• commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    three mentions across 2 paragraphs. all of the mentions imply that consent would somehow relieve accusations of exploitation, but that isn’t established in your article for a certainty, and at best i’d say it’s debatable. i don’t care to debate about it. it’s clear that the vulgar use of the term is unrelated entirely.

    • enkers
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      Your assertion was that consent isn’t at all relevant to veganism in regards to exploitation. However, if there exist situations in which consent could relieve the existence of exploitation then it must be relevant to consider.

      Also, not that it matters, but there are 10 mentions if you also search for “consensual”, but that’s not really here nor there.

      If you don’t wish to debate, you’re free to not respond at any time.

      • commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        Your assertion was that consent isn’t at all relevant to veganism in regards to exploitation. However, if there exist situations in which consent could relieve the existence of exploitation then it must be relevant to consider.

        it’s not clear that the vegan society would allow for any exploitation, consensual or otherwise, and to the extent that sometimes people consent to being exploited, there is no reason to believe that exploitation ceases to exist in those cases.