Be careful not to let the fact that there's so much to be angry about regarding animal abuse turn you into a fundamentally angry person.
Conversation
Replying to
1
Replying to
to me, the weird claim is the idea that people get more rational and compassionate when the harm and advocacy are intermediated
1
Replying to
they get less so, which is precisely why the advocates have to turn it around I think.
2
Replying to
people will have decency to feel guilt/shame when an actual victim rages verbally at them.
2
Replying to
But shock tactics like graphic images of torture in factory farms just drive people more firmly into denial and "it's just food."
2
Replying to
I’m not saying that more anger is the right tactic at all, but the question is whether dRights/dAdvocateAnger is + or -
1
Replying to
angry advocate = people judging "it's not really about animals, she's projecting, it's about her own issues."
1
Replying to
The problem with intermediary anger is that it opens up ambiguity of intermediary motives.
1
Show replies


