89technical

Would you do this? And if so, why? No grown adult needs milk especially not from another sepcies... 🍼 🐄

the ultimate solution is through technology we engineer what has been called a bodyoid: brainless animal bodies that provide as much meat as we desire without harming any sentient beings this would transform medicine - the same platform would allow us to grow organs on demand, eliminate transplant waiting lists, and produce perfectly matched tissues for each patient experimental therapies could be tested on full biological systems without involving conscious animals, regenerative medicine would accelerate as entire replacement tissues become manufacturable in the same way that agriculture turned food from a scarce resource into an abundant one, engineered bodyoids would turn biological material into infrastructure - meat without slaughter, organs without donors, and medical research without sentient suffering

Bulls are tied & raped to steal their semen. The semen is then used to rape & forcibly impregnate the women. She is tied to a rack & violated. Upon giving birth, her beloved baby is kidnapped from her so that they can violate her breasts, & now also the baby. It ends with murder.

British wool production reached approximately 70 million kilograms per year in the early 20th century. The British Wool Marketing Board, established in 1950, guaranteed a price floor for clip wool. For decades, sheep farmers received a meaningful return on their fleece. Then polyester arrived. Then nylon. Then acrylic. Then all the petroleum-derived fibres that could be produced at industrial scale for prices that wool could not compete with. By 2023, the average price paid for British wool clip was approximately 30 pence per kilogram. The cost of shearing is approximately £1.50 per sheep. The farmer pays to remove the wool. The wool does not cover the cost of its own removal. The farmer shears because an unshorn sheep suffers: flystrike, overheating, wool blindness, not because the wool has value. The wool that clothed England for six centuries, that built the Cotswolds, that paid for the Woolsack, that financed the medieval Church's building programme: is now a disposal problem. A byproduct so devalued that it costs the farmer money. Meanwhile, the fleece jacket you are wearing is shedding approximately 1,700 plastic microfibres per wash into the water system. The plastic fibre replaced the wool fibre. The plastic fibre is in the fish. The wool fibre would have biodegraded. The wool fibre was made by a sheep in a Cumbrian field and it cost 30 pence. The plastic fibre was made from petroleum and it is in your bloodstream. We chose this. We chose this specifically.

THE SHIT TEST OF FEMINISM Feminism is a problem. Many men are fed up being vilified as a toxic menace. Our powerful sex drive assaults women. Our fraternal spaces exclude them from their rights. Our direct communication silences their voices. Our ambition for greatness keeps them disenfranchised. Our love of feminine domesticity enslaves them. Our admiration for the heroes of the past idolizes their oppressors. It’s futile to argue. Resistance just dials the hate up to eleven. We’re called horrible names, assigned the most wicked motivations, and imputed with the worst crimes of history. Some men fight on and even get baited into genuinely hating women. Other men try agreeing with them only to be patronized as useful idiots. Most men do their best to mind their own business. So what should we do? Dating coaches talk a lot about passing female “shit tests.” When a guy in a bar approaches a woman, she often starts saying things to throw him off his game. This is actually a sign that she wants to see what kind of man he is. He fails by being an apologetic pushover. He fails by getting angry and argumentative. He passes by showing unthreatened and gregarious confidence. Her: “Why are you wearing that ugly shirt?” Him: “Because otherwise I get too much attention from women.” These tests aren’t shallow. If he fawns over her, he’s manipulatable by others. If he’s flustered by her, he won’t stand up to an actual threat. The more confident she feels in him, the more feminine and relaxed she will be able to be around him. She’s testing the strength of a board before standing on it. The ugly man-hating side of feminism is a society-level shit test. For all the “you go girl” bluster, most women feel acutely their own sexual vulnerability. They are terrified of being adrift, stuck in abusive situations, not able to pursue their passions or their dreams, or left without support for themselves and their children. And so they push against us hard. Do we have a better offer than what the spirit of the age has on tap? Like the man in the bar, the sweet spot for men in society is to be strong, confident, and cheerful. We can’t give in to unhinged demands or narratives and become “male feminists.” We gotta be unapologetic about our sex drive, dedicated to male fraternity, direct in communication, ambitious for greatness, attracted to femininity, and devoted to heroes of the past. Let’s engage them from a posture of strength. But we can’t get baited into playing the part of woman-hating thugs or disengaged statues. Listening with curiosity is powerful, and it doesn’t require sacrificing our convictions at all. Are there legit concerns that no one is attending to, making them susceptible to being exploited by a hate movement? Are there win-wins that haven’t been explored? We’re men; we’re problem solvers! Bring it on. Her: “Men oppress women, just like they always have throughout history.” Him: “What shall I oppress you with off the menu tonight?” Feminism is a shit test to pass, not an enemy to destroy.

sometimes I think about these posts and what peeves me most is that you can theoretically excuse calling Viktor ugly, malnourished, rotting, a corpse etc, with a thin reasoning of "well it's in canon/my opinion". but calling him stunted is such a pure cruel unfiltered ableism