Most oral estrogen contains lactose which means buying it is extremely immoral. Cows are literally raped / artificially inseminated, separated from their children and supporting the dairy industry is supporting the veal industry. >ESTRACE tablets, 0.5 mg, contain 0.5 mg estradiol and the following inactive ingredients: acacia, dibasic calcium phosphate, lactose, magnesium stearate
>>43930941Anon imma keep it real I think there are bigger moral problems to tackle in the world over the use of a single filler ingredient in some estrogen pills
>>43930941This can relooked at as favorable
>>43930952That’s such a terrible response.I could easily say trans rights are a literal drop in the ocean compared to wild animal suffering and all money donated to transgenders instead of charities like against malaria foundation (save human lives = more humans = less wild insects = most wild insects live mostly bad lives = less wild animal suffering) or vegan charities is a waste of money
>>43930941trve but this better reserved for the hondosers on reddit. most of the mtfs here are doing injections it seems.
>>43931049I am pretty sure I will be banned
>>43930941I wish I was a cow who was literally raped.
>>43930941Yeah caring about cows is easier than caring about all the young boys with promising futures who get “encouraged” to waste their lives on a sexual lifestyle, often ending in suicide.
>>43931076Most of us don't have promising futures. We work as waitresses, or maybe cosmetology, beauty operators at best learning stuff.
>>43931036Wild animals, cows?.\Are human made. Which cannot even think for themselves , animals, just meat on a stick.
>>43931147babies and severely mentally handicapped humans can’t reason.The Cambridge declaration of consciousness and New York update to it says all birds and mammals are definitely conscious and insects might be
https://www.reddit.com/r/MtF/comments/1u7yuva/comment/os46wtw/?screen_view_count=7>You're currently banned from this community and can't comment on posts.
Who cares
>>43931252The trait namer expresses that the trait is his or her own personal pleasure, preference, or effectively whim: that he or she prefers it or it pleases him or her to eat animals but not to eat humans.Personal whim is absurd already as a moral claim (as an extreme form of relativism), but to clarify it further and demonstrate why you can ask if this person believes him or herself to be a god. If not, ask if the morality or immorality based on this trait which refers to things he or she arbitrarily likes only apply to him?If the former is true and the person is asserting divinity via the belief that he or she alone dictates morality for the universe based on personal whim, then regarding the absurdity: QED.If the latter and it's only personally applicable, ask if it's moral for another person to eat people if that person it's pleased by them/has a preference to do so. If yes, again, QED. If no, that's a contradiction given the above -- e.g. this person does believe himself to be some kind of god dictating morality for the entire universe based on his personal whim. This just comes down to the same criticisms you can find of confused advocates of relativism.https://philosophicalvegan.com/wiki/index.php/NameTheTrait
