Animal cruelty

[Claudius]

Yeah I know you were seeing my line of reasoning DW. Its a tricky issue. I actually eat meat but I tried for a year or two to be a vegetarian, but after spending vacation time with meat eating family and feeling left out in the cold eating a potatoe and toast I gave up. It was hard to do because I don't like the health nut cuisine I want more of a yum yum vegetarian cuisine.

So when I say its just that we like the taste of meat perhaps I am speaking for myself.

But that did make me think the comment on cannabilism. Its actually probably partially true that we don't eat humans do to taboo. I would like to think that we don't want to harm them is the principle reason. But I guess its more cultural and habitual.

[dragon wench]

Yeah I know you were seeing my line of reasoning DW. Its a tricky issue. I actually eat meat but I tried for a year or two to be a vegetarian, but after spending vacation time with meat eating family and feeling left out in the cold eating a potatoe and toast I gave up. It was hard to do because I don't like the health nut cuisine I want more of a yum yum vegetarian cuisine.

So when I say its just that we like the taste of meat perhaps I am speaking for myself.

But that did make me think the comment on cannabilism. Its actually probably partially true that we don't eat humans do to taboo. I would like to think that we don't want to harm them is the principle reason. But I guess its more cultural and habitual.

As I mentioned I have been a vegetarian, and I'm actually pretty health conscious. I know what you mean about the health nut "cuisine" though... Most of it is God awful, and the person cooking it , even more so than with other types of food, needs to know what they are doing. I gave up on pure vegetarianism, though, when I became pregnant, I was rarely hungry and I found that digesting all of the grains, beans and nuts (critical for protein complementarity) was just too difficult. Once my son was born, I found I needed the additional energy from meat protein, and even though I still eat a lot of vegetarian food, I've never returned to cutting meat out of my diet.

Regarding the cannibalism taboo, I suspect it is as much biologically-based as it is cultural.... after all it doesn't exactly promote "survival of the species."

[Dagoth_shel]

Just the thought of the workers in the 1900's who fell into the vats, forgotten till their bones were found and their matter sent out as Durham's Pure Leaf Lard, makes me seriously throw up...

To quote from Upton Sincliar:

"....there would be meat that had tumbled out on the floor, in the dirt and sawdust, where the workers spat..."

This still happens today, which is a part of my argument against the nation's choices in health. Dees-gusting.

Which is why I'm becoming a vegetarian.

[BlueSky]

Soylent Green ....yummy:laugh:

[dragon wench]

Just the thought of the workers in the 1900's who fell into the vats, forgotten till their bones were found and their matter sent out as Durham's Pure Leaf Lard, makes me seriously throw up...

To quote from Upton Sincliar:

"....there would be meat that had tumbled out on the floor, in the dirt and sawdust, where the workers spat..."

This still happens today, which is a part of my argument against the nation's choices in health. Dees-gusting.

Which is why I'm becoming a vegetarian.

You do realise that when Upton Sinclair wrote "The Jungle" he was making a concerted argument... Right? And you also realise that his focus was exploitation and not food safety, right?

I often find Wikipedia a dubious source of information, but this excerpt sums it up quite well:

"According to Sinclair, he originally intended to expose "the inferno of exploitation [of the typical American factory worker at the turn of the 20th Century],"[3] but the reading public instead fixated on food safety as the novel's most pressing issue. In fact, Sinclair bitterly admitted his celebrity rose, "not because the public cared anything about the workers, but simply because the public did not want to eat tubercular beef"[3]. Sinclair's account of workers' falling into rendering tanks and being ground, along with animal parts, into "Durham's Pure Leaf Lard", gripped public attention. The morbidity of the working conditions, as well as the exploitation of children and women alike that Sinclair exposed showed the corruption taking place inside the meat packing factories. Foreign sales of American meat fell by one-half. In order to calm public outrage and demonstrate the cleanliness of their meat, the major meat packers lobbied the Federal government to pass legislation paying for additional inspection and certification of meat packaged in the United States. [4] Their efforts, coupled with the public outcry, led to the passage of the Meat Inspection Act and the Pure Food and Drug Act of 1906, which established the Food and Drug Administration.

Although the meatpackers lobbied the government for legislation, they did not welcome regulations. Sinclair and President Theodore Roosevelt were both integral to the passage of the Meat Inspection Act and the Pure Food and Drug Act of 1906. Roosevelt was sent multiple copies of The Jungle, including one by Sinclair himself, prompting his curiosity about meat inspection, but not much else. After much persuasion from Sinclair as to the seriousness of the situation, Roosevelt agreed to send two men to investigate Sinclair's claims. The men the president chose, Charles P. Neill and James B. Reynolds, had both done investigative work for Roosevelt before, and were thought trustworthy. Sinclair wanted Roosevelt to send his inspectors into the factories so they could see how poorly the workers were being treated; he wanted the nation to become better educated on the issue of "wage slavery". Instead of acknowledging the poor conditions and inhumane treatment of the workers, the men reported only on the cleanliness, or lack thereof, in these packing factories.

Even though the meat packers had forewarning and time to clean up, the conditions Neill and Reynolds observed were described as "revolting". The only claim in Sinclair's work which they failed to substantiate was that workers who had fallen into rendering vats were left and sold as lard. Roosevelt was so concerned about the impact of Neill and Reynold's report on western stock growers and European meat importers that he did not release the findings for publication. Instead, he helped the issue by dropping hints from the report, alluding to disgusting conditions and inadequate inspection measures. This pressure was adequate, although the bill that was finally passed did not include dating cans of meat or charging the packers for inspection costs.[5] Sinclair rejected the legislation, as he viewed it as an unjustified boon to large meat packers partially because the U.S. was to bear the costs of inspection at $3,000,000 a year.[6][7] He famously noted the limited effect of his book by stating, "I aimed at the public's heart, and by accident I hit it in the stomach."

If you are saying workers still fall into rendering tanks today, you wouldn't happen to have any solid, documented evidence would you? There isn't even clear substantiation that those who fell in the 1900s were actually left there and turned into lard.

I'm not saying, necessarily that it doesn't happen, but when you make claims like that you need to back yourself up.

[jklinders]

Just the thought of the workers in the 1900's who fell into the vats, forgotten till their bones were found and their matter sent out as Durham's Pure Leaf Lard, makes me seriously throw up...

To quote from Upton Sincliar:

"....there would be meat that had tumbled out on the floor, in the dirt and sawdust, where the workers spat..."

This still happens today, which is a part of my argument against the nation's choices in health. Dees-gusting.

Which is why I'm becoming a vegetarian.

Having worked in the food industry for 13 years I actually find these assertions insulting, but would forgive you if you could at least provide a credible source. Any food plant in the US or Canada caught providing product in such conditions would at the very least be sanctioned and fined. Failure to comply would result in shutdown.

Veggies are factory produced too. If you don't trust the conditions in a meat plant, try to remember, that fundamentally a veggie processing floor is not much different. Mass production of any food has risks, when you take that into account, safety is taken out of the equation and dietary choice goes back to being a matter of taste.

For every meat product scare that affected product I ordered in the restaurant I managed, there were 4 issues with veggies. Spinach and bean sprouts as well as some lettuce batches. Don't believe the anti meat propaganda my friend.

[C Elegans]

Just the thought of the workers in the 1900's who fell into the vats, forgotten till their bones were found and their matter sent out as Durham's Pure Leaf Lard, makes me seriously throw up...

To quote from Upton Sincliar:

"....there would be meat that had tumbled out on the floor, in the dirt and sawdust, where the workers spat..."

This still happens today, which is a part of my argument against the nation's choices in health. Dees-gusting.

Which is why I'm becoming a vegetarian.

There are many good reasons to become a vegetarian, but this is not one of them.

One good reason is that you may find it ethically wrong to kill and eat other animals. Another good reason is that if you make an effort to inform yourself and choose the right products, a vegetarian diet may be more environmental friendly and more healthy. However, disgust over an unfunded story from the 19th century is not.

[Demortis]

Regarding the cannibalism taboo, I suspect it is as much biologically-based as it is cultural.... after all it doesn't exactly promote "survival of the species."

Well, it would be Darwinism(sp?) at work. Besides, when it comes down to it, people taste like chicken!!!

[jklinders]

Not really trying to change hearts and minds here, just adding to my earlier point. this is a fresh article I just ran across this morning that underscores my point. Please note that peanuts are among the few sensible protein substitutes available to vegetarians. FDA upbraids peanut plant - Nova Scotia News - TheChronicleHerald.ca

[C Elegans]

I think it is important to distinguish between the question of whether it is morally acceptable or not to kill and eat other animals, and the question of maltreatment of said animals. That food production includes a lot of unnecessary cruelty to the animals we eat, is a fact. However, since it is very much possible to avoid unnecessary cruelty like painful killing methods, financially motivated bad living conditions, painful transportations etc, it is important to decide whether it is the killing and eating itself we reject, or just the unnecessary cruel treatment.

[jklinders]

I'm game CE, I am not by most definitions a cruel guy. I am one of those folks who knows just enough about where his steak comes from to not want to think about it too hard. Lets face facts though. Free range meat is on average 2-3 times more expensive than non. this means we want to be careful how we define "unnecessary" cruelty. After all, if prices go up too high, then only the very rich can have access to it.

I would be in favor of making meat "cruelty" free if it kept choice in the hands of consumers. The average person eats too much of it anyway so a small price increase would not hurt, but let us not forget we are omnivores. It is no more immoral for us to eat meat than it is for a wolf. But I will be the first to admit that the oversized steak I had for supper earlier this week was a little excessive. Moderation in all things should be the rallying cry. Veganism is the opposite of moderation, unless you are a cow or other herbavore.

[C Elegans]

I am a meat eater too, and ethically, I don't think it's an easy choice for us humans who have a choice, whether we should live as omnivores or herbivores. Thus I think people should really think through the alternatives and educate themselves about the facts behind production of both meat and vegetarian foods. For example, it is not trivial to find out exactly how everything is produced and what the impact of this production is short- and long term, ethically, financially and environmentally. We may think it is "cruel and cold hearted" to slaughter a locally produced cow and eat it, but we may not realise that the environmental impact of the transporation of the soy beans we eat instead, is far more negative for all life on earth. In my opionion, too many people choose one or the other based on insufficient information.

[jklinders]

That is is the heart of my entire belief. Buying local, whether it it is meat or plant is the most sustainable way to live of all. Not all land is equally able to raise all manner of food. Most of the land around where I live is more suited to grazing than high level grain production. Grow the wrong food on the wrong land and you make things worse rather than better.

Besides the death of field animals from the harvesting of crops is largely overlooked by those who claim veganism is cruelty free.

There are companies that harvest seafood here on the East coast of Canada, ship it out to asia for processing(somehow this is cheaper) then ship it back to us. Pretty warped eh?

[Dagoth_shel]

You do realise that when Upton Sinclair wrote "The Jungle" he was making a concerted argument... Right? And you also realise that his focus was exploitation and not food safety, right?

I often find Wikipedia a dubious source of information, but this excerpt sums it up quite well:



If you are saying workers still fall into rendering tanks today, you wouldn't happen to have any solid, documented evidence would you? There isn't even clear substantiation that those who fell in the 1900s were actually left there and turned into lard.

I'm not saying, necessarily that it doesn't happen, but when you make claims like that you need to back yourself up.

No I'm not saying that, and if you choose to be hostile about this toward me, I won't retaliate but I will dislike you. My thoughts and claims on the workers falling in are because of the families of the workers, the pain and suffering they felt when they found out they could be eating their father or son...that disturbs me to no end, I feel their pain when I think about this. So I'm not freaking saying it's going on today. Don't assume it makes an a-word out of "u and me". ALSO, I am aware that he was making "a concerted argument." Don't try to make it like I don't know anything.

[dragon wench]

Woah... take it easy there.

I was not being hostile, I was pointing out some problems with your arguments. If you come to a board like this and make sweeping claims that have little basis in fact, you must expect to be challenged.

And yes, you did say it happens today, you wrote:

"....there would be meat that had tumbled out on the floor, in the dirt and sawdust, where the workers spat..."

This still happens today, which is a part of my argument against the nation's choices in health. Dees-gusting.

[Dagoth_shel]

Oh. That. Yes, yes it does. I don't recall the video stream URL, but it was through Kentucky Fried Cruelty where the workers were listening to blaring rock music and slamming the chickens against the wall.

[Demortis]

Well, from where Im sittin we all agree that its cruelty to treat the animals so. But the thing is, even if we managed to close down the ones that were still doing this. Wouldn't it create more of a problem then what we would be tryin to solve. IE, people losing their jobs. The econamy(sp?) gettin worse. AND people wantin to cook up more Turkey's!!!!

[Moonbiter]

I've always found this whole concept very western, and quite a bit absurd. Most of the population of the world is concerned with IF they're going to eat, not what they're going to eat.

[jklinders]

I've always found this whole concept very western, and quite a bit absurd. Most of the population of the world is concerned with IF they're going to eat, not what they're going to eat.

That is just it. The abundance we enjoy in the western world gives us a bit of a laise faire attitude about the food we eat. It bears considering though that the only reason we are able to hand wring over where my evening steak comes from is the very factory farming that some people oppose. There would be no abundance without it and people would go hungry in the west (people are already going hungry as it is ever hear of food banks), just like everywhere else. Maybe that's what the wackos at PETA really want. After all, there is a signifigant faction at the most extreme of these groups that advocate a culling of the human population.

[Dagoth_shel]

I've always found this whole concept very western, and quite a bit absurd. Most of the population of the world is concerned with IF they're going to eat, not what they're going to eat.

I lol'd at this. You're sort of right

No, wait, you ARE right. But still...I tried to eat a burger yesterday and like threw up, I didn't even think of the animal...:speech: