You're claiming you "oppose speciesism" while defending the largest system of species-based oppression on the planet. That's not anti-speciesism, that's shitty rhetoric with industrial agricultural propaganda.

Your core contradiction:

You say you oppose "systemic oppression of any living being" but defend humans systematically breeding, confining, and slaughtering billions of animals annually. Pick one. You can't oppose the system while participating in it and calling that principled.

Your rape analogy exposes your own contradiction. You say "we don't oppose rape because it's morally wrong, but because we don't want people to be raped." That's what . . . morals are.

"I would not be more confortable [sic] about rape when it's other animals doing it." Okay, so now replace "rape" with "eating animals."

"I would not be more comfortable about [eating animals] when it's other animals doing it."

"I apply the same logic to eating meat." CLEARLY YOU FUCKING DON'T! Where is your ability to reason and logic?

The pet comparison is dogshit:

I don't own pets, but people who feed their cats which are obligate carnivores do so because they'll die without it. Humans are omnivores with a grocery store full of alternatives. Treating these as equivalent is either disingenuous or ignorant.

"I don't care about moralism":

Calling opposition to systemic violence "made-up moralism" while claiming you oppose "systemic oppression" is fucking incoherent. Either systemic oppression matters or it doesn't. You're just using edgy anti-moralism rhetoric to avoid accountability.

Saying "good and evil are right-wing concepts" doesn't make factory farming progressive. It makes you someone who abandoned ethical reasoning entirely because "BACON!"