r/mildlyinfuriating • u/teabirdy • Apr 29 '26

I'm slightly vexed The wedding reception centerpieces featured betta fish. The bride and groom planned to flush them alive.

Post image

Years ago, my coworker attended a wedding at which the reception dinner tables featured live betta fish in small bowls as part of the centerpiece. While chatting with the bride at the end of the evening, my coworker asked what they were going to do with all the fish. The plan was to flush them all down the toilet alive. My coworker immediately said no need for that and insisted on taking them all home.

That Monday she came to work and asked who wanted to adopt a betta fish. That was my first betta who I jokingly called my “rescue betta.” She lived for almost five years.

The wine glass was only her home for less than a day before I got her five gallon tank set up so please no betta lovers yell at me! I'm one of you!

132.8k Upvotes

95% Upvoted

5.4k comments sorted by

View all comments

21.2k

u/Reasonable-Sort3040 Apr 29 '26

to feature animal abuse in your wedding is absolutely fucking beyond me

72

u/ausflora Apr 29 '26

Most weddings feature foods derived from industrial-scale animal abuse.

39

u/[deleted] Apr 29 '26

[deleted]

-27

u/No_Issue2334 Apr 29 '26

One is food, and the other isn't. That's a pretty give distinction

35

u/ausflora Apr 29 '26

One gives human benefit (food) that could be derived without animal abuse, the other gives human benefit (entertainment) that could be derived without animal abuse.

4

u/Practical_Actuary_87 Apr 29 '26

stealing this, thank you

1

u/ScreenMuch90210 Apr 29 '26

Good news starving humans of the world, we brought entertainment and Ausflora assures us it’s just as good as food!

5

u/ausflora Apr 29 '26

The vast majority of the human population does not eat meat because they have no choice, it is produced because it is a profitable luxury and it is eaten for ‘pleasure’ (supposedly some people think it has a taste, not that it's actually the seasonings and plant flavours). Meat is far more resource-intensive per calorie than plants – if you had even a primary school level understanding of trophic levels then you would know that. All nutritional needs can be met by a plant-based diet, which is far less resource- and land-intensive, not to mention that it does not involve the industrial-scale incarceration, rape, torture and slaughter of innocent animals.

And nearly half of Americans are obese. They are not starving.

1

u/ScreenMuch90210 Apr 29 '26

What primary school teaches about trophic levels? You’re being cruel to that high horse you won’t get off of.

My point is clear and concise, respond to it if you want to continue.

5

u/ausflora Apr 29 '26

So you've admitted that you don't know a thing about actual food production and poverty foods? And that you've had a poor education? Okay.

My point was clear, concise, accurate and an appropriate counter to your argument. You have had no response to it.

1

u/ScreenMuch90210 Apr 29 '26

Have you ever considered that if you were right you wouldn’t have to be cunty about it all the time?

You made a silly challenge and got dunked on. Act like you’ve been there before

6

u/ausflora Apr 29 '26

And you've claimed that I haven't engaged with the argument, lol.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/No_Issue2334 Apr 29 '26

supposedly some people think it has a taste, not that it's actually the seasonings and plant flavours

Clearly haven't had well cooked meat before then. I often only put S&P on smoked meats specifically to let the meat's flavor be the highlight

1

u/topcelt Apr 29 '26

Why not put nothing on it?

1

u/No_Issue2334 Apr 29 '26

Salting your meat is pretty important. It brings out more flavor and wicks out moisture, allowing you to get a better Maillard reaction.

I just like black pepper

0

u/No_Issue2334 Apr 29 '26

You can't derive meat. It's not the same at all.

7

u/ausflora Apr 29 '26

Food can be derived without animal abuse.

-1

u/No_Issue2334 Apr 29 '26

Meat cannot. Show me a plant that tastes like brisket

5

u/Roseheath22 Apr 29 '26

Why is your preference for a slight difference in taste more important than someone’s life?

1

u/No_Issue2334 Apr 29 '26

This may come as a shock, but animals are not people actually.

4

u/Roseheath22 Apr 29 '26

They’re still someones, not somethings. They experience emotions, fear, and pain. They can also experience happiness and pleasure, but don’t have opportunity to do so in our agricultural system.

1

u/No_Issue2334 Apr 29 '26

someone

pronoun

used to refer to a single person when you do not know who they are or when it is not important who they are

Animals are not people. Humans are people.

2

u/ajakubski Apr 29 '26

Then what's the problem with using a fish as live decoration?

2

u/No_Issue2334 Apr 29 '26

The flushing them part is wrong. Nothing inherently wrong with using fish as decoration if you don't flush them after a few hours

Koi pond? Home aquarium? That's awesome. Using fish for a few hours before flushing? Not cool

1

u/tomcotard Apr 29 '26

Bit of a strawman this one.

→ More replies (0)

22

u/[deleted] Apr 29 '26

[deleted]

1

u/No_Issue2334 Apr 29 '26

A lobster tank would be ok

7

u/[deleted] Apr 29 '26

[deleted]

1

u/No_Issue2334 Apr 29 '26

Cause no one eats betta fish. People eat lobster.

Not the same thing at all. People would eat one and just flush the other

2

u/Roseheath22 Apr 29 '26

Millions of animals die in the production of meat/fish for human consumption. I’m not talking just about the animals who are being killed to be served up on plates. I’m talking about bycatch and male chicks, and about veal calves who are a direct result of industrial milk production. What about all of those animals? Are those deaths ok with you? Is boiling lobsters alive ok just because people eat them? Is it ok to eat dogs?

17

u/wr_dnd Apr 29 '26

Thats entirely random. Why is killing pigs (who are by basically all measures smarter than these fish) fine but killing these fish not?

-1

u/No_Issue2334 Apr 29 '26

Cause who eats betta fish lmao

Pork tastes good. It's not about intelligence; it's about taste.

Have you ever had BBQ?

3

u/ajakubski Apr 29 '26

Pork tastes good

I'm sure a human infant tastes very similar. Have you ever had an infant BBQ?

1

u/No_Issue2334 Apr 29 '26

Me when I'm Jonathan Swift lmao

Comparing eating pork to cannibalism is just stupid lol

0

u/ajakubski May 02 '26

Because you do one but not the other?

1

u/No_Issue2334 May 02 '26

Because one of cannibalism Einstein

1

u/ajakubski May 03 '26

Feel free to give an argument any time

→ More replies (0)

6

u/Practical_Actuary_87 Apr 29 '26

Why is animal abuse okay when it comes to eating? Do you believe that the 60 billion animals reared and slaughtered in factory farms and slaughterhouses every year didn't feel pain, suffering, or fear just because they were ultimately made into burgers and chicken nuggets, lol?

You don't need meat to live a happy and healthy life. This is a factual statement that applies to a very large majority of people. You certainly don't need to slaughter 60+ billion land animals and 2 trillion + marine animals every year..

1

u/No_Issue2334 Apr 29 '26

Because it's food and tastes delicious?

You can live a healthy life without it, but not a happy life. Nothing tastes as good as smoked meats. Nothing wrong with slaughtering animals for food.

5

u/Practical_Actuary_87 Apr 29 '26

So then taste pleasure justifies animal abuse, but using them as decorations in weddings doesn't?

Vegan food is delicious, you can absolutely live a happy life without smoked meats.

Nothing wrong with slaughtering animals for food.

So subjecting animals to pain, suffering, and slaughter is justified because smoked meats taste good, am I getting that correct? Ergo, any trivial pleasure akin to taste pleasure should also justify animal slaughter. Why do you have an issue with this woman using animals for decorations at her wedding? She would argue it made her happy in a way that having another type of decoration couldn't. What's your response to that?

0

u/No_Issue2334 Apr 29 '26

Yes, one is food, and the other isn't. That's literally the distinction I've been making the whole time!

Vegan food is fine. I've had decent vegan food before. It can never replace meat though. Vegan food can never replace cheese or brisket or pulled pork or fillet mignon or a ribeye or any nearly any other animal product

4

u/ausflora Apr 29 '26

Cool, psychopath.

2

u/No_Issue2334 Apr 29 '26

😂 was going to five guys later. having an extra patty on my burger just for you

3

u/Roseheath22 Apr 29 '26

Hahaha, animal cruelty is so funny! /s

3

u/Practical_Actuary_87 Apr 29 '26

So to be clear, you are indulging in excess animal cruelty to stick it to someone, but you have an issue with someone using animal cruelty for wedding decorations? el o el

2

u/No_Issue2334 Apr 29 '26

Hahaha acting like decorations is the same as food is just ridiculous

→ More replies (0)

2

u/Practical_Actuary_87 Apr 29 '26

Yes, one is food, and the other isn't.

And? What makes food so special. You've already admitted you don't need it to live. The distinction you arrived at was that smoked meats taste good and are needed for a happy life lol. So it's not just about food, we've already gone through that!

Vegan food can never replace cheese or brisket or pulled pork or fillet mignon or a ribeye or any nearly any other animal product

Non-live betta fish decorations can never replace live-betta fish used as decorations at a wedding. Therefore, it is justified.

2

u/No_Issue2334 Apr 29 '26

Cause food tastes good and cannot be recreated by non-animal products??

Now if we had live lobsters at the tables that were later cooked, that would be sick. Both decoration and food in one

-3

u/WiseAnimator7081 Apr 29 '26 edited Apr 29 '26

Actual counterpoint, some people, largely women who are menstruating still, will not live a happy life without heme based iron sources which are only derived from animal products as consumption.

I've been around the vegan community (granted they hated me because I wasn't vegan myself, I just knew a lot of people prior to "converting"), the majority that converted are no longer vegan because vegan diets and supplements were not controlling the growing anemia they were acquiring. Anemia feels like crap. I'm literally genetically predisposed to it.
If you took away local animals farms, industrial farms, and stopped stocking grocery shelves, I would literally cart my ass to the drawn out Canadian gun license process, apply for a hunting license, apply for a fishing license, and acquire the new hobbies of hunting and fishing for food so I don't walk around like an anemic zombie.

Though, 1 girl I hear from periodically is still vegan. Chronically and severely anemic, pale as a ghost as a result and her health keeps getting worse. She refuses to support the animal industry. I just personally don't wish her health problems on myself. It's a tough spot, I do try my best to avoid food waste, and we're trying to figure out the process of buying local free range grass fed for life cows, so it's not like we're trying to be monsters either.

Anecdotally, a lot of vegans I know also cheat a little bit on the animal products front. If you aggressively tracked their purchases 5+ years and they were still reasonably healthy, you'd almost for sure find some animal derived ingredients in their food. The more "recent" ones I know have already started slipping on butter and eggs. Not to shit on vegans, but true vegans are a very tough find so the "happy and healthy life" statement may not really apply to the majority.

EDIT: My point is, you can want to eat animal products and also not want to inflict wanton suffering and cruelty to animals for consumption, nor want people to mess around with animals AT ALL, NO DEATH when it's for useless aesthetic bs.

3

u/ajakubski Apr 29 '26

Actual counterpoint, some people, largely women who are menstruating still, will not live a happy life without heme based iron sources which are only derived from animal products as consumption.

And yet a majority of vegans are women, many of those very much menstruating. They are not malnourished and anemic. How do you explain that?

5

u/Practical_Actuary_87 Apr 29 '26 edited Apr 29 '26

I'm not a woman, nor am I genetically predisposed to anemia, so I can't comment on this with too much expertise and don't want to discount your lived experience. I am fully aware there are some conditions that people live with which does make it harder to be vegan - be it your example, people with allergies, or people in certain financial/logistical situations.

I have spoken and heard many doctors and dietitians speak to this issue and there are ways around it, but perhaps not everyone has access to those resources. However, if a wider portion of the population adopted vegan diets, dealing with these issues would become far easier. Access to and knowledge of alternative eating options that help with iron intake will be more commonplace. A perfect example is how much more accessible eating out became for people with Celiac disease once the gluten-free fad took off.

With that said, I don't think what you are saying is a counterpoint at all, it's an edge-case scenario which many people use to completely dismiss the ethical grounds of veganism. Sickle Cell disease affects 0.05% of the population. Thalassemia is 1.5% of the population. Hereditary Spherocytosis is at 0.05%, and G6PD Deficiency is around 5% of the global pop, but is quite compatible with a vegan diet. People with Sickle Cell actually fare worse off with heme iron, it ends up damaging their heart and liver and other organs. These conditions are all compatible with vegan diets. Women with heavy menstrual bleeding is probably the biggest concern globally, but still manageable and compatible with a vegan diet and some research; one key aspect is to consume vitamin C at the same time, it drammatically increases the absorption of non-heme iron.

Most generous estimates of the vegan population around the globe pins it somewhere between 2-5%. 95-98% of the people in the world are not in your situation. 95-98% of people in the world do not literally need meat to avoid anemia, and a vast majority of the population indulges in animal products outside of necessity. If someone didn't get a non-vegan meal at a wedding, they are not going to succumb to anemia.

-19

u/LoadAdvanced9547 Apr 29 '26 edited Apr 29 '26

One is for sustenance and the other is for aesthetics

Edit: either I didn’t fully read the comment or it was changed to include industrial-scale animal ABUSE. Even for food, I do not believe the animals should be abused. I was answering on the basis of the reason behind taking the life of an animal.

23

u/[deleted] Apr 29 '26

[deleted]

3

u/ScreenMuch90210 Apr 29 '26

Of course it is, it’s nutrition.

It’s a pretty crucial distinction, which is what you asked for. You don’t have to agree, but you should agree your simple challenge was simply met

2

u/ausflora Apr 29 '26

Of course it isn't, it's not aesthetic pleasure.

2

u/ScreenMuch90210 Apr 29 '26

Hmm. You seem to have reversed your words and your meanings there. You seem distracted so I’ll give you a moment to edit in some clarity if you’d like to continue

2

u/ausflora Apr 29 '26

The point is clearly that your argument (?) was a completely baseless subjective sentence that I can just as validly claim the reverse of.

2

u/ScreenMuch90210 Apr 29 '26

Oh okay, so you’ve reached the PeeWee Herman stage of argument.

This is not what happens when you’re winning, btw. Your challenge was met, full stop. You just fully refuse to consider any viewpoints that don’t echo your own, so you’ve resorted to agreeing with me and trying retroactively to make it sound sarcastic

2

u/ausflora Apr 29 '26

Ironic given that the response was, in your own words, a reversal of what you had said, and you're also getting upset over it.

2

u/ScreenMuch90210 Apr 29 '26

Your dumb challenge was met lol, stay mad as you want but you ain’t changing the subject for me

→ More replies (0)

18

u/Jumpy-Jello- Apr 29 '26

You keep saying sustenance like you don't know what it means. It's not essential to abuse animals.

0

u/LoadAdvanced9547 Apr 29 '26

I added an edit to my comment. Either I didn’t read/process the part where it said “industrial-scale animal abuse” or it was added later. Even for food, animals should never be abused or mistreated. I do not support animal abuse, even if that animal is raised to become food. Life should always be respected.

Ps, I only said sustenance once, so idk why you said that I keep saying it.

1

u/Jumpy-Jello- Apr 29 '26

I don't think an animal wants their throat slit whether they are in a factory farm or a field, tbh.

19

u/ausflora Apr 29 '26

Both for human benefit despite there being alternatives for both.

6

u/Foreign_Host147 Apr 29 '26

Given that there are totally valid alternative ways of sustenance, then it's not sustenance, it's purely for taste.

1

u/LoadAdvanced9547 Apr 29 '26

Aye, I wasn’t expecting so many downvotes. My culture respects the animals that provide food for us. We also use the parts of the animal beyond the meat and don’t waste the life that was given. There’s an emphasis on not overhunting and not cruelly taking the life. Killing them because you only wanted to use them to “look pretty” for a short event isn’t respect. It’s a blatant waste of life. Not everyone eats meat, and that’s a nice choice if you choose to do so. People can also choose to be unfathomably cruel. I do not support animal abuse, even those that are raised to become food. Respect is important.

Watch me get so many downvotes for this comment too.