this post was submitted on 24 Dec 2025
243 points (94.2% liked)
Bikini Bottom Twitter
4521 readers
475 users here now
Ahoy, me buckos! Welcome to Bikini Bottom Twitter! Your digital reef for the latest salty gossip and treasure tales! And while you're at it, be sure to drop by the Krusty Krab for a delicious Krabby Patty so I can get yer mon- err I mean, 'cause they're the best treat under the sea!
Rule 1 - This is Bikini Bottom Twitter, all posts should be Spongebob related in "(Old-School) Twitter-like" form
Rule 2 - Political posts, as long as it follows rule 1, will be permitted, so long as you behave yourselves.
Bikini Bottom Municipal Code §33-07: Anti-Tankie Ordinance Residents are prohibited from circulating tankie ideology or other authoritarian propaganda on Bikini Bottom Twitter. Offenders will be permanently banned from BPT by the BBPD faster than Plankton is ejected from The Krusty Krab.
Rule 3 - Please no reposts within the last couple days, at least
Rule 4 - All posts should be at least above a "Squirdward-krusty-krab-shift" level of effort
Rule 5 - Be chill, be a Patrick not a squidward.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I think the point isn't about practicality, but ethics. It's less practical to eat carnivores, but is it unethical? If it's ethical to kill and eat a cow, is it also ethical to kill and eat a horse? A dog? A cat?
I think you misunderstood the argument.
It's okay to eat puppies and kittens because they haven't accumulated as much 😌
I had a professor who was native american, and yeah, he spoke quite honestly about how they breed the dogs for meat, and the puppy is more tender. He said his friends would always joke with him when he went back to the reservation for holidays. I can't remember the exact joke, but it was something about how he would have to dig deep into the stew because the puppy was at the bottom.
Is the argument that ethics are a function of accumulation?
Some parts of my country used to eat & sell dog meat during WW2. Now not anymore, for above reasons.
I think it's perfectly clear; the line is neccessity and taste vs. friend and practicality.
Also, third-level consumers are a waste of ressources in most cases, due to metabolic inefficiencies.
And yeah, horse meat is still a thing. Moschtbrökli (some dried good parts kept in apple juice) a more or less local speciality. Quite tasty btw.
Mostly agree - if you eat meat I don't think there's a difference between eating dog and pork.
But surprisingly many people think it is unethical to kill a dog, even if it's your own dog.
The line is ethics and necessity.
Horse + bunny tasty, dog not.
lol, I can’t help but read this as “mushed broccoli” even though there’s no way that’s how it’s pronounced
"Apple juice piece"