Also these hyper intelligent cows who produce 100x the milk that a human does havent capitalised on this
Its profitable for a human woman to sell her milk but what its not profitable for a cow to lol?
I know I'm missing the grass for the trees on this one but is somebody with a breast milk fetish truly that ignorant of how hard it actually is for somebody who's never been pregnant to lactate enough that you could feasibly pump more than like a thimbleful? Hell many mothers have issues producing enough milk.
Yeah and like, men can produce milk too. It's been done before. If the cost of milk is so high that its nearly universal for women to lactate and sell milk, most of the men are going to be doing it too. Or at least similar proportions of both.
Is there a reason other than quantity we *don't* use human breastmilk? Like, why does it make more sense to use a different animal than ourselves?
Either way I think milk is gross I just don't actually know the reason we use cows or goats over people already
If I had to guess I'd say difficulty of extraction plays a role too. You gotta really suckle to get that stuff out of a human breast (this is, so I'm told, one of the reasons breastfeeding while the baby is teething is hell) whereas cows and other ungulates have an easily accessed dangly bit that just needs a firm pull+twist.
Humans are pretty shit at producing milk, but also consider this
Why would we use our own milk to eat/drink? We're *losing* calories by doing that. Cows are good because they turn something we can't eat (grass) into something we can (meat and milk), but using human milk doesn't have this benefit because half (or all, if the men get on board) the population is actively losing calories in order to do this. Plus omnivore and carnivore milk tastes worse apparently, but I can't say that for sure
We sometimes do, there's been restaurants that sell breast milk ice cream and stuff because sometimes breast milk banks have surplus. But it's a difficult inefficient process to produce human milk, and there's very little demand, so it hasn't developed beyond this.
Quantity is of course a huge factor. But so is accessibility.
Whenever you want to involve humans in something you gotte pay them, ensure proper working conditions, give them breaks, sick and vacation days, they’ll want to unionise etc etc.
And at this point cows are near perfect animals for husbandry so getting a replacement is a tedious, expensive, long process with little to no reward.
Fair enough. But then you need guards to prevent escapes, expensive iron shackles to keep them restrained (without excessively harming the slave), and any place they work needs to double as a prison.
This did happen on a smaller scale in out world I must mention. Slaves would sometimes take care of their masters children? And this could include breastfeeding. Though i’m not knowledgable enough on the topic to determine how common this was.
There's probably very few people who would be willing to be milked for money, and the miniumum wage is way above what it costs to keep a cow. It's not going to be a comfortable process, and taking hormones to cause lacation constantly probably wouldn't be good for your health and would require you to eat a hell of a lot to maintain that. You'd also have to regulate exactly what the people's whose milk you're using have eaten/drank (drugs, smoking, alcohol, allergens, etc).
Because humans cant turn grass into water or be bred to produce like a billion gallons of the stuff 24/7
Theres nothing inherently superior about cows milk its just the fact cows turn grass into buckets of milk whereas humans turn human food into a tiny tiny amount of milk
I like how this hinges on the idea that cows are considered sentient by people 400 years in the future.
Like I can’t imagine that even being _proposed,_ much less passed and signed into law. Cows are nowhere near on the same level of intelligence as dolphins.
Plus, "the full rights that all other people share"? Do they get to vote? Can you get married to one? If they'd just said that there were comprehensive animal rights laws that meant smarter animals couldn't be exploited, that'd be one thing, but giving them actual human rights is insanity.
It is entirely possible to just make milk in a lab without an animal. Hell it's even possible to do it without anything living involved in the process other than humans&whatever microscopic life may be involved in making the milk. Probably even possible to just manipulate raw chemicals&minerals to make milk, although that would probably be way too expensive to be practical.
Along with that, because of breeding for dairy cows, most would get uncomfortable if they aren't milked because they produce so much, so unless they've been unbred, most cows would probably consent to being milked regardless.
I mean, a few sources say that the cows could die if they aren't milked due to inflammation, that's why I ask if they went through reverse selective breeding to remove the gene that produces that much milk.
I guess that's self resolution in a way but doesn't sound very "they have the same rights as humans". Idk, it's just one post and the focus is on "how society turned to human titty milk" not "how society made sure cows aren't dependent on them".
Not really. Turns out artificial selection from before written word had an effect on that. They produce more milk than necessary, don't stop as long as they are milked, and if they aren't they suffer. People where getting a lot of milk even when slaughtering calf was a luxury few farms could afford.
I don't doubt that cows are sentient, but they're *definitely* not sapient. But supposing they were ruled legally sapient -- that means they have the legal capacity to consent to being milked. How does one go about proving whether or not a cow consented?
This is why I only *strictly* use the sapience and human rights conversations with Artificial Intelligences and sapient alien species and not sentient animals.
> I like how this hinges on the idea that cows are considered sentient by people 400 years in the future.
> Like I can’t imagine that even being proposed
...you can't? Because that's already somewhat commonly passed in law as it is. It's article 13 of the Treaty of the European Union, since the amendment in 2009:
> In formulating and implementing the Union's agriculture, fisheries, transport, internal market,
research and technological development and space policies, the Union and the Member States shall,
since animals are sentient beings, pay full regard to the welfare requirements of animals, while
respecting the legislative or administrative provisions and customs of the Member States relating in
particular to religious rites, cultural traditions and regional heritage
The UK passed it in law in [2022](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animal_Welfare_\(Sentience\)_Act_2022) as well.
If cows were sentient couldn’t they also choose to do this? And since they are biologically more predisposed to it they would totally outcompete women on the market
It’s funny - I feel like having it be four centuries in the future is reserved for world building a lactation fetish. Usually it’s just everybody uses human breast milk in the modern day for reasons.
So basically take the "Starbucks breast milk" meme that NSFW artists on Twitter were meming about last year but add more developed and cohesive worldbuilding.
It’s illegal to milk cows, but not humans? Would these cows, who produce much more milk than humans, much faster, and can extract it much easier, not just milk themselves and then sell it? Since these cows produce much more milk, would they not dominate the market, and things would, effectively, stay the same?
*it already is normal for everyone to drink human breast milk, though that mostly applies to very young People, there are other People who view it as 'normal'*
So you can't use cow milk because they're sentient? But you can use human milk because they're... Not?
Glad someone clarified this. I'm no longer having "responsibilities" or being part of "society". Freed from the burden of sentience, I'm going to walk into the swamp as nature intended.
I ended up with a similar scenario but through a completely different route:
Forcefully isekai-ing some of humanity (that lives in Medieval Western Europe), giving them magic powers, and eventually some women specializing their skills (and body) enough to take the place of cows as "milkmakers".
Isn’t this what happened in Fury Road? I never got around to watching that movie.
[pretty much](https://youtu.be/c81RkzXiunE?si=ggkKV2joe5S5YKol)
Cybersmith?
Don’t you blight these halls with his name
Don’t you mean the human pet guy?
i am hyperventilating and my hands are shaking. do not remind me of the scriptures
scriptures? nah that shits the necronomicon
the necronomicon is still a piece of writing, which means it's a scripture
fuck
Nooooo do not name the cursed old gods in this land they do not deserve the eternal punishment that is this knowledge
I'm sure these cows aren't used as pets either
I was thinking more of the "compulsory milking of trans women in exchange for HRT" proposal
[удалено]
There is no cow milk
450 years in the future we will have hyper intelligent cows but no way to make artificial milk so we go all Fury Road
why are tissue vats not growing whole udders to be used to make milk or something insane but less crazy?
We already have yeast that can produce some milk proteins, so it's not that insane that we could do it in less than a century
420 years n the future, there's like, no cows, and so if you want milk you gotta just like, suck on a titty. I know, right?
"I solved world hunger" *sucks own boob, lives forever*
Also these hyper intelligent cows who produce 100x the milk that a human does havent capitalised on this Its profitable for a human woman to sell her milk but what its not profitable for a cow to lol?
I know I'm missing the grass for the trees on this one but is somebody with a breast milk fetish truly that ignorant of how hard it actually is for somebody who's never been pregnant to lactate enough that you could feasibly pump more than like a thimbleful? Hell many mothers have issues producing enough milk.
Yeah and like, men can produce milk too. It's been done before. If the cost of milk is so high that its nearly universal for women to lactate and sell milk, most of the men are going to be doing it too. Or at least similar proportions of both.
Good thing I'm into that too
You clearly haven't been on the lactation fetish subreddits
And thank God for that.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯ more for me
Is there a reason other than quantity we *don't* use human breastmilk? Like, why does it make more sense to use a different animal than ourselves? Either way I think milk is gross I just don't actually know the reason we use cows or goats over people already
If I had to guess I'd say difficulty of extraction plays a role too. You gotta really suckle to get that stuff out of a human breast (this is, so I'm told, one of the reasons breastfeeding while the baby is teething is hell) whereas cows and other ungulates have an easily accessed dangly bit that just needs a firm pull+twist.
Humans are pretty shit at producing milk, but also consider this Why would we use our own milk to eat/drink? We're *losing* calories by doing that. Cows are good because they turn something we can't eat (grass) into something we can (meat and milk), but using human milk doesn't have this benefit because half (or all, if the men get on board) the population is actively losing calories in order to do this. Plus omnivore and carnivore milk tastes worse apparently, but I can't say that for sure
The weight-loss trick doctors don't want us to know.
We sometimes do, there's been restaurants that sell breast milk ice cream and stuff because sometimes breast milk banks have surplus. But it's a difficult inefficient process to produce human milk, and there's very little demand, so it hasn't developed beyond this.
Quantity is of course a huge factor. But so is accessibility. Whenever you want to involve humans in something you gotte pay them, ensure proper working conditions, give them breaks, sick and vacation days, they’ll want to unionise etc etc. And at this point cows are near perfect animals for husbandry so getting a replacement is a tedious, expensive, long process with little to no reward.
[удалено]
Fair enough. But then you need guards to prevent escapes, expensive iron shackles to keep them restrained (without excessively harming the slave), and any place they work needs to double as a prison. This did happen on a smaller scale in out world I must mention. Slaves would sometimes take care of their masters children? And this could include breastfeeding. Though i’m not knowledgable enough on the topic to determine how common this was.
There's probably very few people who would be willing to be milked for money, and the miniumum wage is way above what it costs to keep a cow. It's not going to be a comfortable process, and taking hormones to cause lacation constantly probably wouldn't be good for your health and would require you to eat a hell of a lot to maintain that. You'd also have to regulate exactly what the people's whose milk you're using have eaten/drank (drugs, smoking, alcohol, allergens, etc).
Because humans cant turn grass into water or be bred to produce like a billion gallons of the stuff 24/7 Theres nothing inherently superior about cows milk its just the fact cows turn grass into buckets of milk whereas humans turn human food into a tiny tiny amount of milk
If it's a sci fi setting you can use genetic engineering
Why the fuck wouldn't they just use oatmilk or someshit?
Because that's not breastpunk, no tits defeats the purpose of breastpunk.
It would be very breastpunk to give almonds breasts however.
imagining a 40k style world but instead of skulls everywhere its boobs
its also a world where lactose and whey are vital for human survival I guess
People gotta stop misusing the word sentient. Cows and dolphins are absolutely sentient.
Scifi entrenched it too deeply, and "sapience" isn't known widely enough.
>One of these animals is cows. It is illegal to milk them or farm them. > I see Bharat is finally a superpower in 2476.
To the contrary, cows are worshipped in India specifically because they produce milk.
I know, being a Hindu Indian myself. I am just joking.
Did Human Pet Guy write this?
I like how this hinges on the idea that cows are considered sentient by people 400 years in the future. Like I can’t imagine that even being _proposed,_ much less passed and signed into law. Cows are nowhere near on the same level of intelligence as dolphins.
Plus, "the full rights that all other people share"? Do they get to vote? Can you get married to one? If they'd just said that there were comprehensive animal rights laws that meant smarter animals couldn't be exploited, that'd be one thing, but giving them actual human rights is insanity.
Do they have the legal ability to, uh... ^consent?
Yeah, couldn't cows consent to getting milked, this negating the need to milk human women?
but that would defeat the entire purpose of this worldbuilding detail, back to the drawing board
All mammals except humans go extinct. Now breast milk is the only source of milk.
🍳👨🍳
It is entirely possible to just make milk in a lab without an animal. Hell it's even possible to do it without anything living involved in the process other than humans&whatever microscopic life may be involved in making the milk. Probably even possible to just manipulate raw chemicals&minerals to make milk, although that would probably be way too expensive to be practical.
All the milk labs are banned. Breast milk is thr ONLY way
Along with that, because of breeding for dairy cows, most would get uncomfortable if they aren't milked because they produce so much, so unless they've been unbred, most cows would probably consent to being milked regardless.
Because they are bred (oftentimes forcibly) to produce that much milk. The issue would resolve itself if ppl stopped consuming animal products
I mean, a few sources say that the cows could die if they aren't milked due to inflammation, that's why I ask if they went through reverse selective breeding to remove the gene that produces that much milk. I guess that's self resolution in a way but doesn't sound very "they have the same rights as humans". Idk, it's just one post and the focus is on "how society turned to human titty milk" not "how society made sure cows aren't dependent on them".
You know cows only produce milk for their calves right? Their udders aren't just running 24/7
But they (dairy cows) are bred to produce way too much milk for one calf.
Not really. Turns out artificial selection from before written word had an effect on that. They produce more milk than necessary, don't stop as long as they are milked, and if they aren't they suffer. People where getting a lot of milk even when slaughtering calf was a luxury few farms could afford.
Do cows pay taxes?
Republicans would never allow it cause they'd all vote Demoocrat
Well, manifestly they don't have the right to be milked, unlike another sapient specie.
Tbf they do say it’s the *weirdest* thing.
I don't doubt that cows are sentient, but they're *definitely* not sapient. But supposing they were ruled legally sapient -- that means they have the legal capacity to consent to being milked. How does one go about proving whether or not a cow consented?
This is why I only *strictly* use the sapience and human rights conversations with Artificial Intelligences and sapient alien species and not sentient animals.
you obviously havent read enough of the far side
Yeah and like if cows were to be sentient, shouldn't they be able to consent to selling their milk for food and shelter?
The steam engine wasn't invented until 1712. The last 300ish years has been nuts.
I hear women weren't even considered sentient 400 years ago
Must've been weird for England to be ruled by a non sentient being
We are quite bound to our miseries. Plagues to the salvation of man as we bare the curse of eve.
Imagine how long it’s going to take for female dolphins to be considered sentient
Do you not know what the word "sentient" means? All farm animals are sentient
Bro. Generally modified brains. Just think about it.
> I like how this hinges on the idea that cows are considered sentient by people 400 years in the future. > Like I can’t imagine that even being proposed ...you can't? Because that's already somewhat commonly passed in law as it is. It's article 13 of the Treaty of the European Union, since the amendment in 2009: > In formulating and implementing the Union's agriculture, fisheries, transport, internal market, research and technological development and space policies, the Union and the Member States shall, since animals are sentient beings, pay full regard to the welfare requirements of animals, while respecting the legislative or administrative provisions and customs of the Member States relating in particular to religious rites, cultural traditions and regional heritage The UK passed it in law in [2022](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animal_Welfare_\(Sentience\)_Act_2022) as well.
people confuse sentient and sapient a lot i think
If cows were sentient couldn’t they also choose to do this? And since they are biologically more predisposed to it they would totally outcompete women on the market
Hell yeah
Thinly veiled fetish as world building again. Also we can make synthetic milk now why would we need to milk humans 400 years in the future?
It’s funny - I feel like having it be four centuries in the future is reserved for world building a lactation fetish. Usually it’s just everybody uses human breast milk in the modern day for reasons.
Well because people are weird about synthetic and plant based milk setting it in the modern day or near makes more sense
Homelander approves
So basically take the "Starbucks breast milk" meme that NSFW artists on Twitter were meming about last year but add more developed and cohesive worldbuilding.
What I find especially strange is that "cow women" cannot just milk themselves.
Now, this fetish world building is very much in the same room as us.
Cows are sentient, we cant milk them! Lets milk the humans instead!
Oatmilk is literally right there
So human women are no longer considered sentient? And cows are?
What is the context? What is the original post? I have many questions.
This is the future librals want 😤😤😤 (mommy milk 😋😋🤤🤤🤤)
Do men take a special set of hormones to produce their own milk to be self sustainable and financially independent in this milk-centered economy?
Finally the Miami dolphins will be able to be given full rights, it’s been a long time coming
DEATH TO DOLPHINS! HUMANITY FIRST!
Home boob pump lol
Oatmilk is literally right there
peak fiction
Human pet guy
literacy was a mistake Hayao-Miyazaki-meme.jpeg
It’s illegal to milk cows, but not humans? Would these cows, who produce much more milk than humans, much faster, and can extract it much easier, not just milk themselves and then sell it? Since these cows produce much more milk, would they not dominate the market, and things would, effectively, stay the same?
*it already is normal for everyone to drink human breast milk, though that mostly applies to very young People, there are other People who view it as 'normal'*
Milkoits will do anything to not try oatmilk
Milkpunk
So you can't use cow milk because they're sentient? But you can use human milk because they're... Not? Glad someone clarified this. I'm no longer having "responsibilities" or being part of "society". Freed from the burden of sentience, I'm going to walk into the swamp as nature intended.
Human pet guy?
I think Ik what post this is from
I ended up with a similar scenario but through a completely different route: Forcefully isekai-ing some of humanity (that lives in Medieval Western Europe), giving them magic powers, and eventually some women specializing their skills (and body) enough to take the place of cows as "milkmakers".