[ SECRET POST #6455 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #6455 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.


01.



__________________________________________________



02.



__________________________________________________



03.



__________________________________________________



04.



__________________________________________________



05.



__________________________________________________



06.



__________________________________________________



07.



__________________________________________________



08.














Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 48 secrets from Secret Submission Post #923.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

Re: What do you consider a red flag in real life?

[(Anonymous)]

The label for "organic" is a legal one, not a scientific one. Current "organic" farming methods are worse for the environment, use more pesticides, unable to actually be "organic" in reality (i.e. forbidden types of treatments blowing over from the neighboring "non-organic" farm), and are basically ways for production companies to charge through the nose for a worse quality product. It feeds into people who want to seem like they're doing something, but who don't or won't actually put in the work to understand the science, which perpetuates gross scientific ignorance.

In short, someone who says they only eat organic is a person who doesn't do their research, which probably extends to other things in their life as well.

Re: What do you consider a red flag in real life?

[(Anonymous)]

I'm sick of labels that make it seem like you can pay capitalism more than the going rate to get the thing you were actually trying to pay for - in this case, nutritious, reasonable food. And I'm just as fed up with NGOs claiming that the world will be better when more people generously pay extra for their pet litany of "superior, more ethically produced" products.

But I think criticizing people for not according with my particular buying preferences is a dead end. We all have limited time and limited information, and the fact is you usually can't get firsthand information about ANY of the promises on labels. The companies are greedy and corrupt and the government is more than happy to drop the ball on regulation. In light of that, going "but you should have researched it longer and realized that was a scam" seems a little unfair.

I recently read an article by Cory Doctorow where he said "Paying for the product doesn’t fill your vapid boss’s shriveled heart with so much joy that he decides to stop trying to think of ways to fuck you over. [...] If you’re not paying for the product, you’re the product, and if you are paying for the product, you’re still the product.

Just ask the farmers who are expected to swap parts into their own busted, half-million dollar, mission-critical tractors, but can’t actually use those parts until a technician charges them $200 to drive out to the farm and type a parts pairing unlock code into their console.

John Deere’s not giving away tractors. Give John Deere a half mil for a tractor and you will be the product."

Really, I think that's the situation facing people. In supermarkets, and just about everywhere else.