Animal cruelty in the food industry

[Sev]

It's already a thing in the cosmetics industry. Beauty without Cruelty, and all of that.

[Leeward]

Thankfully make-up-powered airheads seem to want to save the cute fluffy bunnies from the torture of having horrible allergic reactions to cosmetics. I'll admit though, it is a step forward.

[Rakuen Growlithe]

Well there is the old joke...

Why are people more opposed to furs than leather?
It's safer to harass rich old ladies than biker gangs.

Probably the same for cosmetics.

[Sev]

As a motorcyclist, that is just silly. Leather gear gives much, much better protection than synthetics. All of the MotoGP boys wear Kangaroo leather, because it is unbelievably abrasion resistant. So Leewards and Skippys are not dying in vain.

[Randall]

Leather is your friend indeed especially when you wipe due to an asshole taxi hitting your bike

[Raven Song]

But Sev, is the leather harvested in a humane way. that's why the fur industry was in such kak. Because of fur farms... and all the horrors that happened there.

Rakuen's comment is only silly if one format has a more humane approach than the other.

One could argue that synthetic fur isn't as warm as real fur (I've experienced this, sadly, I am ashamed) which is basically your argument only on the other side of the story.

also a few reports have come out (whether true or not I don't know) about how some make up places say they no longer do animal testing but they've been proven to still do animal testing...

[Sev]

I don't care about some random cow as much as I care about my safety, and the safety of fellow motorcyclists.

[Rakuen Growlithe]

That might make some sense if it weren't that you choose to take those risks. You don't need to do something that's not safe and it doesn't make sense that someone else should have to pay because you want to put yourself in danger.

[Leeward]

What about other activities that require protective gear, for example leather welding gloves? You could use the same argument to say that welding isn't necessary, but strictly speaking nothing is necessary so that argument has no limit.

[Adagio]

That might make some sense if it weren't that you choose to take those risks. You don't need to do something that's not safe and it doesn't make sense that someone else should have to pay because you want to put yourself in danger.

The risk in motorcycling isn't always the driving itself, but more the irresponsible actions of other drivers...

Bikers don't need to only think for themselves, but for every other driver on that road...
Paying attention to every stupid mistake, every driver makes...

[Rakuen Growlithe]

What about other activities that require protective gear, for example leather welding gloves? You could use the same argument to say that welding isn't necessary, but strictly speaking nothing is necessary so that argument has no limit.

There probably are other alternatives available. And if people stop using there will then be motivation to find better alternatives. It's probably just a case of they have something that works so why change it.

The risk in motorcycling isn't always the driving itself, but more the irresponsible actions of other drivers...

The same can be said about many things but you still choose to put yourself in that position. It's like saying it's perfectly safe to walk in a township at night, flashing cash, it's just that other people are irresponsible. Well, maybe but if it's still your choice to go into a situation you know is unsafe.

[Sev]

I would rather live life than cower in a corner, constantly in a state of fear. No, sir. I would rather die doing what I love than waste away in bed.

[Ocean knight]

I would rather live life than cower in a corner, constantly in a state of fear. No, sir. I would rather die doing what I love than waste away in bed.

You said it. I'm not sure about the death part but the rest i agree with.

[Sev]

You have to be able to accept the risk that comes with your decisions. Every time I hoped on a bike, I realized that I might not come back.

[Ocean knight]

You have to be able to accept the risk that comes with your decisions. Every time I hoped on a bike, I realized that I might not come back.

Positive person of the day! It's the same with a car. If you drive properly and carefully you have higher chances of living. Although that does not mean you are totally safe.
With regards to the leather. Which is more important humans or cows?

[Leeward]

With regards to the leather. Which is more important humans or cows?

That is one of those semi-rhetorical philosophical questions. One life cannot be weighed against another.

Pragmatism would dictate that if a cow is slaughtered for any reason, all of it may as well be used or else it goes to waste.

[Raven Song]

I agree with Leeward. Who are we too say that the cows life isn't as important as our own. Just because we have the ability to speak and create tools doesn't mean the cow is any less of a being than us. If there was a second species on earth that did what we did but wasn't human, and they used us for some means, we would be upset about it. because why are our lives less important than theirs. Why are cows any different?

[Sev]

Unless these beings were considerably more powerful than us, we would be able to defend ourselves. Strength is right to to life. We could destroy every cow living if we so chose, and there would be absolutely nothing that they could do about it.

They are so successful as a species because of us. There are well over a billion of them, which makes them the second most common large mammal after humans.

[Adagio]

IF the cow was slaughtered for NO REASON... THAT I'd consider inhumane...
But, it dies to provide sustinance....

The same can be said for the poor plants you throw into boiling water alive...
Why is that plant's life worth less than the cow? It's also a living thing? Sure, it doesn't have a brain per se, or able to walk around... But it's still alive, none the less... And I promise you, that the cow feels no guilt when it's digesting Flowey...


This is the way things work...
We need to eat... That is a simple fact...
Vegetarianism is not the answer... I'm not substituting a steak for some beans...

[Leeward]

Interestingly, plants do in fact express a primitive form of fear. That lovely fresh smell of cut grass? It's a chemical signal of distress. You sadist.

[Sev]

Really, that's quite curious. Do they feel pain as well?

[Leeward]

That's harder to tell, but at the very least they react to injury, which I guess is a form of pain. Here's an interesting article on the subject.

[Adagio]

I've seen a tree that pulls away its leaves when you touch them... Some form of Acacia I think...
Venus Fly traps certainly reapond to sense. It's reasonable to believe that they can feel pain?

[Leeward]

Pain in itself is difficult to define, but if we use a simple definition such as the reaction to a damaging stimulus by withdrawing from the situation causing it to protect an injury, then yes, plants do experience pain. There is little they can do about it though, which makes reactions such as fear completely pointless for them since they can't use either part of the fight-or-flight reflex. But they definitely do respond to stimuli. We take for granted that they typically flower in the spring, but they can sense the changes in daylight and temperature that differentiate the seasons, and that in itself is already quite advanced.

Also the plant that responds to touch you're thinking of is Mimosa pudica.

[Rakuen Growlithe]

IF the cow was slaughtered for NO REASON... THAT I'd consider inhumane...
But, it dies to provide sustinance....

Again, unnecessarily. You want meat because you want it not because you need it. Surely one would say that it's not fine to slaughter a rabbit every time you turn on your X-Box just because you like doing that. It's unnecessary and, even if the rabbit feels no pain, we would think that is wrong. But killing the rabbit when turning on the X-Box is just as unnecessary as eating meat. They both are done purely because people feel their wants give them free reign to do as they please.

Why is that plant's life worth less than the cow? It's also a living thing? Sure, it doesn't have a brain per se, or able to walk around... But it's still alive, none the less...

It's about weighing up what is necessary and what minimises harm. While we can live perfectly fine without meat we can not live without eating plants, so it is necessary to have some sort of food. Plants do not suffer the same way as a cow, so substituting plants for cows minimises harm. Also, we have to eat.

Plants may have reactions that resemble fear or pain depending how you define them but that is misleading. The criteria that we are worried about is not whether or not they can react to a stimulus but whether they have conciousness that allows them subjective awareness and experiences. There is no reason to believe that is the case for plants.

[Leeward]

IF the cow was slaughtered for NO REASON... THAT I'd consider inhumane...
But, it dies to provide sustinance....

Again, unnecessarily. You want meat because you want it not because you need it. Surely one would say that it's not fine to slaughter a rabbit every time you turn on your X-Box just because you like doing that. It's unnecessary and, even if the rabbit feels no pain, we would think that is wrong. But killing the rabbit when turning on the X-Box is just as unnecessary as eating meat. They both are done purely because people feel their wants give them free reign to do as they please.

I think you're missing the point here. Killing a rabbit is unnecessary for switching on the X-Box, but killing a cow is pretty much a prerequisite to eating meat. The least we could do is not be dicks to the cow about it.

Why is that plant's life worth less than the cow? It's also a living thing? Sure, it doesn't have a brain per se, or able to walk around... But it's still alive, none the less...

It's about weighing up what is necessary and what minimises harm. While we can live perfectly fine without meat we can not live without eating plants, so it is necessary to have some sort of food. Plants do not suffer the same way as a cow, so substituting plants for cows minimises harm. Also, we have to eat.

Plants may have reactions that resemble fear or pain depending how you define them but that is misleading. The criteria that we are worried about is not whether or not they can react to a stimulus but whether they have conciousness that allows them subjective awareness and experiences. There is no reason to believe that is the case for plants.

No they don't suffer the same way, but who's to say plants don't suffer at all? It is not misleading to have a simple definition of pain, it opens the door to ideas we are uncomfortable with. The criterion of consciousness is purely arbitrary, and has no bearing on the capacity to suffer.

I think this has a lot to do with coming to terms with the existence of the food web, and that whether we like it or not, we are a part of it. There is no reason to feel remorse for that. Prey animals (like cows) in the wild typically come to the ends of their lives by predation, and are unlikely to live to an old age. Isn't it a better fate to be humanely put down than hunted and ripped to pieces alive?

[Randall]

The planet was put together with the cliche'd "food chain" in mind.

If I am to feel bad about eating that steak, then what of my cat that eats the birds?

[Adagio]

The planet was put together with the cliche'd "food chain" in mind.

If I am to feel bad about eating that steak, then what of my cat that eats the birds?

Agreed...

There's nothing wrong with killing and eating cows... Many people's livelihoods depend on this!

The issue here has been lost...
The WAY WE DO IT THATS the "immoral" bit... How we go about slaughtering cows inhumanely...

@Rakuen... I disagree... We depend on protein... It's a necessary part of our diet...
Substituting it for other sources is (in my opinion) unhealthy...

Killing a bunny every time I want to play a game? How is that the same as using something as sustenance?

[Randall]

The method is always the key factor...
I have had family who have owned farms, and I have spent time on these farms. There was no suffering.. there was always consideration to doing things humanely. There is a whole science behind that I believe, and industry best practices, etc.. to make it as painless and humane as possible.

[Rakuen Growlithe]

I think you're missing the point here. Killing a rabbit is unnecessary for switching on the X-Box, but killing a cow is pretty much a prerequisite to eating meat. The least we could do is not be dicks to the cow about it.

That will depend on your goal. Is the point to switch on the X-Box or to switch on the X-Box while killing a rabbit? Is your goal to eat food that meets your nutritional requirements or to eat meat? The first one will ask questions such as "how do I meet my requirements in the least harmful way possible?" The second asks questions like "How can I justify doing what I want to do?"

No they don't suffer the same way, but who's to say plants don't suffer at all? It is not misleading to have a simple definition of pain, it opens the door to ideas we are uncomfortable with. The criterion of consciousness is purely arbitrary, and has no bearing on the capacity to suffer.

In the absence of any evidence of their suffering we can say they don't suffer. Conciousness is not arbitrary. Perhaps you would like to volunteer for surgery both while concious and while unconscious and see if it has any bearing on your capacity to suffer?

I think this has a lot to do with coming to terms with the existence of the food web, and that whether we like it or not, we are a part of it.

No! That has absolutely nothing to do with it. An appeal to nature is not a way to find out moral truths, the "can't derive ought from is." There are many natural things that are bad and which we oppose, such as diseases, death in childhood, rape and murder. And many unnatural things which are good and we love, such as the internet, books and the furry fandom.

If I am to feel bad about eating that steak, then what of my cat that eats the birds?

Presumably you are more intelligent and have a greater understanding of moral issues than your cat. Also completely different nutritional requirements.

@Rakuen... I disagree... We depend on protein... It's a necessary part of our diet...
Substituting it for other sources is (in my opinion) unhealthy...

The funny thing is that your opinion doesn't matter. The reality is that the evidence shows that using non-meat sources is not unhealthy and in fact looks like it is more healthy.