Social contradiction on how we treat animals

I’ve been thinking about a thread like this for weeks but don’t feel I’m best placed to start it.

I’m not very clever when it comes to IT (linking articles is sometimes a stretch) and I’m not very good at articulating my thoughts.

I very often see articles in the news about animals being rescued in various situations. I’ll try and link a few later.

It seems people will go to extraordinary financial and physical efforts to help animals in stress but don’t think twice about the animals that provide their food.

Is this simply because of social norms/conditioning ?

Do the people who get enraged by a woman throwing a cat into a bin - https://www.google.com.au/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/world/2010/oct/19/cat-bin-woman-mary-bale - not understand what happens to animals for the provision of their meat and dairy ?

I can remember reading articles on the rescue of horses in ‘quicksand’, dogs or cats stuck in walls and usually with great financial cost involved.

There’s also the people who intervene during wild fires or extreme weather conditions to help wildlife.

I’ll try and link some other articles as I’m remember them.

ElKavo

Cognitive dissonance.

Eat pig, love dog etc. Very similar intelligence levels, some would say pigs are more intelligent, but, but, but bacon tho! I'd be pretty sure if you seasoned dog in the same way as pig you would get the same taste.

CiniO

Animals in a need of help should and often are helped by human. That's a normal decent thing to do for a human being.

Same as killing animals for food.


There's a huge difference in throwing a cat into a bin to make it suffer comparing to killing a pig for a bacon that you're gonna eat.

CiniO

CiniO wrote: »

Animals in a need of help should and often are helped by human. That's a normal decent thing to do for a human being.

Same as killing animals for food.


There's a huge difference in throwing a cat into a bin to make it suffer comparing to killing a pig for a bacon that you're gonna eat.

I suppose this is what I’m talking about.

I see both as acts of great cruelty yet you don’t.

Why do we see it differently ?

So this is on the bbc today.

Relates to what I’m trying to convey.

The disparity between how we treat different animals.

Pet theft to be considered for debate after petition http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-44452040

wexie

Deleted User wrote: »

Back to what question ?

I’d like to keep the thread on track.

The thread asks the question as to why we treat some animals differently to others.

I guess because historically different animals have been domesticated for different reasons and with different purposes

Hitman3000

Deleted User wrote:

The thread asks the question as to why we treat some animals differently to others.

We view certain species as companion animals and others as a source of food, no matter what the animal is used for proper treatment should be afforded.

gozunda

ElKavo wrote: »

Cognitive dissonance.Eat pig, love dog etc. Very similar intelligence levels, some would say pigs are more intelligent, but, but, but bacon tho! I'd be pretty sure if you seasoned dog in the same way as pig you would get the same taste.

Re. why we treat some animals differently to others.


You've eaten dog?. I know they do in the far east and a few other locations etc but not that common elsewhere afaik. Nope no social contradiction imo. Most meat eaters including humans tend to avoid the eating of other meat eaters. There is reseach that shows such selective behaviour is biological as it minimises the risk of the transfer of prion type diseases. Domestic pigs are fed corn meal etc here and do not carry that type of risk afaik.
Though I will admit people do seem to be particularly fond of the taste of pork and bacon - is that cognitive dissonance? https://touch.boards.ie/thread/2057549638/1/#post98421912

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

gozunda

gozunda wrote: »

You've eaten dog?. I know they do in the far east and a few other locations etc but not that common elsewhere afaik. Nope no social contradiction imo. Most meat eaters including humans tend to avoid the eating of other meat eaters. There is reseach that shows such selective behaviour is biological as it minimises the risk of the transfer of prion type diseases. Domestic pigs are fed corn meal etc here and do not carry that type of risk afaik.
Though I will admit people do seem to be particularly fond of the taste of pork and bacon - is that cognitive dissonance? https://touch.boards.ie/thread/2057549638/1/#post98421912

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

I was hoping the thread would allow people to discuss why we choose to kill and eat some animals whereas we treat other animals like family members.

Is it because we are conditioned to without thinking ?

How can one person love a dog with such powerful emotion yet be emotionally disconnected from animals like pigs and cows.

Would be great if you don’t turn this into another anti-vegan thread Gozunda.

The Bishop Basher

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Is it because we are conditioned to without thinking ?

I’d say it’s because we’re conditioned to alright, I’m not so sure we do it without thinking though. That sounds more like bias on your part.

I gave this some thought as I fed my new pup lumps of fried pig from my ceaser salad last night. I love pigs, both dead and alive but this one was dead and in my salad so I didn’t love it as much as the new pup sitting at my feet and staring up at me hoping for a bit of that pig.

Why ? Well the pig was already dead. If you gave me a live pig I might grow to love it in the same way I’ll grow to love that pup but we don’t keep live pigs in urban settings and so on my dinner plate he stays.

It’s social conditioning with plenty of thought put into it. Just because we don’t all come to the same conclusion as vegans and vegetarians doesn’t mean we haven’t though about it as you seem to suggest.

It’s not my intention to suggest people are not thinking about it.

I genuinely don’t know.

I ate meat and dairy for a good period of my life. I knew what it was but didn’t give it much thought.

I decided to go vegetarian about 24 years ago after accidentally watching a children’s tv programme (around 11am bbc 2) about meat production.

I think it was meant to be a positive piece about how the calf becomes a cow and then becomes food but I didn’t receive it that way and have never eaten meat since. I just seen it as abuse.

I did continue to eat dairy for about 20 years (almost ignorant that it also involved the same processes and I genuinely feel like the most stupid human for not ‘joining the dots’ that meat and dairy are effectively the same thing) until I seen a documentary called Blackfish 2013.

That movie blew me away. There was a scene where a female orca, in captivity, gave birth. Her calf was taken away from her. Her reaction to that turned me vegan instantly. Again, I felt very very stupid for not realising animals are sentient beings.

So I suppose that’s where my question came from. I had my lightbulb moments but without that I would probably still be eating meat and diary.

Mooooo

We have dogs and cats here, well cared for. Hell they are my companions for most of the day. We raise cows and calves and care for them as well. Whom i Also spend most of my day with. If we don't care for them properly the margins are so tight we would actually go out of business.
The EU and Ireland have the best standards in the world. The reason a lot theses trade discussions worldwide get held up is the EU won't allow it's standards to drop with regard to agri imports.
If you want to effect change., buy free range chicken and eggs, buy Irish beef and dairy as our animals spend more time at pasture than near on any other country in the world with the higher welfare standards

mvl

Deleted User wrote: »

I ate meat and dairy for a good period of my life. I knew what it was but didn’t give it much thought.

I decided to go vegetarian about 24 years ago after accidentally watching a children’s tv programme (around 11am bbc 2) about meat production.

I think it was meant to be a positive piece about how the calf becomes a cow and then becomes food but I didn’t receive it that way and have never eaten meat since. I just seen it as abuse.

So I suppose that’s where my question came from. I had my lightbulb moments but without that I would probably still be eating meat and diary.

Was it supermarket bought meat, like in ... the type you've never been connected to ...before you paid for it ? I think this is important too.

As individuals taking care of the animals that become "food" have different experience. I grew up in an environment where animals are well looked after, before becoming food, solely for a family needs. Dogs were having chores, they were not indoor pets. The only indoor pet was the cat, who was also supposed to keep the mice away (by eating them !!!).
So growing up I've seen all prepared from scratch, brought from the back yard to the kitchen table: piggies/veals/lambs/chickens/geese ...This is the natural evolution for me, and today I am grateful when my food is sourced from ethical animal farming.
Anyway, I think overall ppl can be either hunters or gatherers. I can only see myself turning vegan for a health reason.

Yeah I would just have bought meat and dairy in stores like I’d guess most people do.

Plague Maiden

[Deleted User] wrote: »

How can one person love a dog with such powerful emotion yet be emotionally disconnected from animals like pigs and cows.

If I had a cow sleeping in my kitchen for 11 years, that lay on the sofa beside me every night, that was a source of energy and happiness for me during the darkest moments of my life, then yeah, I'd probably have a soft spot for cows.

In all seriousness, I don't think it's a matter of hypocrisy. You are putting all animals into the same category. I, and I suspect many other meat eaters, don't. The contradiction would be a dog lover eating dog meat, etc. For thousands of years humans have domesticated dogs for one purpose and we have reared cattle for a separate purpose. Nobody treats all animal life as being of equal worth (unless you're a fundamentalist Jain). You might think you do, but you don't, certainly not in practice.

For me, the key aspect of this is suffering. My butcher is able to source meat locally (from my girlfriend's two uncles, in fact) so I am happy knowing that the cattle were reared and slaughtered humanely. However, when I'm eating out or at a friend's house, I cannot be sure of where the meat comes from. That is a problem for me, although clearly not enough to stop me eating the food. So I'm a hypocrite in that regard.

Finally, I was vegan for 12 months and vegetarian for a further 2 years. It wasn't an ethical decision. Dairy makes me feel congested and, as a result of a digestive disorder, it was recommended that I stop eating meat entirely to see if it improved my digestion.

As a vegan, or at least as someone temporarily living a vegan diet, I was in a good position to fully consider my thoughts on the matter. This won't be true for everyone, but I had been previously too attached to meat to fully address the issue. But when I was away from it I began to fully consider the implications of eating meat.

I arrived at a different point to you. I see our consumption of meat as being part of the natural order. We are carnivores like many other animals. I'm comfortable with that. I'm not comfortable with unnecessary suffering though and I make efforts to cut down on my consumption of products that may be a result of poor conditions, to ensure that the demand for it is -1. Although I appreciate that, due to finances, geography or various other reasons, not everyone can make that same decision and I don't judge them for it.

Plague Maiden

Plague Maiden wrote: »

If I had a cow sleeping in my kitchen for 11 years, that lay on the sofa beside me every night, that was a source of energy and happiness for me during the darkest moments of my life, then yeah, I'd probably have a soft spot for cows.

In all seriousness, I don't think it's a matter of hypocrisy. You are putting all animals into the same category. I, and I suspect many other meat eaters, don't. The contradiction would be a dog lover eating dog meat, etc. For thousands of years humans have domesticated dogs for one purpose and we have reared cattle for a separate purpose. Nobody treats all animal life as being of equal worth (unless you're a fundamentalist Jain). You might think you do, but you don't, certainly not in practice.

For me, the key aspect of this is suffering. My butcher is able to source meat locally (from my girlfriend's two uncles, in fact) so I am happy knowing that the cattle were reared and slaughtered humanely. However, when I'm eating out or at a friend's house, I cannot be sure of where the meat comes from. That is a problem for me, although clearly not enough to stop me eating the food. So I'm a hypocrite in that regard.

Finally, I was vegan for 12 months and vegetarian for a further 2 years. It wasn't an ethical decision. Dairy makes me feel congested and, as a result of a digestive disorder, it was recommended that I stop eating meat entirely to see if it improved my digestion.

As a vegan, or at least as someone temporarily living a vegan diet, I was in a good position to fully consider my thoughts on the matter. This won't be true for everyone, but I had been previously too attached to meat to fully address the issue. But when I was away from it I began to fully consider the implications of eating meat.

I arrived at a different point to you. I see our consumption of meat as being part of the natural order. We are carnivores like many other animals. I'm comfortable with that. I'm not comfortable with unnecessary suffering though and I make efforts to cut down on my consumption of products that may be a result of poor conditions, to ensure that the demand for it is -1. Although I appreciate that, due to finances, geography or various other reasons, not everyone can make that same decision and I don't judge them for it.

I’m certainly not accusing society of hypocrisy.

I’m seeing how different animals are treated and wondering why those choices are made.

I understand our connection with dogs is so different because of our exposure in a domestic setting from such a young age.

I suppose a different question would be if we all grew up with a pigs/piglets knocking about our house/land, just like dogs do, would we still choose to eat them ?

If the answer is no then is it our lack of interactions with ‘food’ animals that allows us to eat them ?

Mooooo

Id say no. Edit i mean no to the lack of interaction allowing consumption, apologies for confusion.
This generation and perhaps the generation before are somewhat removed interaction with animals bit prior to that there were a lot more people living rurally often with pigs and hens outside the back door and a number of cows in the field. Due to less mechanization more members of the family and community were involved in harvests of crops for people and livestock and in daily jobs such as milking. I think it is the distance from livestock and farming in general that has lead to people with similar opinions to yourself.

Mountainsandh

I live rural and I'm surrounded by smallish dairy and meat farmers. The cows, calves and sheep are very well taken care of, look very happy, seem to have great lives.
Yes there's a bit of mooing for a day or two after the calves are taken away, that's a bit sad, but it's just a day or two, then back to enjoying the green grass and the fresh air. The cows never seem overworked, their udders are always healthy and reasonable looking, not monstrous like you see sometimes. Like a lot of other animals in the wild, I don't think cows would stick with a family unit all their lives anyway, a herd yes, a family with mammy and daddy and children for 20 years, no... I am guessing here but I think calves would probably emancipate just a few weeks on from the time they are taken, so the inevitable is just brought a bit closer with dairy farming.

The local farmers love their cattle and sheep. They really do. If I ring them when I spot a sheep stuck in a gate or something, or a stray calf, they're here in an instant. They love talking about them, and spend a lot of time with them, checking on them constantly every day. Their animals are friendly and not at all afraid of humans. They really live life to the fullest.

There are free range hens also nearby, they are really free range, lovely fields to run around, no stress for these ladies. I do feel bad buying cheaper eggs when I can't afford the free range ones, but money is sometimes tight and eggs are healthy food for my family. When I can afford it I buy free range.

I see no contradiction.
If I saw cruelty in the farming around me, I would be weary. If I lived in the US for example, I would probably try and suss out which meat and dairy come from humane farming, and avoid the cruel ones.

I don't think there is the same level of cruelty here in Irish farming, so I'm quite happy eating Irish products.
I do feel bad buying products like chicken or eggs that I think may not have lived up to these standards, and if money allow, will select the better breeders.

There is no contradiction if you trust the breeders to treat the animals with respect and dispatch them humanely.

Plague Maiden

[Deleted User] wrote: »

I suppose a different question would be if we all grew up with a pigs/piglets knocking about our house/land, just like dogs do, would we still choose to eat them ?

My girlfriend won't eat poultry because she grew up on a farm where chickens roamed freely around the yard. She tended to them as a child and will now, point blank, refuse to eat any poultry whatsoever. And yet she eats eggs. Loves them, in fact. People are strange. I feel that you're looking for a specific answer where one doesn't exist.

But I take your point. What is that particular quality of a human/pet relationship that we cannot extend to other animals? Honestly, I don't know. Context, conditioning, societal norms? Just look at horses, particularly the status they're afforded in this part of the world. I accept that they are eaten elsewhere and yet I still can't believe it. But that's an arbitrary distinction I'm making based on, well, who knows?

We need to consume animals to survive. Or at least we used to. Perhaps you and I, in this part of the world, could live vegan lives (yet indirectly contribute to the meat and animal produce industry) but in other parts of the world it's an absolute, live or die, necessity. It's part of the human condition. There are many cultures around the world that don't eat meat, but veganism, in its modern application, is a typically Western lifestyle, enjoyed by people with the time and means to pursue it.

ganmo

Op you said you turned to vegetarianism after watching a kids info programme on meat production. this tells me you never considered where meat came from before that and that is a real problem with all food we produce and eat whether its meat or more processed food

gozunda

[Deleted User] wrote: »

I’m certainly not accusing society of hypocrisy.

I’m seeing how different animals are treated and wondering why those choices are made.

I understand our connection with dogs is so different because of our exposure in a domestic setting from such a young age.

I suppose a different question would be if we all grew up with a pigs/piglets knocking about our house/land, just like dogs do, would we still choose to eat them ?

If the answer is no then is it our lack of interactions with ‘food’ animals that allows us to eat them ?

If we go back in our society even less than 100 years - pigs were raised from birth in households and were known as the 'gentleman who pays the rent'.

Pigs played a immensely important role as an animal who litteraly payed the rent every year. I remember an old couple near me who had an old traditional cottage and a couple of acres. Every other year they reared a pig or two. The treatment of those animals with regard to the food they were fed and how they were looked after differed little from other household animals. That however did not mean that the pig was not destined to provide food or an income for the household.

I believe that the majority of people of that generation and before were not so removed from life and death as many people are today and perhaps importantly were not subject to a diet of largely anthropomorphic Disney and Fathing Wood type fiction.

Tar.Aldarion

This thread has nothing to do with greenhouse gases, a plethora of random things or about bringing up a posters history, which frankly is weird and has no place here or anywhere on this site. Keep it on topic and not personal. Final warning.

Puan, oldest known Sumatran orangutan, dies in Australia http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-australia-44529320

A very emotional last sentence in that story.

The girl refers to the Orangutan in a very human way. As if she sees her as an equal.

Worthless to some but not others.

Bilsthorpe farm cares for 'special needs animals' http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-nottinghamshire-44548777

This is the kind of story that gave me the idea for this thread.

Seems bizarre to me.

Fire service rescue 152 animals since April last year http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-44562199

Mutant z

Very few see livestock as pets as they see cats and dogs so eating bacon and pork doesn't have the same affect on them as it would if it was the meat of animals that are kept as pets hypocritical maybe but completely understandable and anyway its easy to distance yourself from what you eat on your plate to what roams out in the field what is served on your plate is simply food like everything else.

This isn’t ok but everything else is. Would be hilarious if it wasn’t tragic. Can you imagine how many people would turn vegan overnight if they could see inside a slaughterhouse.


Food festival chops live pig racing in face of petition http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-hampshire-45112496

davidjtaylor

The OP's original question is also discussed here.

I've just come across this thread; having read it through in its entirety, I'm surprised no-one challenged this tired old canard:

victor8600 wrote: »

if say 99% of people went vegetarian, it would mean that farm animals will no longer be raised. In effect, most farm animals will be driven to extinction.

Tar.Aldarion

Picture removed. Do not post content like that again. Also, monty_python, another post like that and you are banned. Post deleted.

I have removed the subsequent posts about the image, do not post about it again. PM if you wish to discuss.

N.B. Any further post on the topic will result in a ban.

Tar.Aldarion

Gozunda was banned here but it has been reversed below. Nobody post similar media content directly on thread, please inquire about this if necessary.

Lady Haywire

Deleted User wrote: »

Indeed it is.

Thanks for sharing it.

It’s a very very sad clip.

Think it’s fair to say the second animal didn’t want to be there.

Yesterday a neighbours animal was left in a field by itself or it jumped in from another field, she was roaring & walking up & down the hedge trying to get in to our cattle. Any herd animal left on their own (especially in a strange place) acts like that, it is not simply because he is in a slaughterhouse. He's just unlucky to be the last in line.

Tar.Aldarion

After discussion with Gozunda his/her ban has been lifted, please continue.

davidjtaylor

Hitman3000 wrote: »

Genuine question, what is the purpose of this thread?

Hitman3000, at a guess, I'd say it's more-or-less summed up in the first post, in particular these paragraphs:

Deleted User wrote: »

It seems people will go to extraordinary financial and physical efforts to help animals in stress but don’t think twice about the animals that provide their food.

Is this simply because of social norms/conditioning ?

Do the people who get enraged by a woman throwing a cat into a bin - https://www.google.com.au/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/world/2010/oct/19/cat-bin-woman-mary-bale - not understand what happens to animals for the provision of their meat and dairy ?

I can remember reading articles on the rescue of horses in ‘quicksand’, dogs or cats stuck in walls and usually with great financial cost involved.

There’s also the people who intervene during wild fires or extreme weather conditions to help wildlife.

and what I personally take from this is that klopparama is attempting to understand an all-too-commonly-exhibited cognitive dissonance (what others might call it hypocrisy).

gozunda

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Humans are unreal. These birds - are "particularly intelligent" and "like to communicate with humans and establish a relationship through play".
But other birds like chicken are just food. When will people see it as it is.
French theme park deploys crows to collect litter http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-45155818

All animals are by definition 'intelligent' in that they have the ability to ability to acquire and / or apply knowledge and skills for purposes of survival and reproduction. Humans are fairly normal animals in this regard.

For example see: https://www.quora.com/Do-animals-have-intelligence

Many animal species are also predated and eaten by other animals. So yes animals can be 'intelligent' and also 'food'. There is no contradiction or 'hypocrisy' by humans or any other animal

Just because an organism has certain level of inteligence or otherwise - does not mean it is excluded from the recycling of nutrients (entrophy) within ecological proceses. Even humans although at the top of the global food chain and intelligent sometimes get eaten by other animals.

The only place that this doesn't usually happen is Disneyworld ...

davidjtaylor

gozunda wrote: »

Even humans although at the top of the global food chain and intelligent sometimes get eaten by other animals.

And look at the outcry at that! And the response!

Tar.Aldarion

Ganmo post like that again and it is a ban, also a ban for those thanking things that are not welcome here.

Tar.Aldarion

Actually talk about the "Social contradiction on how we treat animals" or do not talk at all, make other threads about other things. I'm growing more impatient with this and will start banning for going off topic, including the OP. This is not a place to post links with no discussion on the topic or for people to randomly use Appeal to Nature.

gormdubhgorm

I don't want to be eaten alive by the mod so I am firmly sticking to the topic.
I don't view the meat eaters as a contradiction to how we treat animals.

People do not want to be cruel to animals as it is sadism cruelty for cruelties sake for amusement, tying a firework to a dog's tail for example.
Most people including meat eaters would view this as abhorrent.

But for a meat eater eating meat is natural is not done to be cruel to animals it is done for a purpose to eat meat providing nutrition.

I find the main contraction is the vegetarians and vegans who espouse nature.
Yet by going on a vegetarian/vegan diet they have to artificially find nutrition elsewhere which is against nature and is unnatural.

I used to have a pet dog when I was younger.
It would not stop me from eating dog if it was the culture of the country I was in Asia etc.
Likewise I would have no problem eating horse if I was in France or Belgium.

It is all meat and nutrition at the end of the day.
Meat is always the first thing I go for on a plate and it always will be.

seamus

The short answer to the OP is that we are conditioned to believe that animals killed for food are done so painlessly and humanely, or to simply not think about it at all.

So when we see a suffering animal, we save it. Many people then would have no issue packing the same animal off into a truck to food and then just not thinking about what happens next.

In an ideal world animals eaten for food would live a comfortable and stress-free life just like a pet, and when they die it would be lights-out without warning and without suffering. Unfortunately none of that is reality.

Eathrin

Yes, I'm aware previous posts were deleted for being off topic so I'll try to stay on track.

ganmo wrote: »

em the goat farmer is part of the human race
the western world eats too much of everything, cut everyones meat intake by half and calories by 25% and we'd be a much healthier section of the world

We don't usually organise our society according to how those with entirely different circumstances do on the other side of the planet. And if we did, you would see the contradiction as there are or were places where it is acceptable to eat dogs or kill elephants for their tusks or Rhino's for their horns. Most of us in Ireland would find these acts abominable now.

I don't know about you but my caloric intake is just fine. No doubt we'd all be a lot healthier for cutting meat consumption in half but also even more healthy again for getting rid of it entirely and replacing it with plants of equal and greater nutrition.

gozunda wrote: »

Hang on - are we not getting a bit away from the whole 'social contradiction' angle here again?

I can repeat exactly what I said about eating meat and that it is a perfectly normal part of human culture and nutrition again, and how all food production is detrimental to the planet however I don't wish to get cautioned etc for doing so.

Perhaps you could reframe your points etc so that we stick with the thread topic and I'll try and reply ...

And some food production is far far less damaging. However it is necessary so we aught to do the least damage without sacrificing our well being.

My point is that there's no reason to treat dog, cow, cat or pig differently. These are all friendly and intelligent animals capable of great compassion and each capable of suffering in equal amounts by our hands. As there is objectively, scientifically, economically and nutritionally no good reason to bring harm to these animals then you should indeed see the ingrained social contradiction in people's perceptions of how these animals should be treated and what ends they meet.


That's me done in this thread. I don't really think more needs to be said without going off topic here. Thanks.

Lady Haywire

Deleted User wrote: »

Another story that has captured global attention

Killer whale still carrying dead baby after 16 days http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-45133855

Yet not much thought seems to be given for cows separated from their calves.

Not much talk about saving the whales here.
Contains scenes of dead whales so don't blame me if you open it and say you weren't warned.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6066735/Faroe-Islands-whale-hunt-Sea-turns-red-blood-entire-village-butcher-180-animals.html

It's all to do with how we're brought up and what we perceive as normal. Sure cows/pigs/chickens have characters but majority of the world is brought up to see them as livestock & food, whereas cats/dogs & smaller animals are commonly seen as companions.

gozunda

Eathrin wrote: »

Yes, I'm aware previous posts were deleted for being off topic so I'll try to stay on track.

We don't usually organise our society according to how those with entirely different circumstances do on the other side of the planet. And if we did, you would see the contradiction as there are or were places where it is acceptable to eat dogs or kill elephants for their tusks or Rhino's for their horns. Most of us in Ireland would find these acts abominable now.

Yes I agree - we do not "usually organise our society according to how those with entirely different circumstances do on the other side of the planet." Afaik it's not acceptable to "eat dogs or kill elephants" here. That is how it is. There is no contradiction to say there are cultures where such practices do happen.

Eathrin wrote:

I don't know about you but my caloric intake is just fine. No doubt we'd all be a lot healthier for cutting meat consumption in half but also even more healthy again for getting rid of it entirely and replacing it with plants of equal and greater nutrition.

And that is your opinion which you are of course entitled to hold. Without being a medical or nutrional professional - imo it is dangerous and misleading to make suchvwide sweeping statements regarding a diet that you have selected for yourself mainly because I gather from your comments you are against animal based agriculture. That does not constitute any 'social contradiction' btw.

"Eathrin wrote:

And some food production is far far less damaging. However it is necessary so we aught to do the least damage without sacrificing our well being.

Think you are going wayyy of topic again there eathrin but suffice to say that is at best a fallacy. You may choose to see it that way. The real facts and figures show otherwise.There is no 'social contradiction there.

Eathrin wrote:

My point is that there's no reason to treat dog, cow, cat or pig differently. These are all friendly and intelligent animals capable of great compassion and each capable of suffering in equal amounts by our hands. As there is objectively, scientifically, economically and nutritionally no good reason to bring harm to these animals then you should indeed see the ingrained social contradiction in people's perceptions of how these animals should be treated and what ends they meet.

Again eathrin that's an opinion. The majority of people do not need to have a one size fits all philosophy for the world. Intelligence and being part of the food chain are not mutually exclusive. The eating of meat etc is part and parcel of entrophy and the recycling of nutrients on this planet. We can choose to ignore it - however it does not make it a social contradiction.

Eathrin

When I was young, I might have either eaten my dog or some meat I bought at the supermarket to get what are probably similar nutrients. (Well, almost the same, people here seem to conveniently forget that farm animals are pumped full of vitamins and supplements, but then call me weird for taking them straight)

I didn't eat my dog, because of the societal contradiction on how we treat different animals.

Now, I don't harm either.

gozunda

Eathrin wrote: »

When I was young, I might have either eaten my dog or some meat I bought at the supermarket to get what are probably similar nutrients. (Well, almost the same, people here seem to conveniently forget that farm animals are pumped full of vitamins and supplements, but then call me weird for taking them straight)
I didn't eat my dog, because of the societal contradiction on how we treat different animals.
Now, I don't harm either.

Do they really? Please explain how farm animals here are pumped full of "vitamins and supplements" (sic)

As explained for the majority of the population there is no 'societal contradiction' in not eating certain animals. That particular idea is something that is presumed by a small minority that choose not to eat animal products.

Look at this way - do you eat all vegetables and plants? Do you eat ornamental flowers? Do you eat cactus or grass? If so why not? Is there a 'societal contradiction when you don't? How do you reconcile that?

This is the reality of where your bacon comes from

The contradiction being that these pigs are probably more intelligent than your pet dog that you’d spend thousands on to keep alive.

Animals are sentient and not just your pets.

https://youtu.be/L_vqIGTKuQE

Tar.Aldarion

A lot of posts deleted again, if you want to talk about something else make a thread about it. Infractions and warnings handed out to some posters.

Hitman3000

Deleted User wrote:

This is the reality of where your bacon comes from

What relevance is this video to animal welfare in the EU?

davidjtaylor

CiniO wrote: »

Animals in a need of help should and often are helped by human. That's a normal decent thing to do for a human being.

Same as killing animals for food.


There's a huge difference in throwing a cat into a bin to make it suffer comparing to killing a pig for a bacon that you're gonna eat.

Deleted User wrote: »

I suppose this is what I’m talking about.

I see both as acts of great cruelty yet you don’t.

Why do we see it differently ?

I can only speak for myself of course but one reason (there are many) is that life's a long journey - I was vegetarian by 1992 but it took me until 2005 to become vegan. Life gets in the way. I simply hadn't put enough thought into it, I was too busy and didn't take the time to educate myself.

It was selfish of me but I'm not the first, nor the last...

That's just me though; I regret not seeing the light sooner.

Hitman3000

davidjtaylor wrote:

That's just me though; I regret not seeing the light sooner.

Seeing the light? So anyone who does not subscribe to your way of life is wrong? Is that the inference here?

Eathrin

Hitman3000 wrote: »

Seeing the light? So anyone who does not subscribe to your way of life is wrong? Is that the inference here?

Yes. If we can almost universally agree that things like slavery, rape, murder, child abuse etc etc are wrong then why not this.

There is no blame or hatred of those who don't yet subscribe to these views because we know that most of us were once meat eaters who were brought up believing something that was unjust. It's can be difficult and long drawn out to change a belief that has stuck with you so long. Beliefs that you don't question because they've been with you so long, any alternative view just seems totally alien and uncomfortable.

This thread is about a social contradiction and is one thing you might think about when considering what is truly just. Many of these contradictions in how we behave versus what we believe should help lead you to your own conclusions.

Hitman3000

Eathrin wrote:

Yes. If we can almost universally agree that things like slavery, rape, murder, child abuse etc etc are wrong then why not this.

That's some jump.