6 ms·

I don't even understand the whole cut flower thing. It's morbid. You cultivate something that is living and beautiful. Then you kill it, and bring the corpse i

by bostik 7y ago

I don't even understand the whole cut flower thing. It's morbid. You cultivate something that is living and beautiful. Then you kill it, and bring the corpse inside, to essentially observe the once-living thing's decay. (And don't get me started on giving cut flowers as gifts. If your host is an animal lover, you don't pick up roadkill on your way over, either.)

anigbrowl 7y ago
Flowers are nature's billboards to promote pollination. I let a lot of trees and plants run wild around my home, partly because I enjoy looking at bees. Plants flower and then let the flowers die as soon as they've served their purpose; and the competition between plants for space and sunlight is also aggressive. If you let nature take its course, you have to get used to seeing lots of death as different plants kill each other off and run into the limits of their environment. Also, a lot of the real action is happening underground, where most of the nutrients are - sunlight and CO2 are only part of the equation, and for some plants being trimmed back is no more of a big deal than getting a haircut. I get your point, but it's also a reflection of your own psychological state. People mostly like flowers to bring some nature into their home; they could also cultivate houseplants, but that's a lot more work and if you try cultivating multiple plants together they are likely to either kill each other or attract bugs. The transience of flowers isn't inherently morbid, for the same reason you can be vegetarian but still wear woolen clothes.
kinkrtyavimoodh 7y ago
Merely using words with shock value isn't going to help your case. Yes when you sneeze often in spring it's because of plant bukkake in your nose and when you eat saffron you are munching on plant dicks. What's your point?
- lifeisstillgood 7y ago
  Great, that saffron scented curry I was looking forward to after the lockdown just got scratched off my list. :-)
- Razengan 7y ago
  Hiding the facts of something with sugar-coated words isn’t going to help your case. Yes most bizarre and grotesque customs continue as long as agree upon them without questioning their value. It was also perfectly fine to own people as property and throw virgins into volcanoes, once. What’s your point?
  - crispyporkbites 7y ago
    When has it ever been fine to throw virgins into volcanoes? And slavery has always been opposed by huge numbers of people, theses things have never been considered "fine" or comparable to having flowers in a vase.
    - Balero 7y ago
      Whilst I agree with your general point, some of what you said isn't quite right. Human sacrifice has a long history. Though it was, as far as I'm aware, a rare and drastic thing to do. For example there were a few instances in classical Roman history when human slaves were sacrificed. This was done in very dire situations, think pandemic or important battle, and often in earlier Roman periods. It was also actually quite common in Aztec and Mayan, though in differing degrees. They didn't however use volcanoes Also in these classical times human slavery was much more wide spread and accepted. It was a very different situation to modern and colonial slavery. Some examples of it being wide spread being helots in ancient Greece, and the slave economy of Rome. The influx of slaves in the gallic wars lead to the political upheaval that let Cesar come to power, with "cheap" labor taking work from Roman citizens. To summarize, having flowers in a vase is completely normal, and likening it to slavery or human sacrifice is dumb. Also history is interesting!
      - Razengan 7y ago
        > having flowers in a vase is completely normal Why?
  - easytiger 7y ago
    Are you genuinely calling flowers a > bizarre and grotesque custom And comparing it to slavery?
- lsb 7y ago
  I'm pretty sure that's a great new botanical OnlyFans
- bostik 7y ago
  I have learned that vivid imagery, when used sparingly, helps to drive the point through. For the record: I have never liked cut flowers as a concept, and even find flower vase the second most useless household item that one can own. But as to your snark, I actually DO refer to the high-pollen times as plant-orgy season. Not all the time, but often enough.
staz 7y ago
Relevant SMBC https://www.smbc-comics.com/comic/2012-04-28 https://www.smbc-comics.com/comic/2012-04-28
easytiger 7y ago
I suppose you make all your food look as awful as possible, take no effort with your appearance, live in a room of squalor, for the aesthetic has no value or purpose?
- Razengan 7y ago
  All that because they questions the florist trade? What sort of mental gymnastics does one even make to pull that logic: I suppose you only eat what you kill yourself, adorn yourself with the carcasses of dead animals, live in a house decorated with taxidermy, just for the aesthetic value?
  - easytiger 7y ago
    I think you've misunderstood the point. And have tried to wittily turn it around and now you make no sense. > questions the florist trade? No, but because he considers it so evil. The incels really need to get back in their boxes.
thinkingemote 7y ago
It's an attractive.view as it's easy to understand but ultimately simple view of the world which ignores a range of human experience. Similar to the case for not eating meat, or not going to war. Both of which are noble and good but are more complex deeper down.
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
Scapeghost 7y ago
> If your host is an animal lover, you don't pick up roadkill on your way over, either. It all comes down to the "plants don't have feelings/aren't really alive" bias we have. Some people will go to great contorted lengths to justify the destruction of something, using words like tradition, aesthetics or honor and justice (like for war) or just "the way it has always been", and if you try to call them out on it, they'll get angry at you for trying to stop them from destroying something (as seen in the other comments here) :)

by bostik 7y ago

anigbrowl 7y ago

Flowers are nature's billboards to promote pollination. I let a lot of trees and plants run wild around my home, partly because I enjoy looking at bees. Plants flower and then let the flowers die as soon as they've served their purpose; and the competition between plants for space and sunlight is also aggressive. If you let nature take its course, you have to get used to seeing lots of death as different plants kill each other off and run into the limits of their environment. Also, a lot of the real action is happening underground, where most of the nutrients are - sunlight and CO2 are only part of the equation, and for some plants being trimmed back is no more of a big deal than getting a haircut. I get your point, but it's also a reflection of your own psychological state. People mostly like flowers to bring some nature into their home; they could also cultivate houseplants, but that's a lot more work and if you try cultivating multiple plants together they are likely to either kill each other or attract bugs. The transience of flowers isn't inherently morbid, for the same reason you can be vegetarian but still wear woolen clothes.

kinkrtyavimoodh 7y ago

Merely using words with shock value isn't going to help your case. Yes when you sneeze often in spring it's because of plant bukkake in your nose and when you eat saffron you are munching on plant dicks. What's your point?

lifeisstillgood 7y ago
Great, that saffron scented curry I was looking forward to after the lockdown just got scratched off my list. :-)
Razengan 7y ago
Hiding the facts of something with sugar-coated words isn’t going to help your case. Yes most bizarre and grotesque customs continue as long as agree upon them without questioning their value. It was also perfectly fine to own people as property and throw virgins into volcanoes, once. What’s your point?
- crispyporkbites 7y ago
  When has it ever been fine to throw virgins into volcanoes? And slavery has always been opposed by huge numbers of people, theses things have never been considered "fine" or comparable to having flowers in a vase.
  - Balero 7y ago
    Whilst I agree with your general point, some of what you said isn't quite right. Human sacrifice has a long history. Though it was, as far as I'm aware, a rare and drastic thing to do. For example there were a few instances in classical Roman history when human slaves were sacrificed. This was done in very dire situations, think pandemic or important battle, and often in earlier Roman periods. It was also actually quite common in Aztec and Mayan, though in differing degrees. They didn't however use volcanoes Also in these classical times human slavery was much more wide spread and accepted. It was a very different situation to modern and colonial slavery. Some examples of it being wide spread being helots in ancient Greece, and the slave economy of Rome. The influx of slaves in the gallic wars lead to the political upheaval that let Cesar come to power, with "cheap" labor taking work from Roman citizens. To summarize, having flowers in a vase is completely normal, and likening it to slavery or human sacrifice is dumb. Also history is interesting!
    - Razengan 7y ago
      > having flowers in a vase is completely normal Why?
- easytiger 7y ago
  Are you genuinely calling flowers a > bizarre and grotesque custom And comparing it to slavery?
lsb 7y ago
I'm pretty sure that's a great new botanical OnlyFans
bostik 7y ago
I have learned that vivid imagery, when used sparingly, helps to drive the point through. For the record: I have never liked cut flowers as a concept, and even find flower vase the second most useless household item that one can own. But as to your snark, I actually DO refer to the high-pollen times as plant-orgy season. Not all the time, but often enough.

staz 7y ago

Relevant SMBC https://www.smbc-comics.com/comic/2012-04-28 https://www.smbc-comics.com/comic/2012-04-28

easytiger 7y ago

I suppose you make all your food look as awful as possible, take no effort with your appearance, live in a room of squalor, for the aesthetic has no value or purpose?

Razengan 7y ago
All that because they questions the florist trade? What sort of mental gymnastics does one even make to pull that logic: I suppose you only eat what you kill yourself, adorn yourself with the carcasses of dead animals, live in a house decorated with taxidermy, just for the aesthetic value?
- easytiger 7y ago
  I think you've misunderstood the point. And have tried to wittily turn it around and now you make no sense. > questions the florist trade? No, but because he considers it so evil. The incels really need to get back in their boxes.

thinkingemote 7y ago

It's an attractive.view as it's easy to understand but ultimately simple view of the world which ignores a range of human experience. Similar to the case for not eating meat, or not going to war. Both of which are noble and good but are more complex deeper down.

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]

Scapeghost 7y ago

> If your host is an animal lover, you don't pick up roadkill on your way over, either. It all comes down to the "plants don't have feelings/aren't really alive" bias we have. Some people will go to great contorted lengths to justify the destruction of something, using words like tradition, aesthetics or honor and justice (like for war) or just "the way it has always been", and if you try to call them out on it, they'll get angry at you for trying to stop them from destroying something (as seen in the other comments here) :)