Login Help | Join for Free! | Hide This

Community » Forum » Activism

Search

Pigs and pigs

Conversations with reasonably intelligent people

1 - 10 of 12 posts 1 | 2

reddapanda ACT • Posts: 381

1 10 Jan 2016

So I decided to open a new topic...

Firstly, as an example - today I just read this...
https://open.abc.net.au/explore/94091

When I'd say I don't eat meat, almost half the folks I'd say that to would point out that:
a.) those animals wouldn't have lived were it not for the meat/product demand
b.) they don't agree with the worst kinds of factory farmed cruelties and 4-corner style expose's
c.) the species which humans eat commonly are in the greatest abundance.

Which then usually gets into some version discussion of: what's a life worth living?

Which, then usually gets to a point where they agree that caged eggs are abhorrent because that life isn't worth living (and some other examples). But as the person in the ABC article above says (as one example), those particular pigs have pretty good lives for six months and then one day of horror -- is that, a life worth living? Maybe it is, maybe it's not. Where do various people draw that line? (That's what many of my conversations with people have been about.)

Clearly the person in the article has thought about it, clearly many of the people I speak with have thought about it somewhat. And while there is some further education to be done about what actually are better choices: is that where the vast majority of people would be taken to? In which case, for the vast majority is the vegan effort a little - misguided even? (Other than for the people who think about it and it makes sense to them, for?)

I guess I've been doing research, having conversations, reading books, and spending time thinking - what's the way in which I want to contribute. And one of them is really not to under-estimate other people's intelligence by sending them over-scripted overly simplistic messages and hype. Nor to "have the answer" and then only invest time in working out - what's the best way that other people can reach such an answer (too much of that going around in my opinion).

Okay this has been pretty long. Thanks for reading if you have.

robert99 Sweden • Posts: 1360

2 11 Jan 2016

reddapanda said:

Cows, pigs, chickens and even some fish species are so inbreed, biologically manipulated, genetically modified etc that it is doubtful they would survive in the wild.

" the species which humans eat commonly are in the greatest abundance" because humans have bred them. The Chinese want to clone cows as they can n't be born fast enough.

Interestingly the pigs descibed in the article came from England (where the species is now extinct) so they are an invasive species. As pigs live for 10 to 15 years, to kill them after just 6 months rather negates how "good a life they have".

reddapanda ACT • Posts: 381

3 11 Jan 2016

Hello there, and thanks for your thoughts Robert.

So perhaps for you and many others, 6 months of a potentially 15 yr life wouldn't be satisfactory, and neither would a life that was the product of multiple generations of genetic manipulation. And fair points! The 6 month old rare breed pig's life was just the person in the ABC Open article's position, not so much the idea as a whole (just one example).

I think it might be a good strategy to engage with people to find out what their "lines" are (regarding what's cruel and unacceptable, and what's okay and acceptable) by them. I think my favourite approach is that outlined by JS Foer. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uUHIrTV8fMA
[I think Animals Australia seems pretty smart about it on the whole too?]

Instead of supplying people with labels to adhere to such as vegan and vegetarian, rather to explore in an unscary and unjudgmental way; 'what do you think is actually reasonable based on finding out what goes on?'

Another area which omnivores often raise with me is about "lions kill zebras" etc., and vegans tend to say "yeah and we don't need to". And while that's part of what convinces me personally and some other people, I don't know that it either will or has to convince some others... People are not all naive, some people are okay with animals being killed - either directly doing it or having other people do it. But this doesn’t mean they’re okay with everything…

I’d like to be honest about there being better and worse choices – on a spectrum of sorts – in terms of how much suffering and deprivation goes on. And localised to, what are the conditions of what we consume. To open those conversations up, more as equals; where we learn, and plus where we accept not everyone draws the same conclusions from knowledge of what is happening. Thanks again to JS Foer, and some others.

robert99 Sweden • Posts: 1360

4 12 Jan 2016

"Instead of supplying people with labels to adhere to such as vegan and vegetarian ..."

Uhh? Can I not eat meat etc but somehow not be a vegan or vegetarian? It sounds like doing something is so horrendous because then you become labelled as a certain type of person. Shall we change vegan to non-animal product eater etc instead? Sounds all very PC.

It's just frickin' words to describe people ...

From wiki https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Safran_Foer

"He said that he had long been "uncertain about how I felt [about eating meat]" and that the birth of his first child inspired "an urgency because I would have to make decisions on his behalf"."
" ... he called himself vegetarian but still often ate meat"
Sounds like someone wants his cake and eat it too ... and it took having a child to think about eating meat? He was n't so "urgent" all those years before then.

reddapanda ACT • Posts: 381

5 12 Jan 2016

Fair enough Robert, thanks for your thoughts. I guess I just like that he (JSF) asks questions (and I'm okay that he's open about his uncertainty and contradictions, flaws etc.). Maybe I'm attracted to that more than many people, not sure (although his book Eating Animals is pretty popular too). happy

I don't actually mind the vegan label nor the vegetarian label, I've used them both myself, and agree it's a handy shortcut way to communicate. But...

reddapanda ACT • Posts: 381

6 12 Jan 2016

Some omnivores’ criticism (even repulsion) of vegans is the “holier than thou” idea (perception). And yet, rates of recidivism are huge (the majority). I think those things are connected. There are only a tiny number of people like JSF being open about their conflicting thoughts and orientations and experiences through time.

Where's the room for more people who perhaps do or would care – but actually don’t feel they have all the answers, either for themselves or for anyone or everyone else; The room to be really messy and honest with a complex topic - instead of over simplification and selling techniques?

Those are my thoughts today anyway, and that’s what I like that JS Foer was doing.

robert99 Sweden • Posts: 1360

7 13 Jan 2016

Sorry, I just see someone who thinks it's morally superior/right/cool/good to tell his kids/whatever to not eat meat but likes bacon.

Shaelle NSW • Posts: 34

8 14 Jan 2016

Seems to me that one major issue here is lack of tolerance re other people's views.
All too often, we see that strong opinions easily lead to various forms of fanaticism, a refusal to consider shades and nuances or similar views coming from different angles.
Nothing wrong with personal adherence to strong beliefs unless it cuts us off from anyone who subscribes to different standards. They too may have a fresh, valid contribution to make.
Of course, hypocrisy and double standards must be brought to light. However, nothing positive ever came from rigidity of thought.

+ 2

reddapanda ACT • Posts: 381

9 14 Jan 2016

I don't really understand what you've said there Robert, but that's okay and I like people having different views and perspectives than me.

Shaelle, I think that's a neat way of putting it.

Yeah, I think people are attracted to certainty but also repulsed by it. So the presentation of certainties tends to have a polarising sort of effect - with strong adherers and detractors. (That's not the case for all sorts of topics, but many.)

robert99 Sweden • Posts: 1360

10 15 Jan 2016

Let's keep this simple,
- vegan or vegetarian means don't eat meat
- omnivore means eat meat ec.

There are no views, opinions or matters to discuss about this. it's how people are called by what they eat.

If you want to connect morals, insinuations, allusions or whatever to those words, then that's your right. But it does not change the meaning of those words.

< Prev

Next >

[ 1 ] [ 2 ]