[true-misanthropy]

People enraged by sports and video games are ignorant to the societal issues they should be angry about. Frankly, I wish I was one of those people.

[true-misanthropy]

I feel like you would like the book Straw Dogs by John Gray just from the gist i get from your posts xx

Thanks — I just skimmed a review and it sounds like a book I’d be interested in. If any other followers want to check it out, this is the review I read.

[misanthrometheus]

rude things people do:

breathe

borrow books & not return them

assume that others are not also busy

ask to use a pen/lighter then try to keep it

kill insects simply because they are insects

not put things in your hand when your hand is already out

try to make fleeting, insignificant emotions seem significant

not ask for something, then when it’s gone say “you should have offered”

not realize that the horrible void of existence is under no obligation to be kind, fair, just, or beautiful

[true-misanthropy]

Underline, italicise and embolden fifth and last points. 

[true-misanthropy]

Before I begin, let me first note that I think all forms of racism, sexism, homophobia, ableism, etc. are disgusting, and I don't understand how humanity expects to thrive while it keeps insisting that people of a certain race, gender, sexuality or disability are "lower-class".

What I want to discuss is humanity (and SJW in particular)'s ridiculous disregard of speciesism. 

Would you not assume that someone obsessed with equal rights in society would also be obsessed with the rights of animals? I would.

Unfortunately, it is the belief of many so-called "social justice warriors" that animals are not a part of society and do not deserve to be treated with a speck of respect or compassion.

Why is this? Well, I believe it to be the same reason for the disregard of racism, sexism, homophobia and ableism that existed a century ago: tradition. Social justice warriors declare themselves to be more open-minded than their grandparents, more respectful of others and more accepting of change. So why, then, are they so close-minded, disrespectful and outraged by change when it comes to the way we treat animals?

Hypocrisy is the answer. While they have achieved the open-mindedness to accept racism, sexism, homophobia and ableism as terrible and very real things, they refuse to accept that speciesism is the same, if not worse. They refuse to believe their grandparents' notions of sexism, but agree with them on topics of speciesism. 

I believe this is because many of these so-called "social justice warriors" are not as open-minded as they think. They have realised that racism, sexism, homophobia and ableism are wrong through the teachings of tumblr, but they haven't been taught how wrong speciesism is and can't see it without having their eyes opened for them.

Others, of course, know plenty about the cruelties of animal testing and farming but refuse to stop buying their favourite make-up and animal products because they're selfish and, in my view, the worst kind of human scum.

As for those who are uninformed, that's where we come in. Tumblr hasn't taught the uninformed enough about animal rights, and many times, games of the selfish people mentioned above such as "spot the vegan" come first and turn neutral ignorance into anti-veganism. 

We need to get there first. We need more posts detailing the benefits of veganism, the horrors of farming and animal testing, and the logic behind every point. Tumblr has made an impact on millions of people regarding racism, sexism, homophobia and ableism, and now it's speciesism's turn. 

So speak out. Use your knowledge of what happens at dairy farms, the vegan-suited anatomy of the human body, the horrors of animal testing and the rejection of breeders to inform those who are neutrally ignorant. Inform them before "spot the vegan", "we're omnivores" and "animal testing is a benefit to society" gets there first. 

[vegan-yums]

*~Creamy Vegan Pasta~*

Creamy Vegan Garlic Pasta with Roasted Tomatoes

Vegan Green Chili Mac & Cheese

Easy Vegan Creamy Pasta with Kale

Vegan stuffed shells

Vegan Alfredo

Alfredo with roasted asparagus

Creamy Vegan Butternut Squash Linguine with Fried Sage

Avocado pasta with arugula and tomatoes

[a-new-human-race]

True-misanthropy

I was wondering if you’d help me run this blog - I could add you as a member since it’s secondary.

I understand completely why you do not allow asks. I’d rather avoid human contact too. But you seem to understand my views perfectly and never have I met someone as similar as myself - I finally feel like I am not the only one that isn’t human and has a high amount of intelligence.

I would like to meet you. I have met so many that say that “They hate humans” and end up being the disgusting race themselves. There’s types of human. So many categories and each one is horrible in it’s own way. But I finally have different vibes with you.

[true-misanthropy]

(Apologies, the reply box was too short so I had to reblog.)

I don't think we're entirely on the same page with our views. Although I think your idea of bringing down humanity and creating a more open-minded and careful species of human is excellent, I do not believe myself to be inhuman.

A few years ago, I would have. I thought that just because I had these views, I was better than everybody else.

Since then, however, I have come to realise that although I am vegan and as open-minded towards other species as I can be, I still contribute to the survival of humanity and the oppression of other species. I am a consumer; I pay for things and therefore support human jobs. I work with animals but end up helping people anyway -- fixing up their pets, taking in and healing wildlife to spare their guilt...

And above all, I'm too much of a coward to take my own life and decrease the human population by one. Every little helps, but I simply can't do it.

These are my "sins", I suppose, and they forbid me from being better than other humans. I hate humanity more than even I can comprehend, but I hate myself just as much -- no matter how powerful my hatred, I am and will always be one of them.

Depressing excuses aside, I'd love to help with your blog. Unfortunately, I tend to be rather inactive and just make posts when the inspiration comes, but I'm willing to help out as much as I can if you want me to.

[planetariiums]

people who say “you care about animals more than people” as though it’s an insult

[true-misanthropy]

Everyone mocks nihilism, but when you actually think about it, nihilists are the only people who are actually aware of the weakness of humanity's "moral code". Morals are fabricated and designed to suit individual people. Some think murder is wrong, others don't. Ethical beliefs are just personal preferences, not rules set down by the King of the Universe -- unless you're religious, in which case I suppose this post is just for atheists. 

While you're reading this, you're probably thinking, "That's ridiculous. Of course murder is wrong." but who told you to believe that? Just the society you live in. Animals don't generally murder others of their own species because it's counterproductive, not because their "morals" tell them not to.

True, some "morals" help us to create a better world, but who are we to determine what is "right" and what is "wrong"? Who are you to tell me what I believe is wrong when both your morals and mine are simply personal preferences? You think murder is wrong because society told you, I think the solution to Earth's problems is the mass extinction of humanity because I can't see any other way. What makes my views wrong and yours right? Nothing. 

Nihilism is above the petty squabbles of "who's right and who's wrong?" because nihilists have acknowledged the fact that morals are simply personal views, while the rest of society insists that their morals are the correct ones to have and that everyone else is wrong. 

For this reason, despite nihilism's negative connotations, it is actually a more informed view on the world. Most people don't know that "right" and "wrong" aren't real things.

[true-misanthropy]

Tumblr likes to tell people that they don't owe the world anything. Tumblr likes to tell people that the idea of owing the world is capitalist garbage, but they're wrong. 

Of course, capitalism wants you to work from the day you're born, that's totally true, but you do owe the world for existing. Every human on the planet owes the world so much that they can never pay up. We all contribute to pollution, unnecessary slaughter and hatred in one form or another, and we all owe the world big time for our existence. We kill, destroy and create harmful things for the benefit of ourselves alone. We owe the world endlessly for all the death and pollution we've diseased it with.

Tumblr likes to tell people that they owe the world nothing to make them feel better, but I'm afraid your feelings do not come first when discussing your debt to the planet. We do owe the world, and eventually, we'll have to pay up.

[kady-xvx]

This is Cassie at Maple Farm Sanctuary her story Is one I can personally relate to and this is for everyone who thinks that cows are just dumb animals with no intense emotions. Cassie was rescued after escaping from a slaughterhouse, She jumped a 6 foot fence to escape her death! Once she was brought to maple farm sanctuary, it became apparent there was something different about Cassie. She was constantly in fear, Every time she was coaxed out to the paddocks with the other cows, she would bolt and jump fences to get away. She has been diagnosed with agoraphobia and extreme anxiety disorder, with post traumatic stress disorder. As with humans with depression/anxiety they tried medication on Cassie, but it seemed to make her symptoms worse, so she now lives in the comfort of her barn at maple farm sanctuary.  I do not want to imagine what happened to Cassie before she escaped that slaughterhouse, but I’m so glad she’s safe at Maple Farm. This is the extreme emotional trauma that happens to cows in the meat/dairy industry… although you never hear about it because the victims are all killed. Please go vegan for Cassie and every animal out there who is abused and killed every single second of every single day.

[xhummicide666x]

this is such an important post

[true-misanthropy]

Another sickening word frequently used by the human race in a completely inaccurate context is “animal”. 

People describe disorderly, violent, disgusting, evil or criminal people as “animals”. I’ll never understand this. Animals are innocent. No animal has ever killed for sadistic pleasure, no animal has ever been “evil”, and no animal has ever knowingly committed a crime. Animals do nothing but what their instincts tell them to. The only instances in which an animal is aggressive towards a human are caused by either hunger or provoking. Most animals will not attack you for entering their territories, most animals will not attack you if they are well-fed, and no animal in the world will attack you for the pleasure of seeing you die.

So why, then, do humans always refer to people they disapprove of as “animals”? No human in the world is better than an animal, according to morality, which is usually the case when people are accused of being “animals”. Every human has done something sadistic, evil or murderously careless. We as humans are capable of morality, and therefore we are the only animals able to be evil and sadistic. 

Animals cannot be in any way morally wrong or “evil”, because they do nothing but what their instincts tell them to. 

So, next time you think of calling someone an “animal”, think twice. They’re not an animal, they’re disgusting. 

[lnannibal]

The term ‘animal’ to refer to ‘disorderly, violent, disgusting, evil or criminal' people or acts comes from the theological concept of carnality.

"Carnal car·nal [kahr-nl] adjective 1. pertaining to or characterized by the flesh or the body, its passions and appetites; sensual: carnal pleasures. 2. not spiritual; merely human; temporal; worldly: a man of secular, rather carnal, leanings.

bodily, lustful, lecherous, lascivious, libidinous, concupiscent. Carnal, sensual, fleshly, animal all refer to bodily rather than rational or spiritual aspects of humans. Carnal although it may refer to the body as opposed to the spirit, often refers to sexual needs or urges: carnal cravings, attractions, satisfactions. Sensual implies a suggestion of eroticism: sensual eyes; a sensual dance;  it may also refer to experience of the senses: a sensual delight. Fleshly may refer to any physical need or appetite, sex as well as hunger and thirst: the fleshly sin of gluttony; fleshly yearnings. Animal refers to sexual appetites in a censorious way only; it may also describe pleasing or admirable physical characteristics or appearance: animal lust; to move with animal grace. 2. earthly, natural.”

It comes from the expectation of humans to live up to a universal moral code which in theological belief is superior to that of animals because it’s believed (especially in the Abrahamic religions) that humans are the only life-form which have souls, therefore can distinguish right from wrong and have the capacity to adhere to a prescribed moral law. Non-naturalism.

This means abstaining from desires which specifically pleasure your senses, your body, your material conditions, and outbursts of destructiveness (such as the acts of violence you were referring to) which according to theistic moral law are bad because they are desires of physical, ‘worldly’ origins, rather than ‘spiritual’ and pertaining to God.

OP, "Animals cannot be in any way morally wrong or “evil”, because they do nothing but what their instincts tell them to." Are you a theist? because you seem to separate human from animal along the lines of moralistic principles despite humans being merely another organic sentient species walking the planet.

If God, souls, and all that supernatural crap stuff does not exist, and it’s just us alone in the natural universe, then who’s to say that humans also do not but what our evolutionary instinct tells us? whether these instincts be altrusitic or barbarous.

But here is a conundrum: If atheism is correct, what is right and wrong? Is there even such thing? Metaethics studies the macro concept of morality with scientific/non-theistic bias, if you are interested in learning more.

(I am not a moral nihilist, but it’s certainly interesting to study)

[true-misanthropy]

I believe that animals do not have the capacity of morality in that they do not know anything more than their instincts. I am not a theist, and don't believe in "souls", but the term is simply used to mean "conscience" in all cultures, which I do believe in.  I have never seen nor heard of an animal attacking another simply because it wants to see it die. There is always a cause, be it illness, hunger or provocation. Humans frequently do things for sadistic pleasure, and it is everyone's belief that humans are of a "higher level" of intelligence than the other organisms on Earth. This "higher level" is conscience -- the capability of creating and "understanding" right from wrong. Since we are capable of this and I believe animals are not, only humans can be "evil", because only we understand that we are doing "wrong" when we are sadistic.

Referring to your point on carnality, that still does not explain why nor how animalistic behaviours are more vile than human ones. Both animals and humans have bodily urges, but animals do not have bodily urges to kill for pleasure. Humans do, because humans are capable of sadism. Bodily urges are not wrong, but sadistic ones are, and only humans are capable of that.

Of course it is not my place to say what is "wrong" or "right", but neither is it any human's. Morality is based on personal views, but I think every creature on the Earth, were it able to understand humanity's crimes, would agree that what humans are doing is wrong. 

Humans do not simply do what instincts tell them to because we are capable of free will and conscience. Since we can tell "right" from "wrong", this gives us the ability to choose what we do. Our instincts do not guide us in the way animal ones do. They are still there, of course, but no sane human's instinct tells them to kill for pleasure, and we do it anyway. 

As far as we can tell, animals do nothing but follow their instincts. They can learn and choose to take different routes, of course, -- animals are not stupid -- but in the end, the different routes are just means of obtaining food or a mate. No animal goes out of its instinct's calling to do something for "fun". Captive animals perform for food or out of fear, and wild animals hide, kill, eat and breed for survival purposes only. Their instincts tell them to pass on their genes. Human instincts say the same thing, but people choose not to have children. No animal makes a conscious decision to avoid breeding. 

Your first paragraph does bring me back to my original point, though. If "animal" is used to mean "non-spiritual", why do people believe that they are "spiritual" and "good"? As I originally stated, humans are anything but good. We are not spiritually kind because we destroy, we kill, and we torture for sadistic purposes alone. Sure, there are "nice" humans, but every human has done something sadistic or purposelessly destructive in their life, and people tend not to go out of their way to be kind, but they often go out of their way to be cruel.

Surely instinctual, animalistic behaviour is better than "spiritualism", if that is what it entails.

[true-misanthropy]

Another sickening word frequently used by the human race in a completely inaccurate context is "animal". 

People describe disorderly, violent, disgusting, evil or criminal people as "animals". I'll never understand this. Animals are innocent. No animal has ever killed for sadistic pleasure, no animal has ever been "evil", and no animal has ever knowingly committed a crime. Animals do nothing but what their instincts tell them to. The only instances in which an animal is aggressive towards a human are caused by either hunger or provoking. Most animals will not attack you for entering their territories, most animals will not attack you if they are well-fed, and no animal in the world will attack you for the pleasure of seeing you die.

So why, then, do humans always refer to people they disapprove of as "animals"? No human in the world is better than an animal, according to morality, which is usually the case when people are accused of being "animals". Every human has done something sadistic, evil or murderously careless. We as humans are capable of morality, and therefore we are the only animals able to be evil and sadistic. 

Animals cannot be in any way morally wrong or "evil", because they do nothing but what their instincts tell them to. 

So, next time you think of calling someone an "animal", think twice. They're not an animal, they're disgusting. 

[vegan-art]

"Babycakes"  |  Neil Gaiman & Jouni Koponen

[melancholymoose-deactivated2014]

[a-new-human-race]

2 weeks ago:

Now:

This tells us two things;

Firstly. The facts. The human race grows over an average of 8 million a month.That’s 96 million a year. Every decade the human population grows on average 960 million. Nearly 1 billion. A decade. That’s 100 billion more humans in a century.

The Earth is going to be destroyed. But this time it’s not meteors… it’s humans. They’re the viruses. And soon, once every natural resource is consumed. They’ll start consuming themselves. And this time, I’m not sure if the Earth will even continue once humans are done. It’ll be nothing but machines, buildings and pollution.

The Earth will crumble and die… in probably two or three centuries.

If us mammals never evolved… everything would be as it were. Balanced. Peaceful. Beautiful.

…God help us. What have we done?

[true-misanthropy]

This is disgusting.

[lordpudi]

YOU DONT FUCKING SAY

[planetariiums]

I can do nothing but laugh when people try to combine ethics and animal testing. Those two things inherently repel each other and always will.

[true-misanthropy]

I absolutely agree. You're no "social justice warrior" if your "social justice" does not include animal rights. Animals are a part of society whether you like it or not. 

[true-misanthropy]

Humans believe themselves to be more important than every other species on the planet, and the reason for this escapes me. 

The truth of the matter is that humans are the least important species on the planet. Not only do we pollute, slaughter and rob the Earth and its inhabitants; we are not even part of a real ecosystem. We have no purpose.

Humans farm animals and crops rather than hunting or scavenging. We do not regulate animal or plant populations in any real food chain because we cage off our unnatural food sources from other creatures. We breed animals and plants into confined spaces so that we may regulate the numbers and feed ourselves without having to worry about other animals taking their share of the produce. Humans are not part of a real ecosystem and are therefore unnecessary; humanity has no purpose on Earth, no reason to exist, and no reason to continue hindering the lives of other organisms on the planet. 

Contrastingly, most flies help with not only the regulation of other fly populations, but the break-down of waste substances such as rotten foods and faeces. This allows the Earth to reuse the minerals and allow new plants to grow. Flies that eat nectar also help with the pollination of plants.

Hypocritically, humans like to think of flies as "worthless pests" that should be killed on sight.

Humans are worse than that, then, for they are of far less use to the planet than flies.