The cat Skinning incident !

Yo Mamma · 05-09-2001 12:54pm #1

Apparently, animal rights group PETA intend to prosecute the owner of a website for posting a movie in which a small cat was killed and skinned ready for eating. When the site posted the movie, it predictably elicited a huge response and spawned debate over the morality of posting this kind of material on the internet. When the same site posted a movie of a Russian soldier being killed, nobody complained.

Of course nobody complained! We see people being killed all the time on TV - we're all desensitized to it. But there are laws preventing the showing of animals being killed for entertainment purposes so you just don't see it on TV. When you do see footage of animal slaughter you're unprepared for the deep emotional strings it twangs. If it's a domestic companion like a dog or cat, it's even more emotive.

IMO the issue isn't about the shock material being posted on sites like these. It's WHY people are entertained by it. The morality of the person posting movies showing animal slaughter should not be the question - Peoples motives for choosing to watch it should! If nobody watched it, nobody would fcuking post it!

Dont get me wrong here, I cant imaging why anybody should find things like this entertaining, I never saw the offending clip and hopefully I never will, I't sickens me to think of it!

nesf · 05-09-2001 6:21pm

Well think of it this way, if they showed the entire process of the cow to the steak on the table ppl would be sickened, but would accept it more as it's a "food" animal being killed.

So in eccense the above footage should be acceptable in a society where animals are bred for the sole reason of human consumption.

But after reading the article about this they made a good point, the above argument doesn't really work when the website in question is renowned for finding footage of extreme and disgusting nature.

Victor · 05-09-2001 6:38pm

Killed, skinned, cooked, eaten. Fair game, but boring to be honest.

Kill, kill, kill the laser mice.

scutchy · 05-09-2001 7:54pm

I see no difference between this and a movie of someone skinning a banana

Illkillya · 05-09-2001 8:27pm

um... a banana is not a cat....

Chubby · 05-09-2001 9:48pm

If anything, the video shows what a luxury it is not to have to kill for your meat and just pick it up from the supermarket. It is educational in a twisted way and I don't see why they are making such a big deal out of it when there are much more offensive material on the site. A cat is just another animal afterall, so what if they're usually kept as pets. People keep all sort of farm animals as pets too and don't forget the stature of cows in India.

JustHalf · 05-09-2001 10:29pm

Originally posted by scutchy:
I see no difference between this and a movie of someone skinning a banana

Er, Scutch? Perhaps you should have chosen another foodstuff, pork (the production of which involves skinning pigs) or beef (yada yada skinning cows).

It's a banana. No brain. No heart. No soul.

And no funk.

scutchy · 06-09-2001 8:27am

Originally posted by Illkillya:
um... a banana is not a cat....

Yep, but food is food...

scutchy · 06-09-2001 8:31am

Originally posted by JustHalf:
Er, Scutch? Perhaps you should have chosen another foodstuff, pork (the production of which involves skinning pigs) or beef (yada yada skinning cows).

It's a banana. No brain. No heart. No soul.

And no funk.[/B]

Well, the same goes for the preparation of other foodstuff. I refuse to be squeamish about my need to eat - rabbits are pets who are regularly eaten, and quite tasty too!

True, nothing is harmed when fruit is eaten - the point of fruit is, in fact, to be eaten so the seeds can spread. But eating potatoes can be seen as wrong as you're taking a life. Some plants can feel pain, and the venus fly trap (for one) can count to two, but sod it, I eat, and don't feel guilty about it.

beaver · 06-09-2001 11:47pm

Originally posted by Yo Mamma:
<snip>

Of course nobody complained! We see people being killed all the time on TV - we're all desensitized to it.

So all we need is more public displays of cat killings and that will make it okay to show it in future, by your logic?!

Anyone who values humans over cats should honestly be more shocked to see a human die that a cat. Would you be shocked to see a fly or a spider splatted across a window? I doubt it. It's down to the fact that in this country at this time cats are by and large domestic household pets and are not eaten (to the best of my knowledge). It's absolutely a matter of emotions. You don't see too many kids with stuffed toys of "disgusting" animals... no, just the cute ones that it would be _awful_ to kill and eat.

In other countries dog is eaten. So, by the same token that it would be okay to show a cattle slaughter on TV, it would be okay to show a dog slaughter...

In this case the cat was killed and prepared for eating. Amongst the omnivorous, that's a perfectly valid reason for killing an animal.

But there are laws preventing the showing of animals being killed for entertainment purposes so you just don't see it on TV.

As we know, it's difficult to apply many current laws to the Internet... especially ones as region/culture-specific as this.

When you do see footage of animal slaughter you're unprepared for the deep emotional strings it twangs. If it's a domestic companion like a dog or cat, it's even more emotive.

No, _you're_ unprepared. These things effect different people in different ways. If you're able to emotionally detach yourself from food then the issue doesn't arise.

IMO the issue isn't about the shock material being posted on sites like these. It's WHY people are entertained by it. The morality of the person posting movies showing animal slaughter should not be the question - Peoples motives for choosing to watch it should! If nobody watched it, nobody would fcuking post it!

Well obviously whoever first came up with the notion of posting it was someone who thought it would be cool to see it online. You're always going to have people who find interest in things which may seem sick and bizarre to you. The web makes it very easy for them to share it. People's motive for watching it is going to be mostly interest. If I came across it, I would watch it, out of interest. Don't misunderstand me though, if the cat was simply being killed for fun, I wouldn't watch it.

-Ross

When I was young my mother told me not to look into the sun; so once, when I was six, I did...

Magwitch · 07-09-2001 2:25am

Household animals are our dependants, we are their suragate parents if you will. As such they are viewed as children, or at the very least creatures for whom we are responsible and are expected to behave towards as adults. The abuse of these innocent creatures is frowned upon and rightly so, as the act of someone who has a warped brain.

In the US some states have introduced legistation to force the perpartators of such abuses (started with the videoing of burning dogs alive) to be registered as "potential violent offenders" with the police, and force them to seek counciling until a court is satisified. These guys should be forced to seek couciling by court order, if only to scare them into not crossing a defined boundry again. I am not an ALF member, but would kick nine shades of sh*te out of anyone I say commiting an act even close to that.

As a mature adult in the real world I have NO time for malagusted spoilt cruel little turds...I would rather see them skinned and cooked, because humans have a choice to be responsible or "outrageous", but a line is a line and those di*ks crossed it.

Air-head, D*ck heads of the MTV no life generation seem to think little of the word "humanity". HUMANS on tv are FAKING it in movies (news flash!!!) and in the news it should still shock us, has anyone lost sight of that fact? This sort of stunt is a snuff movie by the back door. For those who offered lame justification, would you think the same of a human being skinned and cooked?? Of course not. And if you still hink you can you have alot to learn about life.

Magwitch · 07-09-2001 2:29am

P.S. I would avoid KFC even if I did not look at that!!!!

had a mate who worked there once....

[This message has been edited by Magwitch (edited 07-09-2001).]

scutchy · 07-09-2001 6:58am

Originally posted by Magwitch:
would you think the same of a human being skinned and cooked?? Of course not.

Cannibalism, although much demonised, was prevalent in many cultures, and possibly still is in some. Hawaiians used it, and if you read Caoineadh Art Uí Laoire, you'll note the custom of drinking the blood of the recently deceased.

The 92% of our population that are catholic believe that they consume human flesh and blood every week.

If there was no other source of nourishment available I would consume human flesh. (I'm being careful to avoid puns of the "eat them" sort) Ever see the movie Alive?

The idea of my friends gathering to consume my corpse to absorb my energies and experiences does not disturb me.

That said, to draw a better modern day equivalent, would you watch a human having their organs removed for donation? Do you think this is a sick and disturbing practice? Little Timmy on dyalisis probably doesn't.

WhiteWashMan · 07-09-2001 7:32am

Originally posted by scutchy:
Cannibalism, although much demonised, was prevalent in many cultures, and possibly still is in some. Hawaiians used it, and if you read Caoineadh Art Uí Laoire, you'll note the custom of drinking the blood of the recently deceased.

The 92% of our population that are catholic believe that they consume human flesh and blood every week.

If there was no other source of nourishment available I would consume human flesh. (I'm being careful to avoid puns of the "eat them" sort) Ever see the movie Alive?

The idea of my friends gathering to consume my corpse to absorb my energies and experiences does not disturb me.

That said, to draw a better modern day equivalent, would you watch a human having their organs removed for donation? Do you think this is a sick and disturbing practice? Little Timmy on dyalisis probably doesn't.

erm, i dont think the donation of organs has anything to do with it.
as for the cannibalism, well, just because another culture does it doesnt means that its tolerable to me.
KKK members think its good to lynch someone, i dont. as an example.

scutchy · 07-09-2001 9:35am

Originally posted by WhiteWashMan:
erm, i dont think the donation of organs has anything to do with it.

Well, if you think it's unacceptable to use dead animals for food, I don't see how you can condone using dead humans for organs. As to why you feel there is no parallel... perhaps you'd care to explain?

as for the cannibalism, well, just because another culture does it doesnt means that its tolerable to me.
KKK members think its good to lynch someone, i dont. as an example.

The KKK also believe that "just because another culture does it doesnt means that its tolerable to me."

Do you really equate the burial practices of another culture with the KKK? If I chose cremation or burial at sea over the traditional burial on land, would you associate me with racist bigots? Do you share similar feelings about Catholics who eat human flesh as part of their culture?

WhiteWashMan · 07-09-2001 9:51am

Originally posted by scutchy:
The KKK also believe that "just because another culture does it doesnt means that its tolerable to me."

Do you really equate the burial practices of another culture with the KKK? If I chose cremation or burial at sea over the traditional burial on land, would you associate me with racist bigots? Do you share similar feelings about Catholics who eat human flesh as part of their culture?

sorry, did i say that i thought eating dead animals was bad?
nope. i didnt. i feel there is no parallel because what has skinning a cat in an mpeg got to do with donating organs? its a stupid analogy. just admit it ok.

i wasnt associating you with anything. i used the KKK as a modern day example where they feel its ok to burn and lynch people (it may be against the law but the do it.) and the fact that just because some other culture does something does not mean that i have to accept it.
at least try to make an effort to read what is being written instead of jumping the gun. i have no idea what youare blathering about with your sea burial etc.
in short, in case you missed the message, i think that the fact that someone has put up a film of someone skinning a cat (im not too interested in the reasons, food or otherwise) and i think its a bit over the top. and no, i wouldnt watch someone having their organs removed, for either the purpose of donation, ritual burial, or just to keep the hunger away.
jesus youre very aggressive when people dont have the same point of view as you.

beaver · 07-09-2001 10:02am

Originally posted by Magwitch:
Household animals are our dependants, we are their suragate parents if you will. As such they are viewed as children, or at the very least creatures for whom we are responsible and are expected to behave towards as adults.

It would be wrong to turn around and kill a house pet. Whether that's a cat, dog, cow, platypus, whatever. However, any animal bred for the purpose of food supply is fair game. How can you say a cat is more worthy of not being eaten than is a cow?

The abuse of these innocent creatures is frowned upon and rightly so, as the act of someone who has a warped brain.

Have you ever eaten beef? What mortal sin did that cow commit? A cow or pig is more sinful than a cute little pussy cat? Innocence doesn't come into it.

In the US some states have introduced legistation to force the perpartators of such abuses (started with the videoing of burning dogs alive) to be registered as "potential violent offenders" with the police, and force them to seek counciling until a court is satisified.

Oh, yes! The US is wonderful at compiling lists of people it considers dangerous, abnormal, different, deviant... don't portray this as a good thing. It's not and it's off the point.

The prevention of animal abuse is a good thing. So also is counciling for those people who perpetrate animal abuses.

These guys should be forced to seek couciling by court order, if only to scare them into not crossing a defined boundry again. I am not an ALF member, but would kick nine shades of sh*te out of anyone I say commiting an act even close to that.

LOL. Reminds me of something an Irish teacher of mine said to one student: "I'm not a violent man, but I'd love to thump your head!".

I'd probably do the same too...

As a mature adult in the real world I have NO time for malagusted spoilt cruel little turds...I would rather see them skinned and cooked, because humans have a choice to be responsible or "outrageous", but a line is a line and those di*ks crossed it.

I know lots of people who are spoilt. To the best of my knowledge none of them abuse animals. In addition, I doubt everyone who abuses animals is spoilt.

Air-head, D*ck heads of the MTV no life generation seem to think little of the word "humanity".

There are a whole lot of people in that generation, including myself I guess. Why don't you step _off_ the self-righteousness pedestal and understand that animals would probably be very scarce if an entire generation was on the hunt for them?

On the flip side, not all animal abusers come from this generation. *mutter*thingswerebetterintheolddays*mutter*

HUMANS on tv are FAKING it in movies (news flash!!!) and in the news it should still shock us, has anyone lost sight of that fact? This sort of stunt is a snuff movie by the back door.

Familiarity with something nasty nurtures desensitivity. Movies look real. Actual footage looks real. What's the difference between the news/documentary and Saving Private Ryan, from an imagery perspective?

Yes, if you _think_ about it, obviously it's shocking that people get hurt/killed.

For those who offered lame justification, would you think the same of a human being skinned and cooked?? Of course not.

Killing an animal to eat it is justified, assuming the animal was bred either in the wild or bred to be eaten.

Killing a human to eat is called cannibalism and is a different kettle of moral, ethical and palatable fish entirely! There is no comparison.

And if you still hink you can you have alot to learn about life.

Yes, doesn't everyone?

-Ross

When I was young my mother told me not to look into the sun; so once, when I was six, I did...

[This message has been edited by beaver (edited 07-09-2001).]

[This message has been edited by beaver (edited 07-09-2001).]

WhiteWashMan · 07-09-2001 12:30pm

as much as im sure you think all of your above answers are incredibly witty and brilliant, they are not. thank god for patronising people. without them, life would be so boring.
if these are the things you take from anything i have written then fair balls to you, you really dont live in the same reality as me. and thats a good thing for me.

im not going to bother answering such a pathetic attempt to twist the things i have written. if you want a debate, i'll certainly give you one, but please, thats just a complete waste of time.
half the fun of the boards is poeple like you.

scutchy · 07-09-2001 12:34pm

Originally posted by WhiteWashMan:

im not going to bother answering such a pathetic attempt to twist the things i have written. if you want a debate, i'll certainly give you one, but please, thats just a complete waste of time.
half the fun of the boards is poeple like you.

To bring it back to one simple point, as an omnivore why do you have a problem with watching meat being prepared?

It's been emotional.

scutchy · 07-09-2001 11:01pm

Originally posted by WhiteWashMan:
sorry, did i say that i thought eating dead animals was bad?

My assumption was based on the fact that you seem to feel it is wrong to kill and skin them for the purpose of eating. You don't think beef and chicken grow on supermarket shelves, do you?

i feel there is no parallel because what has skinning a cat in an mpeg got to do with donating organs? its a stupid analogy. just admit it ok.

Were the consumption of human flesh socially acceptable, I would have given that as an example. Instead, I gave an instance where we use dead flesh to sustain life - exactly what happens in that mpeg. That is my parallel.

i wasnt associating you with anything. i used the KKK as a modern day example where they feel its ok to burn and lynch people (it may be against the law but the do it.)

I'm sure you have facts and figures to back that one up in modern times. I put forward the old hawaiian tradition of eating fallen warriors or parents to reclaim their spirits, and the old irish tradition of drinking the blood of the dead.

You said that this was wrong and drew analogies with the KKK - this is more than a tad bigoted.

and the fact that just because some other culture does something does not mean that i have to accept it.

True, but at least you could make some effort to understand it before you start with blanket condemnation.

i have no idea what youare blathering about with your sea burial etc.

I was giving another example of non-traditional burials and asking if you would also associate these with the KKK.

in short, in case you missed the message, i think that the fact that someone has put up a film of someone skinning a cat (im not too interested in the reasons, food or otherwise) and i think its a bit over the top.

Then how can you justify eating meat? It doesn't grow on supermarket shelves. You seem to believe that it is wrong to kill and skin animals, but perfectly okay to eat them - do you not see the contradiction in this?

and no, i wouldnt watch someone having their organs removed, for either the purpose of donation, ritual burial, or just to keep the hunger away.

Do you object to organ donation with the same venom you seem to object to the preparation of cats?

jesus youre very aggressive when people dont have the same point of view as you.

That's half the fun of the boards mate

Magwitch · 07-09-2001 11:41pm

For those who bang on about the meat eating argument you are pi**ing into the wind. If by culture (a la south Korea pre 1988), western domestic pets are a legitimate and/or traditional food source, then so be it. But even cannibles would not go posting their work on the net as movies (unless it was a cookery program of course).

The people who skinned and cooked a cat only posted it on the web to either get hits (so money is the motivation), shock people or make tentative contact with other sick f*cks. I am assuming they did not kill the animal themselves for the sole purpose of filming its carving up and cooking (that woudl bring a whole new depth to this debate).

I have slaughtered and cooked animals before, quite a few, and the difference is they are food stock -raised or caught for a purpose. I would for instance not kill someones pet rabit and eat it, or kill a cow or pig for amusment or shock value... so comaprisons with the web movie act and cattle are off target. I am frankly suprised that people can't get a grip on those basic facts. I have never met a slaughterman who was compelled to brag about a cow he topped for instance (if I did I would avoid him like the pox).

*"quote and cut" merchants need not reply. Get an opinion of your own or learn how to construct an indepentent sentence ffs.

Chubby · 08-09-2001 12:55am

Errrm, Magwitch, have you seen the video? The people in the video are not the same as the people who filmed it or the person who hosted it on his site. The people in the video looks like they're just doing a routine preparation for dinner and someone was there to film it. The guy who owns the site got his hands on it (amougst many other vids) and posted it. The video wasn't made exclusively for the site to make money like you are implying though I am sure that's the intention of it being made available. There is no difference between that and the video someone would've made in a farm animal slaghter house.

So what and who are you ****ed off at? The people who killed the cute animal? The people who filmed the routine slaughter of a food source? Or the person who is exploiting it on his website? The guy is just exploiting what is there. And like he said on his site, no one is upset when he's exploiting videos of human snuff videos (that stuff is much nastier in my opinion). No one is defending that guy. It's just hypocritical to condemn the filmed act if you condone killing and eating other animals.

[This message has been edited by Chubby (edited 08-09-2001).]

The cat Skinning incident !

Comments