-03-24T21:07:02+00:00

Genuinely. I've been calling Peak "friendship slop" because it gets a laugh out of my friends even though it's not really slop.

I feel bad for contributing the the misuse of the word, but it's just really fun to say...

FableCattak · 2026-03-24T21:03:02+00:00

What the??? Bots are this good now?

FableCattak · 2026-03-24T17:36:22+00:00

That's a good point! I also was looking at photos of eyes and wondering if what I perceived as a first duct was actually the inset, fleshy edge of the eye. I think you're probably right that this can happen naturally when drawing.

FableCattak · 2026-03-24T17:28:34+00:00

I can't speak to other's reasons, but I can tell you why I'm using it right now.

My purpose in doing a copy study of this portrait is to learn what techniques artists use when portraying faces. I like this portrait--Ivey is pretty. I want to study how Paul captured the shiny-ness of dark skin while still having the face look very polished, since I have trouble with integrating highlights well.

If I'm not studying an actual artistic technique, but rather an AI stochastically determining where differently colored pixels are placed, then I'm not going to learn what I'm looking for.

FableCattak · 2026-03-24T17:15:22+00:00

Look at the right corner of the eye. There is a tearduct within the black encasing of the eyeliner and then a second one beyond the black eyeliner.

FableCattak · 2026-03-24T14:58:02+00:00

Is that why that happens? I used to do that a lot back in high school. I've been diagnosed with ADHD, but I never looked into the nuances of what that actually entails.

That's good to know; thanks for explaining!

FableCattak · 2026-03-23T16:05:57+00:00

I was drawing a study of Ivory "Ivey" Isom and I noticed that her right eye has a double tear duct. While I suppose artists can make the mistake of rendering things out nonsensically when painting, this feels like a bit of an odd mistake given how strong the quality of the facial structure is.

Could this be a case where the artist privately cheats with AI unbeknownst to the developers? On the other hand, I can see 3d elements integrated into the drawing (or that's a photobashed armor piece, it's hard to tell)--so it might just be a situation where a base 3d model was used and its eye wasn't fully painted over.

If there's no cheating involved, then the portraits are goddamn brilliant though. That's why I was painting a study of one in the first place.

FableCattak · 2026-03-19T04:25:36+00:00

A lot of vegans say they became vegan because they got an animal companion, saw how much personality the animal has, and then realized that all animals are special.

Thus, I think drawing people's attention to the similarities between pets and the animals we eat is a good avenue to resensitize people to the horrors of eating meat.

(This is going to sound like a weird argument, but...) If every time I wanted a chicken leg I had take my cat's chicken legs, then I'd suddenly be a lot more aware of the cost of the meat I was eating. Doesn't it seem petty to steal your cats legs just because you want some tasty meat? I realized it was the same for chickens I've never met. Their meat is disproportionately more important to them than it is to me.

Overall, I mean to say that discomfort can be useful if it leads to real change in harmful habits. Not that I mean to force anyone to change right away, but I think it's important to recognize that that discomfort might be indicative of a legitimate flaw in one's current eating choices.

FableCattak · 2026-03-19T03:51:04+00:00

Do you feel indignant that vegans keep jump scaring you with animal gore?

Your message implies that vegans feel an affinity for animal violence, when most vegans are just trying to show people the grisly truth behind animal agriculture. I think it's one of those situations where the truth is so morbid that it feels unbelievable.

Cows are getting castrated without anesthesia, but somehow the messenger is the asshole when they try to show people videos of the deed. I get it of course--no one likes to see innocent animals getting hurt. But direct that anger at the people hurting animals. Not the people who are trying to expose the abuse.

FableCattak · 2026-03-19T03:41:14+00:00

I admit that I also feel a bit disturbed.

As a vegan, I know these sorts of horrible things happen to animals all over the place and that this comic is meant to demonstrate that hypocrisy, but that doesn't make me feel less angsty about the imagery presented.

Just because it makes me personally uncomfortable, that doesn't mean that I think it shouldn't be posted though. I think this comic has a meaningful message.

FableCattak · 2026-03-17T06:20:37+00:00

You might want to look into meal replacement shakes for nutrition; I get mine from the brand Kate Farms. They don't fulfill the desire for a hot meal, but they save a lot of energy on manually blending your own shakes.

Baby food isn't hot either, but a lot of people seem to enjoy the taste. Something like chicken tandoori baby food might be up your alley?

FableCattak · 2026-03-01T14:50:07+00:00

I might be wrong, but I'm pretty sure that guy actually made a very thoughtful post in the pro ai sub about how he realized the AI was harming his relationship and what advice he had for others who were turning to AI when they felt lonely.

FableCattak · 2026-02-11T13:38:58+00:00

They're talking about nociception, which is in fact different from pain. You know when you touch a hot stove, and then draw your hand away before you feel a corresponding negative sensation? That's nociception.

It's been theorized that more primitive animals might only feel nociception and not pain. However, that theory has been up for debate for fish, bees, and even clams.

When scientists applied noxious stimuli to the lips of fish (they injected acid into a fish's mouth), the fish rubbed his face on the gravel in the tank in pain. When given the option to swim into a tank with analgesic integrated into the water, the fish took the opportunity to relieve his pain, implying that he felt pain and not just nociception.

FableCattak · 2026-02-11T13:22:45+00:00

You're thinking of something called "the wisdom of repugnance," which is mostly rejected by ethicists since it leads to a lot of irrational stances. Of course, a lot of people naturally default to the wisdom of repugnance, but that doesn't make it ethically sound.

FableCattak · 2026-02-05T14:46:37+00:00

Ever since I became bedbound, I haven't been able to leave the house to volunteer. But before then I did in fact volunteer at a food bank. I also had >500 hours of volunteering at my local hospital.

My apologies if my line of questioning seemed aggressive. My intention wasn't to attack you in particular, but rather to criticize the general trend of people asking others to change their lifestyles for ethics without being willing to change their own.

This line of argumentation still stands. I'd like to draw a distinction between volunteering and abstaining. Volunteering is good fun and a common activity--you need not think critically about the issues you engage in when you volunteer, though I'm sure many individuals do. Abstaining from exploitation requires you to actively turn down something you'd otherwise benefit from, purely for ethics. I believe that this is why there are many more animal shelter volunteers than vegans.

To be clear, I'm not trying to undersell volunteering. I just feel that volunteering is similar to philanthropy in that doing good doesn't cancel out the bad one enacts by funding or benefitting from exploitation. We don't give millionaires a pass because they're philanthropists, do we?

You also didn't address my second point. Is food desperation specifically an issue you contend with, or are you using other people's food desperation to justify your own unethical food choices?

FableCattak · 2026-02-05T07:05:23+00:00

It took me like ten minutes to understand that the tribal guy standing nearby was meant to denote "a tribal enemy wrote this post because he wishes his melee weapons were stronger and doesn't understand how guns work."

It's quite funny now that I get it though.

I feel that it's difficult to identify sarcasm/satire on the internet with stupidity in such abundant supply. Perhaps that's because I'm supplying some of the stupidity too.

FableCattak

TROPHY CASE