PETA loses it...again

Hmmm sea kittens, sounds tasty.

The article does make a good point about some animals, e.g. fish, being hurt for sport & fun, while (most) people wouldn't dream of doing the same to others, incorrectly perceived as more sentient.

Quote:

The article does make a good point about some animals, e.g. fish, being hurt for sport & fun

Thanks for the wingnut input this thread needs more humour.

FYI-Fish do not feel pain, if they did they'd swim in the direction of the rod/reel.

Red Irish Lord Sea Kitten taken off Langara Island last May

[IMG]http://i37.photobucket.com/albums/e60/A_Fisher/Langara%20Island%20May%20...

Spot Prawn Sea Kittens for dinner

[IMG]http://i37.photobucket.com/albums/e60/A_Fisher/Langara%20Island%20May%20...

 

Good point Tommy; there's that term, "Charismatic megafauna," that refers to species people care about becoming endangered.

PETA launching this campaign in Montana of all places is particularly weird.  My dad is from Montana, the reddest of red states, where hunting, fishing and ranching are the state's main activities.  I remember going to the restaurant where my uncle worked as a chef, in Red Lodge, and he did us up these steaks that overlapped the plate.  Vegetables weren't a side dish; they were an afterthought, the clutter next to the meat.

When my grandpa died, my dad inherited a few of the family heirlooms, including a bear-size leg-hold trap, a gun, and a brand (for branding cattle).  I have this neat old coffee pot that you use to make coffee over a campfire.  And I used to have a set of glasses that commemorated the largest fish (eg, brown sea kittens, rainbow sea kittens, lake sea kittens, etc) of various species ever caught.

If PETA wants to be alternately ridiculed and ignored, they couldn't do much better than in Montana. 

Tommy_Paine wrote:

[...]Unfortunately, I think that Peta was highjacked by a leader who is at heart an attention junky. 

I can't quite put my finger on it, but there is something vaguely familiar about that... hmmm, damn this short term memory loss.

dp

Quote:

Meat eaters who say things like this....don't kill or butcher their own meat

You have No Idea what you're talking about.

Farmers who hand raise their own stock then kill and butcher those animals love the food they produce and have no qualms or guilt about eating what was once a sentient creature-nor should anyone.

"Meat eaters who say things like this usually don't kill or butcher their own meat. Kinda like a pro-war politician who's never been to war."

I think you miss the point entirely, Le T.  Before Peta and others,  the paradox in the quip wouldn't be apparent to anyone.  It's strikes a nerve, because there's a large number of people who know it's true-- but ignore it. 

It used to be that we believed we had exclusive domain over things like language, reason, tool making, love, terror, and even pain.  But studies over the years have made it impossible to maintain this belief.  

The more like us animals are shown to be in these regards, the less likely we seem to be to shove harpoons in them,  eat them, experiment on them, or thoughtlessly discard them when they are too old to control in front of Hollywood cameras.

I think Peta is due some credit on this score.  However, they seem to be stuck in a public relations campaign that while they have not outgrown, the general public has.

To the detriment of the ethical treatment of animals.

 

 

Was I all swoony and anthropomorphic?  I suppose if I am to be the stricktist empiricist, I am-- because we can't yet do a Vulcan Mind Meld and empirically know what's going through an animals mind at any given time.

However,  given the survival utility concerning things we call "emotions", or physical pain, it would be a gargantuan leap of faith to think those things we are "anthropomophizing" aren't really being experienced in the minds of those animals.

Don't get me wrong, Sineed, I am a species chauvanist.  I eat meat from that perspective.  I just don't kid myself while doing it.  I leave it to the orthodox to opine on whether that says something good, or entirely bad about me.

I think back to an experiment at the University of Western Ontario where a baboon was strapped to a chair and kept imobile for a long period of time to study the effects of cholesterol build up in it's arteries.   Peta, or some other group, broke in and disrupted the study.

And, I was glad. 

The work in such studies is usually done by grad students or others, not so much by the guy who puts his name at the bottom of the eventual paper.  They move on, and maybe one day they are a pediatrician, or working in the Emergency Ward at your local hospital.

Do you want them treating your kids?  Someone who has been trained to ignore the suffering of another animal to further the already understood idea that a high fat diet combined with little activity is bad for you?

 Let's cast our memories back to Nazi Germany, and their quiet program of "euthenizing" people with epilepsy, downs syndrome and other afflictions commonly treatable and easily manageable today-- and in that day, also.  Do you think those good Doctors and Nurses started off with humans?  Or do you think they had lots of practise becoming sociopaths by starting with animals?

How to lie to yourself: 101.

Which doesn't mean hunters and farmers are just one goose step away from managing death camps.  Theirs is a different context entirely, and I'm not saying that about them, or you.

I fish, too.  But not well.  And I do catch and release. And I may yet still take up deer hunting. 

But on the farming end of things, it seems that the hand writting is on the wall for growing animals for food.  It's going to become even more inefficient as time goes on.   We are turning vegan, whether we like it or not, purely from a species chauvanist point of view.

I think the point that animal rights people fail to see is that the way we treat animals isn't about animals.  It's all to do with what it says about us.

 

 

 

 

 

 

I thought of this conversation when I read this thread. 

From "Hitch Hikers Guide to the Galaxy"

Zaphod, Trillian, Arthur and Ford are asked by the waiter if they would like to be introduced to the "Dish of the day."

The creature, a Ameglian Major Cow, is wheeled out and introduces himself by saying, "Good evening ladies and gentlemen, I am the Dish of the Day. May I interest you in parts of my body?"

Arthur and Trillian, with a slightly sick look on their face, raise an eyebrow and go, "HUH?!"

Zaphod gets right into the idea and wonders over to ?meet the meat?. The Dish offers his shoulder and suggests that his rump is very good because he has been exercising and eating plenty of grain. Trillian begins to look a little grey as the Ameglian Major Cow further suggests a casserole of himself!

Arthur is disgusted! The though of eating an animal that has just conversed with him is revolting. He requests a green salad. The Cow then reaches over and places his chubby three-pronged hoof on Arthur's shoulder and attempts to change his mind, "May I urge you to try my liver, it must be very rich and tender by now, I have been force feeding it for months?"

Arthur, still disgusted asks, "Is there any reason why I shouldn't have a green salad?"

The cow replies, "I know many vegetables who are very clear on that point sir, which was why it was decided to cut through that whole problem by breeding an animal that actually wanted to be eaten."

Zaphod is hungry and exclaims, "Hey listen, we wanna eat, we don't want to make a meal of the issues! We'll have four rare stakes and hurry please!"

The cow seems satisfied, "A very wise choice, I'll just nip off and shoot myself." He glances over to Arthur and quips, "Don't worry, I'll be very humane."

Tommy_Paine wrote:

There was a documentary on Peta's founder and leader, Ingrid Newkirk, on T.V. a while back. 

Nope, I think it had something to do wih a federal election.

_________________________________

Whom the hive does not cherish it eats.

ElizaQ wrote:

 

Most people eat things because they like them, out of habit and because that's what they used too.     

I don't know, I think that martin dufresne might have a good case and Webgear backs that up as well, when the higherarchy is messed with all of a sudden it becomes uncomfortable. 

I do agree that most peope do eat what they like, out of habit because it is what they are used to.  It is their reaction when they look at their habit is what interests me. 

I have been a vegetarian for more than 15 years and when it comes up I will give a variety of responses.  When I say it is healtier for me I get almost no arguments about it even thought that is the most arguable case of all (over consumtion of meat is very unhealthy as with any other over consumtion but arguable is meat bad for you?). 

But if I say that it is because I don't like the idea of an animal dying so that I can eat I usually get a very large reaction.  People get upset because I have brought up that uncomfortable, hidden idea that meat was breathing at one point. Notice I do not say anything about the other person, just me and the idea that I am uncomfortble with.  I have a right to be uncomfortable with any idea.

I do have an understanding that there are vegetarians out there who are self-righteous and believe that everyone should stop eating meat because it is unethical blah blah blah.  I do have an understanding that meat eaters get defensive because they have heard this and feel judged by the other person because the self-righteous person does judge them.

Personally I don't feel as if another person who eats meat is making a judgement on the type of person I am just because they don't share the same eating habits that they have.  They are just reacting to a number of factors including who they have talked with previously.

When you take away the judgement aspect I find that when people don't really look at their meat eating when it is brought up they get uncomfortable, not because they think that it is right or wrong but because it isn't something that they have given a lot of thought to.  Including the heirarchy idea, the idea that animals feel pain, and the way the meat industry works right now not being the best for these animals.

I think open discussion about peoples beleifs about meat, animals and the meat industry when the judgement is taken away is good because it tends to take that discomfort away.  If I talk to a person, who is or is not vegetarian, about the reason I don't like to eat meat being I don't like the meat industry and they are informed about it they are usually not defensive and we can have a good conversation and share ideas.

Honestly if I was a farmer who brought up cows, chickens etc (humanely) I would likely eat meat because then I would be close enough to the animals to be able to make the decision - then it would be a day to day reality for me.  I think in that case I wouldn't see animals as being lower than myself, I would be confronted frequently with animals feeling pain and I wouldn't be involved in the meat industry.  When you are farmer there is no unconscience part of eating meat.

But as a non-farmer I don't have that ability. So instead I will just annoy the crap out of people when it comes up I am vegetarian! 

Refuge wrote:

When you take away the judgement aspect I find that when people don't really look at their meat eating when it is brought up they get uncomfortable, not because they think that it is right or wrong but because it isn't something that they have given a lot of thought to. Including the heirarchy idea, the idea that animals feel pain, and the way the meat industry works right now not being the best for these animals.

I don't disagree and have had similar experiences. However Martin's example was specifically about asking people or encouraging people to eat "fake meat" where the reaction is 'well it's just not the same' and extrapolating from that a generalized thought process behind the 'it's just not the same' attitude rather then just simply that, "It's not the same and/ or a disgusting idea in the first place. It's not the same. Fake meat products are not the same as regular meat as much as the corporate industry wants to convince people it is.

If the conversation around the eating of fake meat is broader, about meat eating in general, and not just it being a substitute, like several of the examples that you provide then yes you're challenging people to think about things that they generally don't think about which was my point. Most people don't really think about what they eat in general let alone about just about meat eating.

Quote:

I think open discussion about peoples beleifs about meat, animals and the meat industry when the judgement is taken away is good because it tends to take that discomfort away. If I talk to a person, who is or is not vegetarian, about the reason I don't like to eat meat being I don't like the meat industry and they are informed about it they are usually not defensive and we can have a good conversation and share ideas.

Yes I've found the same. It's the rushing to judgement from both sides of the table that leads to difficultly. People eat things or don't eat things for different reasons. When I was fully a veggie my reasons were different then the reason that other veggies didn't eat meat. It's even possible to get into some pretty conflicting debates within the veggie world of what are the 'better' reasons for being veggie. Been there. I know.

For instance when I was veggie fake meat products were coming onto market. At first I thought woo, cool. I can still get a 'bacon' fix or eat a cold cut sandwich when I wanted. It wasn't quite the same but it was good enough. Then I did some exploration into what I was actually eating. My conclusion, it wasn't much different then eating meat products derived from the industrial meat system. My reasons for eating veggie was as much a reaction to the industrialization process of using animals connected with the industrialzation of our food system as a whole. Those fake meat products you get at the store are highly processed and made from highly processed soy protein where the largest suppliers are actually affiliates of chemical companies like Dupont, Cargill and Solbar. If one has a concern with the corportization of our food supply as a whole and corporate ethics from a political standpoint then there are some serious implications if you trace back what actually goes into such products. Now at least Solbar claims to be non GMO which is a good thing but if your're participating in say an Isreali boycott then those non-gmo veggie protein hotdogs you eat might be in question.

Can't tell you the grief I got from my veggie friends when for pointing this sort of information out. It was like I was attacking a sacred veggie cow or something and they just didn't want to go there.

To note I don't put tofu in the category of being a 'meat substitute'. Tofu is a foodstuff in it's own right and it's only in the West that it's been marketed as a substitute for meat. Tofu is just tofu. Tofu and Tempeh can also be easily made in ones own kitchen, the same way as if you milked your goat and made cheese. It's a processed foodstuff but you don't need an industrial factory and hightech extruders and other high tech gadgets to make it, like you do for fake meat products.

These are just some of the reasons that I think the whole fake meat thing is just bogus in the first place. I actually don't see much difference in a highly processed real chicken nugget and a highly processed texturized soy protein fake chicken nugget. It's still buying into the corporate and industrialized food system as a whole. Veggie is veggie why try to fake it.

 

Quote:

Honestly if I was a farmer who brought up cows, chickens etc (humanely) I would likely eat meat because then I would be close enough to the animals to be able to make the decision - then it would be a day to day reality for me. I think in that case I wouldn't see animals as being lower than myself, I would be confronted frequently with animals feeling pain and I wouldn't be involved in the meat industry. When you are farmer there is no unconscience part of eating meat.

But as a non-farmer I don't have that ability. So instead I will just annoy the crap out of people when it comes up I am vegetarian!

Which is great as far as I'm concerned. You see a possibility for another way of looking at it. Can't knock that. Funnily enough I'm actually dealing with that very process. I just got chickens for the first time, mainly for the eggs as well as some ecological reasons in the food growing I do. They are being raised humanely, lots of room to run around and just be chickens, they're free range but I have yet to figure out whether I personally will be able to put some of those chickens on my table. It's not something I've done before as I grew up in a typical industrialized 'clean' environment where one doesn't need to even contempate how that food, meat or otherwise got onto the shelf and into my grocery cart. I do eat chicken now, though I pretty much only buy from other free-range, humane farmers. So when the time comes to make the decision one way or another I will be confronting my own potential hypocrisy and disconnect with what I eat now.

And why is perfectly replicating that taste THAT important?

I suggested a thought experiment; I could have offered another one, e.g. getting a meat-eater to think he is having his usually fare and telling him, after he says he loves it, that he is eating something else. Do you see how many people would be peeved? It"s that attitude which I am trying to "unpack".

martin dufresne wrote:

I suggested a thought experiment; I could have offered another one,

How about the thought experiment that I thought of "asserting superiority over a living being".........

In society Men are generally percieved to be the ones that need to assert their superiority and women do not (general society not more lefty people). 

I have had friends who are men who have been the experience of everything from given funny looks to being told real men eat meat (remember the Harvey's comercial).  How much of this has to do with men having to supposidly having to assert their superiority or dominace?  When a woman is vegetarian she is usually never questined for superiority reasons.  I have never been told that I wouldn't be a real woman if I didn't eat meat.

  I don't know if that fits Martin, but it is an attempt to get back to the idea meat has more "value" than non meat foods to some since the whole fake meat thing doesn't seem to be going over to well

Eating mock chicken is NOT eating chicken. Period. Eating soy meat is NOT eating a cow. I think this is pretty clear.

 

I feel as if I have walked into a timewarp or something. 

EDITED for double post/problem with lousy forum software as per SOP.

Holy crap!!

I mean, I like asparagus, but not THAT much...

 

The trick is not to overcook them.  Keep them stiff. (I guess that would be PETA's advice.)

Please tell me how that commercial is 'worse' than this one.

Although now that Janet Jackson didn't show her nipples at halftime, perhaps the Superbowl needs to watch it's step. I wonder if they will also cancel their cheerleaders?

al-Qa'bong: my favourite vegetarian.