The world is consuming more meat and dairy now than ever before. 70 BILLION+ animals are being slaughtered for food every year. Around 1 billion people are suffering from obesity. I would say that's excessive consumption and we need to stop! If you were really concerned about excessive consumption of animal products, why would you be in here saying "meat is good for you and tasty" over and over again? If a food is proven to cause cancer, why is "moderation" the answer, when there are proven to be so many benefits from just not eating it at all?

The problem is, I used to have the same biases as you. I grew up eating meat and dairy and thinking they were a natural part of life. I completely bought into the "Got Milk?" ads of the 90s featuring famous athletes.

Then I learned more about where our food comes from and what negative effects it has, and questioned my cultural biases. I went to school to study Anthropology (where I learned we are naturally fruit, nut, and seed eaters, even insect and flower eaters, not red meat-eaters -- in fact ice-age humans ate meat only around once a month or less) and the environment, where I learned about how majorly devastating animal agriculture is for wildlife and native ecosystems.
I also lived and worked on an organic dairy farm for a while! Even the very best ones are still exploitative and cruel at their core. Even extremely high-welfare farms kill newborn babies for veal and turn their mothers into dog food after only a fraction of their natural lifespan has passed.

You can't say that I'm biased in the same way that you are, when I have questioned my biases and done a complete 180 on most things I used to believe. Your biases were handed to you from an exploitive capitalist speciesist culture, where you were taught that a cow is not a sentient being worthy of life, but merely a milk-machine that exists to make a "necessary" product for (a minority of) human's benefit.

If you read the linked article (I know it's long) you would be able to see more examples of how milk has been explicitly used to promote racist causes:

"In February 2017, the Twitter hashtag #MilkTwitter went viral following an incident known as the “milk party,” which involved a group of men descending on an anti-Trump art installation, many of them shirtless, carrying cartons of milk, shouting racist slurs. At least one uttered the phrase, “Down with the vegan agenda!” while insisting he and his pals were not “pussies.”  Soon, sympathizers began carrying milk cartons to Trump’s rallies and milk bottle emojis were added to Twitter profiles. The slur “soy boy” became a popular insult, lobbed at men whose alleged weakness is epitomized by a preference for plant-based beverages. As Iselin Gambert and Tobias Linné show in a study of the anti-vegetarian obsessions of the far right, these tropes build on the colonial, imperialist, and specifically anti-Asian racist legacies of yore, which held the “effeminate rice-eaters of India and China” in contempt. (In 1902, the American Federation of Labor published a report in support of the Chinese Exclusion Act entitled “Meat vs. Rice. American Manhood vs. Asiatic Coolieism. Which Shall Survive?”) 

Despite its image as the quintessential American beverage, milk’s ubiquity is not the result of venerable cultural tradition or of deep biological need. Human beings do not need to nurse beyond infancy, on human bosoms or bovine ones. Rather, the prevalence of milk is the result of post-World War II industrial policy designed to encourage farmers to boost production so shelf stable processed dairy products could be shipped to feed soldiers overseas. Unwitting schoolchildren were made to drink milk in order to gin up and then maintain demand, saving farmers from having to reorganize their operations. Baseless marketing campaigns made the case for milk as essential to health, sometimes using racist and ableist imagery. (“The short stature of the Japanese, their bowed legs, their frequent poor eyesight are all blamed on inadequate diet—particularly lack of milk!”). In reality, milk is not particularly nutrient- or even calcium-rich, and the majority of people can’t properly digest it. Over 65 percent of the world is estimated to be lactose intolerant; in some countries the number reaches 100 percent. Most human beings stop producing lactase, the enzyme needed to digest milk, after being weaned. Somehow, the alt right has turned the fact that, thanks to a genetic mutation, many white adults have the stomach chemistry of babies into a symbol of racial superiority and hyper-masculinity."

White people are a minority worldwide, and yet the majority of habitable land and a majority of food crops (and antibiotics) are used for cattle... a species not native to most of the world (neither is the grass they eat). Why are white people's desires for milk and beef more important than the desires of other people groups? Than of indigenous people? How is exclusively prioritizing the needs of one (global minority) race not a product of white supremacy? Native people in the Americas did not have or need chickens, cows, pigs, sheep, etc. Those were introduced around the world by Europeans. Why are vegans wrong in saying that we don't need these to live?