# Carcasses in butcher window



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

The market butcher forced to stop displaying his meat and game because 'townies' object | Mail Online

How pathetic can you get. So wrong on multiple levels.

Minority allowed to bully. Hate mail etc condoned.
People should know what it is they are buying. If it's not acceptable to see a pigs head, why would it be acceptable to eat a pork chop. Meat isn't bubbled wrapped naturally.


----------



## redroses2106 (Aug 21, 2011)

well it's not very nice to look at is it - I have never seen carcasses hanging in butchers windows where I live - and have never been into a butchers - I don't eat meat so don't want to walk down the street to see a dead animal hanging there - I think all that graphic death should be behind the counter so people choosing to enter a butchers can see it but general passers by and their young children don't have to see it. I don't see a dead carcass bringing in customers either, but displaying some of their pies and pastries and ready made and packaged foods might attract more people.


----------



## ForeverHome (Jan 14, 2014)

In Morrisons the butcher works in full view of the public so goodness knows what the problem is here. 

I agree, kids should grow up knowing where their food comes from, whether it's potatoes caked in mud or a half pig dangling from a hook. I loved the butchers shops when I was a kid, it was like a one-to-one biology lesson. And those chain link anti-fly curtains and the fat butcher with his white apron covered in blood. 

With my grandparents I learned to skin a rabbit, and oh what fun we had bringing home 3 live ducks from market then trying to pluck them after my granddad killed them. The kitchen was full of feathers and in the end we had to call the neighbour, who did all 3 in 5 minutes flat.


----------



## Bisbow (Feb 20, 2012)

Quite agree.
We are letting ourselves get too sanitized for our own good. Nothing wrong with seeing meat as it was meant to be.
If the townies don't like it, look the other way.
I remember the butchers shop in the village with all the meat and carcassas hanging outside the shop and you took your pick. Nothing wrong with that and I am still here to tell the tale


----------



## rona (Aug 18, 2011)

Didn't you know......we now live in Disney land


----------



## havoc (Dec 8, 2008)

I'd use that butcher. I like to see the meat I'm going to buy.


----------



## piggybaker (Feb 10, 2009)

This sort of thing doesn't bother me, my dad was a refrigeration and cold room engineer and he did a chain of butchers so seeing meat hanging from a young age never bothered me, I knew where meat came from and what animal..
I think what has happened to this butcher is sad and I feel the community should have stood by him . 
Mind you animal heads , possible not the best display around


----------



## ForeverHome (Jan 14, 2014)

lol Rona!

We also used to pick our trout live and the fishmonger would bop them on the head in front of us. Oh, my mother bought two live trout once, goodness knows how she got them home alive, but anyway she tried bopping one on the head several times but it was still flapping about ... so she ran a bath for them till my father got home!!!


----------



## Aurelie (Apr 10, 2012)

I grew up seeing carcasses and birds hanging in the window of our local Butcher, it has never occurred to me that there is anything wrong with this at all - my children asked the inevitable 'what are sausages/ham/chicken' made of and I told them the truth, they come into the butchers shop with me too and have never been upset. 

If those people in the article objecting eat meat themselves, then I feel that they are total hypocrites.


----------



## JANICE199 (Feb 1, 2008)

*Have people gone completely bloody mad! So it's ok to display joints of meat but not the whole animal?
You have to wonder what these people teach their kids, as where their meat comes from.*


----------



## lilythepink (Jul 24, 2013)

what a good butcher this one is. shows such a diverse array of the meats they stock. I would definitely have this as my butcher if I lived in the area.

I think the pathetic townies are just that....they need to go to asda and buy some nice pre cooked pre packed alternative to real food.

When I was a child, all butchers used to hang up whatever stock they were cutting up and even the pig head was used for making brawn.

If we have deer roadkill, we put the deer head up for the birds to eat.....wouldn't know what else to do with a deer head.


----------



## ForeverHome (Jan 14, 2014)

lilythepink said:


> what a good butcher this one is. shows such a diverse array of the meats they stock. I would definitely have this as my butcher if I lived in the area.
> 
> I think the pathetic townies are just that....they need to go to asda and buy some nice pre cooked pre packed alternative to real food.
> 
> ...


Do you have a freezer full of venison then? Right folks all round LTP's for dinner!


----------



## 8tansox (Jan 29, 2010)

That would be my favourite butcher's then if he was local to me. What a shame he can't display what he's selling. The world's gone mad I tell ya!


----------



## foxiesummer (Feb 4, 2009)

OMG how pathetic. I would use a carcass displaying butcher rather a shop which wraps the meat in polythene. We often bought pigs heads and made brawn out of the meat and the dogs got the rest.


----------



## lilythepink (Jul 24, 2013)

ForeverHome said:


> Do you have a freezer full of venison then? Right folks all round LTP's for dinner!


i certainly do have a freezer full of venison. I live in a very rural area and plenty deer about so always plenty roadkill at this time of year.

You are welcome to some venison.....but I don't know how long it was on the road before it ended up in my freezer.lol.  dogs love it and so do cats.


----------



## MoggyBaby (Mar 8, 2011)

Oh for goodness sake!!!!

How much more pathetic is this country going to become???

I grew up seeing carcasses hanging in butchers windows. I grew up seeing meat properly displayed, not shrinked wrapped to within an inch of its life!! I even ATE this meat displayed in such a manner.

Guess what? It didn't kill me, it didn't give me nightmares and it didn't have any long-term, negative effects upon my psyche!!!

Folks REALLY need to get their priorities in order!!! 

UNBELIEVABLE!!! 


.


----------



## Sleeping_Lion (Mar 19, 2009)

Too close to the bone for me right now, if you'll excuse the pun.


----------



## ForeverHome (Jan 14, 2014)

lilythepink said:


> i certainly do have a freezer full of venison. I live in a very rural area and plenty deer about so always plenty roadkill at this time of year.
> 
> You are welcome to some venison.....but I don't know how long it was on the road before it ended up in my freezer.lol.  dogs love it and so do cats.


Wow that's so cool. We do see the odd one but by the time we do they are all bloated up. I've had one rabbit once, it was fresh and had been hit on the side of the head. My colleagues were disgusted when I walked into the taxi yard dangling a bunny by its back feet!!


----------



## loubyfrog (Feb 29, 2012)

MoggyBaby said:


> Oh for goodness sake!!!!
> 
> How much more pathetic is this country going to become???
> 
> ...


We were the same....Grew up seeing sheep,pheasants,pigs and rabbits in all Butchers windows.

TBH we were fascinated by them and when Mum was queing to get her meat (YES....Queuing in a Butchers  before the supermarkets took over ) we would play "which one would you eat game and each pick one" 

Its ridiculous and sad that Butchers can no longer display their wares....Just shows how stupid and "convenient" our nation is becoming.


----------



## Dingle (Aug 29, 2008)

What a shame for the butcher... i quite liked the display and would have no problems buying from them if they were my local butcher.


----------



## Bisbow (Feb 20, 2012)

When I was a child my muma d her friend used to rear chickens and rabbits for Christmas. We used to sit round a big old bath and pluck and clean the chickens for freinds and skin and clean the rabbits. Then dry the skins and have them made into gloves. Good times we had.
Our local poacher used to bring in rabbits and game birds that we usd to dress and eat.
We lived very well when food was scarce after the war. Mum usd to make brawn from pigs heads, and it was lovely, better than the stuff you bye now.

It never upset me or my friends to see and help with all this. It taught me where our food came from and stopped me from wasting good food, I still feel the same


----------



## DollyGirl08 (Dec 1, 2012)

I must say it does make me sad to see the carcass of an animal, and in China Town here in Brum the chinese restaurants have all sorts hanging there in a very natural state and it makes me sad for the animals. 
But I just don't look. 
I eat meat.
My dogs have raw food/carcasses. 
It is just a natural part of life.


----------



## MoggyBaby (Mar 8, 2011)

DollyGirl08 said:


> I must say it does make me sad to see the carcass of an animal, and in *China Town here in Brum the chinese restaurants have all sorts hanging there in a very natural state* and it makes me sad for the animals.


And there is a valid point - will 'these' establishments be told to remove THEIR products from the window??? Are these products any less distressing than those in a butchers window??

I don't believe they are and all sorts of carcasses can be viewed when one walks through China Town in London as well as other cities.

You can bet your last pound coin they WON'T be told to take theirs out of the window and I'm sure I don't need to type up the reason why!!!!

.


----------



## DollyGirl08 (Dec 1, 2012)

Yes exactly. 

It is a shame in a way how you don't see proper butchers or greengrocers anymore. Everything is about the big supermarkets these days. 
I hardly eat meat myself and use a supplier for the dogs else i'd use a butcher. I have been to the rag market up town a few times though and the outdoor market for my fruit/veg.


----------



## lilythepink (Jul 24, 2013)

ForeverHome said:


> Wow that's so cool. We do see the odd one but by the time we do they are all bloated up. I've had one rabbit once, it was fresh and had been hit on the side of the head. My colleagues were disgusted when I walked into the taxi yard dangling a bunny by its back feet!!


my husband was out in my car around 7.30pm last night and a deer jumped from the darkness and skimmed the front of my car. No damage done to the car and the deer ran off so I assume it wasn't injured and just very lucky.

If we see a fresh and unbloated deer or rabbit of pheasant we always pick them up and bring them home.....always make sure the deer really is dead cos sometimes they can be stunned so you have to be careful.


----------



## Happy Paws2 (Sep 13, 2008)

The world is slowly going mad, and I think supermarkets are to blame, some children don't even know where milk or eggs come from let alone meat.


----------



## simplysardonic (Sep 1, 2009)

When I was a meat eater this is the sort of butcher I would have gone to. I wonder how many of the complainants eat meat, I bet it's the majority!


----------



## lilythepink (Jul 24, 2013)

Happy Paws said:


> The world is slowly going mad, and I think supermarkets are to blame, some children don't even know where milk or eggs come from let alone meat.


the consumer is the one with a choice. If we insisted on small butchers shops then maybe a few more would be able to keep going.

My kids grew up on a farm...they know exactly from start to finish where meat comes and I always cooked a hot meal every night and they all cook....1 is even a chef. If you ask all 4 of them what they ate for tea last night it would have been processed or a take away or pizza.

My grandchildren are fussy eaters....my own kids never were. My grandchildren live on pizza and the like. They know where meat comes from and they see us here with roadkill....it doesn't bother them and thats not why they eat processed foods. It will be very interesting to see what the next generation prefers to eat.

My granny into her 80s used to put a small stew on in the morning....and that was a regular thing. My grandchildren wouldn't touch a stew.


----------



## Jansheff (Jan 31, 2011)

My father was a butcher so I grew up with body parts lying around, lol. I don't really think anything of it. 

Would be interested to know if the same objections apply to traditional fishmongers. Are they going to be stopped from displaying an entire fish, crab, lobster or prawn?


----------



## Wiz201 (Jun 13, 2012)

What's the difference from seeing whole fish bodies on the counters in the supermarkets? Bloody pathetic


----------



## Sleeping_Lion (Mar 19, 2009)

Most people buy fish without heads or even skin and bones these days, same thing with animals, they prefer nothing to remind them where they come from. God knows what they think happens with the rest of the animal carcass, well, in my instance, my dogs get all the local freebies I can get my hands on! You'd be surprised how much gets chucked in the bin, a sight that I find far more offensive than any display in a butchers window.


----------



## JANICE199 (Feb 1, 2008)

*Talking about this on radio 2 now.*


----------



## loubyfrog (Feb 29, 2012)

Jansheff said:


> My father was a butcher so I grew up with body parts lying around, lol. I don't really think anything of it.
> 
> Would be interested to know if the same objections apply to traditional fishmongers. Are they going to be stopped from displaying an entire fish, crab, lobster or prawn?


I hope not. 

Used to take DD when she was younger to the Fish market (at her request) so she could look at them all as we have a half decent one here.

Some children liked going to play centres or swimming on a weekend......My child enjoyed going to the fish market.


----------



## Happy Paws2 (Sep 13, 2008)

lilythepink said:


> the consumer is the one with a choice. *If we insisted on small butchers shops then maybe a few more would be able to keep going.*


If we had one near us I'd use it, but we don't the last one closed before we moved here.


----------



## Cleo38 (Jan 22, 2010)

Reminds me of this story from a while back.

A father walks his two (overly sensitive!) kids around a fishing harbour & bleets to the local paper that they were distressed by the smell & sight of dead fish  

Devon port Holidaymaker lodges official complaint over smell of fish 'that upset my children' | Mail Online


----------



## Sleeping_Lion (Mar 19, 2009)

Cleo38 said:


> Reminds me of this story from a while back.
> 
> A father walks his two (overly sensitive!) kids around a fishing harbour & bleets to the local paper that they were distressed by the smell & sight of dead fish
> 
> Devon port Holidaymaker lodges official complaint over smell of fish 'that upset my children' | Mail Online


What a twonk!

The sad thing is, one of the complaints about the butchers shop was they had to walk past to get to the sweet shop, I wonder what they bought that had gelatine and other animal products in their sweeties, but they don't want to know.


----------



## ForeverHome (Jan 14, 2014)

Reading Black Beauty is a good reminder of how much things have changed in such a short time. I always remember the bit about the pit ponies when one of them collapses and BB's friend says to him he'll be gone for dog food and his bones for glue. What was my reaction as an 8 year old? Oh I didn't know they made glue out of bones!

There's a difference between caring for animal welfare, and sentimentality. I care that my meat has had a good life. It's worth remembering the animals we eat would never have been born if they weren't earmarked (literally) for the pot.


----------



## Cleo38 (Jan 22, 2010)

ForeverHome said:


> Reading Black Beauty is a good reminder of how much things have changed in such a short time. I always remember the bit about the pit ponies when one of them collapses and BB's friend says to him he'll be gone for dog food and his bones for glue. What was my reaction as an 8 year old? Oh I didn't know they made glue out of bones!
> 
> There's a difference between caring for animal welfare, and sentimentality. I care that my meat has had a good life. It's worth remembering the animals we eat would never have been born if they weren't earmarked (literally) for the pot.


Same here, I loved BB stories when I was young!! I cried my eyes out reading that & refused to use glue in my art class at school


----------



## ForeverHome (Jan 14, 2014)

Cleo38 said:


> Same here, I loved BB stories when I was young!! I cried my eyes out reading that & refused to use glue in my art class at school


Aw bless!

But once we're dead a body is just like an old coat we don't need any more, because it's spring and we've gone to dace in the meadows at the rainbow bridge. May as well recycle it and put it to good use I reckon.

That said when the vet offered to take Misha's body away the image that flashed through my mind was over her body being slung into the back of a van by the tail, no idea why that came to me as I'm sure he wouldn't. But we buried her at home anyway.


----------



## havoc (Dec 8, 2008)

Tell you what - if the furore about this proves anything it's that there's no such thing as bad publicity


----------



## delca1 (Oct 29, 2011)

Personally I find it all a bit pathetic. A local church had to stop it's bell chiming the hour and half hour as _one_ person complained it was disturbing during the night. Sadly the mechanism was either on or off, it couldn't do partial days.
Two years and lots of complaints about the one complaining later the bell chimes again with a new and expensive mechanism allowing the bell to stop overnight.
It's ridiculous.


----------



## cinnamontoast (Oct 24, 2010)

For crying out loud, you see babies being born on TV all the time-surely that's worse?! This is ridiculous: where do people think meat comes from? Stupid, stupid, they want it all clean and in a plastic wrapped package looking nothing like the actual animal. So dumb.


----------



## lilythepink (Jul 24, 2013)

Sleeping_Lion said:


> Most people buy fish without heads or even skin and bones these days, same thing with animals, they prefer nothing to remind them where they come from. God knows what they think happens with the rest of the animal carcass, well, in my instance, my dogs get all the local freebies I can get my hands on! You'd be surprised how much gets chucked in the bin, a sight that I find far more offensive than any display in a butchers window.


nothing gets wasted here either.


----------



## lilythepink (Jul 24, 2013)

Happy Paws said:


> If we had one near us I'd use it, but we don't the last one closed before we moved here.


I live in a tourist area and I think several of the small butchers here rely on seasonal trade to keep going.

There are 2 small butchers in the nearest town....population of just over 4000.

We do have a small tesco, co op and a costcutter too but locals also go to the butcher as opposed to tesco for meat.

I think age plays a big part too. I see plenty people queueing in the butchers and mainly old people though.


----------



## Blackcats (Apr 13, 2013)

One of the most ridiculous things I have ever heard.

Getting so sick of people pushing their bloomin beliefs onto other people. You don't eat meat or like it, fine. But respect other people who do. People like that... I cannot respect their beliefs when they don't for other people's. It's a load of bull when they say they do.

I remember as a child walking past butchers with animals hung up in the window, never bothered me. More of a fascination really.

A horror scene.  People are truly pathetic. 

Some of the comments from those people. ut:

Hands up I do not want to know how our animals here are killed. I don't think anybody would want to see that of course but seeing a pig hung in the window would not faze me at all. I don't see what the problem is, maybe that's just me.


----------



## Fleur (Jul 19, 2008)

I personally see it as a sign of a good butchers - it would actually encourage me in 

We need to stop bringing up our kids to not accept or understand where their food comes from.


----------



## Blackcats (Apr 13, 2013)

rona said:


> Didn't you know......we now live in Disney land


And the sky is made up of pink candy floss clouds where the sun is always shining with a big smile.

It is Disneyland. You're in denial. Don't you see everyone singing with the animals like Snow White. Honestly, the birds and everything help clean my flat up. Darn bloody good at it too.

Everyone knows we all just eat flowers for a living.

It's a rosy world, ya know.


----------



## Sleeping_Lion (Mar 19, 2009)

rona said:


> Didn't you know......we now live in Disney land


Yep, and we should all exist on fairy [email protected] from fairies fed on non-gm rainbows that died of old age!!


----------



## Fleur (Jul 19, 2008)

Sleeping_Lion said:


> Yep, and we should all exist on fairy [email protected] from fairies fed on non-gm rainbows that died of old age!!


As the saying goes:


----------



## northnsouth (Nov 17, 2009)

If they can't look in it's face should they be eating it....

Ridiculous ................


----------



## Blackcats (Apr 13, 2013)

northnsouth said:


> If you can't look in it's face don't eat it....


Damn right.

Personally, when I have kids I would like to tell them how they get their food and educate them in that way. Of course, excluding how our animals do become food in that way if that makes sense.

I wouldn't want my children believing that food comes from out of nowhere by the mere click of fingers.

Wrong for some but I just see it as that.


----------



## ForeverHome (Jan 14, 2014)

My mum would never buy rabbit headless because she says without the head and fur you can't tell if it's a cat.

The last place I saw pheasant and rabbit hanging from a butcher's awning was in Bakewell 14 years ago. Happy days.


----------



## Colliebarmy (Sep 27, 2012)

Those townies also probably complained about the noise when they moved to Sleepy Hollow, mainly church bells and cock crowing at dawn...


----------



## Tails and Trails (Jan 9, 2014)

Blackcats said:


> Damn right.
> 
> Personally, when I have kids I would like to tell them how they get their food and educate them in that way. Of course, excluding how our animals do become food in that way if that makes sense.
> 
> ...


one thing is always guaranteed when you get these type of complainants...
......they will always try to tell you they are worried about the effects on their kids....why dont they just be big about it and admit they are speaking for their own sensibilities?


----------



## Sleeping_Lion (Mar 19, 2009)

Some years ago, working on a stand with some of my art work, a young lad asked if the picture on my table was of a a dog with a dead bird in it's mouth. His grandmother then said yes it was, but that it was bringing it back so that it could be taken to the vets 

They probably went to the hot dog stand after that!!


----------



## Tails and Trails (Jan 9, 2014)

redroses2106 said:


> . I don't see a dead carcass bringing in customers either, .


....well, i just read the thread, and it looks like if they all lived near him this butcher would have stacks of new customers right away..

.....so taking PF as a representative sample, i would say you are on the wrong track there


----------



## Blackcats (Apr 13, 2013)

Tails and Trails said:


> one thing is always guaranteed when you get these type of complainants...
> ......they will always try to tell you they are worried about the effects on their kids....why dont they just be big about it and admit they are speaking for their own sensibilities?


That is true. They use their kids to get their point across.

To tell you the truth in most cases I cannot respect these people who shout out their beliefs on the consumption of meat simply because they are quick to judge you for wanting to eat meat. May as well slam their person bible at you and shove a pitchfork into your face.

How can one respect someone for choosing not to eat meat when some do not respect those for choosing to eat it.

These people who use environmental as a big part in 'Though shall not eat meat' it falls death to my ears. One cannot care so much for the environment when one chooses such luxuries as driving, buying other things which do not help the environment. More to it than just food.


----------



## CavalierOwner (Feb 5, 2012)

How pathetic!  where do people think meat comes from, do they think pigs sh!t out a few chops to fill the butchers fridges then go back to living happily ever after rolling around in piles of mud?  People need to grow up, if you don't like what hangs in a shop window don't look.


----------



## simplysardonic (Sep 1, 2009)

Sleeping_Lion said:


> Some years ago, working on a stand with some of my art work, a young lad asked if the picture on my table was of a a dog with a dead bird in it's mouth. His grandmother then said yes it was, but that it was bringing it back so that it could be taken to the vets
> 
> *They probably went to the hot dog stand after that*!!


To be fair though, the only 'meat' in those hotdogs is probably gristle, eyelids & sphincters. Enjoy!


----------



## Sleeping_Lion (Mar 19, 2009)

simplysardonic said:


> To be fair though, the only 'meat' in those hotdogs is probably gristle, eyelids & sphincters. Enjoy!


Same as in most fast food then, one reason I never buy food from them! Can't even stand the smell of it


----------



## ForeverHome (Jan 14, 2014)

Sleeping_Lion said:


> Some years ago, working on a stand with some of my art work, a young lad asked if the picture on my table was of a a dog with a dead bird in it's mouth. His grandmother then said yes it was, but that it was bringing it back so that it could be taken to the vets
> 
> They probably went to the hot dog stand after that!!


That reminds me of a Noel Coward story when a small boy asked him what those two dogs were doing and he replied "I believe the first dog is tired and the other is pushing him all the way to Kings Cross!"


----------



## simplysardonic (Sep 1, 2009)

Sleeping_Lion said:


> Same as in most fast food then, one reason I never buy food from them!  Can't even stand the smell of it


Me neither, and I am _so_ lucky to live in a village with 2 kebab shops, 2 Indians, several fish & chip shops and the crowning glory- it's own McDonald's :thumbup1:


----------



## Tails and Trails (Jan 9, 2014)

Blackcats said:


> That is true. They use their kids to get their point across..


yeh, and tbh, anyone that mollycoddles their kids so much that they would make a formal complaint out of any passing moment their child "gets upset" (instead of just having a chat with them) aint being much of a parent, as they will be raising people that will grow up as incapable and unconfident and self centred adults....
....doing them no favours at all :frown2:


----------



## Sleeping_Lion (Mar 19, 2009)

simplysardonic said:


> Me neither, and I am _so_ lucky to live in a village with 2 kebab shops, 2 Indians, several fish & chip shops and the crowning glory- it's own McDonald's :thumbup1:


The nearest *fast food* place to me is miles away, no temptation whatsoever, and I'd be as likely to eat in a McDonalds as I would be to shop at a Tescos store


----------



## ForeverHome (Jan 14, 2014)

See if I wanted to I could get ever so upset about these "townie" comments. I've lived in big cities all my life. Ok so generally town kids are less likely to come into contact with the harsh realities of nature and food production, but that doesn't mean they have to grow up in a sanitised and sentimental way. 

I met a pest controller when I lived in Derbyshire, the one time I wasn't in a city, and he used to love testing me because I'm a townie. First time he asked if I minded if he shot a squirrel down from a tree. I said it's your job go for it, didn't bother me, it was a clean shot ... Then some time later he asked me what he should do with his dogs if anything happened to him. I thought yeah now you really are testing me so I said shoot them. He looked shocked. I said they won't obey anyone else, they won't be happy as pets, all you can do is shoot them. Best thing for them, I said.

Well that certainly shut him up anyway, he didn't bother testing me again.


----------



## Sleeping_Lion (Mar 19, 2009)

ForeverHome said:


> See if I wanted to I could get ever so upset about these "townie" comments. I've lived in big cities all my life. Ok so generally town kids are less likely to come into contact with the harsh realities of nature and food production, but that doesn't mean they have to grow up in a sanitised and sentimental way.
> 
> I met a pest controller when I lived in Derbyshire, the one time I wasn't in a city, and he used to love testing me because I'm a townie. First time he asked if I minded if he shot a squirrel down from a tree. I said it's your job go for it, didn't bother me, it was a clean shot ... Then some time later he asked me what he should do with his dogs if anything happened to him. I thought yeah now you really are testing me so I said shoot them. He looked shocked. I said they won't obey anyone else, they won't be happy as pets, all you can do is shoot them. Best thing for them, I said.
> 
> Well that certainly shut him up anyway, he didn't bother testing me again.


I dunno about the shooting dogs thing, if they were really old possibly, I've successfully rehomed a really old working Labrador in the past, and that was before I went all khaki 

PS Townie


----------



## lennythecloud (Aug 5, 2011)

Blackcats said:


> To tell you the truth in most cases I cannot respect these people who shout out their beliefs on the consumption of meat simply because they are quick to judge you for wanting to eat meat. May as well slam their person bible at you and shove a pitchfork into your face.
> 
> How can one respect someone for choosing not to eat meat when some do not respect those for choosing to eat it.
> 
> These people who use environmental as a big part in 'Though shall not eat meat' it falls death to my ears. One cannot care so much for the environment when one chooses such luxuries as driving, buying other things which do not help the environment. More to it than just food.


From the article:

"And James Bird wrote: We are losing our grip on reality if we cant abide being reminded where our sausages originate from (and Im a vegan)." As a fellow vegan I agree with James, I personally don't have a problem with seeing dead animals.

This is not about veggies 'shouting about their beliefs', it's about a bunch of townies not being able to face (literally) where their food comes from.

I don't 'shout out' my opinion on food unless it's in response to someone else voicing theirs in which case I will happily state why I hold the position I do  .


----------



## Blackcats (Apr 13, 2013)

lennythecloud said:


> From the article:
> 
> "And James Bird wrote: We are losing our grip on reality if we cant abide being reminded where our sausages originate from (and Im a vegan)." As a fellow vegan I agree with James, I personally don't have a problem with seeing dead animals.
> 
> ...


I wasn't actually targeting anyone on this thread but merely in general.

Which is absolutely fine. I respect your opinion and any as long as mine is.

And I agree. It didn't actually say if these people complaining were meat eaters or not unless I missed it.

Regardless, if it was meat eaters then just read my replies to Tailandtrails which was saying I didn't agree with it and kids should be educated in what they eat.

If it was vegetarians then it's just pointless imo.

Pointless regardless who complained and if they are meat eaters or not.


----------



## Blackcats (Apr 13, 2013)

Tails and Trails said:


> yeh, and tbh, anyone that mollycoddles their kids so much that they would make a formal complaint out of any passing moment their child "gets upset" (instead of just having a chat with them) aint being much of a parent, as they will be raising people that will grow up as incapable and unconfident and self centred adults....
> ....doing them no favours at all :frown2:


I agree. I am all for protecting children from the evil in this world but portraying it as pink and fluffy is not good. It is not healthy.

I just don't think it is hard to tell a child about where they get their food from. If it does seriously scar them then I am sure that child does not have to eat meat. There are plenty of veggie eaters.

I live in the world where I believe people should know where they get their food from. I don't believe in parenting where the children are lead to believe the things they get come from out of nowhere. Not healthy imo.


----------



## ForeverHome (Jan 14, 2014)

Sleeping_Lion said:


> I dunno about the shooting dogs thing, if they were really old possibly, I've successfully rehomed a really old working Labrador in the past, and that was before I went all khaki
> 
> PS Townie


I wouldn't for one second advocate shooting dogs!

I just wasn't going to put up with being thought of as some townie who can't cut it with country ways.

I well remember a farmer walking into the vets surgery while I was in the waiting room asking for advice on finding wool in his sheepdog's poo. It was a brief discussion, vet offered but we all knew the outcome. That's a look I never want to see on a dog owner's face ever again.


----------



## ForeverHome (Jan 14, 2014)

Ok nobody else has said it, I'm going to.

Children learning that their pets die, that farm animals are bred and killed so we can eat them - those are also important preparation for people dying. And having some understanding of it in advance of having to explain that nanna's gone to heaven is going to help kids grow up understanding that death is a fact of life. Teaching them to accept death and that grieving is not a disease it's a natural response to losing someone we love, well that is a vital part of growing up. 

Wrapping kids in cotton wool does not make the real world go away, it just makes it so much harder for them to deal with it when it happens.

In my opinion, of course.


----------



## springerpete (Jun 24, 2010)

My niece, Danni, was stopping with us a few years back. She is, I hasten to add, a city dweller. I'd been fishing and had returned with a brace of beautifully condition Sewin. ( Sea trout.) Danni and Rose came home from whatever it was they'd been doing, Rose was delighted to have a fresh fish for dinner, as was Danni, until she saw them, and saw me cleaning them. I ended up having to run to the chip shop to buy a piece of cod that had been frozen for goodness knows how long which she was quite happy to eat. '' But that's not the same uncle Pete.'' No amount of explanation could convince her that the fresh caught fish was the better option. I just gave up and let her eat crap if that's what she wished.


----------



## ForeverHome (Jan 14, 2014)

springerpete said:


> My niece, Danni, was stopping with us a few years back. She is, I hasten to add, a city dweller. I'd been fishing and had returned with a brace of beautifully condition Sewin. ( Sea trout.) Danni and Rose came home from whatever it was they'd been doing, Rose was delighted to have a fresh fish for dinner, as was Danni, until she saw them, and saw me cleaning them. I ended up having to run to the chip shop to buy a piece of cod that had been frozen for goodness knows how long which she was quite happy to eat. '' But that's not the same uncle Pete.'' No amount of explanation could convince her that the fresh caught fish was the better option. I just gave up and let her eat crap if that's what she wished.


She's right - it certainly isn't the same! Wow. A friend of mine goes on an annual sea trout expedition with his friend (excuse to get away from the women I reckon) and always used to bring one round and cook it for us.


----------



## Nicky10 (Jan 11, 2010)

Townie here that doesn't mind. Children should know their meat don't just come in minced form that they used to be cows or pigs or whatever. If the people clutching at pearls all won't someone please think of the children were vegans I could understand. But if you eat meat you should know where it comes from and be able to look at it in the face.

But we of course live in a pink fluffy world where nothing eats anything else and no child should ever be told otherwise :frown2:.


----------



## springerpete (Jun 24, 2010)

ForeverHome said:


> She's right - it certainly isn't the same! Wow. A friend of mine goes on an annual sea trout expedition with his friend (excuse to get away from the women I reckon) and always used to bring one round and cook it for us.


Give me sea trout over salmon any day, I love 'em cooked very simply. they're food for a king.


----------



## ForeverHome (Jan 14, 2014)

springerpete said:


> Give me sea trout over salmon any day, I love 'em cooked very simply. they're food for a king.


To be honest out of what I can get hold of a humble mackerel's the favourite in this house, sea trout is very rare in the fishmonger's. I like salmon if it's proper wild, otherwise it's a sea-battery-chicken really. Plus a mackerel goes off so quick you know it's fresh if it looks edible.


----------



## DoodlesRule (Jul 7, 2011)

Haven't seen displays like that in donkeys years - would have thought health & safety would insist its in chillers/fridges


----------



## cheekyscrip (Feb 8, 2010)

Once in Spanish supermarket my little dd saw bodies of piglets on display....



She was in floods of tears totally upset...and she was five...



What older children can see and have to accept gradually may not be suitable for younger ones or more sensitive..some are fine...


MY son was ok at his grandmother funeral (he is 7..but cannot watch any RSCPA ads ,...and definitely not dead baby animals!!)

As we are often forced to take kids shopping then especially piglets, lambs, calves, bunnies etc..babies should not be displayed...



By the way : I DO NOT EAT BABY ANIMALS!!! and hate to see their corpses...


----------



## Sleeping_Lion (Mar 19, 2009)

cheekyscrip said:


> Once in Spanish supermarket my little dd saw bodies of piglets on display....
> 
> She was in floods of tears totally upset...and she was five...
> 
> ...


If you eat chicken, you might be surprised, 8 weeks is the average age before they are culled.


----------



## Nicky10 (Jan 11, 2010)

And they have to be culled at 8 weeks or they grow too heavy for their legs  the industrial hybrids anyway.


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

cheekyscrip said:


> By the way : I DO NOT EAT BABY ANIMALS!!! and hate to see their corpses...


I like lamb which are sheep less than a year old.

Quote from the article


> And James Bird wrote: We are losing our grip on reality if we cant abide being reminded where our sausages originate from (and Im a vegan).


How many parents who complain about their kids being exposed to carcasses etc are happy to let those same kids blow other people up etc on the latest computer game rated 18+ I wonder.

I'd much rather a child could see what they are eating and decide for themselves if it is something they can eat.


----------



## Megan345 (Aug 8, 2012)

springerpete said:


> Give me sea trout over salmon any day, I love 'em cooked very simply. they're food for a king.


My brother and his friend once caught my mum and I mackerel for breakfast while we were on holiday. They were lovely.


----------



## Fleur (Jul 19, 2008)

I love taking my friends little girl to the farm shop - we've been taking her since she was a baby, (and although she doesn't like the smell she dramatically walks around holding her nose protesting at what she calls the 'stinky' shop), she always asks what animal different pieces of meat comes from.
In the spring you can meet the lambs and occasionally bottle feed them, she know these lambs will be in the shop a few weeks later.
She has grown up in a town but with an understanding of where her food comes from - her parents have made an effort to make sure she knows that meat comes from animals and we should respect them by caring for them.


----------



## lennythecloud (Aug 5, 2011)

Nicky10 said:


> And they have to be culled at 8 weeks or they grow too heavy for their legs  the industrial hybrids anyway.


Broilers are the only livestock that are in chronic pain for the last 20 percent of their lives. They dont move around, not because they are overstocked, but because it hurts their joints so much. John Webster of the University of Bristols School of Veterinary Science 

Factory Farming: A Moral Issue, by Peter Singer


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

lennythecloud said:


> "Broilers are the only livestock that are in chronic pain for the last 20 percent of their lives. They don't move around, not because they are overstocked, but because it hurts their joints so much." John Webster of the University of Bristol's School of Veterinary Science


These don't seem to..
[youtube_browser]t2p7U-I0PNU[/youtube_browser]

It's far more likely that a small butcher will source ethically farmed, local meat.


----------



## ForeverHome (Jan 14, 2014)

lennythecloud said:


> Broilers are the only livestock that are in chronic pain for the last 20 percent of their lives. They dont move around, not because they are overstocked, but because it hurts their joints so much. John Webster of the University of Bristols School of Veterinary Science
> 
> Factory Farming: A Moral Issue, by Peter Singer


Well that's the last straw for me and chicken.

You can't trust the supermarket free range labels.

Any processed or restaurant food you can be reasonably sure you're contributing to misery.

My cats don't actually like chicken.

I won't buy cod because it's on and off the endangered list like a yo-yo ...

... so why should I contribute to chicken misery?

Turkey probably much the same, though the cats do love it.

I don't actually remember my farm shop selling chicken!!

I want to know that the animals I eat have had a good life - that's not a good life so stuff chicken that's the end of it. And as soon as I find an alternative for the cats, turkey's gone too.


----------



## lilythepink (Jul 24, 2013)

ForeverHome said:


> My mum would never buy rabbit headless because she says without the head and fur you can't tell if it's a cat.
> 
> The last place I saw pheasant and rabbit hanging from a butcher's awning was in Bakewell 14 years ago. Happy days.


lol. I just love your mum


----------



## havoc (Dec 8, 2008)

Who HAS to take their children past this shop at close quarters? Is it not possible to cross the road? Should we not be complaining at a sweet shop filling the window display with tempting treats full of fat and sugar? Perhaps if the butcher had coloured his display with E numbered chemicals to make it pretty it wouldn't have caused such offence.


----------



## lennythecloud (Aug 5, 2011)

Goblin said:


> These don't seem to..
> [youtube_browser]t2p7U-I0PNU[/youtube_browser]
> 
> It's far more likely that a small butcher will source ethically farmed, local meat.


Yet free range and high welfare only make up around 20% of the market share for fresh chicken and although far better even free range broilers are not immune to joint issues.

Why post a video of a random farm in Georgia to illustrate the point? Wrong breed and wrong setup for anything commercial in the UK. This is what free range in the UK looks like fyi

[youtube_browser]JOgxpJJoGIw[/youtube_browser]


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

lennythecloud said:


> Why post a video of a random farm in Georgia to illustrate the point?


Doesn't matter where it's from. It shows ethical farming is possible. It's also similar to one free range setup I am aware of over here. Breed.. no idea. I don't get to pluck my own chickens.

So joint issues.. If they live a natural life, although without predation, should they be killed as soon as they reach a certain age to avoid it? What about other animals, dogs, cats etc?


----------



## lennythecloud (Aug 5, 2011)

Goblin said:


> So joint issues.. If they live a natural life, although without predation, should they be killed as soon as they reach a certain age to avoid it? What about other animals, dogs, cats etc?


The way they are bred means they have a massive chance of being cripples by the age of 8 weeks. I don't want to see a chickens bred to suffer extreme and chronic joint pain at 8 weeks old no more than I want to see a GSD bred to suffer hip dysplasia at 8 months or a pug that spends it's whole life not being able to breathe.


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

lennythecloud said:


> The way they are bred means they have a massive chance of being cripples by the age of 8 weeks. I don't want to see a chickens bred to suffer extreme and chronic joint pain at 8 weeks old no more than I want to see a GSD bred to suffer hip dysplasia at 8 months or a pug that spends it's whole life not being able to breathe.


I don't have enough facts although from what I can see, you are talking about the most common white 'broiler chicken' breed where I have seen that they should be slaughtered before the problems develop. I can't condone that sort of breeding though.

However you are comparing with lifelong problems for the dogs in question but that's not the topic of this thread at all.


----------



## lennythecloud (Aug 5, 2011)

Goblin said:


> I don't have enough facts although from what I can see, you are talking about the most common white 'broiler chicken' breed where I have seen that they should be slaughtered before the problems develop. I can't condone that sort of breeding though.
> 
> However you are comparing with lifelong problems for the dogs in question but that's not the topic of this thread at all.


By breed I suppose I really mean crossbreed. Broilers in the UK come about by crossing pedigree or 'elite' birds to obtain a 'parent' bird. It's the offspring of these parent birds that are sold onto commercial broiler farms. The reason I say 'wrong breed' is that only 2 companies control the elite flocks and production of 90% of the parent birds in the UK. These are big and white and bred to grow fast meaning they all have a strong chance of being crippled at 8 weeks. The birds designed for free range systems grow slower and as less likely to get problems, but they are still big and white and plenty still get joint issues.

You can't just slaughter them before they get issues, if the industry could get a quicker turn around they would. The issue is the massive size of the birds on a young skeleton.

YOU brought up dogs , and I think breeding an animal that you know will suffer intense chronic pain because of the way you've designed it is wrong - be it a dog or a chicken.


----------



## loubyfrog (Feb 29, 2012)

havoc said:


> Who HAS to take their children past this shop at close quarters? Is it not possible to cross the road? Should we not be complaining at a sweet shop filling the window display with tempting treats full of fat and sugar? Perhaps if the butcher had coloured his display with E numbered chemicals to make it pretty it wouldn't have caused such offence.


Or maybe the butcher should open a "Massage Parlour"

I rang the council,police and who ever else I could think off when one opened 100 yards from our house....I had to walk my Daughter past it twice a day to go to school.

Everyone ignored me apart from the council who said if they weren't moving walls or preparing food then it's fine. :mad5:


----------



## Colliebarmy (Sep 27, 2012)

Hanging dead bodies outside a butchers probably dates back to when the masses were illiterate and writing "lamb" on a chop meant nothing

"Ill have one off that" (points at a dead sheep) .. :biggrin:

all shops had signs outside showing the trade they carried on in pictorial form and pubs had signs with a Red Lion or White Hart/Oak tree drwan on them for the same reasons

plus, of course, Tescos couldnt pass off horse as beef if the head was still on the body and there were no sadlle marks...


----------



## Colliebarmy (Sep 27, 2012)

My mum sent me to the butchers to get a sheeps head once, told me she wanted the eyes left in



so it would see us through the week....


:cornut:


----------



## goodvic2 (Nov 23, 2008)

I am one of those townies who couldn't bare to see dead animals hanging up. If fact I would be appalled. 

I am one of those people who have been brought up on meat: sausages, burgers, stews etc. 

However I have not tried a "new" meat (one I've not tried before) since I've been an adult. 

I am giving serious thought to giving up meat because it just doesn't sit well with me. 

I can't bare to see dead animals


----------



## Jonescat (Feb 5, 2012)

It can backfire  It was a game butcher when I was age 5 that made the connection between my tea and the animal in the window. I didn't know you could not eat meat then, and I wasn't encouraged to give it up but I didn't want to eat it from then on, and as soon as I was old enough to work it out I stopped. You should know what you are eating and be happy with your choices which is why I would support a traditional butcher showing their wares in their shop. 

The story reminds me of the school farms where parents get upset because the pigs and sheep are reared to be fed to the children. Or the crucifix that was too scary to be outside a church.


----------



## Nicky10 (Jan 11, 2010)

goodvic2 said:


> I am one of those townies who couldn't bare to see dead animals hanging up. If fact I would be appalled.
> 
> I am one of those people who have been brought up on meat: sausages, burgers, stews etc.
> 
> ...


The difference being you're seriously considering giving up meat because you can't take that it's dead animals. It's the ones who whine about this but run to the nearest tescos or macdonalds to buy something unrecognisable as an animal that are the hypocrites.


----------



## sskmick (Feb 4, 2008)

I think the carcasses could have been more tastefully displayed tbh.

Having said that I wouldn't have complained, at least you can see exactly what meat you are buying.


----------



## Blackcats (Apr 13, 2013)

Nicky10 said:


> The difference being you're seriously considering giving up meat because you can't take that it's dead animals. It's the ones who whine about this but run to the nearest tescos or macdonalds to buy something unrecognisable as an animal that are the hypocrites.


If it looks pretty or doesn't look like meat it will be eaten but I wonder how many people could actually cut into a pig on a table and eat it.

Makes no sense to me.

Isn't there a lot of food other than meat that have meat flavours and juices in them? Surely, that's coming from a dead animal.

Am I wrong in that? Because I did always assume that's what it is.


----------



## Nicky10 (Jan 11, 2010)

Blackcats said:


> If it looks pretty or doesn't look like meat it will be eaten but I wonder how many people could actually cut into a pig on a table and eat it.
> 
> Makes no sense to me.
> 
> ...


Meat flavouring is often synthetic and nothing to do with meat. I don't know about the juices you'd have to ask a vegetarian I guess.


----------



## Blackcats (Apr 13, 2013)

Nicky10 said:


> Meat flavouring is often synthetic and nothing to do with meat. I don't know about the juices you'd have to ask a vegetarian I guess.


Like fake? How does one even make a flavour like that.

So is bacon, chicken, beef noodles, crisps have no meat content in them?


----------



## ForeverHome (Jan 14, 2014)

Blackcats said:


> If it looks pretty or doesn't look like meat it will be eaten but I wonder how many people could actually cut into a pig on a table and eat it.
> 
> Makes no sense to me.
> 
> ...


I think I would be fine with every step of the process from live animal all the way to plate - except for one thing, and that is _what if I didn't kill it instantaneously? _That would traumatise me, if the animal suffered because I messed up.


----------



## lilythepink (Jul 24, 2013)

Blackcats said:


> Like fake? How does one even make a flavour like that.
> 
> So is bacon, chicken, beef noodles, crisps have no meat content in them?


mostly chemicals. and, I think the stuff they use to flavour chicken crisps is very harmful in higher doses.


----------



## Blackcats (Apr 13, 2013)

ForeverHome said:


> I think I would be fine with every step of the process from live animal all the way to plate - except for one thing, and that is _what if I didn't kill it instantaneously? _That would traumatise me, if the animal suffered because I messed up.


Huh?

Maybe I'm misreading your post but are you talking about killing to get your own food?

I like meat but, no, I couldn't kill to get my food. That I have to admit.


----------



## Blackcats (Apr 13, 2013)

lilythepink said:


> mostly chemicals. and, I think the stuff they use to flavour chicken crisps is very harmful in higher doses.


Oh my god, is it?

Have you got a link for that?


----------



## Nicky10 (Jan 11, 2010)

Just had a quick google essentially unless it says artificial chicken/beef flavouring then it's likely animal derived. I guess they use some kind of chemical for the artificial ones.


----------



## ForeverHome (Jan 14, 2014)

Blackcats said:


> Huh?
> 
> Maybe I'm misreading your post but are you talking about killing to get your own food?
> 
> I like meat but, no, I couldn't kill to get my food. That I have to admit.


I couldn't because I wouldn't know how to. But if I did yes I think I could. Never going to be in that situation though, thank goodness. But I used to go out with my pest controller friend and I never pulled the trigger but I was right next to him when he did. I was fine with everything except the fox, that troubled me, and it also troubled his lurcher. I am confident I could have pulled the trigger on a rabbit IF I knew it would be a clean shot lights out didn't know what hit it - otherwise no way.

About crisps - remember the BSE crisis? Walkers announced they were not going to withdraw their beef crisps as no beef or beef derivatives had ever been anywhere near them.


----------



## Roger Downes (Sep 17, 2013)

Blackcats said:


> Oh my god, is it?
> 
> Have you got a link for that?


Walkers crisps didn't, but sounds like they do have Chicken/Bacon in them now.
Vegetarians' horror at plans by Walkers to add meat to smoky bacon and roast chicken crisps for the first time | Mail Online


----------



## Blackcats (Apr 13, 2013)

ForeverHome said:


> I couldn't because I wouldn't know how to. But if I did yes I think I could. Never going to be in that situation though, thank goodness. But I used to go out with my pest controller friend and I never pulled the trigger but I was right next to him when he did. I was fine with everything except the fox, that troubled me, and it also troubled his lurcher. I am confident I could have pulled the trigger on a rabbit IF I knew it would be a clean shot lights out didn't know what hit it - otherwise no way.
> 
> About crisps - remember the BSE crisis? Walkers announced they were not going to withdraw their beef crisps as no beef or beef derivatives had ever been anywhere near them.


I couldn't regardless of knowing how to. I couldn't bear to see myself killing an animal. I don't mind eating cow, chicken, etc, but I could not kill it myself.

I don't think I could kill a fish either. I can't even kill spiders, haha.

Oh I couldn't agree with that. I could never kill a fox. Isn't that banned now anyway because it was too aggressive and the foxes were killed terribly? Maybe I'm wrong bout that.

Not sure about rabbit. Never tried it, though I am told you have to mix lots of vegetables in with it as rabbit is poisonous so need other ingredients to break it down.

No, I cannot remember hearing that. 

Remember that crisis with pot noodles with shoe polish in them or something.

Don't eat them anymore anyway. Boring, tastless, crap and expensive for what they are. Yuck.


----------



## Bloodraine5252 (Jan 13, 2013)

Blackcats said:


> If it looks pretty or doesn't look like meat it will be eaten but I wonder how many people could actually cut into a pig on a table and eat it.
> 
> Makes no sense to me.
> 
> ...


I could carve a whole pig. I wouldn't be confident in killing it unless I had been shown but I have no problems with cutting up meat. Ive dissected organs and it doesn't make me squeamish. I find it weirder if meat eaters are disgusted by cutting or mincing their own meat tbh. It doesn't wrap itself into neat little parcels!

Chicken and mushroom pot noodles used to be suitable for veggies as they used soy instead. But meat by products are found in a lot of stuff like jelly sweets and biscuits.


----------



## Nicky10 (Jan 11, 2010)

I've dissected all kinds of different animals the only ones that bothered me were the starfish and the urchin but that was just the heat. As for killing them I'd like to think I could do it.


----------



## Tails and Trails (Jan 9, 2014)

Roger Downes said:


> Walkers crisps didn't, but sounds like they do have Chicken/Bacon in them now.
> Vegetarians' horror at plans by Walkers to add meat to smoky bacon and roast chicken crisps for the first time | Mail Online


that will be the irony of vegetarians i mentioned earlier then?

my response? err, you are vegetarians, you dont want to eat meat.
eat vegetables, not meat flavour.

they are meat crisps, they will have meat!
then you get vegetable crisps, they will have vegetables!
(unless that is chemical flavouring too?)


----------



## Blackcats (Apr 13, 2013)

Bloodraine5252 said:


> I could carve a whole pig. I wouldn't be confident in killing it unless I had been shown but I have no problems with cutting up meat. Ive dissected organs and it doesn't make me squeamish. I find it weirder if meat eaters are disgusted by cutting or mincing their own meat tbh. It doesn't wrap itself into neat little parcels!
> 
> Chicken and mushroom pot noodles used to be suitable for veggies as they used soy instead. But meat by products are found in a lot of stuff like jelly sweets and biscuits.


No, it wouldn't bother me either.

I can happily cut up liver, etc, but by god the smell. It's just the smell that gets to me. Other than, nope does not faze me at all.

Do you mean a freshly killed animal though, like skinning for example? No, that I couldn't do.

I'd have no need to either.


----------



## Bloodraine5252 (Jan 13, 2013)

Blackcats said:


> No, it wouldn't bother me either.
> 
> I can happily cut up liver, etc, but by god the smell. It's just the smell that gets to me. Other than, nope does not faze me at all.
> 
> ...


I could if I had to. I don't see any difference between getting it ready for the pot and taking it out If you get what I mean. Its still a dead animal at the end of the day and I don't see the point of getting squeamish at any part of the process.


----------



## Blackcats (Apr 13, 2013)

Bloodraine5252 said:


> I could if I had to. I don't see any difference between getting it ready for the pot and taking it out If you get what I mean. Its still a dead animal at the end of the day and I don't see the point of getting squeamish at any part of the process.


Well 'If I had to' is a whole different ballgame.

Just curious, do you kill and get your meat then? 

Personally, I don't see why a meat eater can't really say they wouldn't be happy killing an animal themselves. Perhaps it is hypocritical of me eating cow but not being happy to kill it myself. I don't know.


----------



## Bloodraine5252 (Jan 13, 2013)

Blackcats said:


> Well 'If I had to' is a whole different ballgame.
> 
> Just curious, do you kill and get your meat then?
> 
> Personally, I don't see why a meat eater can't really say they wouldn't be happy killing an animal themselves. Perhaps it is hypocritical of me eating cow but not being happy to kill it myself. I don't know.


Like I said I would if I had been shown properly how to kill them cleanly. I'm a good shot with target but not sure if I'd be as good a shot and would not want it to suffer because of poor marksmanship.

I can kill, clean, gut and fillet a fish and being an ex chef I had to chop up a lot to make it ready for cooking.


----------



## ForeverHome (Jan 14, 2014)

Blackcats said:


> I couldn't regardless of knowing how to. I couldn't bear to see myself killing an animal. I don't mind eating cow, chicken, etc, but I could not kill it myself.
> 
> I don't think I could kill a fish either. I can't even kill spiders, haha.
> 
> ...


Rabbit is not poisonous at all, it would kill you if you ate nothing else at all ever.

As far as I'm aware a fox is still classified as a pest? But I stand to be corrected!

If you were driving along and saw a rabbit injured and unable to move in the road, would you be able to put it out of its misery?


----------



## Nicky10 (Jan 11, 2010)

The only way rabbit is dangerous is if that's the only thing you eat. They don't call it rabbit starvation for nothing. It's missing stuff you need.

As far as I know you can kill a fox you just can't have a pack of hounds chase it down and tear it apart anymore.


----------



## Blackcats (Apr 13, 2013)

ForeverHome said:


> Rabbit is not poisonous at all, it would kill you if you ate nothing else at all ever.
> 
> As far as I'm aware a fox is still classified as a pest? But I stand to be corrected!
> 
> If you were driving along and saw a rabbit injured and unable to move in the road, would you be able to put it out of its misery?


Then I must be thinking of something else.

Well, I can't give an answer. Until I am ever in that position which I hope I'm not....


----------



## lennythecloud (Aug 5, 2011)

Blackcats said:


> If it looks pretty or doesn't look like meat it will be eaten but I wonder how many people could actually cut into a pig on a table and eat it.


Dead animals don't faze me, at all. I've been lucky enough to have been involved in the post mortems of various species - dogs, chickens, horses, cattle etc. I doubt there's many on here that would be happy reflecting back the limbs, skinning and opening up a freshly dead golden retriever but it doesn't bother me. I've not, at any point, had any desire to eat any of them though...


----------



## Jesthar (May 16, 2011)

northnsouth said:


> If they can't look in it's face should they be eating it....
> 
> Ridiculous ................


Spot on  If you can't acknowledge where any aspect of your food came from, no matter what it is, it's got no business being on your menu in my book. I'd be one of the first in the queue if there were a butcher like that near me.

I am very, very grateful I have a rather decent butcher at my local garden centre - when I went in last weekend he was busy sawing up some short ribs of beef, no prizes for guessing what I bought and will be my evening meal for most of the week. There are also some farm shops nearby I keep meaning to visit but haven't managed to get round to yet. I very rarely buy supermarket meat these days, I'd sooner spend more on local, top quality meat and eat less of it.

I've never actually had the chance to try plucking or skinning my own bird or game, but it wouldn't bother me at all. I've skinned and filleted a gutted fish from a seaside fishmonger, though - just copied what I'd seen TV chefs do. Not sure if I could actually kill, to be honest, but that's more down too not wanting the animal to suffer as I'd have no idea how to do it efficiently.


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

Its someone who doesn't want their conscience picked by being reminded the meat they eat has a face. Shame the butchers were stopped from doing their display - It would have converted more meat eaters into vegetarians.:thumbup1:



.


.


----------



## ForeverHome (Jan 14, 2014)

If given the choice with a trout or mackerel I'll opt to gut it myself, fishmongers are always too hasty. They take too much meat off with the head and never seem to do great job of gutting them, I always have to clean them out again when I get them home anyway. Besides, there are some scraps for cats if I do it my way.

You have to be a bit careful gutting rabbit because if you pierce the intestine that taints the meat and you don't want that.


----------



## MCWillow (Aug 26, 2011)

Not read the whole thread.

I don't agree at all with the fact that the butcher was bullied into taking down his window.
I see nothing wrong with people seeing exactly where their meat came from. My local butcher has very similar displays in his window.

I do know though, that I _personally_, couldnt_ kill_ any meat I eat. I have always said that if I had to kill my own meat (unless it was a life or death situation), I would be a vegetarian.

But then I also dont grow my own wheat and make bread, or grow my own fruit, vegetables and salad. I dont own a cow for milk, cheese, butter or yoghurt. I dont own chickens for my own eggs.

I do find it annoying when people say 'if you can't kill it, don't eat it' (I repeat I have *not* read this entire thread, so thats not targeted at anyone here).

The only person I would have any respect for, coming out with that statement, would be someone that is _entirely_ self sufficient.


----------



## lennythecloud (Aug 5, 2011)

MCWillow said:


> I do know though, that I _personally_, couldnt_ kill_ any meat I eat. I have always said that if I had to kill my own meat (unless it was a life or death situation), I would be a vegetarian.
> 
> But then I also dont grow my own wheat and make bread, or grow my own fruit, vegetables and salad. I dont own a cow for milk, cheese, butter or yoghurt. I dont own chickens for my own eggs.
> 
> I do find it annoying when people say 'if you can't kill it, don't eat it' (I repeat I have *not* read this entire thread, so thats not targeted at anyone here).


But surely, if you _really_ had to, you could pick an apple? There's a big difference between not doing things because you don't have to and not doing things because of you can't bring yourself to do it...


----------



## MCWillow (Aug 26, 2011)

lennythecloud said:


> But surely, if you _really_ had to, you could pick an apple? There's a big difference between not doing things because you don't have to and not doing things because of you can't bring yourself to do it...


Erm, yes of course I could pick an apple - why on earth would you think I couldn't pick an apple?

I actually said I couldn't kill meat that I eat UNLESS it was a life or death situation.

I also said I didn't grow any of my other non-meat food. Not that I _couldn't_ - just that I _didn't_.



MCWillow said:


> Not read the whole thread.
> 
> I don't agree at all with the fact that the butcher was bullied into taking down his window.
> I see nothing wrong with people seeing exactly where their meat came from. My local butcher has very similar displays in his window.
> ...


----------



## Blackcats (Apr 13, 2013)

MCWillow said:


> Not read the whole thread.
> 
> I don't agree at all with the fact that the butcher was bullied into taking down his window.
> I see nothing wrong with people seeing exactly where their meat came from. My local butcher has very similar displays in his window.
> ...


AGREE
AGREE 
AGREE.

I don't like being told that I shouldn't eat meat because I wouldn't have the heart to kill an animal. I am fine with seeing meat hung up like that in butchers but, no, I could not personally shoot an animal, stun it, slash it's throat, take its guts out, or skin it, etc.

And there are many meat eaters (A lot) who would feel the same way. Just because one says they could, doesn't mean they should judge others who wouldn't. They say they could but they're not doing it, are they?

Nor can one judge for that if they're not picking their own food either, be it vegetables, etc. Really I can see no excuse given to that. Then there comes the whole feeding pets raw food, yet so opposed to people eating meat. No different whatsoever. None.

But if I had no choice like mentioned I really don't know what I'd do. After all, if it came to that I'd probably go veggie too. Other food if that ever happened.

Tbh, if I did get my food by killing it myself I'd be called cruel anyway so you cannot win in any of this.

Repped.


----------



## ForeverHome (Jan 14, 2014)

MCWillow said:


> I do find it annoying when people say 'if you can't kill it, don't eat it' (I repeat I have *not* read this entire thread, so thats not targeted at anyone here).
> 
> The only person I would have any respect for, coming out with that statement, would be someone that is _entirely_ self sufficient.


Appreciated - but nobody's said that, only that they ought to be able to face their meat in animal form  The killing discussion developed via gutting and skinning really.


----------



## MCWillow (Aug 26, 2011)

ForeverHome said:


> Appreciated - but nobody's said that, only that they ought to be able to face their meat in animal form  The killing discussion developed via gutting and skinning really.


As I said, I haven't read the whole thread - it just sprang to mind because I have actually had someone say that to me before


----------



## Nicky10 (Jan 11, 2010)

I meant it as if they couldn't except that their burger had once been a bull or chicken drumsticks wasn't just a cute name then they shouldn't be eating them


----------



## Blackcats (Apr 13, 2013)

Nicky10 said:


> I meant it as if they couldn't except that their burger had once been a bull or chicken drumsticks wasn't just a cute name then they shouldn't be eating them


No, I got that. I completely agree as my reply to you was. 

It was the discussion in shooting an animal, a rabbit in misery, skinning, shooting, etc.

Perhaps I was reading it wrong but it did seem to push at me that as a meat eater I shouldn't be squeamish and if I can eat meat I should readily be able to kill it if ever having to.

Didn't sit well with me, especially those who don't actually kill animals for food themselves.

I say no that if it ever had to come to it (Killing an animal for food) I would rather not eat meat. Hypocritical because I am happy to eat meat if someone else is killing it? Maybe.

That's why those who eat meat wouldn't be quick for a tore around the slaughterhouses.

Seeing an animal in the butchers shop hung up with it's head intact is very much different to actually seeing an animal die imo.

I have admitted many times that I am one of those where the case is 'Ignorance is bliss' and I admit that.


----------



## Nicky10 (Jan 11, 2010)

I would imagine a lot of people if truly truly desperate could kill to eat but realistically how many are going to be in that situation. I'm under no illusions about slaughter houses playing happy music and massaging the animals as they wait doesn't mean I want to see one. 

I'd say people are aware what they're eating was an animal but having spoken to an adult who truly believed milk came from special dairy cows and wasn't produced to feed a baby that had been ripped off them at birth :frown2:


----------



## Blackcats (Apr 13, 2013)

Nicky10 said:


> I would imagine a lot of people if truly truly desperate could kill to eat but realistically how many are going to be in that situation. I'm under no illusions about slaughter houses playing happy music and massaging the animals as they wait doesn't mean I want to see one.
> 
> I'd say people are aware what they're eating was an animal but having spoken to an adult who truly believed milk came from special dairy cows and wasn't produced to feed a baby that had been ripped off them at birth :frown2:


That I completely agree with. If one was stranded on an island with nothing but meat around then that is a case of survival and nobody would starve to death because they couldn't kill an animal, surely?

But if there were other options, like the food now then no way. I probably wouldn't go through with it. If I saw a rabbit in the side of the road messed up, alive, would I put it out of his misery? How. Grab that rock and bash its brains in? No.

If it's alive (may be even more cruel) I'd take it to a vets.

I cannot kill spiders honestly, and I have a great fear of them. Usually get the OH to put them outside.

Makes me sad when someone stomps on a spider. I don't joke. I cannot kill an animal and would never want to see it ever.


----------



## ForeverHome (Jan 14, 2014)

Blackcats said:


> That I completely agree with. If one was stranded on an island with nothing but meat around then that is a case of survival and nobody would starve to death because they couldn't kill an animal, surely?
> 
> But if there were other options, like the food now then no way. I probably wouldn't go through with it. If I saw a rabbit in the side of the road messed up, alive, would I put it out of his misery? How. Grab that rock and bash its brains in? No.
> 
> ...


I'd be the first to say people should know where their meat comes from, I would never say they should be able to kill it.

But here's a question, and I'm interested not trying to trap you in any way - I've had to bop a paralysed mouse on the head that Henry brought in, and run over a rabbit that was equally badly injured on the road. As an act of mercy, do you really not think you would be able to do that, to put an end to their suffering?


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

Jonescat said:


> It can backfire  It was a game butcher when I was age 5 that made the connection between my tea and the animal in the window.


Is it backfiring? I would say it's being to make an actual informed choice which should/needs to be supported. That is the crux of the matter. Should we allow a minority to force us to hide the fact that meat comes from animals simply to ease our own minds or should we be honest with ourselves and admit it, both to us and our children?

If my daughter decided she wanted to be vegetarian, we wouldn't force her not to be. Choice, something each of us needs to allow others to make for themselves.


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

Tails and Trails said:


> that will be the irony of vegetarians i mentioned earlier then?
> 
> my response? err, you are vegetarians, you dont want to eat meat.
> eat vegetables, not meat flavour.
> ...


Many vegetarians give up meat for compassionate reasons not because they don't like the taste of meat.

There are a lot brands that make vegetarian meat flavoured crisps - Golden wonder for example.

.

.


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

ForeverHome said:


> Rabbit is not poisonous at all, it would kill you if you ate nothing else at all ever.
> 
> As far as I'm aware a fox is still classified as a pest? But I stand to be corrected!
> 
> If you were driving along and saw a rabbit injured and unable to move in the road, would you be able to put it out of its misery?


Theres an awful lot of ignorance surrounding foxes - and many still bare that age old prejudice towards them. But foxes are an ecologically important indigenous species who's negative impact on farming is cancelled out by the good they do in keeping down the rabbit and rodent population. Foxes are not & have never have been classed as vermin. I wish people would stop treating them so cruelly.

.


----------



## havoc (Dec 8, 2008)

> plus, of course, Tescos couldnt pass off horse as beef if the head was still on the body and there were no sadlle marks...


This is a major point for me. The butcher's display is honest and yet it gave rise to complaint. People say they want to know what's in their food, especially after the horsemeat debacle, but many obviously don't. They want to be conned. In the 1940s it wasn't uncommon for the meat in butcher's to be whale meat or horsemeat and people didn't ask. Just being able to get 'meat' was the important thing. It was during this time that the traditional displays died out because the butcher simply didn't have the product to display. If the head of the animal is on display then you know that's the meat you're buying and it's an indication of the health of the animal pre slaughter.


----------



## rona (Aug 18, 2011)

ForeverHome said:


> I think I would be fine with every step of the process from live animal all the way to plate - except for one thing, and that is _what if I didn't kill it instantaneously? _That would traumatise me, if the animal suffered because I messed up.


You don't think they *mess up* with the meat on your plate sometimes? 
Traumatises me too 



Blackcats said:


> That I completely agree with. If one was stranded on an island with nothing but meat around then that is a case of survival and nobody would starve to death because they couldn't kill an animal, surely?
> 
> But if there were other options, like the food now then no way. I probably wouldn't go through with it. If I saw a rabbit in the side of the road messed up, alive, would I put it out of his misery? How. Grab that rock and bash its brains in? No.
> 
> ...


I cannot and do not want to kill any living creature but having a dog with retrieving instincts, always in the countryside and having worked on a farm it's something I've had to do often in the face of great suffering. Rabbits, birds of various types, mice, frogs,the odd insect and piglets have all ended there suffering in my hands, Literally 
Still makes me feel sick even though I know I'm doing it for them.


----------



## rona (Aug 18, 2011)

havoc said:


> This is a major point for me. The butcher's display is honest and yet it gave rise to complaint. People say they want to know what's in their food, especially after the horsemeat debacle, but many obviously don't. They want to be conned. In the 1940s it wasn't uncommon for the meat in butcher's to be whale meat or horsemeat and people didn't ask. Just being able to get 'meat' was the important thing. It was during this time that the traditional displays died out because the butcher simply didn't have the product to display. If the head of the animal is on display then you know that's the meat you're buying and it's an indication of the health of the animal pre slaughter.


We always used to have pigs heads in our house when I was young. My father nearly always had one boiling in a pot for brawn


----------



## lilythepink (Jul 24, 2013)

Its surprising what human beings can cope with and tolerate. Plenty people here are ok eating meat but couldn't kill it for themselves.

If we had to kill our own meat I am pretty sure that we would kill less of it, eat less of it and waste none of it.

If we were starving, we would kill it.

farmers don't usually make a pet out of a farm animal that is destined for the table and generally these table animals don't get given a name.


----------



## Bloodraine5252 (Jan 13, 2013)

Blackcats said:


> No, I got that. I completely agree as my reply to you was.
> 
> It was the discussion in shooting an animal, a rabbit in misery, skinning, shooting, etc.
> 
> ...


I'm pretty sure this is aimed at me since we were talking about this last night. At no point did I call you a hipocrite for not wanting to kill your own food.

I did say that I (as in me) don't see the point in being squeamish and that I found it weird if meat eaters don't want to cut or mince their own food but want to see it pre-made in cellophane. I didn't say that all meat eaters should go out hunting and be able to kill everything for the table!


----------



## IrishEyes (Jun 26, 2012)

I grew up in the countryside surrounded by animals. My father hunted most of our meat and my mother plucked and cooked what he brought home, we ate what we could and the dogs got what was left. It always saddened me to see the dead animals and I refused to watch how mum prepared them but I had no choice when it came to eating them... 

I also felt sad and upset at seeing the butchers display. 

Now, my brothers all hunt their meat too but I gave up eating meat a while ago but I don't judge anyone who does eat meat (my OH does and our dog is raw fed) and I think that it's important that children know where the meat that they eat comes from and how it get's to their table.. the butcher's display plays a part in this. 

I think the native American Indians had it right, they hunted only what they needed and not one single animal more, the animals lived good free lives beforehand, every part of the animal was used whether for food, clothing or tools absolutely nothing was wasted and they gave thanks to the universe and to the animal for what they had received.


----------



## Tails and Trails (Jan 9, 2014)

noushka05 said:


> Many vegetarians give up meat for compassionate reasons not because they don't like the taste of meat.
> 
> There are a lot brands that make vegetarian meat flavoured crisps - Golden wonder for example.


but i still dont think vegetarians have the right to complain because meat flavoured products will now contain meat, especially as all these flavouring ingredients are chemicals and very bad for you


----------



## ForeverHome (Jan 14, 2014)

Oops forgot the multiquote never mind hope these disjointed points make sense.

Foxes - the pest controller I knew was not allowed to kill the foxes at this particular quarry where he was employed to keep the rabbits down. It upset me that he did but it also went against the landowner's instructions. 

Killing for necessity only - waste is a disease of "civilisation" whether it be meat, water or tyres. Where people are still poor, which is the majority of the globe, everything is used. Large scale obesity is a form of waste too!

The reason I don't agree that people should be able to kill their own meat is because we have come so far down the route of specialisation over thousands of years that I think it's understandable. I do think someone who can't handle a slab of raw steak ought to think twice about eating it, but killing a living creature humanely is a more specialised job. I'm fine with meat eaters who would never think of killing an animal.

And yes I expect the professionals do mess it up occasionally, just like surgeons make mistakes on their patients that can cause terrible distress and suffering and sometimes end lives prematurely and needlessly. 

But also as owners of carnivorous animals it does occasionally fall to us to make a mercy killing, whether it's a trip to the vet's or a diy despatch of the victims of our pets' playfulness.


----------



## DoodlesRule (Jul 7, 2011)

All the comments about whether you would be happy to kill your own meat isn't it a bit of a mute point - most people eat beef, pork, lamb isn't it illegal to slaughter these yourself? Recall reading something about a farmer could slaughter his own cow for example but only he could eat it, ie couldn't share with the rest of his family


----------



## Sleeping_Lion (Mar 19, 2009)

Just thinking about this this morning, at the end of the shoot day, all the carcasses are laid out in a display and they are admired, and respected, because not only have we enjoyed the whole day out hunting our own food as a *team* but those birds and animals have provided us with food. I'm happier being involved in the food chain, and yep, I don't think I'd stop eating meat if I had to kill my own. 

I actually feel sad when I walk round the supermarkets and look at the two for a fiver chickens with their burnt hocks, and the *value* chicken wings/legs.


----------



## lilythepink (Jul 24, 2013)

Sleeping_Lion said:


> Just thinking about this this morning, at the end of the shoot day, all the carcasses are laid out in a display and they are admired, and respected, because not only have we enjoyed the whole day out hunting our own food as a *team* but those birds and animals have provided us with food. I'm happier being involved in the food chain, and yep, I don't think I'd stop eating meat if I had to kill my own.
> 
> I actually feel sad when I walk round the supermarkets and look at the two for a fiver chickens with their burnt hocks, and the *value* chicken wings/legs.


That wouldn't be Tesco, would it?lol


----------



## Sleeping_Lion (Mar 19, 2009)

lilythepink said:


> That wouldn't be Tesco, would it?lol


They all do it, I won't pretend Morrisons is completely ethical, and I do drive further to get there, which is in itself an ethical dilema as I'm using more fossil fuels!!


----------



## rona (Aug 18, 2011)

lilythepink said:


> Its surprising what human beings can cope with and tolerate. Plenty people here are ok eating meat but couldn't kill it for themselves.
> 
> If we had to kill our own meat I am pretty sure that we would kill less of it, eat less of it and waste none of it.
> 
> ...


I used to with the breeding stock and the hand reared piglets 

My favourite sow was call Puddin, one of the boars Harry and a couple of hand reared piglets that were destined for the plate, Honky-tonk and Squealer 

It's years and years ago since I was there and I even remember that Puddins number was 03958 and her mothers was 2121.


----------



## ForeverHome (Jan 14, 2014)

Sleeping_Lion said:


> They all do it, I won't pretend Morrisons is completely ethical, and I do drive further to get there, which is in itself an ethical dilema as I'm using more fossil fuels!!


Your driving a couple of miles is nothing compared to the scandal of the Brussels sprouts ... yes they were grown in the UK but flown to Poland to be trimmed and then flown back again.

My old farm shop meat had travelled no more than 5 miles from live to plate, but unfortunately they started buying it in when they expanded so bye bye farm shop. Then I moved about 3 miles and my new nearest one is a similar set-up to the original so happy days (except they don't have much veg). And beef is the same price as the supermarket rubbish and TDF (to die for)


----------



## rona (Aug 18, 2011)

DoodlesRule said:


> All the comments about whether you would be happy to kill your own meat isn't it a bit of a mute point - most people eat beef, pork, lamb isn't it illegal to slaughter these yourself? Recall reading something about a farmer could slaughter his own cow for example but only he could eat it, ie couldn't share with the rest of his family


https://www.gov.uk/farm-animal-welfare-at-slaughter

On-farm killing or slaughtering

If you plan to slaughter an animal or bird on your farm, you will need a licence - unless the animal is being killed:

for disease control by a competent authority
by a free bullet in the field by a person who holds a firearms certificate
because it is suffering and is being killed for emergency reasons relating to the welfare of the animal, and where the animal needs to be killed/slaughtered immediately
for an owners private consumption
by a qualified veterinary surgeon

Any killing or slaughter must be carried out without causing the animals any avoidable excitement, pain or suffering. Anyone carrying out killing or slaughter - by means other than a free bullet - must ensure that the animal is restrained appropriately and is stunned before slaughter.

Also note that the Food Hygiene Regulations may apply to on-farm killing. You can get advice on these regulations from the FSA.


----------



## Sleeping_Lion (Mar 19, 2009)

ForeverHome said:


> Your driving a couple of miles is nothing compared to the scandal of the Brussels sprouts ... yes they were grown in the UK but flown to Poland to be trimmed and then flown back again.
> 
> My old farm shop meat had travelled no more than 5 miles from live to plate, but unfortunately they started buying it in when they expanded so bye bye farm shop. Then I moved about 3 miles and my new nearest one is a similar set-up to the original so happy days (except they don't have much veg). And beef is the same price as the supermarket rubbish and TDF (to die for)


Chuff! That IS ridiculous!!

I tend to buy sprouts on the stalk these days. My local farm shop does some lovely fresh greens.


----------



## lilythepink (Jul 24, 2013)

rona said:


> I used to with the breeding stock and the hand reared piglets
> 
> My favourite sow was call Puddin, one of the boars Harry and a couple of hand reared piglets that were destined for the plate, Honky-tonk and Squealer
> 
> It's years and years ago since I was there and I even remember that Puddins number was 03958 and her mothers was 2121.


Breeding stock is a bit different don't you think? They are going to be around for a bit longer.

We usually give our bulls a name as they are for breeding and not the table although eventually they will probably end up in McDonalds or somewhere similar.

We had a couple of hand reared lambs that grew into sheep that lived very long lives ....all had names and the tups were always named so we knew which one was which etc.

We took some ex battery hens once and they were much tamer than your average hen....no fear with them at all and 1 in particular was very friendly. My youngest daughter called her Amanda and took her everywhere with her.

We have 1 cow who was hand reared by me...she is now 10 years old and really a pet...she won't end up in any food chain and she has a name....we do breed from her though and her babies go into a freezer somewhere. The cow answers to her name if we call her....not sure if she knows her name though or recognises the voice.

Our cow is now in calf with another calf at foot.....neither calves will get a name.


----------



## lilythepink (Jul 24, 2013)

rona said:


> https://www.gov.uk/farm-animal-welfare-at-slaughter
> 
> On-farm killing or slaughtering
> 
> ...


We send any animals to a local slaughterhouse and pay the costs.

Its roughly £100 to send a cow and then it is transported by refrigerated van to a butcher of our choice and costs roughly £200 to cut up.

Last cow we sent for our own consumption was just over 2 years ago and weighed live weight 750kilos. I have a large family but there is still plenty left in the freezer, I just go and rotate it frequently.Nothing ever gets wasted.

Came back with a huge bag of bones. Not allowed to keep the head and the slaughterhouse takes the offal including heart as part of the payment for slaughter.

they also keep the hide but dispose of the guts.


----------



## rona (Aug 18, 2011)

lilythepink said:


> Breeding stock is a bit different don't you think? They are going to be around for a bit longer.
> 
> We usually give our bulls a name as they are for breeding and not the table although eventually they will probably end up in McDonalds or somewhere similar.
> 
> ...


When will you stop breeding her?
The farm I used to go to a shoot on, had to get rid of their dairy herd but kept 3 of the old cows, One had been born the same day as the youngest child. I haven't been there for a while but 2 were still there and birthday cow was coming up to 20. I can't ever remember them having calves after the herd was dispersed


----------



## lilythepink (Jul 24, 2013)

She is 10 now and didn't have her first calf til she was turned 3 so I suppose the answer to that is she stops breeding when she is too old. Deliberately left not in calf for so long cos I think breeding from any animal before it is old enough just wears them out.

She is the oldest cow we ever had, usually sold them in calf with calf at foot around 5 to 6 years old.

She is fit and well and healthy


----------



## lilythepink (Jul 24, 2013)

rona said:


> When will you stop breeding her?
> The farm I used to go to a shoot on, had to get rid of their dairy herd but kept 3 of the old cows, One had been born the same day as the youngest child. I haven't been there for a while but 2 were still there and birthday cow was coming up to 20. I can't ever remember them having calves after the herd was dispersed


even farmers have hearts. Our cow will stay.


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

IrishEyes said:


> I grew up in the countryside surrounded by animals. My father hunted most of our meat and my mother plucked and cooked what he brought home, we ate what we could and the dogs got what was left. It always saddened me to see the dead animals and I refused to watch how mum prepared them but I had no choice when it came to eating them...
> 
> I also felt sad and upset at seeing the butchers display.
> 
> ...


Absolutely, they respected & cared for the earth and all its treasures , the animals, trees, water, soil, mountains, they believed they all had spirits -& so they lived in harmony with the natural world.



Sleeping_Lion said:


> Just thinking about this this morning, at the end of the shoot day, all the carcasses are laid out in a display and they are admired, and respected, because not only have we enjoyed the whole day out hunting our own food as a *team* but those birds and animals have provided us with food. I'm happier being involved in the food chain, and yep, I don't think I'd stop eating meat if I had to kill my own.
> 
> I actually feel sad when I walk round the supermarkets and look at the two for a fiver chickens with their burnt hocks, and the *value* chicken wings/legs.


To me this just makes a mockery of the lives of these poor birds. Shot namely for sport, not for food.

This picture of Pippa Middleton posing with her mates after shooting 50 game birds turns my stomach - and looking at all the comments after the article, im not alone.
Having a pheasant break? Pippa poses with 50 dead birds on shooting trip in Scotland | Mail Online

The indigenous people of the Americas care/d about and engaged with the natural world. Theres no comparison whatsoever in these wonderful peoples and those who support the cruel and unnatural game bird industry.

.

,


----------



## havoc (Dec 8, 2008)

> To me this just makes a mockery of the lives of these poor birds. Shot namely for sport, not for food.


I think that view is overly simplistic. They are not thrown away, they are eaten. They are shot for the pot and any objection to that process including a social element is really a separate issue. Objections often stem from a misguided idea that it is a load of toffs with a bloodlust shooting for their own benefit only. I have found this not to be true. The shoot puts food on the tables of all sorts of households in the area just as the hunting party used to bring back food for the whole village and still does in many places.


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

havoc said:


> I think that view is overly simplistic. They are not thrown away, they are eaten. They are shot for the pot and any objection to that process including a social element is really a separate issue. Objections often stem from a misguided idea that it is a load of toffs with a bloodlust shooting for their own benefit only. I have found this not to be true. The shoot puts food on the tables of all sorts of households in the area just as the hunting party used to bring back food for the whole village and still does in many places.


Actually game bird meat isn't popular over here & most doesn't even enter our food chain. Even BASC 'claim' 80% of the shot birds are exported. Although even defra don't appear to know where theyre exported to.

The Countryside Alliance are desperately trying to promote it.

This article is interesting - Don't bin pheasant, it's worth a shot in the kitchen pot - Telegraph

.


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

noushka05 said:


> Absolutely, they respected & cared for the earth and all its treasures , the animals, trees, water, soil, mountains, they believed they all had spirits -& so they lived in harmony with the natural world.


Which in itself is a gross oversimplification and a myth in terms of environmental impact. It's all well and good looking at the romantic viewpoints. The fact is their impact wasn't as great simply as they weren't as densely populated and many tribes moved around. Whenever you have had humans, you've had negative environmental impact.


----------



## Blackcats (Apr 13, 2013)

ForeverHome said:


> I'd be the first to say people should know where their meat comes from, I would never say they should be able to kill it.
> 
> But here's a question, and I'm interested not trying to trap you in any way - I've had to bop a paralysed mouse on the head that Henry brought in, and run over a rabbit that was equally badly injured on the road. As an act of mercy, do you really not think you would be able to do that, to put an end to their suffering?


I really don't know to be honest as cruel as that may sound. Until I am in such a position where an animal is suffering I really cannot give you an answer. I would rather have that animal in quesation pts than bashed on the head so horrifically.

Tbh, it's a horrible position to be in.


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

Goblin said:


> Which in itself is a gross oversimplification and a myth in terms of environmental impact. It's all well and good looking at the romantic viewpoints. The fact is their impact wasn't as great simply as they weren't as densely populated and many tribes moved around. Whenever you have had humans, you've had negative environmental impact.


Warts & all - And they're still opposite ends of the spectrum to our destructive, selfish race!

The environmental wisdom and spirituality of North American Indians is legendary.

Animals were respected as equal in rights to humans. Of course they were hunted, but only for food, and the hunter first asked permission of the animal's spirit. Among the hunter-gatherers the land was owned in common: there was no concept of private property in land, and the idea that it could be bought and sold was repugnant. Many Indians had an appreciation of nature's beauty as intense as any Romantic poet.

Religious beliefs varied between tribes, but there was a widespread belief in a Great Spirit who created the earth, and who pervaded everything. This was a panentheist rather than a pantheist belief. But the pantheistic tone was far stronger than among Christians, and more akin to the pantheism of William Wordsworth. It was linked to an animism which saw kindred spirits in all animals and plants.

The Indians viewed the white man's attitude to nature as the polar opposite of the Indian. The white man seemed hell-bent on destroying not just the Indians, but the whole natural order, felling forests, clearing land, killing animals for sport.

clearing land, killing animals for sport.

Of course, not everything that every Indian tribe did was wonderfully earth-wise and conservation-minded. The Anasazi of Chaco Canyon probably helped to ruin their environment and destroy their own civilization through deforestation. In the potlatch the Kwakiutl regularly burned heaps of canoes, blankets and other possessions simply to prove their superiority to each other; the potlatch is the archetypal example of wanton overconsumption for status. Even the noble plains Indians often killed far more bisons than they needed, in drives of up to 900 animals.

In other words, the Indians were not an alien race of impossibly wonderful people. They were human just like the rest of us. And in that lies hope.

Wisdom derives from way of life, and is as fragile as nature. Many Indians shared their animism, their respect for nature and their attitude to the land with other hunter-gatherers. But when ways of life change, beliefs change to support them. The advent of agriculture and then industry brought massive shifts in attitudes to nature (see How we fell from unity.)

Beliefs can also change ways of life. Our present way of life is laying waste to the environment that supports us. New beliefs can help us to change that way of life, and in arriving at those beliefs, we can learn immensely from the beliefs of the North American Indians.

Perhaps the most famous of all Indian speeches about the environment is the beautiful speech of Chief Seattle of the Squamish tribe of the Pacific Northwest USA. But alas, Seattle's "environmental" speech was written by scriptwriter Ted Perry, in the winter of 1971/72, for a Canadian film on ecology, and attributed to Seattle for aesthetic effect. It is still a brilliant piece of work which distills the essence of many scattered Indian speeches. Those who wish to read Perry's piece can follow the above link. Also read in full Seattle's original speech, a moving lament on the passing of the Indian, but with only a fraction of the ecological awareness.

In a sense it's a pity that the story came out - it undermined a very fruitful myth. But by assembling the wisdom from many different Indian speakers and writers, as I have tried to do below, it is possible to glimpse that same embracing pantheistic attitude to the earth

North American Indians: the spirituality of nature


----------



## IrishEyes (Jun 26, 2012)

Goblin said:


> Which in itself is a gross oversimplification and a myth in terms of environmental impact. It's all well and good looking at the romantic viewpoints. The fact is their impact wasn't as great simply as they weren't as densely populated and many tribes moved around. Whenever you have had humans, you've had negative environmental impact.


I don't think it is a gross oversimplification or a myth, they were acutely aware of their connection with the earth and honoured her as much as they possibly could, they kept their impact as minimal as possible not because they were smaller in number than us but because that was their intention.. to care for the earth and respect all her creatures because they did not own the earth, they were borrowing it from their children as the quote goes.

Yes I agree that wherever humans are there will be negative impact but it is our duty to keep that to a minimum..


----------



## Jesthar (May 16, 2011)

noushka05 said:


> IrishEyes said:
> 
> 
> > I think the native American Indians had it right, they hunted only what they needed and not one single animal more, the animals lived good free lives beforehand, every part of the animal was used whether for food, clothing or tools absolutely nothing was wasted and they gave thanks to the universe and to the animal for what they had received.
> ...


That's a bit of a rose tinted Hollywood view, to be fair, guys - for example, before the Spanish introduced a non-native, invasive species to the USA (the horse) one of the most favoured tribal methods of hunting buffalo was to stampede a whole herd over a cliff and just take the best bit of each animal, usually just the hump. The rest was left to rot. Only with the ascendancy of the horse were many tribes able to switch to selective hunting.

Please note I'm *not* saying we shouldn't strive to live lightly and with respect, and that the native Americans didn't also get a lot of stuff right. But it is rather important to distinguish the warts and all facts from the fluffy idealism it's so temptingly easy sugar-coat the past with.


----------



## ForeverHome (Jan 14, 2014)

noushka05 said:


> To me this just makes a mockery of the lives of these poor birds. Shot namely for sport, not for food.


Most of their lives would not have existed if it wasn't for being planned, bred, cared for and protected from predators with the sole aim that their lives should end this way. If they have a good life I really don't see what the problem is. A pheasant startled by a dog and taking flight is nothing new in the pheasant's life and by the time it hits the floor most likely it's already dead and has no idea what hit it.

If you fancy venturing out into hunting with dogs territory, the deer's natural predator the good old wolf hunted to extinction by man (again) would have run down the deer selecting the weakest of the herd and torn it to shreds - so doesn't seem very far removed from nature to me. Fox hunting, totally different, a fox is not a prey species.

Mass vegetarianism won't save a single life because the animals bred for the food chain simply wouldn't be bred in the first place.


----------



## lilythepink (Jul 24, 2013)

Blackcats said:


> I really don't know to be honest as cruel as that may sound. Until I am in such a position where an animal is suffering I really cannot give you an answer. I would rather have that animal in quesation pts than bashed on the head so horrifically.
> 
> Tbh, it's a horrible position to be in.


It depends what you consider sufferring.

A rabbit hit by a car and not dead but with a broken back or back legs etc needs dispatching asap...not picked up, taken in a car, have a vet look at it and then inject it...that takes far too long and that rabbit is in pain and then scared.


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

Jesthar said:


> That's a bit of a rose tinted Hollywood view, to be fair, guys - for example, before the Spanish introduced a non-native, invasive species to the USA (the horse) one of the most favoured tribal methods of hunting buffalo was to stampede a whole herd over a cliff and just take the best bit of each animal, usually just the hump. The rest was left to rot. Only with the ascendancy of the horse were many tribes able to switch to selective hunting.
> 
> Please note I'm *not* saying we shouldn't strive to live lightly and with respect, and that the native Americans didn't also get a lot of stuff right. But it is rather important to distinguish the warts and all facts from the fluffy idealism it's so temptingly easy sugar-coat the past with.


Not rose tinted at all, Im fully aware they would drive herds of buffalo off cliffs - these hunts had no impact whatsoever on the species & the meat they provided could feed the tribe for months at a time

They used everything > 
They Use of Buffalo by the Native Americans - Term Paper - Killersolos

;


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

noushka05 said:


> The environmental wisdom and spirituality of North American Indians is legendary.


And a myth. Beowulf or Robin Hood are legendary but not true.

Indians had uses for every part of the buffalo true but their practice of slaughtering whole herds, forcing them off a cliff or trapping and killing them in an enclosure would naturally sometimes produce more carcasses than could be used. Waste occurred and there at times animals were left to rot. At times only the delicacies were taken, the tongues or humps. The main difference was the overkilling did not cause the extinction of the species. Why? Simply as there wasn't the population or the tools to do so. Modern humans can use far more of a carcass than they do. We already have examples in this thread of heads being used but the majority don't. Why.. easier to pick up a slab of cling filmed meat. My father-in law and mother-in-law abhorred the waste in modern society going without so many things just after the war, actually having to fish for food on occasion. Wasting nothing is not only about "religion" or being one with nature, it's about subsistence and survival.

What about indians deliberately setting fires? Often woodland was deforested by indians so more "important" plants could grow, like blueberries. Sometimes it was to remove hiding places for animals allowing them to be hunted easier. Other times it was for warfare.

We know from evidence that often settlements had to move.. why? It was down to the fact local resources, especially wood, for fires etc had been exploited in the local area.

I'm brought back to a quote which is an important one although can't remember by whom.



> Even though a landscape may appear green it is not in indicator of natural ecology


----------



## Lurcherlad (Jan 5, 2013)

ForeverHome said:


> Mass vegetarianism won't save a single life because the animals bred for the food chain simply wouldn't be bred in the first place.


But that's a good thing IMO.

It saddens me that so many animals are born to a short life, often living with low welfare standards ending in a long and tortuous journey to a scary and less than humane death - in the name of cheap, mass produced meat 

Better they are not born at all IMO.

There will be programmes on soon showing the wonder of thousands of lambs being born, with presenters and farmers gushing over the creation of life, and never tiring of the amazing sight, etc.

Those programmes don't make me feel full of the joys of Spring at all, knowing what their future holds


----------



## Nicky10 (Jan 11, 2010)

Driving entire herds off cliffs= ok because they are speshul native people and therefore totally in tune with nature and stuff. 

Cows, sheep, pigs, goats, chickens, ducks all dying because they won't be food animals= ok because then those mean, icky humans won't be eating them.

One animal dying the horror, the scandal those mean evil humans, presumably because they're not a magical, in tune with the earth native tribe 

A wild rabbit already scared and injured would likely be dead before you got to the vet anyway. They're extremely susceptible to dying from shock. Better to put it out of it's misery there and then


----------



## ForeverHome (Jan 14, 2014)

Blackcats said:


> I really don't know to be honest as cruel as that may sound. Until I am in such a position where an animal is suffering I really cannot give you an answer. I would rather have that animal in quesation pts than bashed on the head so horrifically.
> 
> Tbh, it's a horrible position to be in.


It is a horrible position to be in but as Liliythepink says think of it from the animal's point of view. Take a rabbit, hit by a car, in pain and paralysed, vulnerable, huge smelly noisy things that have never hurt it before and the shock that suddenly out of the blue one of them has pounced on it, injured it and gone again, unlike any other predator that would at least have finished it off. Now the monsters all pause while a huge animal steps up, stressed (rabbit doesn't understand concern and empathy, it knows you are stressed) and stops in front of him. He can't run. He is out in the open.

Now you have a choice.

Bend down and pick up the rabbit, causing terrible pain to its existing injuries. Now he knows he's going to get eaten, for sure, no hope of lying there and not being noticed. Probably you want to stroke the bunny, to calm him, to reassure him you mean the best for him - but his instincts are telling him to expect claws to come out of paws. Confusion and more fear. Now you wrap him up in a blanket or coat or something - at least he is in the dark but there are all these strange smells and sounds, and what is this strange movement of the earth? Pets are used to cars, remember. Time drags on, the bumps and bends in the road are still causing his broken bones to jar and grate. You get to the vets, you have to wait, more smells including predator smells of cat and dog. Then he is put on the table, poked and prodded, and finally relief in blue liquid form.

Or, pick up a rock and it's lights out, no more pain, no more terror.

Even better, don't get out of the car, just aim.

It's much kinder that way.


----------



## ForeverHome (Jan 14, 2014)

Lurcherlad said:


> But that's a good thing IMO.
> 
> It saddens me that so many animals are born to a short life, often living with low welfare standards ending in a long and tortuous journey to a scary and less than humane death - in the name of cheap, mass produced meat
> 
> Better they are not born at all IMO.


Animals have no concept of the length of their life. Is it really better to have not lived at all than to have a life cut short? Please don't think I am having a go at you in any way, this is one of those comments that's going to be misinterpreted but honestly I am fine - my brother died aged 25 ... if I'd known that was going to happen, would I have wished he'd never lived? I know I'm taking an argument to an absurd extreme but don't I have a point?


----------



## Blackcats (Apr 13, 2013)

lilythepink said:


> It depends what you consider sufferring.
> 
> A rabbit hit by a car and not dead but with a broken back or back legs etc needs dispatching asap...not picked up, taken in a car, have a vet look at it and then inject it...that takes far too long and that rabbit is in pain and then scared.


Maybe so. Really then, how does one even know when an animal is suffering.

Personally, I would feel very uncomfortable in grabbing a rock on the side of the road and bashing in an animals brain, regardless if it is suffering or not.

I hope that I never have to be in such a position anyway. Until then, I can give no answer.


----------



## Blackcats (Apr 13, 2013)

ForeverHome said:


> It is a horrible position to be in but as Liliythepink says think of it from the animal's point of view. Take a rabbit, hit by a car, in pain and paralysed, vulnerable, huge smelly noisy things that have never hurt it before and the shock that suddenly out of the blue one of them has pounced on it, injured it and gone again, unlike any other predator that would at least have finished it off. Now the monsters all pause while a huge animal steps up, stressed (rabbit doesn't understand concern and empathy, it knows you are stressed) and stops in front of him. He can't run. He is out in the open.
> 
> Now you have a choice.
> 
> ...


Well thanks for the long post and describing such an incident with an animal suffering. I ought to do the kindest thing and do it but how can I so willingly say I would when I have never been in such a position.

Might as well say yes though, might I?

And would one do that to a person hit by a car and left on the side of the road like that?


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

ForeverHome said:


> Most of their lives would not have existed if it wasn't for being planned, bred, cared for and protected from predators with the sole aim that their lives should end this way. If they have a good life I really don't see what the problem is. A pheasant startled by a dog and taking flight is nothing new in the pheasant's life and by the time it hits the floor most likely it's already dead and has no idea what hit it.
> 
> Better they had never lived than be kept in battery conditions until they are released to be blasted out of the air for fun.
> 
> ...


Supply & demand, I think it works in all areas of consumerism.



Goblin said:


> And a myth. Beowulf or Robin Hood are legendary but not true.
> 
> Indians had uses for every part of the buffalo true but their practice of slaughtering whole herds, forcing them off a cliff or trapping and killing them in an enclosure would naturally sometimes produce more carcasses than could be used. Waste occurred and there at times animals were left to rot. At times only the delicacies were taken, the tongues or humps. The main difference was the overkilling did not cause the extinction of the species. Why? Simply as there wasn't the population or the tools to do so. Modern humans can use far more of a carcass than they do. We already have examples in this thread of heads being used but the majority don't. Why.. easier to pick up a slab of cling filmed meat. My father-in law and mother-in-law abhorred the waste in modern society going without so many things just after the war, actually having to fish for food on occasion. Wasting nothing is not only about "religion" or being one with nature, it's about subsistence and survival.
> 
> ...


Oh dear comparing Native American culture, which is well documented, to Beowulf & Robin hood? Now we are scraping the bottom of the barrel 

.


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

noushka05 said:


> Beowulf & Robin hood? Now we are scraping the bottom of the barrel


That's your backed up, logical counter point then.. :001_tt2: Robin hood(s) existed in some form, just not the romantic view people have now, Beowulf likely existed but the story is fantasy.. Indians had a religion based on nature, the idea didn't exploit nature however is fantasy and certainly not the romantic view many currently hold when you look at the actual evidence.


----------



## Lurcherlad (Jan 5, 2013)

ForeverHome said:


> Animals have no concept of the length of their life. Is it really better to have not lived at all than to have a life cut short? Please don't think I am having a go at you in any way, this is one of those comments that's going to be misinterpreted but honestly I am fine - my brother died aged 25 ... if I'd known that was going to happen, would I have wished he'd never lived? I know I'm taking an argument to an absurd extreme but don't I have a point?


It is not the length of their life that saddens me, so much as the kind of life (and death) that they have.

I do understand your point though 

It is a very emotive subject, of course, and I am so sorry you lost your brother at all, let alone so young x


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

ForeverHome said:


> Animals have no concept of the length of their life. Is it really better to have not lived at all than to have a life cut short? Please don't think I am having a go at you in any way, this is one of those comments that's going to be misinterpreted but honestly I am fine - my brother died aged 25 ... if I'd known that was going to happen, would I have wished he'd never lived? I know I'm taking an argument to an absurd extreme but don't I have a point?


Personally, I would rather never be born than live a short life & die a violent death.

This is a very interesting account of a pig farmer who turned vegetarian>>

https://www.thedodo.com/community/B...mis/happy-pigs-make-happy-meat-428323633.html

.


----------



## ForeverHome (Jan 14, 2014)

Blackcats said:


> Well thanks for the long post and describing such an incident with an animal suffering. I ought to do the kindest thing and do it but how can I so willingly say I would when I have never been in such a position.
> 
> Might as well say yes though, might I?
> 
> And would one do that to a person hit by a car and left on the side of the road like that?


It's different for pets who are used to being handled by people and understand that we are not going to harm them. It's different again for people who can speak to you and understand what you're saying to them.

I'm sorry for labouring the point and no please don't say yes if you don't mean it! All I'm saying is remember this is a wild animal and our rational and sentimental values don't mean a thing to them. If you know you wouldn't be able to help an animal in this situation, better to know in advance so if heaven forbid that should ever arise you know to go and fetch someone who can than stand there struggling with your conscience.


----------



## IrishEyes (Jun 26, 2012)

ForeverHome said:


> Animals have no concept of the length of their life. Is it really better to have not lived at all than to have a life cut short? Please don't think I am having a go at you in any way, this is one of those comments that's going to be misinterpreted but honestly I am fine - my brother died aged 25 ... if I'd known that was going to happen, would I have wished he'd never lived? I know I'm taking an argument to an absurd extreme but don't I have a point?


I think that would depend on the quality of life. These animals are brought into the world purely as a food source and suffer horrendous abuse throughout their short lives purely so that we can have cheap meat. I think that is the difference.

I'm sorry for your loss.


----------



## ForeverHome (Jan 14, 2014)

Thanks Lurcherlad and Irisheyes for your kind words. 

Irisheyes - that's the point isn't it, not the fact that they are bred for the food chain, but their welfare, the way they lived and died. Personally I would prefer to help solve this by doing something about the food industry, rather than campaigning for people to become vegetarian, which even if everyone did there would still be a market for pet food.


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

IrishEyes said:


> I think that would depend on the quality of life. These animals are brought into the world purely as a food source and suffer horrendous abuse throughout their short lives purely so that we can have cheap meat. I think that is the difference.
> 
> I'm sorry for your loss.


Gosh that'll teach me not to scan, I'm so sorry for loss aswell FH xx

.


----------



## IrishEyes (Jun 26, 2012)

noushka05 said:


> *Gosh that'll teach me not to scan,* I'm so sorry for loss aswell FH xx
> 
> .


Sorry you have lost me!?


----------



## ForeverHome (Jan 14, 2014)

noushka05 said:


> Gosh that'll teach me not to scan, I'm so sorry for loss aswell FH xx
> 
> .


Thank you but *slightly embarrassed* was - just - illustrating .....


----------



## lennythecloud (Aug 5, 2011)

ForeverHome said:


> Thanks Lurcherlad and Irisheyes for your kind words.
> 
> Irisheyes - that's the point isn't it, not the fact that they are bred for the food chain, but their welfare, the way they lived and died. Personally I would prefer to help solve this by doing something about the food industry, rather than campaigning for people to become vegetarian, which even if everyone did there would still be a market for pet food.


The issue is that it isn't possible. We currently slaughter around 70 billion farm animals per year globally, that number is increasing exponentially and is set to double to 14 billion by 2050. Have you any idea how much land they would need to live a none intensive life? The amount of food and water they require and the amount of waste they produce is staggering.

Whilst we have this volume of animal's on the planet then most have to be treated like a factory product unless consumption falls - it's an inconvenient truth.


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

IrishEyes said:


> Sorry you have lost me!?


It was only when I read your post that I went back & re-read FH's post. I have a terrible habit of not reading everything before i jump in with a reply.



ForeverHome said:


> Thank you but *slightly embarrassed* was - just - illustrating .....


I know you were theres nothing to be embarrassed for xx


----------



## Cassies-mum (Jul 22, 2009)

My father used to take birds of prey to hunt, i was taught to do this at a very young age and my dog brings me rabbits that are fit for eating, we often have rabbit or pheasant for tea, but dont buy it from the butchers, we eat whatevers caught by the dog, personally corpses in butcher windows doesnt bother me, but thats probably because ive had it in the house x


----------



## ForeverHome (Jan 14, 2014)

lennythecloud said:


> The issue is that it isn't possible. We currently slaughter around 70 billion farm animals per year globally, that number is increasing exponentially and is set to double to 14 billion by 2050. Have you any idea how much land they would need to live a none intensive life? The amount of food and water they require and the amount of waste they produce is staggering.
> 
> Whilst we have this volume of animal's on the planet then most have to be treated like a factory product unless consumption falls - it's an inconvenient truth.


Well then it's also an uncomfortable truth that there are an unsustainable number of humans on the planet ...


----------



## lennythecloud (Aug 5, 2011)

ForeverHome said:


> Well then it's also an uncomfortable truth that there are an unsustainable number of humans on the planet ...


It is but there is very little we can do about that. The population will grow until at least 2050 barring any real disasters and that's that. It offers no solution to the problem of factory farming to merely state that fact.


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

ForeverHome said:


> Well then it's also an uncomfortable truth that there are an unsustainable number of humans on the planet ...


We could feed so many more if we reduced dependency on farming livestock though.

Some staggering statistics & facts on this website, which I hasten to add is not an Animal Rights website. > Is Meat Sustainable? | Worldwatch Institute

Lets say we have 20,000 kcal [kilocalories] of corn. Assume that we feed it to cattle (as we do with about 70 percent of the grain produced in the U.S.). The cow will produce about 2,000 kcal of usable energy from that 20,000 kcal of corn (assuming 10 percent efficiency; the efficiency is actually somewhat higher than that, but 10 percent is easy to work with and illustrates the point reasonably). That 2,000 kcal of beef would support one person for a day, assuming a 2,000 kcal per day diet, which is common in the U.S. If instead people ate the 20,000 kcal of corn directly, instead of passing it through the cow, we would be able to support more people for that given unit of land being farmed; not necessarily 10 times more, because people are not as efficient as cattle at using corn energy, but considerably more than the one that could be supported if the corn were passed through the cow first!
[So], we could support more people on Earth for a given area of land farmed if we ate lower on the food chainif we ate primary producers instead of eating herbivores (corn instead of beef). Or, we could support the same number of people as at present, but with less land degradation because we wouldnt need to have so much land in production. 
Patricia Muir, Oregon State University

While 56 million acres of U.S. land are producing hay for livestock, only 4 million acres are producing vegetables for human consumption. 
U.S. Department of Commerce, Census of Agriculture


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

Which is why insects are being looked at as an alternative and you have people looking at vat grown meat. Meat in it's current form will be unsustainable as will be the countryside and natural habitat in general.


----------



## ForeverHome (Jan 14, 2014)

As the developing world gains access to better healthcare, as we find cures for more diseases, as we have the means to eradicate illnesses, with every individual saved, personal tragedy and suffering are avoided and relieved, and the global problem grows exponentially. There isn't going to be a decline in world population after 2050 and if every person in the world went vegetarian tomorrow we'd still be facing crisis and not be able to feed the world another 100 or 200 years down the line. It is not a solution. Not to mention that ecosystems would collapse and we'd still have to build more housing, until all wildlife had been eradicated and only fruit trees were left standing.


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

ForeverHome said:


> Not to mention that ecosystems would collapse and we'd still have to build more housing, until all wildlife had been eradicated and only fruit trees were left standing.


Multiple wars started over water first though which should slow population growth down a bit. Then there's pandemics as things become immune to antibiotics etc.


----------



## lennythecloud (Aug 5, 2011)

ForeverHome said:


> As the developing world gains access to better healthcare, as we find cures for more diseases, as we have the means to eradicate illnesses, with every individual saved, personal tragedy and suffering are avoided and relieved, and the global problem grows exponentially. There isn't going to be a decline in world population after 2050 and if every person in the world went vegetarian tomorrow we'd still be facing crisis and not be able to feed the world another 100 or 200 years down the line. It is not a solution. Not to mention that ecosystems would collapse and we'd still have to build more housing, until all wildlife had been eradicated and only fruit trees were left standing.


Actually the united nations predicts a fall in global population at some yet unknown point in the future. As countries get more developed (and women are educated) the birth rate falls dramatically. Reducing the number of livestock reduces the number of resources used and give us breathing space for the future. The attitude of 'oh lets do nothing because things are going to fall apart in 200 years anyway' is fatalistic and useless.


----------



## Cassies-mum (Jul 22, 2009)

Are humans not omnivores? Surely this means we naturally *should* be eating both mean and plants? Excuse that this isnt worded brilliantly but personally I would probably starve if the option of eating mean was taken away, unless personally choosing to be a vegetarian then mean should be available and always will? If i were vegetarian i wouldnt force my kids to be?x


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

lennythecloud said:


> Actually the united nations predicts a fall in global population at some yet unknown point in the future. As countries get more developed (and women are educated) the birth rate falls dramatically. Reducing the number of livestock reduces the number of resources used and give us breathing space for the future. The attitude of 'oh lets do nothing because things are going to fall apart in 200 years anyway' is fatalistic and useless.


Lovely term.. breathing space.. Doesn't mean anything though does it. Breathing space will be found by intensive farming of insects, or vat grown meat not just giving up meat.

Alternatives and choice.. Most people are prepared to allow for both not delude themselves into thinking their personal choice is the only way.


----------



## ForeverHome (Jan 14, 2014)

lennythecloud said:


> Actually the united nations predicts a fall in global population at some yet unknown point in the future. As countries get more developed (and women are educated) the birth rate falls dramatically. Reducing the number of livestock reduces the number of resources used and give us breathing space for the future. The attitude of 'oh lets do nothing because things are going to fall apart in 200 years anyway' is fatalistic and useless.


Again cannot be taken in isolation. Education is one thing but you need welfare systems in place too. If you are very poor it seems silly to have lots of children you can't feed, but that a) covers for inevitable mortality b) spreads the workload and c) spreads the burden of caring for you in your own old age. I'm not saying do nothing, I'm saying vegetarianism is not an answer.



Cassies-mum said:


> Are humans not omnivores? Surely this means we naturally *should* be eating both mean and plants? Excuse that this isnt worded brilliantly but personally I would probably starve if the option of eating mean was taken away, unless personally choosing to be a vegetarian then mean should be available and always will? If i were vegetarian i wouldnt force my kids to be?x


Yes we should, we do have too much animal protein in a Western affluent diet but it is hard to achieve good nutrition with no animal protein at all. Not sure if studies into sustainability have taken into account crops that provide a balanced diet.


----------



## Jesthar (May 16, 2011)

Cassies-mum said:


> *Are humans not omnivores?* Surely this means we naturally *should* be eating both mean and plants? Excuse that this isnt worded brilliantly but personally I would probably starve if the option of eating mean was taken away, unless personally choosing to be a vegetarian then mean should be available and always will? If i were vegetarian i wouldnt force my kids to be?x


Yes, we are omnivores. That gives us the advantage of being able to exist on plant based matter alone if we need/desire to, but in general terms eating a _moderate_ amount of meat is most efficient nutritionally.

Where many of us in the modern world tend to go wrong is that because meat is no longer an expensive 'luxury' item and we can get hold of it so readily, we eat _way_ too much of it. And I have to confess that I can be amongst those who love my meat too much, but I'm growing out of that and eat a lot more veg and challenge myself to source my meat more locally and make it go further these days. Ideally I wouldn't have minded raising my own chickens, but my house deeds prohibit it...


----------



## Cassies-mum (Jul 22, 2009)

Jesthar said:


> Yes, we are omnivores. That gives us the advantage of being able to exist on plant based matter alone if we need/desire to, but in general terms eating a _moderate_ amount of meat is most efficient nutritionally.
> 
> Where many of us in the modern world tend to go wrong is that because meat is no longer an expensive 'luxury' item and we can get hold of it so readily, we eat _way_ too much of it. And I have to confess that I can be amongst those who love my meat too much, but I'm growing out of that and eat a lot more veg and challenge myself to source my meat more locally and make it go further these days. Ideally I wouldn't have minded raising my own chickens, but my house deeds prohibit it...


I love some veg/fruit, but couldnt survive on that alone, I dont eat loads in general but small meals with meat as well as vegetables is what my dietitian reccomends, that being said about half the meat we eat in my house is caught by the dog x


----------



## rona (Aug 18, 2011)

Roast veg are just as tasty without a big lump of meat :thumbup::thumbup:


----------



## Colliebarmy (Sep 27, 2012)

sskmick said:


> I think the carcasses could have been more tastefully displayed tbh.


I could have so much fun with that but........


----------



## Colliebarmy (Sep 27, 2012)

What about the school i used to take kids into daily for 4 years who had a "meat herd" that we drove by every morning and every afternoon 6 days a week?

kids from the age of 7 upwards looking at Bambi...Bambi burgers, Bambi chop, Bambi roast

ok guys, whose for dinner?....


----------



## lennythecloud (Aug 5, 2011)

Cassies-mum said:


> Are humans not omnivores? Surely this means we naturally *should* be eating both mean and plants? Excuse that this isnt worded brilliantly but personally I would probably starve if the option of eating mean was taken away, unless personally choosing to be a vegetarian then mean should be available and always will?


The beauty of being a human is that we are adapted to consume a wide variety of food. People will argue until the end of time about what the perfect human diet is but you can get one answer from looking at Inuit living off seal blubber in the extreme north, another from a tribe near the equator eating starchy roots and 100 more from the different diets we ate throughout history.

What isn't in dispute is that a human can be perfectly healthy without consuming animal products.



Cassies-mum said:


> If i were vegetarian i wouldnt force my kids to be?x


But I bet you'd 'force' them not to eat horse, dogs, snakes and spiders...



Goblin said:


> Lovely term.. breathing space.. Doesn't mean anything though does it. Breathing space will be found by intensive farming of insects, or vat grown meat not just giving up meat.
> 
> Alternatives and choice.. Most people are prepared to allow for both not delude themselves into thinking their personal choice is the only way


 I actually fully support 'lab grown' meat production, I think it's a completely vital part of the solution. So much so I've got investments in one of the companies trying to make it happen. But just carry on assuming that I believe things when I've given no indication that I do.....

As well as alternative solutions reducing animal produce consumption (in the mean time as neither are actually yet viable) is vital. It's already happening, the percentage of people cutting down on animal products is growing in both Europe and the US. As a vegan I've found my life getting 10x easier in the last 2 years because of the growing acceptance of it in the wider population.



ForeverHome said:


> Yes we should, we do have too much animal protein in a Western affluent diet but *it is hard to achieve good nutrition with no animal protein at all.* Not sure if studies into sustainability have taken into account crops that provide a balanced diet


Just not true. I've been vegan for around 10 years. I'm educated, fit and perfectly healthy - I don't find it hard to get good nutrition. Every single amino acid is available from plant sources.

With regards to crops, masses are fed to livestock and converted inefficiently into muscle. Far, far more crops are needed this way than eating them directly.


----------



## ForeverHome (Jan 14, 2014)

lennythecloud said:


> Just not true. I've been vegan for around 10 years. I'm educated, fit and perfectly healthy - I don't find it hard to get good nutrition. Every single amino acid is available from plant sources.


I said it's hard, not that it can't be done. Every nutrient is available from non-animal matter, I agree, but am I wrong that a little knowledge is required to get them in balance and useable combination? All I'm saying is it's not just a matter of removing the steak from the plate and putting a pile of lentils there it its place. Is my understanding wrong or out of date?


----------



## Colliebarmy (Sep 27, 2012)

Where does it stop though, can fishmongers display fish prepared for sale? can tins show what animal the contents came from?

I mean, its all dead int it


----------



## Cassies-mum (Jul 22, 2009)

lennythecloud said:


> The beauty of being a human is that we are adapted to consume a wide variety of food. People will argue until the end of time about what the perfect human diet is but you can get one answer from looking at Inuit living off seal blubber in the extreme north, another from a tribe near the equator eating starchy roots and 100 more from the different diets we ate throughout history.
> 
> What isn't in dispute is that a human can be perfectly healthy without consuming animal products.
> 
> ...


Not allowing a child to eat meat is totally different to not allowing them to eat snakes and spiders lol what i said has been taken a little too extremely here. If a child wants to eat meat fine, if vegetarian fine? Each to their own.,.


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

Cassies-mum said:


> If a child wants to eat meat fine, if vegetarian fine? Each to their own.,.


And going back to the OP, don't we owe it to our children to ensure they know what it is they are eating?

A survey by the British Nutrition foundation found that 29% of primary school children think that cheese comes from plants, one in ten secondary school children believe that tomatoes grow under the ground, nearly 18% primary school children say that fish fingers come from chicken.  Personally I would much rather children know meat comes from that cute pig or lamb and are prepared to actually use as much of it as possible. In the UK I never saw chicken backs/turkey necks, pig tails for sale for use in soups etc. Here in Germany it's common. Heart, liver and kidney are all available and memories of school dinners not withstanding, why shouldn't it be easily available for human consumption?

Tesco generated almost 30,000 tonnes of food waste in the first six months of 2013 and that doesn't include how much waste is thrown away by customers. Given this and looking as sustainability, don't you think this is a great place to start? Doesn't gaining an appreciation of what it is you are eating help understand why we cannot waste it?


----------



## Cassies-mum (Jul 22, 2009)

Goblin said:


> And going back to the OP, don't we owe it to our children to ensure they know what it is they are eating?
> 
> A survey by the British Nutrition foundation found that 29% of primary school children think that cheese comes from plants, one in ten secondary school children believe that tomatoes grow under the ground, nearly 18% primary school children say that fish fingers come from chicken.  Personally I would much rather children know meat comes from that cute pig or lamb and are prepared to actually use as much of it as possible. In the UK I never saw chicken backs/turkey necks, pig tails for sale for use in soups etc. Here in Germany it's common. Heart, liver and kidney are all available and memories of school dinners not withstanding, why shouldn't it be easily available for human consumption?
> 
> Tesco generated almost 30,000 tonnes of food waste in the first six months of 2013 and that doesn't include how much waste is thrown away by customers. Given this and looking as sustainability, don't you think this is a great place to start? Doesn't gaining an appreciation of what it is you are eating help understand why we cannot waste it?


 Totally agree, my nephew was shocked whrn i bought in a pheasant and told him it was going to be dinner! X


----------



## Flamingoes (Dec 8, 2012)

I've been veggie since I was 3 - even my toothpaste is veggie :lol:

However I completely agree with the butcher's display - if you're going to eat meat (which is everyone's personal choice) then at least know where it comes from.

How dare people feel they have the right to enforce their views on others; he did absolutely nothing wrong, in my opinion, and I would much prefer people support and value a local business than a supermarket.

Self-righteous idiots.



MoggyBaby said:


> Oh for goodness sake!!!!
> 
> How much more pathetic is this country going to become???
> 
> ...


Well something did 



Nicky10 said:


> I've dissected all kinds of different animals the only ones that bothered me were the starfish and the urchin but that was just the heat. As for killing them I'd like to think I could do it.


And the bee - oh how it's scarred you :nonod:



Tails and Trails said:


> but i still dont think vegetarians have the right to complain because meat flavoured products will now contain meat, especially as all these flavouring ingredients are chemicals and very bad for you


What about the chemicals, steroids and growth hormones used on certain animals due for human consumption?


----------



## Blackcats (Apr 13, 2013)

Cassies-mum said:


> Are humans not omnivores? Surely this means we naturally *should* be eating both mean and plants? Excuse that this isnt worded brilliantly but personally I would probably starve if the option of eating mean was taken away, unless personally choosing to be a vegetarian then mean should be available and always will? If i were vegetarian i wouldnt force my kids to be?x


Yes, we are omnivores. It is built in us to eat meat but then that is personally a choice as mentioned. Yes, we could survive in having a diet that consists without meat, though there are many arguments in health being effected, though the same can apply to the quality of meat we eat as well.

If you are vegetarian you have chosen to be so you should not say 'I'm a vegetarian so you're going to be too'

No, you let your children make their own choices personally. Selfish otherwise.


----------



## Nicky10 (Jan 11, 2010)

Humans are omnivores it means we can live on everything from vegan right through to all meat diets as some tribes do or did traditionally anyway the inuit and the masaii are the only ones I can think of right now. Being a vegetarian by choice would seem strange to most of the world where being able to eat meat is a luxury to be aimed for. But we have that choice in wealthy countries so eat whatever you want just don't try to force it on others :yesnod:.


----------



## Cassies-mum (Jul 22, 2009)

I think children should be able to choose wether to be veggie or not, we kept ducks, my nephew loved them, horrified christmas day when we were having one for dinner lol he said "i dont want to eat edd!" And burst into tears! I said thats fine you can have more vegetables instead - he quickly changed his tune! He was only 4/5 bless him x


----------



## Blackcats (Apr 13, 2013)

noushka05 said:


> We could feed so many more if we reduced dependency on farming livestock though.


I think there's a better solution. Stop wasting so much food and throwing it in the bin. Britain is one of the worst countries in Europe for wasting food.

Personally, I hate to see food wasted in my house. Makes me very upset.

I didn't understand the last bit of your comment but could you explain please how reducing livestock would feed more people? I thought (It may not have been you who said it) that so much meat is going to waste anyway and we kill too many animals for nothing. Still, stopping that, how would it benefit the rest of the world in regards to world hunger. I assume you meant that?

I know they are always in talks of the production of genetically modified crops etc, but a lot of people are wary of consuming something like that, and apparently the land it can take up too, the same way in using biofuel. Much less pollution and does not release CO2 (Only in managing the crops) but would take up a lot of land in using this method. Think the same applies to genetically modified crops as haven't they been cloned in a way where they can grow in hot climates (Suitable for somewhere like Africa) but money and wariness is a big thing with it? Correct me if I'm wrong. Science isn't a strong subject of mine at college.

Off topic slightly with that but going back to what you say, how would it be a positive thing in reducing our farming. If we were to stop, what would we do with so much cattle? There is far too many cows now who not only release methane which is a greenhouse gas but forests are continuously cut down to farm these cows. (Mentioned all this before and the last is the fault of man I agree) so a positive effect would be in the reduction of deforestation (Though gold mining takes up a lot too) but what could we do with all of these free cows? I don't see farmers wanting to keep bulls and spending money on them if they weren't to make money from them? They're not going to keep them in their fields surely?

Hope I didn't misread your post. Apologies if so.


----------



## Blackcats (Apr 13, 2013)

Cassies-mum said:


> I think children should be able to choose wether to be veggie or not, we kept ducks, my nephew loved them, horrified christmas day when we were having one for dinner lol he said "i dont want to eat edd!" And burst into tears! I said thats fine you can have more vegetables instead - he quickly changed his tune! He was only 4/5 bless him x


I defend meat eaters (Think everyone knows that by now) and some may see I am completely anti-vegetarian but when I have kids and if they want to be a vegetarian/vegan I would support them in that choice. The same applies to if they want to eat meat.

Bless. As I said pages back, I am a believer in educating children in how they get their food and making them also aware (Now thinking about it) in how much food we waste. Though that really does come down to greed. How many of us buy things we don't really need because the supermarkets do those temptation offers of buy one get one free or buy one get two free, etc? Which by the way usually saves you nothing (They got caught out a lot for it) and we are then inclined to buy more as it seems a good offer and then waste it all in the bin as we actually overbuy on how much we need. That's because the reduction prices always seem a nice treat. They're lies a lot of the time. Trickery.

I can put my hands up and say I have been a greedy pig and have bought this and that, knowing full well I wouldn't eat it all so it has to go in the bin. Or food is left in the fridge and chucked out as not eaten by sell by date. Eyes bigger than stomach sort of thing. Remember watching a programme on TV not long ago in size of plates and how we eat by the size of them. This was done by a psychologist and he was talking about how much plates have gone bigger over the years (Shockingly bigger actually) and we feel more inclined to fill up a plate if it is bigger so we therefore put more on it, eat more than we realise (Leading to obesity) or wasting a lot of food. Having a smaller plate we put less and realise we are actually full by it because we are eating the correct portion. Very interesting.

I'm lucky now though as if there is something I don't want, I give to my neighb our who is happy to eat it. Happy for him, happy for me as no food being wasted.


----------



## lennythecloud (Aug 5, 2011)

Nicky10 said:


> Humans are omnivores it means we can live on everything from vegan right through to all meat diets as some tribes do or did traditionally anyway the inuit and the masaii are the only ones I can think of right now. Being a vegetarian by choice would seem strange to most of the world where being able to eat meat is a luxury to be aimed for. But we have that choice in wealthy countries so eat whatever you want* just don't try to force it on others :yesnod:*.


Now this is a strange phrase that I've never quite got my head around...

To Force: "coercion or compulsion, especially with the use or threat of violence."

When someone implies that my diet unsustainable, unhealthy, unnatural etc then I think to my self "well I think they're wrong because....", I don't think "oh there goes that terrible person, * forcing* their diet on me."

If you really feel genuinely forced when someone explains why they eat like they do, surely you need to be asking yourself where your backbone went?


----------



## Nicky10 (Jan 11, 2010)

lennythecloud said:


> Now this is a strange phrase that I've never quite got my head around...
> 
> To Force: "coercion or compulsion, especially with the use or threat of violence."
> 
> ...


I did say try to force. The people that preach about their superiority in whatever it is, people that do try by law or moral lectures to make people live how they choose.


----------



## ForeverHome (Jan 14, 2014)

lennythecloud said:


> surely you need to be asking yourself where your backbone went?


Yeah, who's the cannibal around here??


----------



## lennythecloud (Aug 5, 2011)

Nicky10 said:


> I did say try to force. The people that preach about their superiority in whatever it is, people that do try by law or moral lectures to make people live how they choose.


Apart from obvious legislation with a strong grounding in food safety or welfare, I'm not aware of a law in this country that legislates against what people reasonably want to eat. Maybe you can point me to one?

When has a lecture ever forced anyone do anything? There's a difference between someone trying to influence, inform or educate and someone trying to force. Someone giving a lecture can only hope to do the former to a thinking person, If you think they're trying to force you (see the definition of the word) then you should call the police....


----------



## northnsouth (Nov 17, 2009)

MCWillow said:


> Not read the whole thread.
> 
> I don't agree at all with the fact that the butcher was bullied into taking down his window.
> I see nothing wrong with people seeing exactly where their meat came from. My local butcher has very similar displays in his window.
> ...


Or the person that says that and chooses not to eat meat.


----------



## Blackcats (Apr 13, 2013)

I'm not the one who goes around calling people beats for eating meat. Which has once again been said on this thread. 

Funny that one is. 

:001_rolleyes:


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

Blackcats said:


> I think there's a better solution. Stop wasting so much food and throwing it in the bin. Britain is one of the worst countries in Europe for wasting food.
> 
> Personally, I hate to see food wasted in my house. Makes me very upset.
> 
> ...


Waste is indeed a big issue, and we are a shamefully wasteful country . Perhaps they should bring back the ration book like they had in the war lol

No you didn't misunderstand me But will try to clarify more - Raising livestock for meat is very inefficient, it requires an enormous amount grain to convert to a small amount of meat protein. If much of this grain went directly to feeding humans instead of the livestock, billions more people could be fed... Less land would be required & less water, so less impact on the environment all round

I'm very wary of consuming GM myself, its easy for vegans/vegetarians to avoid GM, much harder for meat eaters because much of the feed fed to livestock is genetically modified. Take a look at this Friends of the Earth document > http://www.foe.co.uk/sites/default/files/downloads/hoofprints.pdf

I don't imagine everyone would ditch meat overnight, I suspect if it happened it would be gradual, so as demand for meat reduced less animals would be bred

.


----------



## lennythecloud (Aug 5, 2011)

Blackcats said:


> I'm not the one who goes around calling people beats for eating meat. Which has once again been said on this thread.
> 
> Funny that one is.
> 
> :001_rolleyes:


I assume you mean beasts? Who has said that? I haven't seen it....


----------



## CanIgoHome (Oct 25, 2008)

more of own english heritage going to pot because of the PC brigade I think we all need reminding time to time were own food comes from


----------



## MCWillow (Aug 26, 2011)

northnsouth said:


> Or the person that says that and chooses not to eat meat.


Not so much.

If a vegetarian expects me to kill any meat I eat, then I expect any vegetarian to produce any food they eat. They should grow their own fruit and vegetables, they should be able to produce their own eggs, milk and cheese. They should be growing wheat, milling their own flour and making their own bread, pasta etc.

I've already said, except in extreme circumstances, I would find it very difficult to kill any animal I eat.

I would find it much easier to produce my own vegetables, fruit and salad though!


----------



## Flamingoes (Dec 8, 2012)

lennythecloud said:


> Now this is a strange phrase that I've never quite got my head around...
> 
> To Force: "coercion or compulsion, especially with the use or threat of violence."
> 
> ...


Stop being so ridiculous; you know precisely what she meant and if we're going to start getting into semantics then I feel this is _really_ starting to go downhill


----------



## Blackcats (Apr 13, 2013)

lennythecloud said:


> I assume you mean beasts? Who has said that? I haven't seen it....


You, yes you. I am tired of you throwing around accusations that people jump onto you and meat eaters have no respect for veggies or vegans. I have seen more than one comment from you now using the word beasts when describing someone who eats meat. Perhaps it isn't pointed at anyone specific in this thread but I find it insulting.

Should I call you stupid for being a veggie. No, because I have more respect than that.

By all means state your opinion and your reasons on why you have chosen not to eat meat. Try and get the word out there but please stop using silly words to get your point across. Quite frankly, I cannot take you seriously when you opt to using 'beast' all the time. I see no respect but you want it yourself.

Respect is earnt my friend.


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

Blackcats said:


> You, yes you. I am tired of you throwing around accusations that people jump onto you and meat eaters have no respect for veggies or vegans. I have seen more than one comment from you now using the word beasts when describing someone who eats meat. Perhaps it isn't pointed at anyone specific in this thread but I find it insulting.
> 
> Should I call you stupid for being a veggie. No, because I have more respect than that.
> 
> ...


You must have the wrong person because ive just done a search & Lenny certainly hasn't described a meat eater as a beast I thought it was out of character.

.


----------



## Blackcats (Apr 13, 2013)

It was on another recent thread. There are a lot of these about so my apologies but it still applies.

_I would say most of it is British grown yes although I'm happy to be a global citizen and openly eat some fruit and pulses grown abroad. People who eat local meat often don't look past that to the soya and fish meal shipped half way around the world to feed the *beasts*. If you're eating pigs and poultry there is not much getting around that. _


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

Blackcats said:


> It was on another recent thread. There are a lot of these about so my apologies but it still applies.
> 
> _I would say most of it is British grown yes although I'm happy to be a global citizen and openly eat some fruit and pulses grown abroad. People who eat local meat often don't look past that to the soya and fish meal shipped half way around the world to feed the *beasts*. If you're eating pigs and poultry there is not much getting around that. _


beasts as in livestock - that's what they feed them on -soya & fish meal.

.


----------



## Jonescat (Feb 5, 2012)

Wasn't that about globally sourced fish meal and soya being fed to locally reared animals that then went in to the food chain but had still caused a lot of environmental impact? I thought it was using beasts in the farmyard sense not the insulting one


----------



## lennythecloud (Aug 5, 2011)

Flamingoes said:


> Stop being so ridiculous; you know precisely what she meant and if we're going to start getting into semantics then I feel this is _really_ starting to go downhill


It's not ridiculous. The word force is emotive and implies compulsion, coercion and violence and that's why it's used as a lazy way of trying to discredit what people may be legitimately trying to say. I'm sorry but 'trying to inform others' or 'trying to explain it to others' is not the same as 'trying to force it on others'.



Blackcats said:


> You, yes you.


No I didn't



Blackcats said:


> I am tired of you throwing around accusations that people jump onto you and meat eaters have no respect for veggies or vegans.


I haven't done that either....



Blackcats said:


> I have seen more than one comment from you now using the word beasts when describing someone who eats meat. Perhaps it isn't pointed at anyone specific in this thread but I find it insulting.


No I haven't. You're lying or haven't actually read what I've put.



Blackcats said:


> Should I call you stupid for being a veggie. No, because I have more respect than that.


Go ahead but that would be mean as I haven't actually called you or anyone else stupid. You say you respect me but are quite willing to fabricate the things I've posted..



Blackcats said:


> By all means state your opinion and your reasons on why you have chosen not to eat meat.


I have and shall continue to 



Blackcats said:


> Try and get the word out there but please stop using silly words to get your point across. Quite frankly, I cannot take you seriously when you opt to using 'beast' all the time. I see no respect but you want it yourself.


Feel free to humour me and try and find where I've actually called anyone a beast...



Blackcats said:


> Respect is earnt my friend.


Since I'm 'getting into semantics' , I'm not your friend...


----------



## Blackcats (Apr 13, 2013)

If that is the case then I am happy to apologise. 

When I read it, I didn't see that mentioned but perhaps that was me missing something important when I was reading so many long posts.

Regardless can't people (not aimed at anyone is particular) just talk on a thread without having to wear a proud badge saying I eat meat or I eat this and that...

It's not competition.

I don't wanna be judged harshly for eating meat and the same applies to those who are vegan/vegetarian, surely.


----------



## Blackcats (Apr 13, 2013)

lennythecloud said:


> It's not ridiculous. The word force is emotive and implies compulsion, coercion and violence and that's why it's used as a lazy way of trying to discredit what people may be legitimately trying to say. I'm sorry but 'trying to inform others' or 'trying to explain it to others' is not the same as 'trying to force it on others'.
> 
> No I didn't
> 
> ...


LOL.

With that attitude no wonder nobody takes you serious on these threads.

Carry on by all means though, sooner or later your comments will just be lost in the wind.

And now who is lying. You know full well you did in that one thread. I have many members who saw it but, hey, we are all big liars and you are just a saint.

Really? Coming from one so quick to get so defensive at each single comment when it does not agree with your opinion. Oh, bless.

Yeah? And thank god for that.

Have fun without your debating....with nobody. Will all fall to death ears eventually.


----------



## lennythecloud (Aug 5, 2011)

Blackcats said:


> It was on another recent thread. There are a lot of these about so my apologies but it still applies.
> 
> _I would say most of it is British grown yes although I'm happy to be a global citizen and openly eat some fruit and pulses grown abroad. People who eat local meat often don't look past that to the soya and fish meal shipped half way around the world to feed the *beasts*. If you're eating pigs and poultry there is not much getting around that. _


Oh dear  . Since I'm on a roll with the definitions Beast: 'an animal'. Unless you eat soya and fish meal and are in turn eaten by 'people who eat local meat' I wasn't talking about you.


----------



## lennythecloud (Aug 5, 2011)

Blackcats said:


> LOL.
> 
> With that attitude no wonder nobody takes you serious on these threads.
> 
> ...


What? Please refrain from making things up and patronising me, I thought you respected me? If you want to accuse me of something please provide evidence, you clearly can't be trusted to read what I've actually posted.


----------



## Blackcats (Apr 13, 2013)

lennythecloud said:


> What? Please refrain from making things up and patronising me, I thought you respected me? If you want to accuse me of something please provide evidence, you clearly can't be trusted to read what I've actually posted.


Respect you. I don't think I actually said I did.

I apologised for misreading your posts, which happens but it appears I don't seem to be the only one mentioning your replies.

Don't think anyone else does either.

That's hilarious honestly. Like there has not been one post from you where you don't respond to a member being sarcastic and giving snide comments. But thanks for saying I am patronising. Seems we both have issues with our posting. Admitting can be sore though, ey.


----------



## Flamingoes (Dec 8, 2012)

lennythecloud said:


> What? Please refrain from making things up and patronising me, I thought you respected me? If you want to accuse me of something please provide evidence, you clearly can't be trusted to read what I've actually posted.


I can cheerfully say I have zero respect for you; it's vegetarians or vegans; whatever you are, that give us a bad name.

People like Noushka, I respect; she's incredibly passionate, as is Simply Sardonic - as am I; but I'd be surprised if you could find a thread where we 'force it down peoples throats.'

Just to clarify, before you decide to quote Googles dictionary definitions at me, by this I mean being derogatory and or trying to instill guilt in those who chose to eat meat.

I'm out of this thread now because I find you incredibly irksome - by 'irksome' I mean cr*pping well annoying.


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

lennythecloud said:


> When has a lecture ever forced anyone do anything? There's a difference between someone trying to influence, inform or educate and someone trying to force. Someone giving a lecture can only hope to do the former to a thinking person...


Personally I find it interesting, those who go on and on about vegetarian diets have not actually stated their viewpoint clearly on the topic in question. That in itself is quite telling.


----------



## Blackcats (Apr 13, 2013)

I apologised Lenny for misreading your comments. As some members are aware, I am very slow in understanding things and I do have a problem with misreading which most of us have been guilty at some point in doing. If you don't want to accept my apology fine by me. Not going to keep begging.

You can also accuse me of lying and attacking like you did in the other thread. Which you just admitted what you said in that other thread did not happen. I have many members who were on that thread at the time. 

Personally, like Flamingoes said. You are that vegan/veggie who give the others a bad name. People like Ouesi (sp?) SS, etc, are the ones I respect who are happy to hear what I have to say and will reply back being much more friendly and formal. I enjoy hearing what they have to say. I enjoy being educated...

You are the one continuously saying people are forcing this and that down your throat. You cannot stand meat eaters. That's a sure fact. That's where your posts fail because you cannot respect meat eaters nor their posts in threads. You jump on them. 

I am not the only one who feels like this believe me.

Out of this thread too.


----------



## turkeylad (Mar 1, 2009)

I am a very strict vegan for me personally but a butchers shop is what it is and should be able to display there produce people have choices whether they use a shop or not.......

my 7 dogs are not vegetarian and i like to see what i am buying for them rather than minced up packages that i am not clear what is in them.


----------



## MCWillow (Aug 26, 2011)

lennythecloud said:


> What? Please refrain from making things up and patronising me, I thought you respected me? If you want to accuse me of something please provide evidence, you clearly *can't be trusted to read what I've actually posted.*


Pot, kettle, black?

This was *your* reply to a post I made


lennythecloud said:


> But surely, if you _really_ had to, you could pick an apple? There's a big difference between not doing things because you don't have to and not doing things because of you can't bring yourself to do it...


This was the post you replied to


MCWillow said:


> Not read the whole thread.
> 
> I don't agree at all with the fact that the butcher was bullied into taking down his window.
> I see nothing wrong with people seeing exactly where their meat came from. My local butcher has very similar displays in his window.
> ...


Please tell me where I said I couldnt pick an apple if I really had to.

If you actually _read_ it, I said I couldn't kill an animal I was eating unless it was a life or death situation. Which I did point out to you in a subsequent post, but you obviously chose not to address it.

I don't like hearing people say that other people don't listen and make things up, when they, themselves, are doing exactly that.


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

I think youre being really unfair to Lenny, i have only ever seen Lenny put his point across, just like everyone else does.

If someone sees a post they believe to be misinformed - giving what you think is correct information isn't ramming it down someones throat. That's debating - 


lets not get this thread closed hey


.


----------



## MCWillow (Aug 26, 2011)

noushka05 said:


> *I think youre being really unfair to Lenny*, i have only ever seen Lenny put his point across, just like everyone else does.
> 
> If someone sees a post they believe to be misinformed - giving what you think is correct information isn't ramming it down someones throat. That's debating -
> 
> ...


Not when s/he is accusing other people of something s/he is guilty of themselves. See my post above yours


----------



## ForeverHome (Jan 14, 2014)

*sigh* this was a really interesting discussion, I go away to chop 1.2kg of turkey thigh into cat bite size chunks while one is climbing up my leg and the other one is getting jealous, come back and what happened??


----------



## Sleeping_Lion (Mar 19, 2009)

For those not using the ignore function, this thread is about five posts long for me, it's great 

Other than that, it is refreshing to see people who are willing to accept if they eat meat, they see where it comes from. I've already got one new recruit for next year to go beating on one of the shoots I go on, from this forum, and I'd willingly show them how to prepare game for themselves and/or their dogs. 

It does surprise me, and make me wonder, for those who own dogs and are against eating meat, where on earth do they source their dog food from? Do they follow round animals waiting for it to drop dead of old age?


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

MCWillow said:


> Not when s/he is accusing other people of something s/he is guilty of themselves. See my post above yours


Fair point.



Sleeping_Lion said:


> For those not using the ignore function, this thread is about five posts long for me, it's great
> 
> Other than that, it is refreshing to see people who are willing to accept if they eat meat, they see where it comes from. I've already got one new recruit for next year to go beating on one of the shoots I go on, from this forum, and I'd willingly show them how to prepare game for themselves and/or their dogs.
> 
> It does surprise me, and make me wonder, for those who own dogs and are against eating meat, where on earth do they source their dog food from? Do they follow round animals waiting for it to drop dead of old age?


I think your ignore function must be broken again, as I assume this is aimed at me:hand:

I don't think you'll find a single post of mine where I have ever said im against eating meat - of course in my ideal world I'd love no animal was ever killed for our benefit. All I have done is give an opinion & correct common misconceptions about veganism. Though I try hard, I know full well Im far from perfect - I am not a vegan, im an ovo vegetarian & yes I have dogs which I feed meat to. Most of us are hypocrites to varying degrees, which is why I have the utmost respect & gratitude to the strict vegans out there, because they are the ones having the least impact on the environment & the suffering of animals. Acknowledging that doesn't make me a hypocrite either. Livestock farming IS one of the greatest threats to our very existence & to all life on earth - even the UN admit it.

Again as I have said many times, killing animals for food is polls apart from killing animals for sport - like your game bird example.

,


----------



## springerpete (Jun 24, 2010)

Oh God, I was wondering when the 'Shooting thing' would rear it's ugly head.


----------



## havoc (Dec 8, 2008)

> Again as I have said many times, killing animals for food is polls apart from killing animals for sport - like your game bird example.


I think it's important not to generalise. A newspaper article saying a particular shoot kills more birds than go for the pot is not my experience of reality. I'm very happy when a spare brace comes my way and there isn't spare for me every shoot. I have to wait my turn just like everyone else.


----------



## lilythepink (Jul 24, 2013)

noushka05 said:


> Waste is indeed a big issue, and we are a shamefully wasteful country . Perhaps they should bring back the ration book like they had in the war lol
> 
> No you didn't misunderstand me But will try to clarify more - Raising livestock for meat is very inefficient, it requires an enormous amount grain to convert to a small amount of meat protein. If much of this grain went directly to feeding humans instead of the livestock, billions more people could be fed... Less land would be required & less water, so less impact on the environment all round
> 
> ...


I don't think our meat really was intended to be grain fed but more naturally grass fed. 
Our native cows do very well on grass all year and little or no grain. They may lose a bit of weight in winter but will put it back on in spring.Sheep in UK live out all year mainly.
We have deadlines and targets and profit margins to make just so small farmers can make a living.

If meat was considered more of a luxury rather than an every day right then people wouldn't eat as much and just may have a little bit more respect from where it is sourced.


----------



## ForeverHome (Jan 14, 2014)

lilythepink said:


> If meat was considered more of a luxury rather than an every day right then people wouldn't eat as much and just may have a little bit more respect from where it is sourced.


And where would that leave us feeding pets?


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

springerpete said:


> Oh God, I was wondering when the 'Shooting thing' would rear it's ugly head.


 I certainly wasnt 1st to bring it up lol



havoc said:


> I think it's important not to generalise. A newspaper article saying a particular shoot kills more birds than go for the pot is not my experience of reality. I'm very happy when a spare brace comes my way and there isn't spare for me every shoot. I have to wait my turn just like everyone else.


I accept that some shoots are far more ethical than others. But the industry as a whole is cruel & unethical. 80% of the birds never enter our food chain - even BASC admit that much, they claim they are exported but defra say they have no information on this. They use to be buried in pits or incinerated. 90% of the gamebirds released to be shot are battery farmed - they have even less welfare standards than battery farmed chickens. Native wildlife is persecuted on an industrial scale, the impact on some of our protected raptors is having a devastating consequence. With 50 million gamebirds released annually, the impact on our native flora & fauna is likely to be immense. For someone who cares about animal welfare & nature I will always be strongly opposed.



lilythepink said:


> I don't think our meat really was intended to be grain fed but more naturally grass fed.
> Our native cows do very well on grass all year and little or no grain. They may lose a bit of weight in winter but will put it back on in spring.Sheep in UK live out all year mainly.
> We have deadlines and targets and profit margins to make just so small farmers can make a living.
> 
> If meat was considered more of a luxury rather than an every day right then people wouldn't eat as much and just may have a little bit more respect from where it is sourced.


Ive read that aswell Lily, cows really shouldn't be fed on grains.

Your cattle are very lucky, fed on want they should be fed on

totally agree with your last sentence x


----------



## havoc (Dec 8, 2008)

> If meat was considered more of a luxury rather than an every day right then people wouldn't eat as much and just may have a little bit more respect from where it is sourced.


Absolutely! Meat is a luxury. It's been reduced to the equivalent of a ready meal nowadays, a few shrink wrapped cuts which people recognise. I'm all for putting the whole beast on show in the butchers and let people see how to use it all.


----------



## lilythepink (Jul 24, 2013)

ForeverHome said:


> And where would that leave us feeding pets?


we all agree, too many BYBs and too many unwanted pets? Maybe if food wasn't so easily and readily available for our pets we wouldn't have so many? so then there would be less that are bred?

When I was a child, the family dog was fed a tin of meat and winalot biscuits and I would think most dogs were the same. We went through the dog food revolution when companies realised what big business it is and how much we are willing to pay for our pets.....along came dried food...best thing since sliced bread. Now, we have the raw revolution. Its only a matter of time before something else comes along to replace raw and raw is demonised as dry is now.

Does it not raise an eyebrow for you when someone will pay hundreds of pounds for dental treatment for a cat and then either ignore their own teeth or moan non stop about it? the pet food companies have cashed in on this.

When I was a child, people gave kittens and puppies away, it wasn't the norm to neuter. Now, a moggy commands about £80 where I live.


----------



## lilythepink (Jul 24, 2013)

ForeverHome said:


> And where would that leave us feeding pets?


Have you ever wondered exactly where pet food meats are sourced from?

We can't trust companies re our own foods, certainly can't trust them where pet food comes from cos there is less testing and standards etc.

Chicken carcasses minus most of the meat you would suppose were cut up for human consumption and the rest was disposable? what if the chicken was condemned for human consumption........is that a risk to our pets? Is it a risk to us handling it?

If I have an animal that dies or has been given certain drugs before it died etc and I call in the knacker man, he charges me to take that animal away. I have never been asked how it died or what killed it....or if it had had any drugs before it died....or if it was euthanised via injection......you tell me where that meat goes?

2 years ago we had our old stallion PTS by injection. We were going to bury him cos he was a pet but the weather was so wet we couldn't get machinery on the land to dig a hole. after 2 weeks, we got the knacker man.....where did my old boy end up?

It is supposed to be incinerated if injected.


----------



## rona (Aug 18, 2011)

Sleeping_Lion said:


> For those not using the ignore function, this thread is about five posts long for me, it's great


Best function on this forum


----------



## lennythecloud (Aug 5, 2011)

Flamingoes said:


> I can cheerfully say I have zero respect for you; it's vegetarians or vegans; whatever you are, that give us a bad name.


I don't speak for you or anyone else. If people want to disagree with me then that's fine and if 'they' want to give 'you' a bad name because of it then it's not my problem, it's down to their own small mindedness.



Flamingoes said:


> People like Noushka, I respect; she's incredibly passionate, as is Simply Sardonic - as am I; but I'd be surprised if you could find a thread where we 'force it down peoples throats.'


I probably couldn't because, as I've said, the concept of 'forcing down peoples throat' is not something I really believe exists. I put my points across strongly, as Noushka pointed out, that's just debating.



Goblin said:


> Personally I find it interesting, those who go on and on about vegetarian diets have not actually stated their viewpoint clearly on the topic in question. That in itself is quite telling.


You really do need to start actually reading what I've put before assuming...

Post #67


lennythecloud said:


> From the article:
> 
> "And James Bird wrote: We are losing our grip on reality if we cant abide being reminded where our sausages originate from (and Im a vegan)." As a fellow vegan I agree with James, I personally don't have a problem with seeing dead animals.


and then

Post #122


lennythecloud said:


> Dead animals don't faze me, at all. I've been lucky enough to have been involved in the post mortems of various species - dogs, chickens, horses, cattle etc. I doubt there's many on here that would be happy reflecting back the limbs, skinning and opening up a freshly dead golden retriever but it doesn't bother me.





Blackcats said:


> You cannot stand meat eaters. That's a sure fact. That's where your posts fail because you cannot respect meat eaters nor their posts in threads. You jump on them.


That's also not true. If it was a sure fact I wouldn't have worked in the livestock industry for many years and I wouldn't be friends with many meat eaters, farmers and even a butcher . Debate is fine in a relevant place a thread about attitudes to meat and a thread about the environmental impact of vegetarianism are relevant places.



MCWillow said:


> The only person I would have any respect for, coming out with that statement, would be someone that is entirely self sufficient.]Please tell me where I said I couldnt pick an apple if I really had to.
> 
> If you actually read it, I said I couldn't kill an animal I was eating unless it was a life or death situation. Which I did point out to you in a subsequent post, but you obviously chose not to address it.


I did read your post and responded with my interpretation of it. I probably could have been clearer but it is this I was responding to:

"But then I also dont grow my own wheat and make bread, or grow my own fruit, vegetables and salad. I dont own a cow for milk, cheese, butter or yoghurt. I dont own chickens for my own eggs.

I do find it annoying when people say 'if you can't kill it, don't eat it' (I repeat I have not read this entire thread, so thats not targeted at anyone here).

The only person I would have any respect for, coming out with that statement, would be someone that is entirely self sufficient."

You don't grow you're own fruit and veg because you don't have to. You don't kill your own meat because by your own admission you actually couldn't (unless you were going to die otherwise). If someone rocked up to your house with a lamb and said 'here's a present for tea tonight, kill it and we'll eat it', you wouldn't do it. If someone rocked up to your house with a live basil plant and said 'tear a few leaves off and we'll eat it" then I assume you would? ( this is obviously hypothetical situation, substitute with a plant of your choice).

That's what most people mean when they say 'if you can't do it, don't eat it'. It's not to do with self sufficiency, as you implied, it's the fact that you're sensitivities mean that you'd be unable to kill an animal in anything but the most extreme situation but are happy to fund an anonymous person to do it for you. It's unlikely you hold the same sensitivities over harvesting plants.


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

lennythecloud said:


> You really do need to start actually reading what I've put before assuming...


So, you quote someone else, not state your own views. You say you're not fazed yet spend the rest of the time on the thread arguing against it and why vegetarianism is right and everyone should do it. You basically skirt the main issue, changing the topic to one you want to impose.



> Debate is fine in a relevant place a thread about attitudes to meat and a thread about the environmental impact of vegetarianism are relevant places.


This thread originally had nothing to do with vegetarianism until people like you changed the topic. The actual people complaining about the display were "townies" many of whom are likely to eat meat themselves. How is the environmental impact of vegetarianism relevant?


----------



## lennythecloud (Aug 5, 2011)

Goblin said:


> So, you quote someone else, not state your own views. You say you're not fazed yet spend the rest of the time on the thread arguing against it and why vegetarianism is right and everyone should do it. You basically skirt the main issue, changing the topic to one you want to impose.


1) I quoted someone from the article and said that I agree with that guy. If that wasn't enough then in the following sentence and a subsequent post I reinforced that it was my own opinion. What more could you possibly want? How exactly am I skirting the issue? I agree that the butcher was unfairly targeted and his window doesn't bother me.

2) I didn't bring up vegetarianism, I didn't bring up broiler welfare and I didn't bring up killing animals for food. Other people did but I'm not allowed to reply because you don't like or agree with my particular take on things? If you don't like it feel free to use the ignore function. It's what it's there for and I won't be offended.



Goblin said:


> This thread originally had nothing to do with vegetarianism until people like you changed the topic. The actual people complaining about the display were "townies" many of whom are likely to eat meat themselves. How is the environmental impact of vegetarianism relevant?


See above. I didn't change the topic, only replied to people.


----------



## DoodlesRule (Jul 7, 2011)

Well back on topic, apparently the display is back 

For all we know could have just been a ploy for lots of free advertising


----------



## Jesthar (May 16, 2011)

lilythepink said:


> When I was a child, the family dog was fed a tin of meat and winalot biscuits and I would think most dogs were the same. We went through the dog food revolution when companies realised what big business it is and how much we are willing to pay for our pets.....along came dried food...best thing since sliced bread. *Now, we have the raw revolution. Its only a matter of time before something else comes along to replace raw and raw is demonised as dry is now*


Somehow I doubt raw will be demonised, unless it's by the whole prey advocates, as it's about the most natural diet you can get.



lennythecloud said:


> You don't grow you're own fruit and veg because you don't have to. You don't kill your own meat because by your own admission you actually couldn't (unless you were going to die otherwise). If someone rocked up to your house with a lamb and said 'here's a present for tea tonight, kill it and we'll eat it', you wouldn't do it. If someone rocked up to your house with a live basil plant and said 'tear a few leaves off and we'll eat it" then I assume you would? ( this is obviously hypothetical situation, substitute with a plant of your choice).
> 
> That's what most people mean when they say 'if you can't do it, don't eat it'. It's not to do with self sufficiency, as you implied, it's the fact that you're sensitivities mean that you'd be unable to kill an animal in anything but the most extreme situation but are happy to fund an anonymous person to do it for you. It's unlikely you hold the same sensitivities over harvesting plants.


That's not really a fair comparison, though is it? Anyone can harvest a plant or pick a fruit (and yes, I do grow some of my own), but in this day and age not many have the knowledge and experience required to dispatch an animal quickly and efficiently. So if someone were to turn up on my doorstep with an animal to kill for food, then unless it were a life or death starvation scenarion, I'd want to find someone with that knowledge to do the deed effectively so the animal didn't suffer unduly. It's got nothing to do with my sensitivities, and everything to do with wanting the job done well. And I believe that was what McWillow actually meant.

And it can also depend on the animal. Even in the days where a lot of people kept chickens and pigs in their back yard, people who would quite merrily kill a chicken for the pot would get a slaughterman in to stick a pig, usually a whole street on the same day.

Anyway, I like the fact that the display is back


----------



## bird (Apr 2, 2009)

lennythecloud said:


> ..
> 
> You don't grow you're own fruit and veg because you don't have to. You don't kill your own meat because by your own admission you actually couldn't (unless you were going to die otherwise). If someone rocked up to your house with a lamb and said 'here's a present for tea tonight, kill it and we'll eat it', you wouldn't do it. If someone rocked up to your house with a live basil plant and said 'tear a few leaves off and we'll eat it" then I assume you would? ( this is obviously hypothetical situation, substitute with a plant of your choice).
> 
> That's what most people mean when they say 'if you can't do it, don't eat it'. It's not to do with self sufficiency, as you implied, it's the fact that you're sensitivities mean that you'd be unable to kill an animal in anything but the most extreme situation but are happy to fund an anonymous person to do it for you. It's unlikely you hold the same sensitivities over harvesting plants.


I don't grow my own because,
1, I have small garden
2. It's solid flipping clay
3, I have a stupid back and had to give up my own allotment because of it

I don't kill my own for the simple reason I don't know how to do it, if I was shown a few times and on my first go the "professional" was stood with me then I would be able to do so. The days when my grandparents kept various animals on their allotment and grandma would go and choose one for the pot are long gone.

Humans on the whole are totally ignorant of where their food comes from, whether it be animal OR vegetable. Or the environment in which both can be produced. Hence the massive greenhouses in Southern Spain. 

I say well done to that butcher, it's an excellent display of meat and what meats are eaten, it's time we got real about our foods again, and little jonnys and janes should know that the lamb chop or mince on their plates last night came from a sheep or a cow, not out of polystyrene trays covered in cling film from the supermarkets.


----------



## Calvine (Aug 20, 2012)

JANICE199 said:


> *Have people gone completely bloody mad! So it's ok to display joints of meat but not the whole animal?
> You have to wonder what these people teach their kids, as where their meat comes from.*


JANICE, you are right. My neighbour said to her daughter and kids that something was 'black as coal'...and none of the kids knew what she was talking about. And one of the kid's friends thought that that chips somehow came ready sliced, frozen and ready to cook (in a bag). If she'd seen potatoes with mud on them, she would not have had a clue what they were!


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

lennythecloud said:


> See above. I didn't change the topic, only replied to people.


Interesting to see that when people create a thread about how to go vegetarian it doesn't become a meat vs plant discussion.. Could it be meat eaters are far less confrontational and more accepting of how others want to live and don't feel compelled to push their personal agenda at the slightest excuse


----------



## lennythecloud (Aug 5, 2011)

Jesthar said:


> So if someone were to turn up on my doorstep with an animal to kill for food, then unless it were a life or death starvation scenarion, I'd want to find someone with that knowledge to do the deed effectively so the animal didn't suffer unduly. It's got nothing to do with my sensitivities, and everything to do with wanting the job done well. And I believe that was what McWillow actually meant.





> I don't kill my own for the simple reason I don't know how to do it, if I was shown a few times and on my first go the "professional" was stood with me then I would be able to do so. The days when my grandparents kept various animals on their allotment and grandma would go and choose one for the pot are long gone.


As (ironically) I'm probably one of the few members on here who've actually killed livestock, I can tell you the right technique isn't particularly difficult to learn (apart from pigs, they're a little trickier).

The 'I want the job done right' argument doesn't really stand when you don't really know the job IS done right. There are some fantastic slaughter men but many are inconsiderate, poorly paid and occasionally sadistic workers, often immigrants who are hired because they're the only people willing to do the job. We don't yet have mandatory cctv in slaughterhouses so unless you or someone involved in the production personally knows the abattoir then you really have no idea if the job has been done well.

Footage showing exactly why we need cctv in British slaughterhouses: (GRAPHIC)

[youtube_browser]-TFdHAnpTYI[/youtube_browser]



Goblin said:


> Interesting to see that when people create a thread about how to go vegetarian it doesn't become a meat vs plant discussion.. Could it be meat eaters are far less confrontational and more accepting of how others want to live and don't feel compelled to push their personal agenda at the slightest excuse


Maybe but then you look at the thread sleeping lion started with no provocation - 'why i'll never be veggie', and some of the responses in there, and then your argument falls down.

Someone posted a Tim Minchin video in another thread and it reminded me of a quote from him I found interesting. It seems even some meat eaters are compelled to push the 'vegetarian agenda' at the slightest excuse:

"Have you always been interested in conservation issues?"

"I'm incredibly interested in altruism as a notion… Basically, if anyone is suffering or if there's anything that I think should be fixed in the world, if I have a little chance to help, I do. Having said that, I do a hell of lot more selfish stuff than I do selfless stuff… All short-sighted environmental destruction strikes me as incredibly absurd, but I drive a car and I fly 50 times a year. I loathe that we think we can just use finite resources, and I go about using finite resources. I'm not a vegetarian, so I'm a hypocrite in that I think I should be. I can argue the vegetarian position in a way that I don't think you can argue against; both environmentally and ethically. And I can argue against all the stupid points that non-vegetarians make about eating meat and how we've evolved to and all this b******t."

Tim Minchin talks orangutans, vegetarianism and unleashing his inner ape! | longcall


----------



## bird (Apr 2, 2009)

lennythecloud said:


> As (ironically) I'm probably one of the few members on here who've actually killed livestock, I can tell you the right technique isn't particularly difficult to learn (apart from pigs, they're a little trickier).
> 
> The 'I want the job done right' argument doesn't really stand when you don't really know the job IS done right. There are some fantastic slaughter men but many are inconsiderate, poorly paid and occasionally sadistic workers, often immigrants who are hired because they're the only people willing to do the job. We don't yet have mandatory cctv in slaughterhouses so unless you or someone involved in the production personally knows the abattoir then you really have no idea if the job has been done well.


No I agree, all I can do is use my local butchers, that uses locally sourced meat (when I'm not tracking 20 odd miles to the organic free range place that's only open once a month) where it is possible to have the meat traced to an abattoir and farm. Supermarkets also have a lot to answer for (and those using them) as when they buy meat that's a little "off" they just assume they have either not stored it correctly or the supermarket hasn't stored it correctly. It never crosses their minds that the animal has been stressed at the "point of kill" and therefore the stress has tainted the meat.


----------



## IrishEyes (Jun 26, 2012)

I think that a few on here are being very unfair on lenny, a few posts have actually been quite rude while Lenny is only debating and expressing thoughts same as everyone else. 

No, the OP isn't in itself about vegetarianism but that was bound to come up in discussion, how could you have a thread about a butcher's display and not think that veggie's would give their thoughts on the matter as non meat eaters? It was actually in the first few posts that it was said the majority of the "townies" complaining were hypocrites and probably ate meat... sorry but you have no way of knowing what those people eat or don't eat (unless they all stated so).

Quite a few of us veggies on here said that the display should have stayed and I haven't seen anyone push a meat free diet on any one else.


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

IrishEyes said:


> No, the OP isn't in itself about vegetarianism but that was bound to come up in discussion, how could you have a thread about a butcher's display and not think that veggie's would give their thoughts on the matter as non meat eaters?


Ever heard the word context? Look through the thread and you'll see many vegetarians give their viewpoint on the topic, not start to preach.


----------



## lennythecloud (Aug 5, 2011)

Goblin said:


> Ever heard the word context? Look through the thread and you'll see many vegetarians give their viewpoint on the topic, not start to preach.


So when I give my opinion it's 'preaching' but when blackcats, you or anyone else gives theirs then it's not. How convenient.


----------



## Blackcats (Apr 13, 2013)

DoodlesRule said:


> Well back on topic, apparently the display is back
> 
> For all we know could have just been a ploy for lots of free advertising


Bloody worked if that's the case.


----------



## 1290423 (Aug 11, 2011)

lilythepink said:


> what a good butcher this one is. shows such a diverse array of the meats they stock. I would definitely have this as my butcher if I lived in the area.
> 
> I think the pathetic townies are just that....they need to go to asda and buy some nice pre cooked pre packed alternative to real food.
> 
> ...


Doubt it would have been long, other birds alone scavenge them pretty quickly.
I was out walking the other day on a quiet lane with very little traffic, however the was a rabbit hit and killed outright just ahead of me, when I passed by on the way back which was only maybe 40 minutes later it has completely gone


----------



## MCWillow (Aug 26, 2011)

lennythecloud said:


> I did read your post and responded with my interpretation of it. I probably could have been clearer but it is this I was responding to:
> 
> "But then I also dont grow my own wheat and make bread, or grow my own fruit, vegetables and salad. I dont own a cow for milk, cheese, butter or yoghurt. I dont own chickens for my own eggs.
> 
> ...


So you interpreted me saying that I would find it difficult to kill an animal to eat, as me saying I couldn't pick an apple to eat?

Erm, well, OK then.... Just because thats how _you_ interpreted it, it doesn't actually mean I can't picks apples, and it isn't actually what I said. I said what I meant - it didn't need to be interpreted - it was quite clear. I would find it difficult to kill an animal I was going to eat, unless it was a life or death situation.

Personally, I can't see what is so difficult to understand about that statement 



> You don't grow you're own fruit and veg because you don't have to.


Another reason would be that I live on a canal, and the banks are full of oak trees - not much grows well in my garden, not even grass. I have actually tried (and failed) to grow my own vegetables, mainly because of the soil quality and copious shade provided by the 8 (protected) oak trees in my garden 



> You don't kill your own meat because by your own admission you actually couldn't (unless you were going to die otherwise). If someone rocked up to your house with a lamb and said 'here's a present for tea tonight, kill it and we'll eat it', you wouldn't do it. If someone rocked up to your house with a live basil plant and said 'tear a few leaves off and we'll eat it" then I assume you would? ( this is obviously hypothetical situation, substitute with a plant of your choice).


Well apart from anything else, I don't actually like lamb so never eat it anyway. But, you're right, I wouldn't kill an animal that someone brought to my boat (not house) and said 'kill this for dinner'.

But then I have never said I would have I? I have stated from the start that I personally, couldn't kill an animal to eat, so I don't actually see what argument you have with me - apart from asking me why I couldnt pick an appple.... 



> That's what most people mean when they say 'if you can't do it, don't eat it'. It's not to do with self sufficiency, as you implied, it's the fact that you're sensitivities mean that you'd be unable to kill an animal in anything but the most extreme situation but are happy to fund an anonymous person to do it for you. It's unlikely you hold the same sensitivities over harvesting plants.


Just like some vegetarians are happy for anonymous people to grow their fruit, vegetables and grains for them? Just like they are happy to fund someone else milking the animals that provide their butter, milk, cheese and yoghurt? Just like they are happy to fund someone keeping chickens, ducks or geese and collecting their eggs?

Its hypocritical for someone to say 'if you cant kill it to provide you with food, dont eat it', when they themselves are quite happy to eat something someone else has produced to provide them with food.

If you (general you) feel that you should only eat what you yourself can provide, then grow and produce everything you yourself eat.

Because if you _don't_ do that, when you are expecting other people to do it, it makes you a hypocrite.


----------



## 1290423 (Aug 11, 2011)

270 odd posts on a butchers meat display!:yikes:
Fact of the matter is in this day and age almost everything we do in likely to cause offence to someone!

I personally don't like to see the carcasses hanging there by their feet, and yes! I do know where meat comes from - its worse in India as the normally still have their fur on and the stench is rotton I'll cross to road to avoid! BUT that said I wouldn't complain about such a display.

Thing is some people don't like it others really don't mind, but there's always someone out there to complain, Wonder how many of you would complain if a sex shop opened on the corner of your street? Or a brothel maybe

And Noushka and Lenny, loving your posts, wish I could rep you for em all!


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

lennythecloud said:


> So when I give my opinion it's 'preaching' but when blackcats, you or anyone else gives theirs then it's not. How convenient.


If I change any thread to a topic of my choosing yes it is. As stated plenty of examples on this site. Vegetarian one.. not converted, Crufts ones.. no mention of the cruelty supported.. It's a minority who'll jump on any thread to preach. I've not seen Blackcats or myself trying to persuade people to eat meat, in fact the opposite stating it's people's individual choice.


----------



## Blackcats (Apr 13, 2013)

Sex shop nah. Why would I care.

And I highly doubt they would ever put a Brothel in my area. Nobody has the money.


----------



## MCWillow (Aug 26, 2011)

A sex shop opened just round the corner from where I work - it didnt last long, and is now an RSPCA shop :lol: We'll see how long that lasts (its not a great position for a shop, whatever it is!)

A brothel - yes I _would_ mind. I wouldn't mind if brothels were legal and had guidelines to stick to - but they don't, and some brothels are mixed up in human trafficking - so if a brothel opened up near me, I would be asking authorities to investigate it.


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

MCWillow said:


> A sex shop opened just round the corner from where I work - it didnt last long, and is now an RSPCA shop :lol: We'll see how long that lasts (its not a great position for a shop, whatever it is!)
> 
> A brothel - yes I _would_ mind. I wouldn't mind if brothels were legal and had guidelines to stick to - but they don't, and some brothels are mixed up in human trafficking - so if a brothel opened up near me, I would be asking authorities to investigate it.


Used to have a brothel quite close to us, about 400meters as the crow flies. Not there now and not shocked as I am sure it couldn't have had many clients. Actually found it amusing rather than anything else. Then again, attitudes are generally different over here. I'd much rather have a licensed brothel than street prostitutes. Some of the sex shops I've seen over here could be mistaken for a lingerie shop. God forbid we ban lingerie from display as it may offend as children may see it and we may actually have to explain "worldly things".


----------



## MCWillow (Aug 26, 2011)

Goblin said:


> Used to have a brothel quite close to us, about 400meters as the crow flies. Not there now and not shocked as I am sure it couldn't have had many clients. Actually found it amusing rather than anything else. Then again, attitudes are generally different over here. I'd much rather have *a licensed brothel* than street prostitutes. Some of the sex shops I've seen over here could be mistaken for a lingerie shop. God forbid we ban lingerie from display as it may offend as children may see it and we may actually have to explain "worldly things".


Exactly what I was trying to say - thank you


----------



## lennythecloud (Aug 5, 2011)

Goblin said:


> If I change any thread to a topic of my choosing yes it is. As stated plenty of examples on this site. Vegetarian one.. not converted, Crufts ones.. no mention of the cruelty supported.. It's a minority who'll jump on any thread to preach. I've not seen Blackcats or myself trying to persuade people to eat meat, in fact the opposite stating it's people's individual choice.


I didn't change the thread topic, other people did. Are you really trying to tell me that threads on here never evolve and divert away from the first post?

I don't jump on 'any thread to preach'. This thread is, at it's fundamental core, about social opinion and ethics surrounding meat. I've hardly started a debate about religion, trains or soviet Russia here - it's all been roughly centred around dead animals. On this thread and the others I've posted on it's entirely relevant, I hardly go rampaging around the 'what's for tea' threads striking down anyone who dares to eat a bacon sandwich.

Of course I believe in reducing animal consumption as a solution to current livestock issue or I wouldn't be damn well doing it myself. Of course I believe in improving livestock welfare, I've spent a lot of time working with these creatures. Of course I'm going to defend my way of life or why I hold certain opinions. Not once on this thread have I tried to convert anyone, put across my opinion yes, but what they do with that is completely and utterly up to them.

I'd invite you again to use the ignore button Goblin, It'd quickly solve any beef you have with my posts (pun intended).


----------



## lennythecloud (Aug 5, 2011)

Also:

Talking about abstaining from animal products and animal welfare = completely bastardising the topic of the thread to suit my own evangelical agenda.

Brothels and sex shops = completely fine.


----------



## MCWillow (Aug 26, 2011)

lennythecloud said:


> Also:
> 
> Talking about abstaining from animal products and animal welfare = completely bastardising the topic of the thread to suit my own evangelical agenda.
> 
> Brothels and sex shops = completely fine.


Also: totally ignoring the reply I made to you = completely fine.

Night night


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

lennythecloud said:


> This thread is, at it's fundamental core, about social opinion and ethics surrounding meat.


This thread is about a minority trying to force their opinion on others.



lennythecloud said:


> Brothels and sex shops = completely fine.


Yes, as an example of things people don't like to see and would complain about seeing. My response..



Goblin said:


> God forbid we ban lingerie from display as it may offend as children may see it and we may actually have to explain "worldly things".


Which is directly relevant to the topic as a comparison.


----------



## Nicky10 (Jan 11, 2010)

A legal brothel where the women did it of their own choice and had protection from abuse from clients and the bosses I wouldn't have a problem with tbh. It's the fact that most are forced into it or abused I have an issue with. 

Surely if you're a vegetarian/vegan you know not to go near a butchers, unless of course you own a carnivore pet and are feeding them meat, because there will be meat there. We're omnivores we can eat anything, some vegetarians/vegans just get very preachy they're as annoying as the I is carnivore *beats chest* you all weak because you're vegetarians types.


----------



## Sleeping_Lion (Mar 19, 2009)

Was chatting to my local butchers, who is a member of the Guild of Butchers. He was asked to comment on the whole situation, and apparently his comment was unprintable! Doesn't surprise me, knowing Brindon!!

Apparently the display is being reinstated in the morning.


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

Nicky10 said:


> some vegetarians/vegans just get very preachy they're as annoying as the I is carnivore *beats chest* you all weak because you're vegetarians types.


Hear Hear. It's always about choice though and respecting other opinions.

I find the "preachyness" is the same with "converts" to so many things, be it anti smoking, religion etc etc etc. Most anti-english welshman I ever met was an englishman living in wales.


----------

