Another step for animals rights!

  • bamboo@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    26
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    Apple claimed this was for environmental reasons, not animal rights reasons.

    • deegeese@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      29
      arrow-down
      16
      ·
      1 year ago

      It’s more enshittification. Making it cheaper and worse and telling everyone it’s an upgrade.

      OP is editorializing that it’s for vegan ethics.

        • alp@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Leather lasts a lot longer and personally I think it feels better. But the fake leathers often fall apart really quickly and can’t be cared for like leather. A maintained leather item can last centuries, not that an accessory would last very long but faux leather crumbles pretty quickly

    • bob_wiley@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      21
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      1 year ago

      Which I don’t really get. Most leather is a waste product from the meat industry. Are they just going to throw it away if everyone stops using it? That doesn’t really seem environmentally friendly… nor does using recycled synthetic materials instead of natural materials. Unless there issue is with the tanning process, but it seems like there should be options there.

      • Maestro@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        15
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Tanning is very polluting. Even throwing away the hides is better for the environment than tanning them.

        • bob_wiley@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Is it all tanning or would vegetable tanning better than chrome tanning? I assume chrome tanning is worse, but faster and cheaper, which is probably why it’s done more often.

      • PuddingFeeling@lemmy.caOP
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        But the bigger issue is the amount of environmental destruction beef farming has on the planet. Why don’t we stop that instead?

          • PuddingFeeling@lemmy.caOP
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            8
            arrow-down
            7
            ·
            1 year ago

            But it does reduce the profitability of beef. Thus reducing operations and preventing more carbon.

            • bob_wiley@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              6
              arrow-down
              6
              ·
              1 year ago

              Unless it’s reducing the demand for beef, I’m not sure how it’s going to shrink the operations. Beef might just get more expensive if they need to compensate for reduced leather demand.

            • Balder@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              1 year ago

              But then, if it depends on customers to collectively stop buying something, we’re doomed already.

              • PuddingFeeling@lemmy.caOP
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                4
                arrow-down
                4
                ·
                1 year ago

                One less animal product consumer prevents the deaths of many animals. You’re using the all or nothing fallacy.

          • PuddingFeeling@lemmy.caOP
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            7
            ·
            1 year ago

            Have you tried beyond burgers they taste just like the real thing and so humanity can skip the cruelty of lining cows in a narrow chute and slaughtering them unceremoniously.

                • Mister@lemmy.ca
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  arrow-down
                  4
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Excessive red meat you mean? Same goes for excessive fried potatoes. Everything in moderation

                  • PuddingFeeling@lemmy.caOP
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    4
                    arrow-down
                    5
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    Same goes for processed plant based products if you want healthy tasty meals there’s plenty of whole food planted based recipes out there for you to try.

      • NotAPenguin@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Not a waste product, they rely on the profits of everything, it’s a product just as much as meat is and slowling demand for it is good.

      • Eggyhead@artemis.camp
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        Well meat farms produce a lot of methane, which is a potent greenhouse gas, so reducing any kind of demand from a ranch is probably better than nothing. That said, I thought the leather used for iPhones weren’t from animals we’d traditionally use for eating. Moleskin or something?

    • FlexibleToast@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      I’m curious how many animals are killed to make leather. I would think that the animal is killed for food and the byproduct is leather. If we’re still raising feed cattle and just wasting the leather, wouldn’t that be worse for the environment?

        • FlexibleToast@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          You’re tight, but I couldn’t think of a better term for it. I suspect leather is made with material that is generated not for leather making but as a consequence of the meat industry. And since when is “using the whole animal” a bad thing? Unless I’m wrong and there are animals killed specifically for their leather, that would be pretty fucked up.

      • alp@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Right, when we make things out of wood sure it’s killing trees, but it’s a sustainable resource that is better than mining for other materials that don’t biodegrade. Of course in leathers case it is literally a byproduct so there is very little environmental concers. Garentee faux leather is much more environmentally unfriendly

        • FlexibleToast@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Like almost everything, this announcement sounds more like green washing.

          For your wood example, wood is actually a great green resource. It’s not like they’re cutting down the old growth trees anymore. They selectively cut and they have tree farms. Trees are also not as good of a carbon sync as people tend to think they are. Yes, they absorb carbon over their lifetime, but when they die, they rot and release it back into the atmosphere. The carbon we’re worried about is the stuff that came out of the ground that was there for millions of years, which is far longer than a tree lifespan.