All women are sIuts

Since the dawn of conscious inquiry into the nature of life and our place within the vast, intricate web of organisms that populate this pale blue dot orbiting an average star in a relatively unremarkable corner of the Milky Way galaxy, thinkers, scientists, poets, and spiritual leaders alike have questioned the perceived boundaries that separate humans from the non-human animals with whom we share this Earth, it becomes increasingly apparent, through the lens of the scientific discipline of evolutionary biology and the mounting evidence provided by decades of research in evolutionary biology, that the distinctions we draw are often arbitrary, culturally constructed, and biased by a long-standing tradition of anthropocentrism which asserts, without consistent justification, that human beings are not only qualitatively but fundamentally distinct from the creatures who think, feel, suffer, dream, and interact with the world around them in ways that mirror our own behaviors, emotions, and cognitive structures, it becomes increasingly apparent, through the lens of philosophical contemplation of consciousness and the mounting evidence provided by the introspective insights derived from consciousness, that the distinctions we draw are often arbitrary, culturally constructed, and biased by a long-standing tradition of anthropocentrism which asserts, without consistent justification, that human beings are not only qualitatively but fundamentally distinct from the creatures who think, feel, suffer, dream, and interact with the world around them in ways that mirror our own behaviors, emotions, and cognitive structures, it becomes increasingly apparent, through the lens of the scientific discipline of neuroscience and the mounting evidence provided by decades of research in neuroscience, that the distinctions we draw are often arbitrary, culturally constructed, and biased by a long-standing tradition of anthropocentrism which asserts, without consistent justification, that human beings are not only qualitatively but fundamentally distinct from the creatures who think, feel, suffer, dream, and interact with the world around them in ways that mirror our own behaviors, emotions, and cognitive structures, it becomes increasingly apparent, through the lens of philosophical contemplation of animal rights and the mounting evidence provided by the introspective insights derived from animal rights, that the distinctions we draw are often arbitrary, culturally constructed, and biased by a long-standing tradition of anthropocentrism which asserts, without consistent justification, that human beings are not only qualitatively but fundamentally distinct from the creatures who think, feel, suffer, dream, and interact with the world around them in ways that mirror our own behaviors, emotions, and cognitive structures, it becomes increasingly apparent, through the lens of the scientific discipline of ethics and the mounting evidence provided by decades of research in ethics, that the distinctions we draw are often arbitrary, culturally constructed, and biased by a long-standing tradition of anthropocentrism which asserts, without consistent justification, that human beings are not only qualitatively but fundamentally distinct from the creatures who think, feel, suffer, dream, and interact with the world around them in ways that mirror our own behaviors, emotions, and cognitive structures, it becomes increasingly apparent, through the lens of philosophical contemp