7 ms·

I once saw a group of ranchers butcher a cow in the plains of Paraguay. They had an area of the farm where the cows were slaughtered -- the area was a small pat

I once saw a group of ranchers butcher a cow in the plains of Paraguay. They had an area of the farm where the cows were slaughtered -- the area was a small patch of grass under a large tree. As the ranchers brought a cow near the tree and tied its tether to it, the cow started shaking and making strange sounds -- sounds you wouldn't expect from a cow. She knew she was about to be slaughtered. The shaking got worse and the cow eventually defecated and peed itself. As the rancher pulled out his knife, the cow started aggressively pulling on the tether and started howling. The cow knew it was going to die. That brief moment left quite an impression on me.

blackeyeblitzar 2y ago
That is just so sad, and makes me rethink my eating habits. Or at least who I purchase from. I do remember that people like this have studied animal behavior more closely and used it to make the design of slaughterhouses more humane. But interestingly she also observed that animals have the ability to hide pain: https://www.cpr.org/show-segment/temple-grandin-on-why-slaughterhouses-have-gotten-so-good/ https://www.cpr.org/show-segment/temple-grandin-on-why-slaug...
- begueradj 2y ago
  Yes, actually all animals know to hide their pain. Why ? Because they have to. When a predator sees a group of possible preys, the first thing he does is to observe them to detect the weakest one. Hence the weakest animal has to hide his pain/sickness and pretend to be ok. In this context, when female mammals give birth, they automatically eat their placenta and lick the blood on the floor: to leave almost no traces that would give clues to predators that birth has taken place (to protect their offspring, in other words)
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  - catlikesshrimp 2y ago
    Placenta is also very nutritive.
    - fnordpiglet 2y ago
      Likewise when many animals vomit they eat the vomit again, especially predators where the food is hard won and highly dense in nutrition. Finding food is really difficult in nature and something as high quality as a placenta is not reasonable to waste.
    - throwup238 2y ago
      Reminds me of the The Katering Show. They did an episode on making placenta lasagna, called plasagna: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-LhgJjicMz8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-LhgJjicMz8
- fnordpiglet 2y ago
  I don’t know how you’re going to change your buying habits to avoid this. The story described actually sounds humane. There is no awesome way to kill an animal for slaughter. The entire point also was the animals knew when you’re taken to this place you don’t come back and die. This involves an intelligence and knowledge of mortality and the past, which in an animal farm that slaughters their own cattle, is unavoidable. My experience is even at farms that transport for slaughter the animals know this is where past animals have disappeared to and the anxiety can be very high among animals. I always find it surprising people think animals aren’t aware of mortality, their impending death, etc. Spending time with animals it becomes clear, at least in my experiences, that the primary difference between their experience and ours is the ability to communicate it and that life writ large has a very similar existential experience.
  - andyjohnson0 2y ago
    I agree with a lot of what you wrote. And I too find it surprising how people often downplay animal sentience and awareness, and capacity for suffering. There is ample evidence of these in primates, cetaceans, birds such as corvids, and domestic animals like dogs and cats. But killing a large animal, like a cow, by hand using a knife is hardly "humane" or "unavoidable". The slaughtered animal would experience severe pain and awareness of its situation before it eventually loses consciousness.
    - fnordpiglet 2y ago
      If done right the time of awareness is brief when slaughtering with a knife. A bolt gun is better for sure but not guaranteed by any measure. The truth is it is more about the person than the tool - their experience, thoughtfulness, and compassion. But the suffering doesn’t start with the fatal injury and suffering is often less about pain and more about the torment of what’s about to happen. That’s true for people and for animals. IMO that’s the point
    - netsharc 2y ago
      I wonder how animals understand death, because to understand death they'd need to understand consciousness and the lack of it, and I feel like that's human level complex thinking. Animals have logic, of course, IF predator is coming at me THEN I have to run for my life BECAUSE ... because they run on instinct? Because their herd does the same? Because they've learnt about what death is? Mountain goats have probably slipped and fallen off cliffs, but I doubt they have fear of heights. Interestingly they probably are able to calculate whether a jump is doable or not, but do they doubt themselves? I guess cats and dogs show doubt..
- stbenjam 2y ago
  > Or at least who I purchase from. There is no ethical slaughter.
moomoo11 2y ago
[flagged]
- Ferret7446 2y ago
  Plants feel distress too, we are just happily ignorant of it; not too different from people who are happily ignorant of the fact that meat doesn't just appear in the grocery store. While I cannot encourage it, ceasing to live and reproduce is the best way to reduce the suffering you cause to other life forms to sustain yourself, and reduce your resource burden on the planet, and if that's what you value, not doing so would be defined as hypocritical.
  - Timon3 2y ago
    Although I disagree with the GP, neither of your arguments are fully thought through. > Plants feel distress too, we are just happily ignorant of it; not too different from people who are happily ignorant of the fact that meat doesn't just appear in the grocery store. Yet meat introduces an additional, unnecessary layer of suffering while also increasing the amount of plant suffering (you need far more than 1kg of feed to produce 1kg of meat). If everyone ate only plants, the amount of plant suffering would decrease. Unless you go to the absolute and define any amount of suffering as fully equal, this argument is not a defense for meat production. > While I cannot encourage it, ceasing to live and reproduce is the best way to reduce the suffering you cause to other life forms to sustain yourself, and reduce your resource burden on the planet, and if that's what you value, not doing so would be defined as hypocritical. Again, you're taking the absolutist route that reducing the suffering of animals isn't worth anything unless it fully eliminates suffering. Incremental improvements are worth it, because they still reduce suffering. This is the "you want to improve society, yet you take part in it, how curious" argument in disguise - and it's pretty disgusting to apply it here.
jashper 2y ago
Oh man, that’s horrible, that definitely makes me rethink my eating habits as well, oy This is why we need cellular agriculture
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
CalRobert 2y ago
I lived across from a farm in Ireland for a few years, and sometimes I heard the most horrible wailing coming from the barn across the road. It was about 180 meters away, so quite loud. I asked a mutual neighbour the next day "were they slaughtering the cows last night?" And they just said "oh, no, they just took the calves away and the cows get sad". As a parent myself I feel worse about dairy than beef. Weirdly I think I'd be more comfortable eating a carnivore than an herbivore. That feels more "fair", in a sense. But it's a horrendously inefficient way to get calories.
tdeck 2y ago
Oddly this is one of the things factory farms try to do better. From what I have heard, because they don't have time to deal with spooked cattle when killing so many of them, the whole killing area is designed so they don't know what's coming until the last moment.
- ceph_ 2y ago
  Factory farms do not make animals suffer less, quite the opposite
  - mystified5016 2y ago
    No, factory farms are indifferent to suffering. The suffering or wellbeing of the animals means absolutely nothing either way unless it affects efficiency or profit. Factory farms optimize efficiency and profit, not suffering. That the most efficient and profitable methods tend to cause greater suffering is merely a coincidence. There is no malice, just indifference.
    - ceph_ 2y ago
      Looks like you're making up a strawman to ague with. But either way, I hope no one is ever indifferent to the suffering of you or your family. Sounds like hell.
  - Dylan16807 2y ago
    "Factory farm" is the wrong term to use here. This is specifically about the slaughterhouse, which might have almost no connection with the farm.

blackeyeblitzar 2y ago

That is just so sad, and makes me rethink my eating habits. Or at least who I purchase from. I do remember that people like this have studied animal behavior more closely and used it to make the design of slaughterhouses more humane. But interestingly she also observed that animals have the ability to hide pain: https://www.cpr.org/show-segment/temple-grandin-on-why-slaughterhouses-have-gotten-so-good/ https://www.cpr.org/show-segment/temple-grandin-on-why-slaug...

begueradj 2y ago
Yes, actually all animals know to hide their pain. Why ? Because they have to. When a predator sees a group of possible preys, the first thing he does is to observe them to detect the weakest one. Hence the weakest animal has to hide his pain/sickness and pretend to be ok. In this context, when female mammals give birth, they automatically eat their placenta and lick the blood on the floor: to leave almost no traces that would give clues to predators that birth has taken place (to protect their offspring, in other words)
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- catlikesshrimp 2y ago
  Placenta is also very nutritive.
  - fnordpiglet 2y ago
    Likewise when many animals vomit they eat the vomit again, especially predators where the food is hard won and highly dense in nutrition. Finding food is really difficult in nature and something as high quality as a placenta is not reasonable to waste.
  - throwup238 2y ago
    Reminds me of the The Katering Show. They did an episode on making placenta lasagna, called plasagna: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-LhgJjicMz8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-LhgJjicMz8
fnordpiglet 2y ago
I don’t know how you’re going to change your buying habits to avoid this. The story described actually sounds humane. There is no awesome way to kill an animal for slaughter. The entire point also was the animals knew when you’re taken to this place you don’t come back and die. This involves an intelligence and knowledge of mortality and the past, which in an animal farm that slaughters their own cattle, is unavoidable. My experience is even at farms that transport for slaughter the animals know this is where past animals have disappeared to and the anxiety can be very high among animals. I always find it surprising people think animals aren’t aware of mortality, their impending death, etc. Spending time with animals it becomes clear, at least in my experiences, that the primary difference between their experience and ours is the ability to communicate it and that life writ large has a very similar existential experience.
- andyjohnson0 2y ago
  I agree with a lot of what you wrote. And I too find it surprising how people often downplay animal sentience and awareness, and capacity for suffering. There is ample evidence of these in primates, cetaceans, birds such as corvids, and domestic animals like dogs and cats. But killing a large animal, like a cow, by hand using a knife is hardly "humane" or "unavoidable". The slaughtered animal would experience severe pain and awareness of its situation before it eventually loses consciousness.
  - fnordpiglet 2y ago
    If done right the time of awareness is brief when slaughtering with a knife. A bolt gun is better for sure but not guaranteed by any measure. The truth is it is more about the person than the tool - their experience, thoughtfulness, and compassion. But the suffering doesn’t start with the fatal injury and suffering is often less about pain and more about the torment of what’s about to happen. That’s true for people and for animals. IMO that’s the point
  - netsharc 2y ago
    I wonder how animals understand death, because to understand death they'd need to understand consciousness and the lack of it, and I feel like that's human level complex thinking. Animals have logic, of course, IF predator is coming at me THEN I have to run for my life BECAUSE ... because they run on instinct? Because their herd does the same? Because they've learnt about what death is? Mountain goats have probably slipped and fallen off cliffs, but I doubt they have fear of heights. Interestingly they probably are able to calculate whether a jump is doable or not, but do they doubt themselves? I guess cats and dogs show doubt..
stbenjam 2y ago
> Or at least who I purchase from. There is no ethical slaughter.

moomoo11 2y ago

[flagged]

Ferret7446 2y ago
Plants feel distress too, we are just happily ignorant of it; not too different from people who are happily ignorant of the fact that meat doesn't just appear in the grocery store. While I cannot encourage it, ceasing to live and reproduce is the best way to reduce the suffering you cause to other life forms to sustain yourself, and reduce your resource burden on the planet, and if that's what you value, not doing so would be defined as hypocritical.
- Timon3 2y ago
  Although I disagree with the GP, neither of your arguments are fully thought through. > Plants feel distress too, we are just happily ignorant of it; not too different from people who are happily ignorant of the fact that meat doesn't just appear in the grocery store. Yet meat introduces an additional, unnecessary layer of suffering while also increasing the amount of plant suffering (you need far more than 1kg of feed to produce 1kg of meat). If everyone ate only plants, the amount of plant suffering would decrease. Unless you go to the absolute and define any amount of suffering as fully equal, this argument is not a defense for meat production. > While I cannot encourage it, ceasing to live and reproduce is the best way to reduce the suffering you cause to other life forms to sustain yourself, and reduce your resource burden on the planet, and if that's what you value, not doing so would be defined as hypocritical. Again, you're taking the absolutist route that reducing the suffering of animals isn't worth anything unless it fully eliminates suffering. Incremental improvements are worth it, because they still reduce suffering. This is the "you want to improve society, yet you take part in it, how curious" argument in disguise - and it's pretty disgusting to apply it here.

jashper 2y ago

Oh man, that’s horrible, that definitely makes me rethink my eating habits as well, oy This is why we need cellular agriculture

deleted 2y ago
[deleted]

CalRobert 2y ago

I lived across from a farm in Ireland for a few years, and sometimes I heard the most horrible wailing coming from the barn across the road. It was about 180 meters away, so quite loud. I asked a mutual neighbour the next day "were they slaughtering the cows last night?" And they just said "oh, no, they just took the calves away and the cows get sad". As a parent myself I feel worse about dairy than beef. Weirdly I think I'd be more comfortable eating a carnivore than an herbivore. That feels more "fair", in a sense. But it's a horrendously inefficient way to get calories.

tdeck 2y ago

Oddly this is one of the things factory farms try to do better. From what I have heard, because they don't have time to deal with spooked cattle when killing so many of them, the whole killing area is designed so they don't know what's coming until the last moment.

ceph_ 2y ago
Factory farms do not make animals suffer less, quite the opposite
- mystified5016 2y ago
  No, factory farms are indifferent to suffering. The suffering or wellbeing of the animals means absolutely nothing either way unless it affects efficiency or profit. Factory farms optimize efficiency and profit, not suffering. That the most efficient and profitable methods tend to cause greater suffering is merely a coincidence. There is no malice, just indifference.
  - ceph_ 2y ago
    Looks like you're making up a strawman to ague with. But either way, I hope no one is ever indifferent to the suffering of you or your family. Sounds like hell.
- Dylan16807 2y ago
  "Factory farm" is the wrong term to use here. This is specifically about the slaughterhouse, which might have almost no connection with the farm.