Discussion in 'Off-Topic' started by Cheetah, Nov 3, 2019.
Horse isn't bad. The bans on it are.
The "your" was deliberate.
In some countries dogs and horses are indeed eaten.
Also, afaik no one uses whales as work-animals. Other than Aqua-man.
Lambs were used as pets in the past (maybe even now), up to the point where they got eaten.
Most such animals exist in so large numbers only because they are raised with that end in mind.
Ah, a matter of hunger then!
I think there is some special connection between sea mammals and humans. There are stories of dolphins saving people since most remote antiquity, or giving human characteristics to sea mammals. Even superpredators like orcas never attacks humans:
I don't know, i feel there is something inherently wrong in killing and eating sea mammals. Like in killing and eating big apes.
We kill and eat land mammals all the time. Why should the sea ones be taboo?
Both land and sea mammals kill and eat other mammals as well.
Re apes, is their meat tasty at all? I know gorillas are hunted for parts of their body being used to make expensive ashtrays. Weren't whales hunted in past centuries primarily for whale oil? (used for lamps)
Eating apes is cannibalism IMO. In fact it carries the same health risks as eating humans.
The distinction between food and pet and abhorrent is pretty much cultural.
In times of scarcity people did eat anything, only some extremely strong taboos prevented to eat some animals.
I remember reading about scandinavians colonists in Greeenland at the end of Medieval Climate Optimum: archeologists found clear proves of starvation but also clear indications that they didn't augment their diet with fish!
The hipotesis is that they had some strong taboo against fish (which is weird because we do not have historical evidence of such taboo in medieval Norway).
Anyway, what animals we eat or not is strongly cultural and change with time.
To my knowledge horse meat is considered not food in most anglosaxon cultures, while is much appreciated in southern Europe (rich in iron and very tasty).
Rabbits are again very appreciated in Italy, France, Spain, etc. but considered as pets here in Scandinavia.
Dogs are also something special, and only in Asia (AFAIK) are considered food: I remember I had a cough and my Korean friends offered to prepared a dog soup that is considered ideal in wuch cases.
I (claimed) to be already better before they went ahead with their plan.
In South Korea today dog meat is not that common and it's getting out of people's diet.
Only a few traditional restaurants are still allowed to serve it (and I was very careful to avoid them).
I think that horse-meat is a latin countries thing. It isn't common at all here - I never ate such. But I wouldn't be against the idea
Swordfish, on the other hand, is certainly excellent. When I become ultra rich again I plan to eat it regularly
Horse meat used to be a lot more common in a scandiwegian's diet. The vikings loved it. But after the christianization of Norway horse meat became linked with pre-christian pagan rituals and thus heavily frowned upon. Pretty silly.
The problem with horse meat is that most horses are kept as pets and will often receive some kind of medication in a period leading up to their demise. This makes it unfit for human consumption. But if not it's perfectly usable meat and it's a huge waste to not use it. Since horses aren't ruminants and usually live half decent lives, it's arguably a much better and cleaner source of meat compared to beef.
There was a recent case in the local media here where a girl ate her horse after it died. She received a lot of flak for it in social media, and the hypocrisy and general wasteful attitude in that really disgusted me. Fortunately she eventually got a lot of support too.
We had a horse processing plant in the general area of the state when I was small. It got perpetually protested and shut down. Then state law changed. Near as I can tell, given the arguments (if you cant afford the care we demand for end-of-life horses then you can't afford a horse) I'd say the entire issue is basically rank classism. An opening salvo in some of the divides that seem of more relative prominence today, really.
When Jonathan Haidt was trying to figure out the differences between liberals and conservatives, this was one of his surveys questions
"A family's dog was killed by a car in front of their house. They had heard that dog meat was delicious, so they cut up the dog's body and ate it for dinner. Is this OK?"
Apparently, the answer is predictive about other things.
That an actual phrasing of the question? A great deal less respect than most processors usually put in their verbiage animal bodies.
Cleaned, dressed, etc. Despite them being "cuts" of meat once it's separated into the meal from the thing that was.
Edit: Ok, I looked it up, everything is citing "cut up." Which is not toneless, especially as it pertains to a question that asks for a morality and feelings. Which is why you butcher a carcass, you inter a body, or lay to rest a person. The verbiage's tone conveys a great deal. Divide into pieces might be more neutral, but yeah. Bad question, bad wording.
On a sort of side-edit note, while I was looking that up popped an article regarding the ethics of owning pets at all. I'd say that's a predictable progression for the little death cultist nobles of today.
These are euphemisms. "Cut up" is a simple description of what is actually happening.
I don't really understand what this has to do with my point, that the continued existence of industrial meat farming does not place upon humans, generally, let alone Norwegians, specifically, the necessity to consume whale meat.
It seems, intuitively, more terrible to kill one human than to kill an equivalent mass of fruit-flies. I could be wrong, but it would require a fairly powerful argument to convince me.
Integration is a component of sentience. We don't know if fruit flies are sentient, even a kg of them.
I'm not especially in favour of killing fruit flies, either. Just less strongly opposed than I am to killing humans.
Neither was Sarah Palin, iirc
I am prepared to compromise on Norwegians eating Sarah Palin, if that's what you're driving at.
Why are you refusing to see the bigger picture, the economics of meat eating, if you will?
If whale meat gets taken off the market, then the small minority of whale eaters will buy different meats. They're not going to go "so no whale? I'll have an apple instead". That will create more demand from traditional meat sources.
The tiny percentage that whale meat constitutes, include relatively little suffering as whales live free lives. If that percentage is eliminated if will be replaced with meat that will include more suffering, as average livestock live crappy lives.
Now you're being silly.
Separate names with a comma.