VeggieBoards banner
1 - 20 of 151 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
319 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
"Icing on the cake"

It's a term people use sometimes. (I'm not referring to anybody here)

It's just something I remember, and it's extremely offensive. I'm just curious if anybody else feels the same way.

I'll try to explain:

My ethics- core to my identity and who I strive to be as a good person- are only icing on the cake?

"Oh, but I love the cake too!"

Great, but what is "the cake"? Take away something that important- scraping it off as mere icing- and really what is left?

Take away my ethics, and you have a hedonistic shell of a person. The burnt stuff stuck to the bottom of the pan because you forgot to oil it. A bag of organs chugging away only because they have yet to die. A warm body.

"But I love you for you."

And you'd say that to anybody, but in essence, you'd generally be satisfied with the average meat eating beer chugging middle-aged frat boy? Just as in-love? Just as happy and committed?

And while you say you love me for "me", whatever that means, you don't really want or require anybody like me because pretty much any warm body would stand in just as well, and the entirety of my moral being- any purpose I could have in life- is really just "icing".

If ethics are just "Icing on the cake", I shudder to imagine what kind of cake people find acceptable to eat.

External beauty by virtue of genetics, good career, financial stability, interpersonal charisma- those kinds of things are icing on the cake. To me, ethics are not just "Icing on the cake"; they are the cake itself.

"Oh, but I like lots of flavours of cakes. They're all special."

Whatever happened to those silly fairytale notions of "true love" and "meant to be"? That kind of flexible thinking isn't love; it's convenience. It doesn't matter who the person is, just that they're available? That's not special!

Cognitive dissonance is great at providing retroactive reasons for why you "love" somebody, but no matter how special you say they are (or even convince yourself that they are) they really aren't special to you- actions speak a lot louder than words, and by very definition the nature of a person can't really be inherently special to you when you fail to make any true distinctions between that person and others. They are not special just because you randomly picked them- special is found in the qualities of a thing; it is demonstrated only in deliberate discernment.

If you aren't set on an ethical veg*n cake, regardless of the actual icing, and would be just as pleased with any old lump of pseudo-ethics provided they're packaged in handsome and charm, then you really don't love me for me- you don't want *me* in particular, or even somebody who is generally like me, you just want a warm body. At best you're just infatuated by the packaging, or are in love with the idea of being in love but really don't care or know who I am.

I'm not saying that there is a "one" for each person, but is it too much to ask for some more concrete standards that differentiate me from that guy outside puking in the street? Not to say that only "one in the world" is romantic, but is it too much to ask for one in a million? Maybe one in a thousand? One in a hundred, even?


I don't want to start any arguments; I'm just curious if anybody can relate.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
2,861 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by vepurusg View Post

"Icing on the cake"
I don't want to start any arguments; I'm just curious if anybody can relate.
Relate entirely


Morality and Ethics are what seperates man from beast.

IMHO anyone who lets physical attraction overide their partners lack of morality ethics is not much better than a dog or barbary ape.

Nowt wrong with dogs or barbary apes, obviously, BUT!

To be a dog or a barbary ape when you have the ability to be much more is just a tragic waste.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,548 Posts
I wanna put my icing on your cake.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
2,587 Posts
I luv this term. Not sure why u think it has anything to do with ethics?

Or is this your way of talking about your relationship maybe?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,079 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by vepurusg View Post

My ethics- core to my identity and who I strive to be as a good person- are only icing on the cake?

"Oh, but I love the cake too!"

Great, but what is "the cake"? Take away something that important- scraping it off as mere icing- and really what is left?

Take away my ethics, and you have a hedonistic shell of a person. The burnt stuff stuck to the bottom of the pan because you forgot to oil it. A bag of organs chugging away only because they have yet to die. A warm body.
I don't interpret the saying quite the way you do.
I don't really hear people say that too often anymore, but if/when it is used, and in a case where someone might be saying it to you, it means you are already quite awesome. The fact that you have morals/ethics makes it all that much better, because maybe the person saying "it's the icing on the cake" doesn't know too many people like you. I don't know...maybe I'm not understanding your post?
I really, really like cake...give it to me with lots of icing and I'm pretty much
Icing is a great thing, making something that is really good, even better.
Now, if someone doesn't like icing, it's a whole other story...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
319 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clueless Git View Post

Relate entirely

[...]
To be a dog or a barbary ape when you have the ability to be much more is just a tragic waste.
Thanks! Yes, another great way to phrase it. Denying our overwhelmingly important memetic natures just for the convenience of satisfying some base instincts more quickly.

It's a real shame.

That same denial, at least from what I've seen, is what leads most veg*ns to recidivism.

They couple with an omnivore, fall "in love", and then the next onslaught of cognitive dissonance kicks in.

"I love him/her"
-"Because/therefore he/she is a good person"
"He/she eats meat"

Contradiction. Does not compute...
Re-evaluation of premises:

Conclusion: "Eating meat must not be so bad."

Consistency reached.

Gradual erosion of moral fibre.

Anybody who is willing to forfeit that kind of morality for immediate emotional and physical gratification is, in my opinion, on a very slippery slope.

Everybody assumes that he or she is stronger than that, and it won't happen to him or her. "That's just other people that happens to" Somehow everybody thinks him or herself immune to fundamental human psychological hangups.

Quote:
Originally Posted by luvourmother View Post

Or is this your way of talking about your relationship maybe?
I mean when stated in regards to ethics being that icing.

I'm not talking about any relationship in particular. I'm too much of a snob to be in a relationship anyway.


I just focus on work. I was just reminded of that from a few years ago, and was wondering if anybody felt the same way. Just curious.

Quote:
Originally Posted by karenlovessnow View Post

it means you are already quite awesome. The fact that you have morals/ethics makes it all that much better, because maybe the person saying "it's the icing on the cake" doesn't know too many people like you. I don't know...maybe I'm not understanding your post?
It's one of those offensive compliments. They're trying to say that you are awesome, but they end up doing it in a way that reveals that they don't really consider your morality to be essential.

Consider the question of "Why do you want to be with *me* specifically and not somebody else?"

Very few people can actually answer that with anything meaningful.

Honestly: "You were single at the time I happened to be looking"

Oh, wow, I'm really special.


Sappily: "I love you"

Happenstance and hormones- that says little about me. Why?

Good try: "Because you're vegan"

Oh, so you wouldn't be with an omnivore? What about your last significant other?

Now it's just offensive: "Well, I mean that's icing on the cake."

So it's not necessary then- you evidently don't think it's a requirement. Why me and not somebody else if such a quality is so easily interchangeable with any other desirable quality?

The bottom line is that, ethics being icing, means they like that quality, but they don't really care- it could be exchanged for anything else beyond the basic "cake"

Maybe I'm vegan, but the other person gives better massages- it's a wash then? My ethics are just some superficial bonus material?

No, that's not OK.


Now if they said: "You're a good, moral person, and that's what I care about and love about you and I wouldn't have anything else. That you're cute is icing on the cake"

That I'll take.


I hope that makes sense.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,483 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Envy View Post

I wanna put my icing on your cake.
You can ice my cake anytime


To the op: I'm not entirely sure I followed your train of thought, but it sounds like maybe you are having relationship trouble. Maybe take some time to yourself and think things through. Good luck!


Also, for the record: icing is the best part of the cake. I always asked my mom to double frost my birthday cakes.


Another aside: as to the 'it was meant to be' and 'true love' bits: 1)I don't believe in predestination. How can something be meant to be with out it? Then in that case, wouldn't *everything* be meant to be, from the profound (Love at first sight!) to the banal (I was meant to eat mashed potatoes today). Just a thought.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
319 Posts
Discussion Starter · #9 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kibbleforlola View Post

To the op: I'm not entirely sure I followed your train of thought, but it sounds like maybe you are having relationship trouble. Maybe take some time to yourself and think things through. Good luck!
Oh, no, no relationship trouble. I'm married to my work. Thanks though


I suppose some day I'll need to start collecting cats... or dogs. Maybe both.

This is just conceptual.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kibbleforlola View Post

Another aside: as to the 'it was meant to be' and 'true love' bits: 1)I don't believe in predestination. How can something be meant to be with out it? Then in that case, wouldn't *everything* be meant to be, from the profound (Love at first sight!) to the banal (I was meant to eat mashed potatoes today). Just a thought.
I was speaking somewhat figuratively.

Conscious predestination is not a coherent concept. There is causality, but the universe functions in accordance with wave mechanics of quantum probability; every outcome being consequence with respect to its probability density. Anyway, that's neither here nor there.

I was just referencing classically romantic memes for comparison.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,483 Posts
Classically romantic memes are often rooted in misogyny. Who would want that?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
319 Posts
Discussion Starter · #11 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kibbleforlola View Post

Classically romantic memes are often rooted in misogyny. Who would want that?
Not all of them. I just meant the ones you mentioned; the not quite so misogynistic ones.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,483 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by vepurusg View Post

Not all of them. I just meant the ones you mentioned; the not quite so misogynistic ones.
You mean the one's you mentioned? All I did is bring up the ones you had previously mentioned. And yes, 'love at first sight' is most definitely rooted in misogyny.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
319 Posts
Discussion Starter · #13 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kibbleforlola View Post

You mean the one's you mentioned? All I did is bring up the ones you had previously mentioned. And yes, 'love at first sight' is most definitely rooted in misogyny.
Oh, I thought you knew I thought you mentioned the ones I mentioned. I didn't mention "love at first sight", but I guess you did, so I think I thought you thought what I thought, which was in error because you thought additional thoughts that you may or may not have thought that I thought but which in retrospect I think you're now thinking I thought but didn't.

Okay, well at least I'm glad we've cleared that up.

As to "Love at first sight"; It's definitely superficial, but what makes you think it's misogynistic? Unless you just mean that in the sense that superficiality has typically been, and in regards to the one way predator-prey relationship it seems to imply in the typical case?

But in that sense, one could easily say that anything short of modern feminism is misogynistic due to the cultural ubiquity in most ancient societies. Is it not ever appropriate to reclaim old concepts? To reforge them in the context of greater equality, while still paying some respect to the more positive aspects of their powerful memetic heritages.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,910 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by vepurusg View Post

"Icing on the cake"

It's a term people use sometimes. (I'm not referring to anybody here)

It's just something I remember, and it's extremely offensive. I'm just curious if anybody else feels the same way.

I'll try to explain:

My ethics- core to my identity and who I strive to be as a good person- are only icing on the cake?

"Oh, but I love the cake too!"

Great, but what is "the cake"? Take away something that important- scraping it off as mere icing- and really what is left?

Take away my ethics, and you have a hedonistic shell of a person. The burnt stuff stuck to the bottom of the pan because you forgot to oil it. A bag of organs chugging away only because they have yet to die. A warm body.

"But I love you for you."

And you'd say that to anybody, but in essence, you'd generally be satisfied with the average meat eating beer chugging middle-aged frat boy? Just as in-love? Just as happy and committed?

And while you say you love me for "me", whatever that means, you don't really want or require anybody like me because pretty much any warm body would stand in just as well, and the entirety of my moral being- any purpose I could have in life- is really just "icing".

If ethics are just "Icing on the cake", I shudder to imagine what kind of cake people find acceptable to eat.

External beauty by virtue of genetics, good career, financial stability, interpersonal charisma- those kinds of things are icing on the cake. To me, ethics are not just "Icing on the cake"; they are the cake itself.

"Oh, but I like lots of flavours of cakes. They're all special."

Whatever happened to those silly fairytale notions of "true love" and "meant to be"? That kind of flexible thinking isn't love; it's convenience. It doesn't matter who the person is, just that they're available? That's not special!

Cognitive dissonance is great at providing retroactive reasons for why you "love" somebody, but no matter how special you say they are (or even convince yourself that they are) they really aren't special to you- actions speak a lot louder than words, and by very definition the nature of a person can't really be inherently special to you when you fail to make any true distinctions between that person and others. They are not special just because you randomly picked them- special is found in the qualities of a thing; it is demonstrated only in deliberate discernment.

If you aren't set on an ethical veg*n cake, regardless of the actual icing, and would be just as pleased with any old lump of pseudo-ethics provided they're packaged in handsome and charm, then you really don't love me for me- you don't want *me* in particular, or even somebody who is generally like me, you just want a warm body. At best you're just infatuated by the packaging, or are in love with the idea of being in love but really don't care or know who I am.

I'm not saying that there is a "one" for each person, but is it too much to ask for some more concrete standards that differentiate me from that guy outside puking in the street? Not to say that only "one in the world" is romantic, but is it too much to ask for one in a million? Maybe one in a thousand? One in a hundred, even?


I don't want to start any arguments; I'm just curious if anybody can relate.
Okay.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,075 Posts
I find icing to be terribly offensive. Last night my mother iced a banana cake, and I was extremely upset. I cannot get over her insensitivity, she knows how I feel about icing, and yet she still did it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,075 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clueless Git View Post

IMHO anyone who lets physical attraction overide their partners lack of morality ethics is not much better than a dog or barbary ape.

Nowt wrong with dogs or barbary apes, obviously, BUT!

To be a dog or a barbary ape when you have the ability to be much more is just a tragic waste.
*Nods*. If I am going out with a guy and he turns out to be a barbary ape, I break up with him immediately.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,910 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Freesia View Post

I find icing to be terribly offensive. Last night my mother iced a banana cake, and I was extremely upset. I cannot get over her insensitivity, she knows how I feel about icing, and yet she still did it.
This post has been reported for being off-topic. Try to keep any posts like this in he "Stupid Cakes Omnivores Ice" thread.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,609 Posts
MOD POST

If you aren't interested in the OP's post, just don't respond. Any further sarcastic or off-topic posts will be deleted. Not sure why you all think it's so funny, but we do have a rule against off-topic posting that the mods DO try to enforce.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
7,160 Posts
Can somebody who understood it please paraphrase the original post in 100 words or less? I really do not understand what the point is?
 
1 - 20 of 151 Posts
Top