TeeHee The "empathetic gender" doing not-so-empathetic things. Animal torturers are lowest scum of this universe. Simp/white knight nightmare thread.

[SlutLiberationFront]

Wow they are called the empathetic gender!!!! Almost like they were not the same as vile men... oh yeah, they actually are.

Let's see some actions by the empathetic gender that shows how empathetic they can be.

---

Girl arrested after posting sick films of herself 'torturing and killing animals'

A TEENAGE girl has been arrested for torturing and killing cats and dogs with her friend and then posting footage of their reign of terror online. Alina Orlova, 17, was arrested on the far eastern …

www.thesun.co.uk

---

Teen girl arrested for ‘torturing and killing animals and posting video online'

WARNING GRAPHIC CONTENT: Alina Orlova, 17, and a pal are accused of torturing and killing cats and dogs for "bloodlust"

www.dailyrecord.co.uk

---

Teenage girls in shocking animal abuse and mutilation case are charged with cruelty

Students and male 'accomplice' to face justice accused of torturing and killing dogs and cats, posting pictures online, and other crimes.

siberiantimes.com

---

Indiana woman who shared videos of herself torturing, killing cats and dogs charged under federal PACT Act

An Indiana woman, who shared images and videos on social media that showed her torturing and graphically killing cats and dogs by hanging and skinning them, has been charged under the Preventing Animal Cruelty and

blog.humanesociety.org

---

Russia jails ‘sadistic’ teens who filmed themselves torturing, killing animals

The two filmed themselves torturing at least 15 animals including dogs and cats they got from shelters and small ads.

www.hindustantimes.com

---

GRAPHIC CONTENT: Russian girls torturing and killing pets

HARROWING footage of two teenage girls boasting about torturing animals while abusing house pets has sparked fury.

www.express.co.uk

---

GRAPHIC: Snapchat video shows teen girls torturing kitten

A Wichita Falls teenager is now being held at the juvenile detention center after police say she tortured a kitten to death, while her friend recorded it all.

www.kron4.com

---

Kokomo woman accused torturing animals and posting videos on social media arrested by the FBI

A woman arrested during a raid by the Federal Bureau of Investigations on Tuesday is charged with extreme animal abuse and torture.

www.wrtv.com

---

Local woman arrested for allegedly torturing animals

A Kokomo woman whom officials say tortured and mutilated cats and dogs while filming the actions on social media was arrested Tuesday afternoon during a raid of her residence just

www.kokomotribune.com

---

Florida Today

Northeast Florida authorities say they’ve arrested two teenage girls seen in videos posted online lighting a threatened gopher tortoise on fire and stomping it to death.

www.floridatoday.com

---

Woman seen torturing, killing cats and dogs on social media arrested in Indiana

Krystal Cherika Scott, 19, was arrested and charged with two counts of making and distributing "animal crush videos."

www.ktvb.com

---

VIDEO: Texas teen live streams putting dog in dryer

LEWISVILLE, Texas (KVTV) - A disturbing video shows a Texas teenager putting a small dog into a dryer and then turning it on and laughing. The girl livestreamed her actions on social media. We must warn you that some viewers might find the following video unsettling. BHDN_SE-003TU_TX_ TEEN...

katv.com

---

Florida teen tortured and killed neighbor's cat, deputies say

A 13-year-old boy is accused of torturing his neighbor's cat to death in Central Florida. The Marion County Sheriff's Office arrested the teen on charges of aggravated animal cruelty and petit theft. SEE ALSO: Woman's death from fentanyl and cocaine intoxication leads to indictment. The...

cbs12.com

---

Woman accused in animal torture told agents her 'good side loves cats and dogs'

Krystal Cherika Scott was arrested Tuesday on federal animal cruelty charges

www.wthr.com

---

Teen with history of torturing animals sentenced to prison for sexual assault, strangulation

www.strangulationtraininginstitute.com

---

Winston-Salem teen accused of torturing, killing animals facing more charges

FORSYTH COUNTY, N.C. (WGHP) — A Winston-Salem teen accused of animal cruelty is now facing more charges, according to a Forsyth County Sheriff’s Office news release. A tip submitted to Crimestopper…

www.wnct.com

---

Cat tortured and killed by Ocala 13-year-old, Sheriff's Office says

The Marion County Sheriff's Office says it has arrested and charged a 13-year-old for killing a neighbor's cat. The Sheriff's Office says the teen is charged with aggravated animal cruelty, which is a felony. The Sheriff's office says the teen told detectives he found a cat in the neighborhood...

mycbs4.com

---

Dayum, I don't think they look so empathetic now, do they? There are early teen girls listed there. Some start as young as 6 years old. Talk about "empathetic gender". As I've always said, there is no "empathetic" gender. Cruelty is embedded in nature and thus it is in humans as well. But again, we might perceive things as being "cruel" as we are sentient being with the capacity of complex thinking and empathy, which for animals in the wild, killing something else alive is just another day of survival, but it is not natural for humans as we are far move evolved than that due to ethics, we have the called "mirror neurons", which can gives us empathy and place us in whatever place or situation someone/something else might be, and clearly, many people lack it or completely turn it off somehow.

So no, there is no "empathetic gender" bullshit, fuck you and this whole planet altogether.

Animal abusers are the lowest scum of this planet and I would kill them with my bare hands if I could. Imagine being so much of a piece of shit you take your shit out on defenseless animals that have nothing to do with your shit. Maybe next time go try to do the same to a person that has nothing to lose like some MS-13 member and see how it goes for you. You will end up like all their victims, completely dismembered to thousands of pieces, no eyes, no internal organs, tongue, heart, anything. Easier to target the weak and defenseless, huh? Go take your shit out on a latin american gang or drug cartel next time if you feel so brave, strong and dominant, maybe you will make the famous FunkyTown Gore video v2 as the victim.

 

[Deleted member 37146]

Haven't read it, not gonna read it cause I have seen enough animal slaughter footage for a lifetime but I'd say it's based. It's the meme gender

 

[SlutLiberationFront]

Haven't read it, not gonna read it cause I have seen enough animal slaughter footage for a lifetime but I'd say it's based. It's the meme gender

These are just the reports, not the actual videos.

 

[trying to ascend]

I mean, we eat meat regularly, which is even worse than torturing animals, so I don't get why there is so much controversy around that

 

[SlutLiberationFront]

I mean, we eat meat regularly, which is even worse than torturing animals, so I don't get why there is so much controversy around that

There is a difference between killing animals for consumption such as in slaughterhouses and literally torturing them to death for "fun", likes and fame on social media. Maybe some of these girls want to have a talk to the Sinaloa Cartel to make a special appearance on their next live women dismemberment video like they did to that CJNG woman?
They deserve the same done to them.

 

[trying to ascend]

There is a difference between killing animals for consumptions such as in slaughterhouses and literally torturing them to death for "fun". Maybe some of these girls want to have a talk to the Sinaloa Cartel to make a special appearance on their next live women dismemberment video like they did to that CJNG woman?
They deserve the same done to them.

I see the first as worse, since you take their life away. Inflicting suffering would just be as bad as (or worse) death, if most people who were exposed to it prefered to be killed than to continue suffering, which doesn't happen.

If this intent mattered, then killing humans for consumption would be more moral than torturing them, which is not.

Nah, they don't. We do worse things to animals for our own pleasure (consumption) every day, so there's no point in pushing them because they cause them suffering (killing animals for their own pleasure) without punishing ourselves first

 

[SlutLiberationFront]

I see the first as worse, since you take their life away. Inflicting suffering would just be as bad as (or worse) death, if most people who were exposed to it prefered to be killed than to continue suffering, which doesn't happen.

If this intent mattered, then killing humans for consumption would be more moral than torturing them, which is not.

Nah, they don't. We do worse things to animals for our own pleasure (consumption) every day, so there's no point in pushing them because they cause them suffering (killing animals for their own pleasure) without punishing ourselves first

The point is, ethical slaughterhouses do it quickly and painlessly, and we NEED that food, meat is essential and without meat we wouldn't have evolved the same way. Doing it fast without pain and for a purpose, that is FOOD, as in a survival situation is infinitely more moral than just going around taking cats, dogs, turtoises, birds and such and just mindlessly inflicting suffering on them for no reason than for sadistic fun at the expense of the suffering of a defenseless animal that has nothing to do with their bullshit personal problems. If they want to take their shit out on then face go do it and prove they are dominant, I want to see how brave they are gonna be facing El Mencho sicarios or Mexican criminals or any other latin american criminal.
Taking it all out on defenseless animals is all too easy. There is a difference between food and senseless sadistic "fun" involving the suffering of a being that is inherently innocent to us just living their lives.
I woulnd't think twice before beating or even nearly killing anyone that mess with my cats.

 

[trying to ascend]

The point is, ethical slaughterhouses do it quickly and painlessly, and we NEED that food, meat is essential and without meat we wouldn't have evolved the same way. Doing it fast without pain and for a purpose, that is FOOD, as in a survival situation is infinitely more moral than just going around taking cats, dogs, turtoises, birds and such and just mindlessly inflicting suffering on them for no reason than for sadistic fun at the expense of the suffering of a defenseless animal that has nothing to do with their bullshit personal problems. If they want to take their shit out on then face go do it and prove they are dominant, I want to see how brave they are gonna be facing El Mencho sicarios or Mexican criminals or any other latin american criminal.
Taking it all out on defenseless animals is all too easy. There is a difference between food and senseless sadistic "fun" involving the suffering of a being that is inherently innocent to us just living their lives.
I woulnd't think twice before beating or even nearly killing anyone that mess with my cats.

We don't need meat, we can survive pretty fine without it. Also, it would be ethical for a hypothetical person who needs blood to suck your blood? Since without it, this person would die. Of course it wouldn't make it ethical, it's needs/intent don't make the action ethical.

Pain only matters in a utilitarian optic. If you can kill it, why can't you inflict pain on it? Since the first is far worse (hence why murder has a harsher sentence than physical assault).

If they needed to torture animals to live, would it be justified? According to your reasoning (ends justify the means), it would.

Animals would do the same to them if they were in a position of advantage. And yes, I know they don't know what they are doing, but that's why they shouldn't have rights in first place (and yes, disabled people should, since they belong to a species where moral agency is the norm).

You can protect your property, therefore its justified for you to kill someone who is trying to kill your cat, but its of none's buisiness if the someone is killing its own animal.

One question, are you an utilitarian? It really seems so

 

[worthlessloser26]

We don't need meat, we can survive pretty fine without it. Also, it would be ethical for a hypothetical person who needs blood to suck your blood? Since without it, this person would die. Of course it wouldn't make it ethical, it's needs/intent don't make the action ethical.

Pain only matters in a utilitarian optic. If you can kill it, why can't you inflict pain on it? Since the first is far worse (hence why murder has a harsher sentence than physical assault).

If they needed to torture animals to live, would it be justified? According to your reasoning (ends justify the means), it would.

Animals would do the same to them if they were in a position of advantage. And yes, I know they don't know what they are doing, but that's why they shouldn't have rights in first place (and yes, disabled people should, since they belong to a species where moral agency is the norm).

You can protect your property, therefore its justified for you to kill someone who is trying to kill your cat, but its of none's buisiness if the someone is killing its own animal.

One question, are you an utilitarian? It really seems so

The point is women seem to get a sense of sadistic pleasure from torturing these animals. You don’t see that in men as much because men are capable of empathy.

 

[SlutLiberationFront]

We don't need meat, we can survive pretty fine without it. Also, it would be ethical for a hypothetical person who needs blood to suck your blood? Since without it, this person would die. Of course it wouldn't make it ethical, it's needs/intent don't make the action ethical.

Pain only matters in a utilitarian optic. If you can kill it, why can't you inflict pain on it? Since the first is far worse (hence why murder has a harsher sentence than physical assault).

If they needed to torture animals to live, would it be justified? According to your reasoning (ends justify the means), it would.

Animals would do the same to them if they were in a position of advantage. And yes, I know they don't know what they are doing, but that's why they shouldn't have rights in first place (and yes, disabled people should, since they belong to a species where moral agency is the norm).

You can protect your property, therefore its justified for you to kill someone who is trying to kill your cat, but its of none's buisiness if the someone is killing its own animal.

One question, are you an utilitarian? It really seems so

We needed meat to evolve from the dawn of the first ancestors of humans that hunted big animals, we wouldn't survive or evolve the same way eating grass and fruits.
A need doesn't mean ethics, nor does it mean it is actually a need in some other occasions (crime revenge in the underworld of drugs such as cartel videos), as it can be pure greed and used as weapon.
Inflicting pain is wrong as it is suffering, we as humans recognise the suffering of others because of empathy, hence why we feel bad for someone in the forum when the dude says "I don't have any reasons anymore, I want to rope". Killing animals shouldn't be done for fun, let alone torturing them to death. Only if consumption (food) done in a clean, as fast as possible way, or for protection purposes, such as the cat hunting in Austrialia because many bird species and other animals are becoming extinct since the cat population got out of control, same goes for the snake hunting in USA and other animals in other places, where they become invasive and pose a risk.

Why would someone need torture an animal to live and why would you think it would be justified from my reasoning?

And yes, animals would do the same to us, they would hunt us and they still do, just look at bear attacks, snakes, crocodiles... they don't know what they are doing, they see food, they will hunt the food and eat it, but we humans are past that and evolved ethics, codes, which animals are devoid of, as they live purely on instinct. We are not living purely on instinct anymore, we are not primitive animals in the nature fighting for survival anymore unless you are talking about 100% tribal people that 100% live from hunting and crops.

 

[trying to ascend]

The point is women seem to get a sense of sadistic pleasure from torturing these animals. You don’t see that in men as much because men are capable of empathy.

Psycopathy has no gender. Though I don't agree with those actions, its hypocrital to criticize them while we eat meat. Also, to not punish someone for killing insects, since they feel pain like dogs (but people don't care, since they are ugly and no one feels empathy for them).

You are just applying lookism to animals and doing the same thing foids do to us, being selective based on what the image causes on you

 

[worthlessloser26]

Psycopathy has no gender. Though I don't agree with those actions, its hypocrital to criticize them while we eat meat. Also, to not punish someone for killing insects, since they feel pain like dogs (but people don't care, since they are ugly and no one feels empathy for them).

You are just applying lookism to animals and doing the same thing foids do to us, being selective based on what the image causes on you

The only bugs i kill are bugs than can harm me like mosquitos or a hornet. Imo that is considered self defense I won’t even kill an ant because they are harmless.

 

[SlutLiberationFront]

Psycopathy has no gender. Though I don't agree with those actions, its hypocrital to criticize them while we eat meat. Also, to not punish someone for killing insects, since they feel pain like dogs (but people don't care, since they are ugly and no one feels empathy for them).

You are just applying lookism to animals and doing the same thing foids do to us, being selective based on what the image causes on you

The thing about insects is that they are undesirable visitor. For example, I don't kill spiders and such, all I do is leading them out of the house, but if I see something that can pose a threat, like a venomous centipede (never saw one in person) I would definitely kill it, not because I like killing animals or because I lack empathy, it's because they pose a risk and disease, like for example, rats. People still contract black death and bubonic plague to this day. Many bugs require you to kill them to avoid disease, death, or painful experiences, but that is not really a necessity if you for example have a pet that can take care of them or other insects that hunt these insects, like spiders that are very good for fending your house off undesirable visitors. They can cause diseases, painful bites and often deadly ones, and many of them look repulsive to us, maybe because of either the way they look, or what we associate them with, or the risk they pose, as I said before.
Also many don't feel pain. And killing mosquitoes is a must, they kill millions of people each year with the diseases they carry, malaria alone kills more than a million people a year, without even taking into account the other countless potentially deadly diseases they carry.

Kill It Or Let It Live?

Happenings in the insect world

ucanr.edu

 

[trying to ascend]

The only bugs i kill are bugs than can harm me like mosquitos or a hornet. Imo that is considered self defense I won’t even kill an ant because they are harmless.

That's the same as killing a child because it hits you or because someone flicked your forehead and claiming self defense.

Its not an equivalent reaction, since you are taking their life, while they are just causing little harm to you

 

[SlutLiberationFront]

That's the same as killing a child because it hits you or because someone flicked your forehead and claiming self defense.

Its not an equivalent reaction, since you are taking their life, while they are just causing little harm to you

Did you know that mosquitoes are the deadliest animal on the planet? They kill millions of people a year like I explained above with malaria alone, without taking into account dengue fever, zika, and all the other viruses and parasites they carry. A child is not the deadliest creature in the world nor is it gonna seriously harm you and pose a threat to your life.

 

[trying to ascend]

We needed meat to evolve from the dawn of the first ancestors of humans that hunted big animals, we wouldn't survive or evolve the same way eating grass and fruits.
A need doesn't mean ethics, nor does it mean it is actually a need in some other occasions (crime revenge in the underworld of drugs such as cartel videos), as it can be pure greed and used as weapon.
Inflicting pain is wrong as it is suffering, we as humans recognise the suffering of others because of empathy, hence why we feel bad for someone in the forum when the dude says "I don't have any reasons anymore, I want to rope". Killing animals shouldn't be done for fun, let alone torturing them to death. Only if consumption (food) done in a clean, as fast as possible way, or for protection purposes, such as the cat hunting in Austrialia because many bird species and other animals are becoming extinct since the cat population got out of control, same goes for the snake hunting in USA and other animals in other places, where they become invasive and pose a risk.

Why would someone need torture an animal to live and why would you think it would be justified from my reasoning?

And yes, animals would do the same to us, they would hunt us and they still do, just look at bear attacks, snakes, crocodiles... they don't know what they are doing, they see food, they will hunt the food and eat it, but we humans are past that and evolved ethics, codes, which animals are devoid of, as they live purely on instinct. We are not living purely on instinct anymore, we are not primitive animals in the nature fighting for survival anymore unless you are talking about 100% tribal people that 100% live from hunting and crops.

False, our ancestors were first herbivorous and then omnivorous. Though I don't denythat not eating meat causes some harm (vegan kids are shorter and have weaker bones), but they are not equivalent to take a being's life, since they do not threat yours.

How Humans Became Meat Eaters

Our earliest ancestors subsisted on plants, seeds, and nuts. What spurred them to change their diets so dramatically?

www.theatlantic.com

It was just a hypothetical situation like the utility monster, but it justifies your reasoning, because your reasoning is: ''You shouldn't cause unnecessary suffering.'' While this situation makes the suffering necessary.

Empathy is totally subjective, shouldn't be a metric for anything

Did you know that mosquitoes are the deadliest animal on the planet? They kill millions of people a year like I explained above with malaria alone, without taking into account dengue fever, zika, and all the other viruses and parasites they carry. A child is not the deadliest creature in the world nor is it gonna seriously harm you and pose a threat to your life.

By absolute numbers? Sure.
By death devided by number of attacks? No, I don't think they are the deadliest and that's what matters the most here, since that's the chance they have of killing you.

This would justify killing the ones who can potentially kill you

 

[SlutLiberationFront]

False, our ancestors were first herbivorous and then omnivorous. Though I don't denythat not eating meat causes some harm (vegan kids are shorter and have weaker bones), but they are not equivalent to take a being's life, since they do not threat yours.

How Humans Became Meat Eaters

Our earliest ancestors subsisted on plants, seeds, and nuts. What spurred them to change their diets so dramatically?

www.theatlantic.com

It was just a hypothetical situation like the utility monster, but it justifies your reasoning, because your reasoning is: ''You shouldn't cause unnecessary suffering.'' While this situation makes the suffering necessary.

Empathy is totally subjective, shouldn't be a metric for anything

Empathy should be applied within the boundaries of human morality. We know that an innocent creature shouldn't suffer to death in excruciating ways because of... nothing, because some idiots wanted to have fun harming animals.
The earliest ancestors were herbivorous, but the more we evolved, the more we needed and fruits and things alike were not enough to sustain our bodies and its needs (bones, essential metals like iron, zinc), and other proteins that meat is rich of, unlike fruits that lack a lot and you would die of explosion before getting the necessary amount of nutrients out of them.

And yes, you shouldn't cause unnecessary suffering, ever. I wouldn't. Not to an animal, but if it was someone that did something horrible in the realms that justifies such thing... then that's another subject.

 

[remincel]

More proof that foids are remorseless psychopaths. Seriously, how can you see something as defenseless (compared to us) and unquestionably loyal as a small animal and torture it just for fun? They have the same mentality towards ugly men, they get off on inflicting pain and suffering onto those that they consider "lesser" than themselves. I bet they also enjoyed the attention they got from uploading those videos, bunch of narcissistic attention whores. There aren't enough bullets in the world for the whole pack of them.

I am far from a moralfag, but nothing makes my blood boil than cruelty for the sake of cruelty. There is no "justice" nor "retribution" in an action such as this, it's just pure, unadulterated evil.

Psycopathy has no gender. Though I don't agree with those actions, its hypocrital to criticize them while we eat meat. Also, to not punish someone for killing insects, since they feel pain like dogs (but people don't care, since they are ugly and no one feels empathy for them).

You are just applying lookism to animals and doing the same thing foids do to us, being selective based on what the image causes on you

First of all, while humans do consume meat products, most of them do not kill the animal in question themselves, we only buy the meat afterwards. Second, the reason most of those animals die is for food and food only. I'm not going to look down on a hunter for killing an animal quickly and painlessly and then eating it, but I am going to look down on a hunter for killing an animal for sport. There's a difference.

As for insects, I'd consider them unwanted intruders. Most people don't go killing insects outside, it's usually when they enter your home uninvited.

Also, there's a difference between killing something and torturing it for fun. Killing can sometimes be a necessity, but there's no justification for something as deliberate and sadistic as torture.

 

[metabuxx]

Le empathetique genderino

 

[D.R.]

We don't need meat, we can survive pretty fine without it. Also, it would be ethical for a hypothetical person who needs blood to suck your blood? Since without it, this person would die. Of course it wouldn't make it ethical, it's needs/intent don't make the action ethical.

My answer there would be that I'm an antinatalist so the ideal is to just prevent someone from having the need in the first place, other than that the cost benefit analysis will be slightly different in each scenario I guess. And I agree we don't need meat to be healthy, so why be ok with either animal torture for meat and animal torture for non-taste pleasure?

Pain only matters in a utilitarian optic. If you can kill it, why can't you inflict pain on it? Since the first is far worse (hence why murder has a harsher sentence than physical assault).

Yeah I would say it does all boil down to pain and pleasure, killing is also only bad in the context that you are a sentient organism that can care/suffer as a result of being killed, if a plant is killed it doesn't matter, it cannot produce any negative emotions. Sentience/suffering capacity is obviously prerequisite for anything to be bad here, doesn't matter if you give a potato freedom or you lock it in a cage.

If they needed to torture animals to live, would it be justified? According to your reasoning (ends justify the means), it would.

Ideally species that need to torture things just would not exist in the first place, so prevent them from breeding unless somehow the existence of that species is preventing even more harm from happening for some absurd reason.

Animals would do the same to them if they were in a position of advantage. And yes, I know they don't know what they are doing, but that's why they shouldn't have rights in first place (and yes, disabled people should, since they belong to a species where moral agency is the norm).

Disagree with that idea about disabled people having rights as a result of the overall species having moral agency, by that logic, if the human species were generally retarded but we were the few smart outliers, we shouldn't have rights because the vast majority of our species are dumb.

Intelligence has nothing to do with the capacity to experience pain so it's irrelevant to me, if a device existed that could reduce me to the intelligence level of a fish, I would still not agree to being burned alive if tomorrow I connected myself to that device because I wanted to experience being a fish, pain remains an issue in my mind even when I'm dumb.

You can protect your property, therefore its justified for you to kill someone who is trying to kill your cat, but its of none's buisiness if the someone is killing its own animal.

As long as I'm sentient I would have a problem with being considered property, clearly there's a difference between sticking a knife in a tomato or a cat. Again, why is property damage even an issue if suffering did not exist? It's the suffering from your property being damaged that is the problem, and a cat that is considered property is also capable of suffering.

One question, are you an utilitarian? It really seems so

Don't know about the other guy but I would say suffering is all that matters, yeah, if I could just press a button to immediately kill everyone in one second painlessly, thereby also eradicating all species that have some kind of need to torture things, that would be ideal.

 

[Autismus Maximus]

They will get a slap on the wrist. It's Russia.