Here I am again, outing another vegan on Reddit.

It’s entertaining how defensive they get when I challenge their beliefs. It’s just as entertaining (and a bit maddening) when they pull out the predictable emotive wording to defend themselves… and, according to them, “the animals.”

It goes something like this: They post a mildly offensive comment or a leading question that implies they vehemently oppose what they’re questioning. Then, someone like me counters their comment or answers their question with facts and logic. They then reply with a snarky, defensive response (some more than others) that is even more offensive than their last comment, and I come back with even more devastating facts and logic.

Finally (and this is comedy gold), their reply attracts the mods or Reddit’s anti-bullying bots’ attention and subsequently gets deleted. My last comment stays up, and that’s the end of that argument. I WIN!! Maybe. Lol.

I mean, it doesn’t always happen like that. But my last couple of encounters this weekend ended like that. Weee! Haha!

Anyway, it’s funny how they seem to emerge from the woodwork when baby calves make an appearance, either as bottle babies or when interacting with their mother, as I discussed previously.

This instance came from the same subreddit r/Cows. The screenshot below shows a short clip of a Brown Swiss heifer calf eagerly waiting for the bottle. The video was adorable, as she was pacing the fence and reaching out with her tongue for her regular feeding.

I didn’t talk much about it last time, but r/Cows is a fun subreddit where people post pictures of cows, heifers, bulls, steers, and calves. Occasionally, someone has a question to answer, but mostly, it’s just people showing off pictures of cattle.

People leave comments that generally admire how cute, beautiful or handsome the critters posted are.

A few, though, get a little rude and snarky.

The following conversation is with an animal activist who got a bit defensive when I used my truth bombs. The OP (original poster) answered her question with his facts about what was going to happen to those little heifers. The final screenshot below is my answer to the activist’s (red) defensive and illogical response. (I’m CrazyForageBeefLady)

Now, here’s where the rubber meets the road. This activist thought she would be smart and launch a long-winded response that triggered Reddit’s bots to hold her comment to be reviewed by r/Cows’ moderation team. Check it out for yourself, and you’ll probably see why it got withheld (and deleted, as I confirmed with the mods) as it did.

wow, you got really angry with my comment, relax a lot lol. Meh, I don’t know, I wouldn’t like to see dogs being artificially bred and fattened while the mother is taken away from her offspring (and then killed and created calf) to produce milk in overproduction due to artificial selection and at the end of their lives stick a fucking piece of metal at high speed to kill him. Well, I think it is bad because it has been shown that the cognitive abilities of cows (and pigs) far exceed that of dogs and they can have the self-awareness of 3-year-old children, again, I would not like to see children of 3 years old being raised and fattened artificially to stick a fucking piece of metal into them at high speed. Every living being wants to live, and unlike a lion or any predator, human beings have a neocortex that allows us to have more empathy and recognition of others, and the fact that “most don’t” does not take away the questionability of the matter, Well, slavery was questioned by many people at the time, but “the majority were not” (I only say this to clarify that it is not a valid argument) The relationship with the first comment is that in many farms (especially industrial) the mothers are artificially pregnant so that they produce a lot of milk (by artificial selection for centuries, similar to sheep wool) and their offspring are fed separately, although it will vary. According to the farm. Again, don’t be mad, this is just a conversation between strangers on Reddit. Sorry for my mid english

I don’t know about you, but I don’t believe I sounded angry in responding to her. Blunt, sure, but not angry.

If I were angry, if that girl legit pissed me off, you’d be reading a whole lot of coarse language, and I would be saying some things that the Reddit bots probably won’t like much.

Now, I can’t argue that she sounds angry, either. But I would say that she’s misguided, misinformed, and talking a lot of nonsense about a topic that exceeds her understanding. I mean, she admitted she wasn’t a “cow expert,” and she did an excellent job of proving that here.

Also, since Reddit is full of people from all over the world from all walks of life, I understand her English isn’t the best, so I’ll try not to pick on her for her poor grammar or wording. Keyword: try. It’ll be a challenge.

Note, too, that I’ll also be writing in a way that I’m talking directly to her, not to you readers in general.

Also, some of you may argue that she’s not here to defend herself, and yes, that is true. But I’m not attacking her personally. I’m only attacking her arguments because they deserve to be addressed and ripped to shreds. I don’t do the ad hominem fallacy arguments because that’s a sign of defeat and that the argument is done. It’s also a shameful bullying tactic that nobody deserves.

(Thank you to my paranormal debunker YouTube friends who have taught me that. It’s taken me long enough to figure that out.)

Now, let’s tear apart her latest response piece by piece.

Ripping Some Inane Arguments to Shreds

Part One: First Sentence

Meh, I don’t know, I wouldn’t like to see dogs being artificially bred and fattened while the mother is taken away from her offspring (and then killed and created calf) to produce milk in overproduction due to artificial selection and at the end of their lives stick a fucking piece of metal at high speed to kill him.

Ripping Apart First Sentence: My Responses

Meh, I don’t know, I wouldn’t like to see dogs being artificially bred and fattened…

Dogs are bred and raised for meat in Indo-Asian countries, so this argument is pretty pointless.

And it’s your opinion that you don’t like it. That’s fine. Just as you’ve voiced your opinion that you don’t like animals being so-called “murdered” so that their bodies can be used to nourish others’ bodies like mine and maybe secretly yours. Also fine. Whatever.

But we’re talking COWS here, amiga. Not doggoes. Cows, which have been intentionally bred and selected for human food production. Dogs are, for the most part, in most (if not all) parts of the world, bred and raised to be companion animals, property, life and livestock guardians, bomb-, drug-, and dead-body-detectors, and more. Not cattle!

I’ll get into the artificial breeding part later, as you seem heavily misinformed about its alleged harms.

Now, the stuff you laid out here doesn’t make much sense. You cannot fatten and artificially breed livestock at the same time. You’ve either got to do one or the other.

Fattening them for slaughter will heavily compromise their breeding ability. Fat animals get a lot of adipose (fat) deposits in their reproductive organs, negatively impacting their fertility. Too much fat in the udder compromises milk production. Heifers that are “fattened” for the show ring have a really tough time getting pregnant and producing milk for their calf because the amount of fat surrounding their ovaries causes polycystic syndrome and reduces their fertility. Fatty deposits in their mammary tissue mean they won’t be producing enough milk for their calf if, by chance, they do get pregnant.

…while the mother is taken away from her offspring…

The mother is often taken away from her offspring because the cow needs a break from the heavy demands placed on her body by constantly feeding her calf.

A cow that constantly produces milk to feed her calf can have trouble keeping her body in good shape. If she’s not fed properly, she will lose weight. She will get thin. And, if she’s pregnant again, she needs to get that older calf off her so that she can make some proper colostrum (first milk, very important for a newborn) for her soon-to-be new baby.

By six months, the calf doesn’t even need its mother’s milk. Its rumen is fully developed by three months old, and by six months, it only needs milk as a treat supplement in addition to its now-regular meal of grass, hay, and some grain.

Young calves removed by the farmer and put on the bottle are also not a bad thing. While the calf won’t do much to impact the cow’s milk production (especially if it’s a heavy-producing dairy cow), it can injure the udder and invite infection that negatively impacts the cow’s milking ability, as the OP described.

This is especially true if that cow’s milk is going to be sold as a commodity food source, and that farmer relies on that cow to keep the farm going. The cow won’t miss the demanding calf when she’s already used to this happening and doesn’t want anything to do with that youngster in the first place.

…(and then killed and created calf)…

I’ll add this part to the “that makes no logical sense” file. You can’t kill a cow and expect that dead cow to continue to create new calves. That’s not how it works.

…to produce milk in overproduction…

Dairy cows are selected to produce more milk than their calves can drink. That’s how artificial (not natural) breeding works. A Holstein cow produces ten times the amount of milk a Holstein can drink in a day. A Jersey cow: about eight times. A Brown Swiss cow: also about eight times or more.

But you read from the OP why calves are removed from cows. It’s a fact of farm life. There’s nothing evil about it. It’s better for both the cow and the calf.

It’s not overproduction because there’s such a huge demand for dairy products that dairy farmers must have the kind of cows that work to meet that demand.

Also, dead cows don’t produce milk. Once they’re dead, they’re dead. They stop reproducing and stop making milk.

I don’t know what reality you live in, where dead, killed cows continue to breed and “overproduce” milk.

…due to artificial selection…

You’re at least correct about how dairy cows come about. I’ll give you that.

But again, you either raise cows to give birth and raise calves, or you fatten them. It’s OR, not AND.

…and at the end of their lives stick a fucking piece of metal at high speed to kill him.

And yes, when they’ve done their duty and are at the age where they can’t be as productive or as healthy anymore, and nothing else can be done for them, they get slaughtered.

But they don’t get slaughtered for no reason. They get turned into FOOD. For people. And dogs. And other pets and zoo animals.

Nothing wrong with that. That is, except what you and your militant friends claim.

Part Two: Second Sentence

Well, I think it is bad because it has been shown that the cognitive abilities of cows (and pigs) far exceed that of dogs and they can have the self-awareness of 3-year-old children, again, I would not like to see children of 3 years old being raised and fattened artificially to stick a fucking piece of metal into them at high speed.

Ripping Apart Second Sentence: My Responses

Well, I think it is bad…

Again, this is purely your opinion. It’s not fact. You’re entitled to your opinion, and I will respect that.

What I don’t respect is you laying things out as inarguable facts when they a) are arguable, b) are often untrue and c) illogical.

…because it has been shown that the cognitive abilities of cows (and pigs) far exceed that of dogs…

That’s the first bare-faced lie you’ve told so far.

The cognitive abilities of cows have not been scientifically proven to “far exceed” that of dogs, as you claim. In fact, all the sources I’ve come across state very clearly, that such abilities are similar to most of our house pets, but not this “far exceed” horseshit.

The only animals that far exceed the cognitive abilities of dogs are humans. Not cows. Or pigs.

Only one source I found states that cows are better at navigating mazes than dogs are, but dogs, being instinctually predatory in nature, are far better at locating sounds. This comes from the summary provided by New Roots Institute on bovine cognition and intelligence.

Pigs have also been found to be as similar in intelligence and cognition as dogs. But not “far exceeding.” You can find research on Google to prove that, just as I did.

Like I said earlier, I won’t attack you, but I will attack your arguments, especially if you’re lying and talking out of your behind.

…and they can have the self-awareness of 3-year-old children…

I cannot say this is a bare-faced lie; rather, it’s a theory that hasn’t yet been rigorously scientifically proven. The scientific community speculates that cattle may have some level of self-awareness and self-agency, but it’s difficult (and pretty foolish) to compare that to the average prepubescent human child.

Currently, science agrees that cattle do not have such self-awareness and that current research argues that it is based either on speculation or misinterpreted findings.

We know that cows (and pigs) are sentient beings, yes. But that doesn’t mean they’re self-aware.

So, stick that in your pipe and smoke it.

See? A Google search where I’m not focused on articles that satisfy my cognitive bias can debunk a whole lot of bullshit.

…again, I would not like to see children of 3 years old…

“Again?” First, it was about dogs; now it’s about… what, children? You didn’t speak about children first, but you’re saying “again,” as you said about children initially, even though you said dogs initially.

So which is it? Dogs or kids?

Or are dogs children and children dogs?

You’re not making sense here.

LOL.

I digress.

Let’s highlight the elephant in the room with this little quote: Cows at three years old are ADULTS.

Read that again, slowly: A-D-U-L-T-S

This means they are fully mature mammalian animals; they are beyond ready to make babies and are way too old to stay with their dear old mothers.

Just because they have the cognitive ability of a human toddler doesn’t mean they have the body of one. Be real. Be honest.

At three years old, in cow years, that’s equivalent to a human being between 18 to 25.

Does that make sense?

Are you still… nah, I won’t go there.

So, that puts your argument as still both opinion and illogical.

You don’t like it. Fine. Big deal.

But they’re not toddlers. Baby calves are toddlers. Not big 1600-pound. Fully-grown. Adult. Lumbering cows.

…being raised and fattened artificially…

Okay, so we know that farms aren’t natural. They’re “artificial” environments, yes. Man-made, yes.

Even most pastures are “artificial.” Even though the weather and Nature predict what will grow where and how.

Farms and farmers are heavily impacted by and dependent on nature. Even though they’re… “artificial.”

How else are cattle going to be raised and fattened? If it’s not “artificial,” then what?

I’m not sure what you intended by this phrase. Maybe it’s because of your poor English that you worded it this way while you intended to word it another way. I’ll let it slide.

Moving on.

…to stick a fucking piece of metal into them at high speed.

Your disgust and hatred is palpable. I get it.

Part Three: Third Sentence

Every living being wants to live, and unlike a lion or any predator, human beings have a neocortex that allows us to have more empathy and recognition of others, and the fact that “most don’t” does not take away the questionability of the matter[.]

Ripping Apart Third Sentence: My Responses

Oh boy.

Every living being wants to live…

Sure they do. That doesn’t mean they have any control over how or when they choose to die. It’s just a fact of life.

Nothing lives forever. Including you. And me.

…and unlike a lion or any predator, human beings have a neocortex that allows us to have more empathy and recognition of others…

Yeah… so?

What’s your point? That, because of that neocortex, we shouldn’t be killing animals and eating meat, unlike a lion or any predator?

That, my friend, is absolute hogwash.

We humans are predators. We’re not prey animals. We have the same forward-facing eyes and instinctual ability to seek and destroy (or seek and find) and chase and catch.

Just like other predators.

It’s a pathetic, weak excuse for us not to eat meat.

You know what that neocortex does? It helps us have the empathy to raise our animals in humane ways where they feel safe, are well-fed, are healthy, and live in happy social environments. We are very intelligent in how we learn these things and apply them to make the animals we care for and care about happy.

At least, we do our best with what we have and what we know. Nothing is perfect. We fuck up now and then.

And, we also have the empathy to know what “sticking that fucking piece of metal at high speed into them” actually does. Well, most of us do. Some of us (have to include you) don’t and curse it like it’s an evil, despicable thing.

See, what it does is render that animal suddenly unconscious where it doesn’t feel a damn thing. That “fucking piece of metal,” as you call it, impacts the brain so significantly and so suddenly that everything in the animal’s body shuts down completely.

The knife to the main blood vessels supplying the brain makes it permanent.

This sudden death means the animal will not and does not suffer. It does not writhe in pain or remain alive and conscious before exsanguination (bleeding out).

Our neocortex developed that system because our empathetic selves do not want to see the animals we kill for food suffer. We want them to be alive one moment and dead before it even knew what hit it.

The part about us being able to recognize others is completely irrelevant to this conversation.

and the fact that “most don’t” does not take away the questionability of the matter[.]

Filed in the “this shit makes no sense” file.

I have no clue what you’re inferring here. I don’t read minds.

Moving on.

Part Four: Fourth Sentence

Well, slavery was questioned by many people at the time, but “the majority were not” (I only say this to clarify that it is not a valid argument)

Ripping Apart Fourth Sentence: My Responses

Ah, the predictable “slavery” card. Good Lord.

Well, slavery was questioned by many people at the time…

What relevance does this have to animals?

Many “at the time” (whenever that was that you were referring to… again, I don’t read minds) didn’t question slavery and continued to participate and enact it.

Even today, human trafficking is still prevalent in many parts of the world, including here in Canada/America. It’s illegal, it’s disgusting and vile, but still reality.

But since I’m guessing you’re referring this to cows, it’s absurd.

We’ve established that cows have the cognitive ability of a toddler. This means they have no concept of things like slavery. They don’t know they’re enslaved, and quite frankly, they don’t even care.

Only pontificating proselytizing fools like you do.

Enslaved people, though, did know and did care. They’re humans. NOT cows.

Why the fuck do you think the Underground Railroad exist during the American Civil War? Why the fuck do you think that many black people attempted to escape the colonizer’s plantations at risk of getting shot and mauled by dogs? Because they KNEW they were slaves, they KNEW there was freedom beyond those fields of cotton and tobacco. COWS DON’T.

You know what happens when you try to “liberate” a herd of cows? There’s actually video proof of this shit. They get all confused as to why they’re outside the barn, milling about not sure where they can go to get back to safety. Meanwhile the same idiot member of the Animal Liberation Front (ALF) is frantically waving their arms at them to, “Be free!!! Save yourselves!!” As they get almost trampled and run over by a large herd of stressed, frightened, and very confused bovines.

They had NO desire to wander the countryside as “freed slaves.” NONE whatsoever.

So the fact that you have the audacity to compare black enslaved people to cows is fucking atrocious and disgusting.

Now you’re starting to piss me off.

…but “the majority were not”…

Let’s round this back to PEOPLE, here, not animals. Just so I don’t blow my lid off.

The so-called “majority” of those who did not question slavery were white, cisgender, heterosexual males who believed anyone who wasn’t white nor a penis-owner was sub-human, unintelligent, and incapable of making rational decisions of their own volition.

That included women, the handicapped, and any person who wasn’t white Caucasian.

Then again, this is completely wrong. Many people (white males) questioned slavery, and many lives were lost during a war called the American Civil War (you’ve probably heard of it, if you took World History of the Americas) that ended in 1865 because those who fought for the Union wanted slavery to end and be made illegal—and free thousands of slaves.

This, still has nothing to do with animal agriculture. At all.

…(I only say this to clarify that it is not a valid argument)…

Lol, no shit Sherlock.

It’s a shit argument. When you look at the wars fought and the legislation created to recognize that people of colour were PEOPLE, aka HUMANS, and not merely dumb animals, you can say that the majority of people more than just questioned slavery; they acted to abolish it.

But, I’ll say it again: The slavery argument, when applied to animals, is absolute bullshit.

Animals are not enslaved. Cows are not enslaved.

And drawing parallels between the oppression of women, black people, indigenous cultures and other ethnic groups to fucking livestock is disgusting and beyond atrocious. Shit like that pisses me off to no end.

Part Five: Fifth Sentence

The relationship with the first comment is that in many farms (especially industrial) the mothers are artificially pregnant so that they produce a lot of milk (by artificial selection for centuries, similar to sheep wool) and their offspring are fed separately, although it will vary. According to the farm.

Ripping Apart Fifth Sentence: My Responses

I’m glad she dropped the slavery horseshit.

She was answering the question that I posed in the screenshot above about what bottle-feeding calves had to do with concerns about their ultimate demise/purpose.

And I’ll say this: her answer doesn’t really answer my question.

I’ll respect that she at least tried, but I’m not satisfied with her answer.

…in many farms (especially industrial) the mothers are artificially pregnant…

There’s no such thing as “artificial pregnancy.” This nonsensical term bears no relevance nor meaning to the realities of raising animals for food.

Either a cow is pregnant or she’s not. There’s no artificial…. natural… whatever you want to call it about it.

Artificially bred, yes. That’s another term for artificial insemination (AI), where the human takes the collected bull semen and deposits it in the cow’s uterus.

Many of you vegans have a HUGE problem with this, you call it rape, forcible impregnation and so on. What you guys don’t understand is that it’s not forcible by any means: being forcible is hurting the cow, and no AI tech wants to lose their job over that. It’s also much gentler on the cow compared with a bull. Bulls are big and can hurt cows and break hips and legs. They’re rough, too, and they’ll wreck fences and other things when bored. They’ll also fight each other over nothing.

Dairy bulls are especially dangerous to handle. Many of you who see cows as nothing more than “cute grass puppies” have no idea how terrifying and life-threatening those animals are. No clue. AI takes the bull out of the farm and also removes the massive safety risk they impose.

But artificial pregnancy? Come on, now. That’s really reaching, there.

…so that they produce a lot of milk…

This is false correlation by causation. And a common myth I intend to write about in the future.

A cow’s pregnancy does not relate to her producing milk. Making a cow pregnant does not make her make milk.

A cow will be pregnant and not make milk. Just as a cow can be pregnant and still produce milk.

Correlation does not equal causation.

There are only two ways to get a cow to produce milk:

1. Giving birth: Birthing stimulates a cow (and any female mammal) to begin making milk. This is so that there’s a highly nutritious food source immediately available for the defenceless, near-helpless newborn.
2. Stimulation of the mammary glands: Regular stimulation by massaging the teats encourages the release of oxytocin in the hypothalamus of the pituitary gland, which stimulates milk production. Regular collection of milk also stimulates continued milk production because the body thinks there’s a supply to be satisfied, regardless of who or what the collector may be.

Cows can get pregnant when they’re still producing milk. They can get pregnant when they’re not. Cows can also produce milk when they’re not pregnant.

Pregnancy, therefore, does not determine whether a cow can make milk or not. Pregnancy only assures that the cow will eventually produce milk when it ends (birth), even if she’s still producing now.

Dairy cows get a two-month break from milking when they are in their “third trimester” or two months away from calving. They stop producing milk. They can take the time to gain some weight and put their energy into growing a healthy calf. And, when it’s time for them to calve, they can make colostrum for their first calf so that it gets the important immunoglobins and antibodies it needs as it starts to develop its immune system.

Make sense?

Bloody hope so.

…(by artificial selection for centuries, similar to sheep wool)…

True.

…and their offspring are fed separately…

Also true, but this still doesn’t answer the relevancy of what I initially asked.

Yes, dairy calves are fed separately for the reasons we discussed above.

However, you implied that bottle calves were being grown to be killed and that if they weren’t raised on the bottle and raised by their dam instead, they weren’t going to be grown to be killed.

As I stated above, I asked for the relevancy because it made zero sense. I don’t see its relevance at all.

Whether those calves are raised on the bottle or not makes zero difference in whether they’re going to be kept back as future cows or fattened up for the freezer.

Millions of heifer calves that are raised on the bottle become future cows. Many eventually become meat instead. Almost all, as adults and when they’ve lived their lives to the fullest extent as dairy cows, will become food for pets and humans.

As I said above, there’s nothing wrong with any of that.

FINALLY, THE LAST SENTENCE!!

Holy smokes, this was a BOOK to write!! We end this big wall of text and words with this sentence.

Again, don’t be mad, this is just a conversation between strangers on Reddit. Sorry for my mid english

Well, you bringing up the slavery argument got under my skin, I’ll admit that. And a lot of your arguments were pretty nonsensical and rather stupid—a few I found to be untrue by a quick Google search.

I’m glad your comment got deleted by the mods because I would’ve had to write about as long a response as I did here. You wrote a BIG wall of text that was difficult to sift through. I had to break it apart piece by piece even to make much sense of it, and even then, that was a challenge!

I don’t see this conversation going further than what it already had on Reddit.

You’ve been long forgiven for your bad English. But not for the fallacies and half-truths you put forth. Then again, since you’re all that knowledgeable about cows and have a lot to learn… maybe I can give you some leeway.

Conclusions

So, I apologize that this was a very, very, VERY long read.

But there was so much to cover that I couldn’t break this up into different posts. It had to be kept in one post.

It’s plain that people like this young lady (from wherever in the world she lives) think they know what they know, but when they reveal it in an argument, they don’t know all that much.

I was harsh on her in some places, yes. I had my reasons, despite her English not being that great. I was harsh because she was repeating a lot of arguments that other militant activists have made before, ridiculously irrelevant arguments like slavery and artificial breeding is evil.

You’ll also note that this had almost nothing to do with the OP’s bottle-feeding calves, but rather the ethics of raising dairy cows and the fact that they’re about as smart as my two cats or someone’s pet pooch.

I don’t deny that cattle are intelligent. But just because they’re sentient doesn’t make them sapient. And it doesn’t remove them from the supper menu.

Eat beef. Enjoy it.

I sure will.

God bless.

~Karin