Bye bye MEAT! How will the post-meat future look?

[bcuster]

Bit like talking to a 14 year old in 1985 who's wearing a Smiths tee-shirt. Or worse still Morrissey himself now.

Meat is Murder man, why can't you just cry for Bambi like me whilst I fly around the US with my ageing dad band.

In fairness, the editor's posts have been more about the effects of meat consumption on global warming. I, otoh, have taken the complementary position that meat consumption, in its present form, has been a violation of the covenant man made with certain species when they were brought into the human family

 

[friedaweed]

In fairness, the editor's posts have been more about the effects of meat consumption on global warming. I, otoh, have taken the complementary position that meat consumption, in its present form, has been a violation of the covenant man made with certain species when they were brought into the human family

In fairness that's very honest of you on your part, he otoh just sounds like a ranty vegetarian version of Student Grant and Milley Tant from a 1980's copy of viz. At least you post more than a cut and paste from plant based nirvana.com flourished with insults for anyone who tries to engage.

4/10 x

 

[butcher]

Bit like talking to a 14 year old in 1985 who's wearing a Smiths tee-shirt. Or worse still Morrissey himself now.

Meat is Murder man, why can't you just cry for Bambi like me whilst I fly around the US with my ageing dad band.

He has a band?

 

[Funky_monks]

I got the point, just weary of you.

It's just silly bollocks isn't it?

Never been in an establishment that only sold mince - loads of other cuts of meat make it obvious that its an animal, even if you've never seen whole/split carcases in a butchers shop.

 

[Funky_monks]

In fairness, the editor's posts have been more about the effects of meat consumption on global warming. I, otoh, have taken the complementary position that meat consumption, in its present form, has been a violation of the covenant man made with certain species when they were brought into the human family

Not really, they haven't.
There's no discussion about the scientific research about that, just repetition ad infinitum that there's a massive scientific consensus for whatever the fuck The Guardian or "Plant Based News" says this week, even when a scientist who's job it is says no such consensus exists and can point to a declaration with over a thousand other scientist signatories who also think this.

 

[Funky_monks]

More evidence that the methane emissions from fossil fuels are vastly underrated: https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.2215275120

 

[WouldBe]

It's just silly bollocks isn't it?

Never been in an establishment that only sold mince - loads of other cuts of meat make it obvious that its an animal, even if you've never seen whole/split carcases in a butchers shop.

Most butchers shops used to have posters on the walls showing the animal divided into cuts of meat.

 

[editor]

Most butchers shops used to have posters on the walls showing the animal divided into cuts of meat.

Yes. Pretty, sanitised illustrations that show nothing of the grisly, bloody process involved in carving up a slaughtered animal.

 

[WouldBe]

Yes. Pretty, sanitised illustrations that show nothing of the grisly, bloody process involved in carving up a slaughtered animal.

I don't think there is a person on earth who hasn't cut themselves so you would have to be incredibly thick to not associate the two.

 

[Funky_monks]

Most butchers shops used to have posters on the walls showing the animal divided into cuts of meat.

No hints whatsoever that this was once an animal.....

 

[friedaweed]

Yes. Pretty, sanitised illustrations that show nothing of the grisly, bloody process involved in carving up a slaughtered animal.

Hang the bloody DJ.

 

[friedaweed]

No hints whatsoever that this was once an animal.....

Clearly the cressflake thinks we're all buying protein not knowing what it is.. oh hang on that's just him. He loves his cheese though, and his air miles.

 

[Funky_monks]

Hang the bloody DJ.

View attachment 369920

You can tell its bollocks because as anyone who has been anywhere near a carcase to cut it up knows, its not at all bloody. Animals are bled as part of the slaughter process (it's usually what kills them) to prevent spoilage.

 

[friedaweed]

You can tell its bollocks because as anyone who has been anywhere near a carcass to cut it up knows, its not at all bloody. Animals are bled as part of the slaughter process (it's usually what kills them) to prevent spoilage.

Murderer

 

[Funky_monks]

Murderer

Only if you think that animals are somehow people.

 

[friedaweed]

Only if you think that animals are somehow people.

Plants don't have any feelings.

 

[bcuster]

Plants don't have any feelings.

View attachment 369924

That's true

 

[bcuster]

Only if you think that animals are somehow people.

We have a duty to avoid exploiting these creatures and subjecting them to cruelty. No rational person could argue otherwise...

 

[butcher]

Clearly the cressflake thinks we're all buying protein not knowing what it is.. oh hang on that's just him. He loves his cheese though, and his air miles.

You are not telling me Ed supports the dairy industry are you?

 

[friedaweed]

You are not telling me Ed supports the dairy industry are you?

No I think he's a Swansea fan.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

We have a duty to avoid exploiting these creatures and subjecting them to cruelty. No rational person could argue otherwise...

We exploit the natural world in all kinds of ways. That's how we've got to the situation where there are 8 billion people in the world. Going 'hands off' isn't an option. And there never was a time when humans were hands off. That's actually part of the genius, if you like, of humans. Even hunter-gatherers manipulated the world far more than they're sometimes given credit for - managing their environments, carrying out not just clearing but selective planting, setting traps, etc.

In some sense, all organisms exploit their environments - that's what being alive is. We've become so successful at it that we now need to moderate ourselves in order to avoid self-destruction. But personally I don't have a problem with the idea that part of that exploitation involves other animals. I do have big problems with various ways in which we currently do that - so the second part about subjecting animals to cruelty I do agree with.

 

[Funky_monks]

In some sense, all organisms exploit their environments - that's what being alive is. We've become so successful at it that we now need to moderate ourselves in order to avoid self-destruction. But personally I don't have a problem with the idea that part of that exploitation involves other animals. I do have big problems with various ways in which we currently do that - so the second part about subjecting animals to cruelty I do agree with.

I guess the crux of it is that for some, death is cruelty, whereas for others it isn't. For me the "humane" aspect means allowing livestock to express natural behaviours where possible whilst keeping them from natural deaths (such as dying horribly of a disease or having your eyes pecked out by crows as you are slowing down/getting old/being born) and ultimately killing them in a way that causes minimal suffering, again, unlike natural deaths, such as being ripped apart whilst you are still alive by animals with big teeth or spikes with sharp sticks as per early humans.

 

[friedaweed]

I guess the crux of it is that for some, death is cruelty, whereas for others it isn't. For me the "humane" aspect means allowing livestock to express natural behaviours where possible whilst keeping them from natural deaths (such as dying horribly of a disease or having your eyes pecked out by crows as you are slowing down/getting old/being born) and ultimately killing them in a way that causes minimal suffering, again, unlike natural deaths, such as being ripped apart whilst you are still alive by animals with big teeth or spikes with sharp sticks as per early humans.

Most folk who hunt, shoot or fish for food go to considerable lengths to ensure that the animal doesn't suffer a prolonged death. If I take a fish for the pan it is always dispatched of correctly.

 

[Jeff Robinson]

But personally I don't have a problem with the idea that part of that exploitation involves other animals.

Well yeah, exploiters tend to think that their exploitation of others is fine, perhaps inevitable, possibly even noble. They also tend to have a set of rationales for the exploitation that when scrutinised are transparently self-interested bullshit.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

Well yeah, exploiters tend to think that their exploitation of others is fine, perhaps inevitable, possibly even noble. They also tend to have a set of rationales for the exploitation that when scrutinised are transparently self-interested bullshit.

I post on here in good faith. I assume others are in good faith as well until proven otherwise. Thing is I think I understand your position much better than you understand mine. When you post something like this, it shows me you don't really get where I'm coming from at all.

To give you a worked example of a simple form of exploitation that I have no problem with whatsoever, there is one that takes place in London parks. In Bushy Park and Richmond Park in SW London live herds of semi-wild deer. They live pretty easy lives most of the time - their health is monitored by humans and there are no predators to worry about. But once a year they face a game of Russian roulette as the annual cull is carried out and a certain number of them are shot dead. Their carcasses are sold for meat.

The only alternative to the cull would be not to have any deer in the parks. They're exploited by us, giving us an annual supply of venison and also giving thousands of urban people the enjoyment of wandering through an open space with deer around them. Their lives are about as good as they could be. But that doesn't involve a naive view whereby you just leave them alone. We've killed off their natural predators such as wolves. Without the cull, their populations would explode to such an extent that humans wouldn't be able to use the parks, then of course their populations would crash (with deaths a great deal more unpleasant than one caused by a well-aimed bullet or two). Such is the way of things.

It is naked exploitation. And I'm glad it's done.

 

[Jeff Robinson]

I post on here in good faith. I assume others are in good faith as well until proven otherwise. Thing is I think I understand your position much better than you understand mine. When you post something like this, it shows me you don't really get where I'm coming from at all.

To give you a worked example of a simple form of exploitation that I have no problem with whatsoever, there is one that takes place in London parks. In Bushy Park and Richmond Park in SW London live herds of semi-wild deer. They live pretty easy lives most of the time - their health is monitored by humans and there are no predators to worry about. But once a year they face a game of Russian roulette as the annual cull is carried out and a certain number of them are shot dead. Their carcasses are sold for meat.

The only alternative to the cull would be not to have any deer in the parks. They're exploited by us, giving us an annual supply of venison and also giving thousands of urban people the enjoyment of wandering through an open space with deer around them. Their lives are about as good as they could be. But that doesn't involve a naive view whereby you just leave them alone. We've killed off their natural predators such as wolves. Without the cull, their populations would explode to such an extent that humans wouldn't be able to use the parks, then of course their populations would crash (with deaths a great deal more unpleasant than one caused by a well-aimed bullet or two). Such is the way of things.

It is naked exploitation. And I'm glad it's done.

I think I understand your position perfectly. You support exploiting and killing animals. You support repeatedly impregnating cows and stealing their children so you can drink their milk and then shoot them in the head when the don't produce profitable levels of milk. You support the mass gassing and grinding up of baby male chicks because they're economically useless to the egg industry. You support ripping lambs away from their mothers and killing them so you can eat their legs. You support hooking fish by the lips and suffocating them. You support gassing pigs. You also, for all practical intents and purposes, support factory farming. You support it not just because you pay for its products (as you've repeatedly acknowledged) but because you support killing and exploiting animals for food, fibre and other purposes. And in our actual industrialised capitalist societies - not some fantasy hypothetical society - that means producing goods as cheaply as possible to maximise economic returns. In the farming context, that means factory farming. There's one position that opposes all of these things: veganism. That's the position that people who give a shit about animals support.

 

[bcuster]

I agree with LBJ's assessment of the deer in the park. The problem with the domestic animals used for food production is that they face a 100% certainty of inhumane treatment and death.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

If you give a shit about animal welfare, you have to be a vegan. There is no other acceptable position. Two sides, black/white.

Makes life nice and simple, I guess. Trouble is that you don't have a hope of understanding others who aren't like you. You're going to struggle to understand the attitudes of many farmers towards their animals, for instance.

There are plenty of virtuous circles to be found within farming systems, wherein animal welfare, human welfare, sustainability, biodiversity and environmental footprint, carbon footprint and quality of produce all improve together within better systems. This is one example of that, from a study of sheep farmers. It's yet another example of how small farms score significantly better than large ones.

The Relationship between Farmers’ Perceptions and Animal Welfare Standards in Sheep Farms

Results of the research suggested that higher welfare standards for sheep exist on farms run by farmers who have a higher perception level of animal welfare.

It's a small study with various culturally specific references, such as reference to ritual sacrifice. It's what I'd expect, though. Small is better when it comes to farming. Current trends towards fewer, bigger farms in places like the UK are a very bad development.

 

[friedaweed]

I think I understand your position perfectly. You support exploiting and killing animals. You support repeatedly impregnating cows and stealing their children so you can drink their milk and then shoot them in the head when the don't produce profitable levels of milk. You support the mass gassing and grinding up of baby male chicks because they're economically useless to the egg industry. You support ripping lambs away from their mothers and killing them so you can eat their legs. You support hooking fish by the lips and suffocating them. You support gassing pigs. You also, for all practical intents and purposes, support factory farming. You support it not just because you pay for its products (as you've repeatedly acknowledged) but because you support killing and exploiting animals for food, fibre and other purposes. And in our actual industrialised capitalist societies - not some fantasy hypothetical society - that means producing goods as cheaply as possible to maximise economic returns. In the farming context, that means factory farming. There's one position that opposes all of these things: veganism. That's the position that people who give a shit about animals support.

It's not just the legs that people eat you know and every fisherman I know that takes fish for the pan would never dream of allowing the fish to suffocate. There are quite stringent rules on fisheries about that.

It sounds like you don't know what you're talking about really but as long as you feel smug in your vegan paradise.

 

[Jeff Robinson]

View attachment 370126

It's not just the legs that people eat you know and every fisherman I know that takes fish for the pan would never dream of allowing the fish to suffocate. There are quite stringent rules on fisheries about that.

It sounds like you don't know what you're talking about really but as long as you feel smug in your vegan paradise.

Yeah, I'm sure great care is taken of the individual fish in commercial fishing operations:

But pray tell, what are these 'stringent rules'? I can't wait to hear all about them.