Bullfighting - Yea or Nay?

starbelgrade

fonecrusher1 wrote: »

Cowardly. Thats the first word that comes into my head when i think of bullfighting.

What fight? Its a slaughter.

Pathetic.

The slaughtering of animals occurs on a daily basis, only they end up in the food chain.

A bull in the ring has two ways to survive - he can kill or maim the matador, or be granted a pardon & allowed to live. Granted, the matador has a distinct advantage, but the bull always has an opportunity to live, unlike any animal farmed for it's flesh.

It is a small, but important distinction.

amacachi

starbelgrade wrote: »

The slaughtering of animals occurs on a daily basis, only they end up in the food chain.

A bull in the ring has two ways to survive - he can kill or maim the matador, or be granted a pardon & allowed to live. Granted, the matador has a distinct advantage, but the bull always has an opportunity to live, unlike any animal farmed for it's flesh.

It is a small, but important distinction.

In most meat factories/slaughterhouses or whatever else you want to call them the animals are stunned then killed if small enough, or killed instantly whereever possible. They're not killed slowly for entertainment purposes.

fonecrusher1

starbelgrade wrote: »

The slaughtering of animals occurs on a daily basis, only they end up in the food chain.

A bull in the ring has two ways to survive - he can kill or maim the matador, or be granted a pardon & allowed to live. Granted, the matador has a distinct advantage, but the bull always has an opportunity to live, unlike any animal farmed for it's flesh.

It is a small, but important distinction.

I think its retarded & a bit gay.

A farm animal is led to a slaughter house & is killed instantly with the correct equipment ie: stun grips or a pneumatic slaughter gun.
In Bull'fighting' the animal essentially gets tortured for a period of time before it is eventually killed. Thats how i see it.

Of these two deaths, which would you prefer?

I think theres a few folks on here acting as if this sh!t is entertaining & doesn't at all bother them to look tough.:rolleyes:

If a person wants to act hard in front of a crowd step into a ring & fight a fair fight instead of gang-killing a very low intelligence creature like a bull.

Tar.Aldarion

I'd much prefer two people fighting to the death. ^_^

Indubitable

fonecrusher1 wrote: »

I think its retarded & a bit gay.

A farm animal is led to a slaughter house & is killed instantly with the correct equipment ie: stun grips or a pneumatic slaughter gun.
In Bull'fighting' the animal essentially gets tortured for a period of time before it is eventually killed. Thats how i see it.

Of these two deaths, which would you prefer?

If it was possible I could live after the fight and get to go down fighting then I would rather be in a bull fight. I can see your point though.

PeakOutput

fonecrusher1 wrote: »

I think its retarded & a bit gay.

A farm animal is led to a slaughter house & is killed instantly with the correct equipment ie: stun grips or a pneumatic slaughter gun.
In Bull'fighting' the animal essentially gets tortured for a period of time before it is eventually killed. Thats how i see it.

Of these two deaths, which would you prefer?

i think the problem here is people equating an animals life to a humans its the age old insurmountable gap of some people using emotions as a basis for their argument and another group using logic, neither are more right than the otehr they are just fundamentaly different ways of looking at an issue

asking which would you prefer is not any sort of argument because it is not a human we are doing this to

I think theres a few folks on here acting as if this sh!t is entertaining & doesn't at all bother them to look tough.:rolleyes:

i think the amount of people who like to look tough on the net to a bunch of randomers is probably less than you think

If a person wants to act hard in front of a crowd step into a ring & fight a fair fight instead of gang-killing a very low intelligence creature like a bull.

this idea of a fair fight is a joke one man v one bull is not a fair fight. using the spears and extra men and training etc tips the balance away from the bull(quite alot)

the reason so many more people are against this now than say 100 years ago is because as peoples living conditions improve their value of life increases and they apply this to all aspects of life(equal rights for other races, poor people in africa, animals) on the whole this leads to the betterment of humanity but i have a problem when these values are excessively placed on animals.

an animals life is not worth the same as a humans and i guarantee you they dont think our lives are worth as much as theirs. it is unstoppable that this trend towards increasing the value of life will increase as the average persons living conditions increase

starbelgrade

amacachi wrote: »

In most meat factories/slaughterhouses or whatever else you want to call them the animals are stunned then killed if small enough, or killed instantly whereever possible. They're not killed slowly for entertainment purposes.

Every year nearly 360 million pigs, sheep, goats and cattle as well as several billion poultry are killed in EU slaughterhouses.

Under current EU regulations, there is no requirement to appoint a specific person responsible for animal welfare or to ensure that their staff is properly trained and certified.

After stunning, there is no requirement to ensure that animals are regularly monitored to ensure they do not regain consciousness before slaughter.

Whilst people would like to think that all the meat that they eat comes from animals that were slaughtered in the most humane way possible, this is not always the case. In fact, it is such a big issue that the EU have spent the last 8 years trying to bring about regulations that will force slaughterhouses to bring their standards into line with their recommendations, which are not expected to come into effect for at least another 3 years.

Other parts of the world, from which we import meat, have far lower standards than the EU.

So, next time you tuck into a burger, can you really be sure that the cow from which it came, died a less painful death than a bull in a ring?

If not, then I suggest you become a vegetarian.

(And by "you", I mean anyone who is not already one, not you specifically)

ScumLord

murraymarmalade wrote: »

been to a bullfight in portugal....they didnt kill the bulls at the event,just placed swords in him.

Just placed swords in him? Doesn't that usually lead to death?

starbelgrade

ScumLord wrote: »

Just placed swords in him? Doesn't that usually lead to death?

No.

The bulls aren't killed in the ring either. They are killed after the spectacle by a butcher, though some are "pardoned" & allowed to live.

irishconvert

starbelgrade wrote: »

No.

The bulls aren't killed in the ring either. They are killed after the spectacle by a butcher, though some are "pardoned" & allowed to live.

What bull fights have you been watching?????

starbelgrade

irishconvert wrote: »

What bull fights have you been watching?????

I was referring to bullfights in Portugal, where the bull is not killed in the ring.

fonecrusher1

PeakOutput wrote: »

i think the problem here is people equating an animals life to a humans its the age old insurmountable gap of some people using emotions as a basis for their argument and another group using logic, neither are more right than the otehr they are just fundamentaly different ways of looking at an issue

asking which would you prefer is not any sort of argument because it is not a human we are doing this to



i think the amount of people who like to look tough on the net to a bunch of randomers is probably less than you think




this idea of a fair fight is a joke one man v one bull is not a fair fight. using the spears and extra men and training etc tips the balance away from the bull(quite alot)

the reason so many more people are against this now than say 100 years ago is because as peoples living conditions improve their value of life increases and they apply this to all aspects of life(equal rights for other races, poor people in africa, animals) on the whole this leads to the betterment of humanity but i have a problem when these values are excessively placed on animals.

an animals life is not worth the same as a humans and i guarantee you they dont think our lives are worth as much as theirs. it is unstoppable that this trend towards increasing the value of life will increase as the average persons living conditions increase

Translation: sure they're only animals, who cares?

Not going to going to go back & forth with buzzword jousting & trendy psychobabble.
I take your point but whatever way you cut it, its backward.

I think the problem i have with it is the word bullfighting. Its simply not a fight.
Maybe it should be called something more appropriate like Bull-killing?

Indubitable

fonecrusher1 wrote: »

I think the problem i have with it is the word bullfighting. Its simply not a fight.
Maybe it should be called something more appropriate like Bull-killing?

It must be a fight if a bull can stick a horn through someone's mouth?

starbelgrade

fonecrusher1 wrote: »

I think its retarded & a bit gay.

A farm animal is led to a slaughter house & is killed instantly with the correct equipment ie: stun grips or a pneumatic slaughter gun.
In Bull'fighting' the animal essentially gets tortured for a period of time before it is eventually killed. Thats how i see it.

Of these two deaths, which would you prefer?

Of the two deaths & as a meat eater, I am not hypocritical enough to suggest that one is better than the other. In both cases, an animal dies for the pleasure of humans, and as I outlined in another post, the "humane" slaughter of animals is slaughterhouses is not always guaranteed.

There is more of a chance of it, but that's splitting hairs.

fonecrusher1 wrote: »

I think theres a few folks on here acting as if this sh!t is entertaining & doesn't at all bother them to look tough.:rolleyes:

If a person wants to act hard in front of a crowd step into a ring & fight a fair fight instead of gang-killing a very low intelligence creature like a bull.

I am by no way "acting tough". I have been to many bullfights & enjoyed the spectacle immensley.

However, there is no way on earth I would go into a ring with an enraged 460kg plus musclebound animal, intent on gorging me with it's horns. I'll leave that to the skilled matadors & just sit back & enjoy it as I chomp down on my steak sandwich.

fonecrusher1

kingofthe3rdyrs wrote: »

It must be a fight if a bull can stick a horn through someone's mouth?

A fight my hole. 4 or 5 humans with spears/words vs a dumb animal.

If you seen a guy getting the sh!t kicked out of him by 5 or 6 other guys would you consider that a fight?

starbelgrade

fonecrusher1 wrote: »

A fight my hole. 4 or 5 humans with spears/words vs a dumb animal.

If you seen a guy getting the sh!t kicked out of him by 5 or 6 other guys would you consider that a fight?

Why are you comparing animals to humans? Surely you must acknowledge that there is a difference?

PeakOutput

fonecrusher1 wrote: »

Translation: sure they're only animals, who cares?

nope, translation is; there is a line, does kicking the ****e out of a dog for fun for years pass the line? certainly, does shoving a banger up a cats ass pass the line certainly, does killing animals for food cross the line? certainly not does bullfighting? im undecided

I take your point but whatever way you cut it, its backward.

why

I think the problem i have with it is the word bullfighting. Its simply not a fight.
Maybe it should be called something more appropriate like Bull-killing?

and then you would be ok with it?

fonecrusher1

Personally i enjoy nothing more than a juicy steak & watching the odd matador goring.:D

I always think, hey ya fcuk with the bull.......

starbelgrade

fonecrusher1 wrote: »

I think the problem i have with it is the word bullfighting. Its simply not a fight.
Maybe it should be called something more appropriate like Bull-killing?

Bullfighting is a term used only in English, to describe "corrida de toros", which literally translates as "race of bulls". The Spanish who enjoy it do not consider the event to be a fight, but more of a spectacle, even an art form.

Indubitable

starbelgrade wrote: »

Bullfighting is a term used only in English, to describe "corrida de toros", which literally translates as "race of bulls". The Spanish who enjoy it do not consider the event to be a fight, but more of a spectacle, even an art form.

6,000 posts:D

starbelgrade

kingofthe3rdyrs wrote: »

6,000 posts:D

The true sign of a wasted life.

Tar.Aldarion

I've nearly wasted 6 now.

fonecrusher1

starbelgrade wrote: »

Bullfighting is a term used only in English, to describe "corrida de toros", which literally translates as "race of bulls". The Spanish who enjoy it do not consider the event to be a fight, but more of a spectacle, even an art form.

Tell ya what, if the 'Matador' was to hop into the ring armed only with a knife & his much more sophisticated human brain then yes that would be a fight instead of a bunch of chicken-sh!ts stabbing an animal to death.

Im no hippy or vegetarian, im very much a meat-eater & im well aware that the stack of animal flesh i consumed this weekend was stripped from the carcass of a slaughtered beast, packaged & then placed on a supermarket shelf & then went into my belly - mmm... yummy.

I don't have a problem with the killing of the bull in a bullfight, its the way its done that i don't like.

Im just not a fan of cowardly animal cruelty/torture.

starbelgrade

fonecrusher1 wrote: »

Tell ya what, if the 'Matador' was to hop into the ring armed only with a knife & his much more sophisticated human brain then yes that would be a fight instead of a bunch of chicken-sh!ts stabbing an animal to death.

Im no hippy or vegetarian, im very much a meat-eater & im well aware that the stack of animal flesh i consumed this weekend was stripped from the carcass of a slaughtered beast, packaged & then placed on a supermarket shelf & then went into my belly - mmm... yummy.

I don't have a problem with the killing of the bull in a bullfight, its the way its done that i don't like.

Im just not a fan of cowardly animal cruelty/torture.

You are also a fan then of ignoring how animals in slaughterhouses are also sometimes killed then.

fonecrusher1

So very entertaining. Sure this sort of thing happens all the time in slaughterhouses....:rolleyes:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dgKkhygTcpo

Pathetic.

starbelgrade

fonecrusher1 wrote: »

So very entertaining. Sure this sort of thing happens all the time in slaughterhouses....:rolleyes:

fonecrusher1

starbelgrade wrote: »

Whats footage of farm workers acting like idiots with livestock got to do with bullfighting?

Why are you comparing these two things? Surely you must acknowledge that there is a difference?

Answer this. Do you think bullfighting is entertaining?

starbelgrade

fonecrusher1 wrote: »

Whats footage of farm workers acting like idiots with livestock got to do with bullfighting?

Why are you comparing these two things? Surely you must acknowledge that there is a difference?

You say that bullfighting is "animal cruelty/torture".

I see no difference between that & what has been widely documented to occur in both animal farms & slaughterhouses. If you consider as examples, the tail docking of almost all pigs farmed in Ireland & the intensive and often cruel conditions under which poultry are reared, the bull has a much greater quality of life.

In the end, they are all killed. The only difference is, is that I will admit that both involve pain inficlicted on animals, while you seem to think that there is some big difference that makes one more acceptable than the other.

All you are doing is drawing a line in the sand.

fonecrusher1 wrote: »

Answer this. Do you think bullfighting is entertaining?

As a spectacle, yes.

Am I uncomfortable with an animal suffering for my pleasure? About as much as I am in an animal being raised & slaughtered for my pleasure.

fonecrusher1

starbelgrade wrote: »

As a spectacle, yes.

Interesting. Which bit really gets you off? As in at what point in the bullfight do you find it to be the most fun?

not bakunin

Personally, I amn't going to say that it offends or disgusts me, just to make myself seem morally superior on a topic I know little enough about.
However, I do dislike the ways in which anti-bullfight groups seem to trivialise the whole history and context behind the bullfight. There's an art form to the way in which the cuadarillo operates, and anyone who doubts this should go and read Hemingway's Death in the Afternoon before arguing that the matadors are just like any regular angry scumbags.
True aficionados don't go to a fight to watch a bull get killed, they see him as an opponent to be respected and a skillful battle between two highly trained warriors. And that's not just my own opinion!

On the other hand, I do think that certain aspects of it have to be looked at closely. I think the use of horses in the ring is cruelty, as while the bull may have some chance against a man on foot, a matador on horseback has the obvious height advantage and the horses' sides are also extremely vulnerable to the bull.

"Bullfighting is the only art in which the artist is in danger of death and in which the degree of brilliance in the performance is left to the fighter's honour." - Hemingway