4 ms·

I lived near a pig farm in the UK for a couple of years in the 1990s. Seen some shit that turned me into a vegetarian ever since. Animal welfare is a fucking j

by gw98 4y ago

I lived near a pig farm in the UK for a couple of years in the 1990s. Seen some shit that turned me into a vegetarian ever since. Animal welfare is a fucking joke. It is literally only rolled out for the inspectors. The folk who work on the farms and the abattoirs end up dehumanised as well leading to stuff like this: https://www.bristolpost.co.uk/news/bristol-news/former-slaughterhouse-workers-killed-butchered-7801760 https://www.bristolpost.co.uk/news/bristol-news/former-slaug... . I don't judge people for eating meat. That's your decision. But I can't support this industry.

technoooooost 4y ago
There are some small farms doing things right, their meat is 3-4x the price of normal meat, but worth it.
- xashor 4y ago
  Not saying that you actually believe this, but because of mentioning "small farms" I want to highlight the fallacy of believing that in general smaller farms are better for animal welfare: https://www.fondation-droit-animal.org/proceedings-aw/is-animal-welfare-better-on-smaller-farms/ https://www.fondation-droit-animal.org/proceedings-aw/is-ani... The abuse is often just different.
- steve_adams_86 4y ago
  Similar to the comment above, I won’t judge people for eating meat (I did for 35 years). I wonder though, why is it that much more important to offer an animal slightly better welfare so we can murder it? Welfare is an arbitrary notion. Ultimately we raise these animals and ostensibly care about them, but our goal is only to profit off of their bodies and kill them as children, long before they would die naturally. I suppose all I’m saying is that it isn’t good welfare no matter how you slice it. These animals are slaves that get murdered in horrifying conditions 99.9% of the time. I tried to feel okay about it for a long time, but eventually came to realize that the meat I spent 2-4x on for better welfare was only marginally different from the stuff I found came from reprehensible conditions. I also discovered a lot of small farms which have better welfare on the farm still send their animals places where they’re exposed to completely abysmal suffering and death in their final hours. The depth of how bad these systems get is beyond what I ever imagined. Anyway, even as someone who used to shoot animals and spear fish, this whole journey made me realize: I don’t think there’s such a thing as ethical meat, and virtually no one is “doing it right”, as much as I was willing to pay for that and I wanted to believe in it. I often wonder why I came to that conclusion and others don’t. I almost feel like a crazy person some days, but I take real comfort in not supporting these systems.
  - slothtrop 4y ago
    > I wonder though, why is it that much more important to offer an animal slightly better welfare so we can murder it? The general view appears to be that gratuitous suffering is bad, but that animal life is not sacred. From the secular perspective, neither is human life for that matter (see: pro-choice), but we have a social contract with each other as persons, and not beings with low or nil consciousness. Indigenous tribes would also tell you that for as much as they respect animals, their death is no object - apropos, would you tell them they should join us and relocate to where heavily fertilized land is? > These animals are slaves that get murdered in horrifying conditions 99.9% of the time. Life in seclusion with plentiful food and no predators in itself is less stressful than surviving in the wild, without the important confounding factor that is conditions in large conventional farms. There's no reason to assume the small farm one knows and buys meat from is "horrifying". That's not denying that they can exist, but you can't extrapolate that most farmers are in it to be cruel - this is a conclusion in search of evidence. Have you ever known farmers? I see a lot of anecdotes and adjectives in these discussions, and not enough evidence. > I don't think there’s such a thing as ethical meat Because you object to any and all killing of animals for meat. You made this clear when you opened with "murder".
    - steve_adams_86 4y ago
      I grew up farming, I’ve hunted, and for the last 6 years or so I was spear fishing quite often. I’ve stopped for the last year or two. I don’t object to any and all killing of animals for meat. It seems that many people genuinely do it out of necessity, and that is arguably going to have to be okay in perpetuity. I suppose that’s why a common tenet of veganism is to practice it only insofar as it is practicable. I draw the line at my sickness or death, because fundamentally I’m an animal just like those I’d otherwise seek to protect. I suppose I believe life is sacred, period, and that humans aren’t innately special fauna on earth. I don’t see a need for a cow to die for my enjoyment, just as I wouldn’t kill someone’s pet or another human. You’re right though, I opened with murder because indeed I see it as unnecessary, cruel, and beyond reason. Not all cases are like this though, and I don’t think all meat eating needs to end. I should add too that I don’t believe many (if any, it would be a vanishingly small proportion) are in farming to be cruel. I’m confident most farmers think they’re doing a good thing and taking good care of their livestock. I simply believe they are wrong, though. Using an animal’s body for profit strikes me as a fundamentally unkind thing to do to a sentient being.
Elinvynia 4y ago
Is there something you would judge people for? If yes, what is the difference between that and this?
- steve_adams_86 4y ago
  Not who you asked but I think in this context a lot of non meat eaters mean it more like “I won’t condemn you for it”, but I suppose judgement is inevitable. It doesn’t have to prevent discourse, and the reality is that most people who don’t eat meat did at some point as well. There needs to be an element of humility or things fall apart. I suppose vegans and vegetarians are judged likewise, and that’s okay as well. It just doesn’t need to be condemnation or critical in negative ways. I think most importantly because we can’t have conversations about these things otherwise. This post is already flagged, but if we’re constructive and curious, there can be excellent, meaningful conversations about these matters.
- gw98 4y ago
  It's a good question. I find that outward judgement for something I feel strongly about is likely detrimental to the cause. Every militant opinion is energy wasted. I prefer to cook stuff people like and create bridges, not resentment in this case.
slothtrop 4y ago
I find it frustrating that it's difficult to get real stats in North America. You either hear from animals rights groups who will always tell you everything is bad, or farmers Op-eds who say nothing is, but not an impartial source with real data to form a clear picture. Which means any decision to avoid the prospect of bad treatment of animals is a guess erring on the side of caution, and people proselytize on the strength of conjecture. To say nothing of the fact that people will not agree on what poor treatment of animals means; for activists, it's absolute by virtue of captivity, close quarters, and death. Consumers of animal products obviously don't agree with that metric and don't care. Surely greater transparency and regulation could be achievable. No reason consumers still have to be in the dark and have to make decisions based on vagaries, anecdotes, cherry-picking. I expect lobbying groups have opposed this but this will blow up in their faces.
ploppyploppy 4y ago
What is your proof that horrific crime was caused by abattoir work?
- gw98 4y ago
  It contributed to the outcome for sure. I suggest you read this: https://www.bbc.com/news/stories-50986683.amp https://www.bbc.com/news/stories-50986683.amp Particularly the linked study: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4841092/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4841092/

by gw98 4y ago

technoooooost 4y ago

There are some small farms doing things right, their meat is 3-4x the price of normal meat, but worth it.

xashor 4y ago
Not saying that you actually believe this, but because of mentioning "small farms" I want to highlight the fallacy of believing that in general smaller farms are better for animal welfare: https://www.fondation-droit-animal.org/proceedings-aw/is-animal-welfare-better-on-smaller-farms/ https://www.fondation-droit-animal.org/proceedings-aw/is-ani... The abuse is often just different.
steve_adams_86 4y ago
Similar to the comment above, I won’t judge people for eating meat (I did for 35 years). I wonder though, why is it that much more important to offer an animal slightly better welfare so we can murder it? Welfare is an arbitrary notion. Ultimately we raise these animals and ostensibly care about them, but our goal is only to profit off of their bodies and kill them as children, long before they would die naturally. I suppose all I’m saying is that it isn’t good welfare no matter how you slice it. These animals are slaves that get murdered in horrifying conditions 99.9% of the time. I tried to feel okay about it for a long time, but eventually came to realize that the meat I spent 2-4x on for better welfare was only marginally different from the stuff I found came from reprehensible conditions. I also discovered a lot of small farms which have better welfare on the farm still send their animals places where they’re exposed to completely abysmal suffering and death in their final hours. The depth of how bad these systems get is beyond what I ever imagined. Anyway, even as someone who used to shoot animals and spear fish, this whole journey made me realize: I don’t think there’s such a thing as ethical meat, and virtually no one is “doing it right”, as much as I was willing to pay for that and I wanted to believe in it. I often wonder why I came to that conclusion and others don’t. I almost feel like a crazy person some days, but I take real comfort in not supporting these systems.
- slothtrop 4y ago
  > I wonder though, why is it that much more important to offer an animal slightly better welfare so we can murder it? The general view appears to be that gratuitous suffering is bad, but that animal life is not sacred. From the secular perspective, neither is human life for that matter (see: pro-choice), but we have a social contract with each other as persons, and not beings with low or nil consciousness. Indigenous tribes would also tell you that for as much as they respect animals, their death is no object - apropos, would you tell them they should join us and relocate to where heavily fertilized land is? > These animals are slaves that get murdered in horrifying conditions 99.9% of the time. Life in seclusion with plentiful food and no predators in itself is less stressful than surviving in the wild, without the important confounding factor that is conditions in large conventional farms. There's no reason to assume the small farm one knows and buys meat from is "horrifying". That's not denying that they can exist, but you can't extrapolate that most farmers are in it to be cruel - this is a conclusion in search of evidence. Have you ever known farmers? I see a lot of anecdotes and adjectives in these discussions, and not enough evidence. > I don't think there’s such a thing as ethical meat Because you object to any and all killing of animals for meat. You made this clear when you opened with "murder".
  - steve_adams_86 4y ago
    I grew up farming, I’ve hunted, and for the last 6 years or so I was spear fishing quite often. I’ve stopped for the last year or two. I don’t object to any and all killing of animals for meat. It seems that many people genuinely do it out of necessity, and that is arguably going to have to be okay in perpetuity. I suppose that’s why a common tenet of veganism is to practice it only insofar as it is practicable. I draw the line at my sickness or death, because fundamentally I’m an animal just like those I’d otherwise seek to protect. I suppose I believe life is sacred, period, and that humans aren’t innately special fauna on earth. I don’t see a need for a cow to die for my enjoyment, just as I wouldn’t kill someone’s pet or another human. You’re right though, I opened with murder because indeed I see it as unnecessary, cruel, and beyond reason. Not all cases are like this though, and I don’t think all meat eating needs to end. I should add too that I don’t believe many (if any, it would be a vanishingly small proportion) are in farming to be cruel. I’m confident most farmers think they’re doing a good thing and taking good care of their livestock. I simply believe they are wrong, though. Using an animal’s body for profit strikes me as a fundamentally unkind thing to do to a sentient being.

Elinvynia 4y ago

Is there something you would judge people for? If yes, what is the difference between that and this?

steve_adams_86 4y ago
Not who you asked but I think in this context a lot of non meat eaters mean it more like “I won’t condemn you for it”, but I suppose judgement is inevitable. It doesn’t have to prevent discourse, and the reality is that most people who don’t eat meat did at some point as well. There needs to be an element of humility or things fall apart. I suppose vegans and vegetarians are judged likewise, and that’s okay as well. It just doesn’t need to be condemnation or critical in negative ways. I think most importantly because we can’t have conversations about these things otherwise. This post is already flagged, but if we’re constructive and curious, there can be excellent, meaningful conversations about these matters.
gw98 4y ago
It's a good question. I find that outward judgement for something I feel strongly about is likely detrimental to the cause. Every militant opinion is energy wasted. I prefer to cook stuff people like and create bridges, not resentment in this case.

slothtrop 4y ago

I find it frustrating that it's difficult to get real stats in North America. You either hear from animals rights groups who will always tell you everything is bad, or farmers Op-eds who say nothing is, but not an impartial source with real data to form a clear picture. Which means any decision to avoid the prospect of bad treatment of animals is a guess erring on the side of caution, and people proselytize on the strength of conjecture. To say nothing of the fact that people will not agree on what poor treatment of animals means; for activists, it's absolute by virtue of captivity, close quarters, and death. Consumers of animal products obviously don't agree with that metric and don't care. Surely greater transparency and regulation could be achievable. No reason consumers still have to be in the dark and have to make decisions based on vagaries, anecdotes, cherry-picking. I expect lobbying groups have opposed this but this will blow up in their faces.

ploppyploppy 4y ago

What is your proof that horrific crime was caused by abattoir work?

gw98 4y ago
It contributed to the outcome for sure. I suggest you read this: https://www.bbc.com/news/stories-50986683.amp https://www.bbc.com/news/stories-50986683.amp Particularly the linked study: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4841092/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4841092/