His uncle was needlessly harming and exploiting those animals for his own profits. It's literally inherently part of the business he chose to run.

What does identity politics have anything to do with that?

Am I also playing into identity politics by saying a Bus driver drives buses?

I think you're confusing job title with identity politics bud.

Because there is no debate to be had.

Sorry not sorry it offended your fragile ego to discover abusing and exploiting animals is not necessary. Simple facts do not concern themselves with the 'debates' of fragile egos.

edit: I love how you also refused to answer the most simple of questions in this thread (posed by different users) which would reveal whether or not those cows were treated well. Keep trying to convince yourself though.

> You don't think grazing animals in the wild aren't pregnant every year

How does this justify forcefully inseminating them (aka raping them) as a human?

> You have no room for gray in your black and white world.

Correct. I will not compromise when it comes to needlessly violently exploiting and abusing innocent animals for pleasure. There is no room for that form of 'grey' in my world.

Abusing and exploiting animals for pleasure is not necessary. This is a simple fact that also does not concern itself with making room for "gray".

> This is why you get kickback from society.

Nope. It's because these simple facts challenge consumer behaviors and pleasures that people's egos are attached to.

Exposure to this information over time will weaken the ego so these people can accept these simple facts and this trend is already observable on this platform. There is far less "kickback" from society the more educated society becomes on this topic and the information is spreadsing. The same exact dynamic also played out for the public's perception of cannabis. The masses were propagandized against it for ages and also "kickbacked" in the face of simple facts on the topic. Facts are facts, however. The ego can only try to block out facts for so long before eventually realizing the fact wasn't ever the problem, but the ego's attachment to the topic at hand.

> its not surprising if your version doesn’t have a sense of authenticity.

Right, because exploitation and abuse aren't inherently part of the dairy industry.

No wait, those industries would not exist if not for the exploitation and abuse.

It should not be surprising that animals would become defensive over their children in such industries.

What happened to all the male cows who could not produce milk?

How did cows become pregnant in the first place?

You can claim and shout that they weren't abused all you like if that helps convince yourself. Abuse is inherent in the industry.

edit: Notice how this user refused to answer any of these very simple questions while continuing to shout "iTz nOt AbUsE!".

Yep, very convincing.

He ran a dairy farm (where calves are taken from the parents and the cows are exploited and abused) yet he has the nerve to call the cows the assholes for becoming more hostile and aggressive over protecting their calves...

> I see the vegans are down voting

Sure, make this about identity politics rather than facing the fact that he was needlessly exploiting and harming animals.

In that industry, their calves are taken from them and you even specified that the cows were 'assholes' more so when they had calves.

I wonder why your uncle was nearly stomped to death and why these cows were becoming more hostile and aggressive after having calves in an industry where those calves are taken from them for further exploitation and abuse. 🤔