Schoolkids vote to send lamb to slaughter

[JuanBolio]

Do you think they care?

I don't think they know. A deer in the wild knows to flee humans whenever it sees them. The livestock never suspect.

I think, Juan, that you have a slightly skewed view of how livestock are handled on farms. On the good farms - and most farms are good - they are treated humanely and they get what they need.

I understand this. I regard the "good" farms far better than the bad ones. The bad ones just sicken me.

they aren't treated like pets and they don't bond with their keepers. At least cattle, hogs and chickens don't - I don't know much about sheep since they aren't raised in any significant quantity here in Indiana. They recognize humans as the Givers of Food, but this concept you seem have of the sweet little pig who follows trustingly around after his owners just isn't accurate. At least it's not how it is on any farm I've ever been on, and I've been on a lot. I guess they don't think of humans as the Ones Who Are Going to Load Me On a Truck and Sell Me To a Someone Who's Going to Turn Me into Ham, either, but all I can say is that they don't appear to think of them as...well, much of anything, really, aside from the Giver of Food angle. So long as they aren't hungry, they mostly just ignore humans, really. I mean, we just aren't that interesting to them.

I understand this as well. I didn't mean to imply that the animals often if ever formed real emotional bonds with their handlers. Pigs in particular will go viciously feral after only a year in the wild. I was just saying that they don't view us as predators, and they should. I see masquerading as a provider to them only to let the axe fall later on as a dirty trick... though an effective one.

But you're right, of course, that there's no chance of a long life. They are destined for the table.

Yep.

 

[Deckerd]

Mmmmm roast pork with crackling.

 

[cultcross]

How do you know they didn't go to the abbatoir? You're just assuming they didn't. The concept of a 'meat farm' is alien to Brits. Most farmers usually do a bit of everything but unlike mainland Europe, most livestock is sent out to graze in the summer and only kept in in the worst of the winter. Except sheep who stay out all year.

You're right, I am assuming that they didn't see the lamb slaughtered - but I think its a pretty good assumption.

As for meat farms vs. free ranged livestock, the net effect is the same. Yes, its better that the animals have room to wander and the illusion of freedom, but its still just an illusion. They still have zero chance of escaping their predator.

Only one animal gives the slightest shit about 'freedom'. And as we're not cannibals, it's not something the agriculture industry needs to worry about.

 

[SeerSGB]

If you're going to eat it, you should know how it gets to your table, IMHO.

Why?

I know my steak comes from animal that goes moo and lamb from an animal that goes baa but I prefer know to personally know the animal it comes from.

I have the same problem with dog on the menu. Being some-one who's family has had several dogs over the years I just can't handle dog meat on the menu.

Cause there's to many people in the world that think "Meat comes from the grocery store" and that's the end of the thought process, that's why.

I was in AP-Agriculture Science with a girl that thought like that. And she wasn't being a smart-ass, she didn't get or want to get that meat came for an animal. Part of our mid-term classes was the study of meat prep practices by farmers. Since we couldn't get permission to go to a meat-packers, the teacher video-taped his father slaughtering hogs for the season.

Now I grew up around farms. My neighbor down the road used to slaughter and render his hogs right on the side of the road. It was a community event almost; cause people knew it meant fresh pork, bacon, ham, etc, and the man-- nicest person you ever met-- would always cut down a few extra hogs to give meat to people in the valley. So for me the video was nothing, the same for a lot of us "country boys".

The girl in my class: She freaked out and refused to believe that was where meat really came from. I'm not shitting you, she thought meat just "Came" from the grocery store. We couldn't even tease her about it cause it was just so pathetic and sad that she had never been taught some as basic as animals sometimes die for us [humans] to live.

For me it's a matter of respecting that you have to take a life to support a life. And in that we need to have our eyes open to the reality so that we can (1) make an education choice (2) understand that we need to make the process as humane a possible, cause we are killing a living, breathing, emotional, creature that can feel fear and pain.

 

[Deckerd]

Well I think it was a worthwhile exercise for those primary kids especially because there was some controversy amongst them.

We've killed spare cockerels in the past for the pot but it's difficult for the vast majority of people to do the raising killing cooking thing since they don't live in a suitable environment. Also it's illegal to kill traditional livestock if you want to sell it commercially - it must be done at a licensed abbatoir. The big difference, and it is a big difference, is anything classed as game, which includes deer. Deer breeders can select which animals they are culling from the herd and just shoot them with a rifle. It's much more humane. The rest of the herd barely notice.

 

[JuanBolio]

Only one animal gives the slightest shit about 'freedom'. And as we're not cannibals, it's not something the agriculture industry needs to worry about.

An animal born into captivity knows nothing else. An animal born into the wild and placed in captivity tends to seek escape back to the wild.

As for what the agriculture industry needs to worry about... as with any other industry, their main concern is their bottom line.

 

[john titor]

Its amusing to see how many people are saying how sensible these kids are. It kinda reminds me of when people would commend people for espousing or conforming to whatever ideological structures were in place which involved the suffering of some group of people or other. Don't ask for specific examples, there are too many and I'm too lazy. Society ie the majority of people like to reassure themselves that they are right and totally justified even when they don't scrutinize the validity of their beliefs. Personally I don't care about whether its right or wrong to eat meat, it tastes nice. But animals have sentience and so I'm dissapointed that having gotten themselves acquainted with that sentience they chose to kill it anyway. It wasn' an enlightened decision, just one which pleases wider society and its primitive ideals.

 

[john titor]

I'm of two minds. Yes, slaughtering farm animals for meat is necessary. However it is far from noble. Hunting and bringing down prey in the wild is one thing - raising animals for their meat is a barely necessary evil. Also, one does not expect this evil to be forced on children, who had to make the choice after raising this animal and doubtlessly growing attached to it.

Furthermore, it had no consequence for them. They were not forced to watch the death of the lamb - the spilled blood that their decision resulted in. They should have been made to watch, so that they can understand that actions have very real consequences.

Nonsense. I'm sorry, JuanBolio, to put it so bluntly, but that's how it seems to me. Of course slaughtering animals for meat isn't "noble." Neither is being a plumber, but both things are necessary. To me, the choice here isn't between "nobility" and "evil" - it's between reality and a petting zoo.

People should have to deal with the consequences of the evil they create - but since I don't consider eating meat "a barely necessary evil," clearly my attitude differs rather sharply from yours. Do we all have to watch manure being turned into fertilizer so that we understand where our carrots come from?

I do think those of us who eat meat do eventually need to get a fairly heavy dose of realism, but not necessarily right away. We don't want children to have to cope with the realities of war...or cancer treatment...or death of loved ones right away. They will need to do those things sooner or later, but reality doesn't have to be presented at its harshest starting in early childhood. I'd say this exercise is a fine beginning.

And by the way...clearly they didn't become attached to the lamb. If they had, they wouldn't have voted the way they did. Apparently they treated it as livestock, and you don't get attached to your future lambchops, bacon or rib roast. That's how farmers do their jobs.

Its not necessary, people can survive as vegans. Ergo non necessaire.

 

[JustKate]

Its amusing to see how many people are saying how sensible these kids are. It kinda reminds me of when people would commend people for espousing or conforming to whatever ideological structures were in place which involved the suffering of some group of people or other. Don't ask for specific examples, there are too many and I'm too lazy. Society ie the majority of people like to reassure themselves that they are right and totally justified even when they don't scrutinize the validity of their beliefs. Personally I don't care about whether its right or wrong to eat meat, it tastes nice. But animals have sentience and so I'm dissapointed that having gotten themselves acquainted with that sentience they chose to kill it anyway. It wasn' an enlightened decision, just one which pleases wider society and its primitive ideals.

But they didn't "conform to ideological structures." Nor did they do what would "please the wider society." The current ideology for most people in the Western world, and that which pleases most people, is that "Eating meat is fine, but I don't want to think about where it comes from."

And if it's OK to eat meat, it's OK to eat meat from an animal you've raised as future meat. It's what people have been doing for thousands of years. Were all of them "unenlightened"? Or did they just need high-quality, complete protein in their diets? Not to mention something that "tastes nice"?

 

[SeerSGB]

~snip~

" The current ideology for most people in the Western world, and that which pleases most people, is that "Eating meat is fine, but I don't want to think about where it comes from."

I see this a dangerous disconnect from reality that can bleed over into other arenas of life. Like politics or religion. "I don't care how it gets done, so long as I benefit from the outcome"

 

[JustKate]

^ Well, sure - I didn't say it was my ideology. I know exactly where my meat comes from. I actually buy a lot of my beef and most of my pork from a couple of farmers that I know - mostly because they're nice people and I'd rather give the money to them than to a large meat packer. But I realize not everybody has the luxury of knowing and living near farmers who can sell to you directly. And it is more expensive, too.

 

[Robert Maxwell]

~snip~

" The current ideology for most people in the Western world, and that which pleases most people, is that "Eating meat is fine, but I don't want to think about where it comes from."

I see this a dangerous disconnect from reality that can bleed over into other arenas of life. Like politics or religion. "I don't care how it gets done, so long as I benefit from the outcome"

Is there something more the average person needs to know about it, beyond "animals are raised and killed so I can eat them"?

 

[Amaris]

If you're going to eat it, you should know how it gets to your table, IMHO.

Why?

I know my steak comes from animal that goes moo and lamb from an animal that goes baa but I prefer know to personally know the animal it comes from.

I have the same problem with dog on the menu. Being some-one who's family has had several dogs over the years I just can't handle dog meat on the menu.

Cause there's to many people in the world that think "Meat comes from the grocery store" and that's the end of the thought process, that's why.

I was in AP-Agriculture Science with a girl that thought like that. And she wasn't being a smart-ass, she didn't get or want to get that meat came for an animal. Part of our mid-term classes was the study of meat prep practices by farmers. Since we couldn't get permission to go to a meat-packers, the teacher video-taped his father slaughtering hogs for the season.

Now I grew up around farms. My neighbor down the road used to slaughter and render his hogs right on the side of the road. It was a community event almost; cause people knew it meant fresh pork, bacon, ham, etc, and the man-- nicest person you ever met-- would always cut down a few extra hogs to give meat to people in the valley. So for me the video was nothing, the same for a lot of us "country boys".

The girl in my class: She freaked out and refused to believe that was where meat really came from. I'm not shitting you, she thought meat just "Came" from the grocery store. We couldn't even tease her about it cause it was just so pathetic and sad that she had never been taught some as basic as animals sometimes die for us [humans] to live.

For me it's a matter of respecting that you have to take a life to support a life. And in that we need to have our eyes open to the reality so that we can (1) make an education choice (2) understand that we need to make the process as humane a possible, cause we are killing a living, breathing, emotional, creature that can feel fear and pain.

I believe the Native Americans had the right idea when it came to animals being food. They respected the animal and never took it for granted. Meat was necessary, but it wasn't something taken lightly or callously. Each person knew the sacrifice the animal was making so that they could live.

As for this whole event, I'm more unsettled about the kids naming it, befriending it, and then voting to have it slaughtered. May seem over-reactionary to many here, but that's a little unbalanced, don't you think?

J.

 

[ShamelessMcBundy]

Unbalanced how?

 

[Amaris]

Unbalanced how?

As in they had no problem naming and befriending an animal they were going to slaughter. I've been a meat cutter, so the act doesn't bother me, it's the processes leading up to it.


J.

 

[JustKate]

It doesn't bother me, but maybe I'm odd. Naming it isn't the same as making it a pet. For all we know, only one or two kids really thought of it as a pet, and perhaps they were the ones who named it. Or that might have been a teacher's or a parent's idea. The others, assuming they aren't twisted in some way, clearly thought of it as livestock that was destined for the table.

Farmers don't name their livestock - well, some might name dairy cows since they keep them for several years, but not anything destined to be meat in the near future. And most don't name their milking cows either, though they do get to know them as to disposition and whether they're good mothers or not, stuff like that.

 

[Aragorn]

There's nothing wrong with the humane killing of animals for food, obviously, but it's still kind of creepy to hear of kids that age actually voting to kill a lamb.

They then voted 13-0 to send the one dissenter to be slaughtered.

 

[john titor]

Its amusing to see how many people are saying how sensible these kids are. It kinda reminds me of when people would commend people for espousing or conforming to whatever ideological structures were in place which involved the suffering of some group of people or other. Don't ask for specific examples, there are too many and I'm too lazy. Society ie the majority of people like to reassure themselves that they are right and totally justified even when they don't scrutinize the validity of their beliefs. Personally I don't care about whether its right or wrong to eat meat, it tastes nice. But animals have sentience and so I'm dissapointed that having gotten themselves acquainted with that sentience they chose to kill it anyway. It wasn' an enlightened decision, just one which pleases wider society and its primitive ideals.

But they didn't "conform to ideological structures." Nor did they do what would "please the wider society." The current ideology for most people in the Western world, and that which pleases most people, is that "Eating meat is fine, but I don't want to think about where it comes from."

And if it's OK to eat meat, it's OK to eat meat from an animal you've raised as future meat. It's what people have been doing for thousands of years. Were all of them "unenlightened"? Or did they just need high-quality, complete protein in their diets? Not to mention something that "tastes nice"?

Of course not but the indoctrinatory process was evident. And it did please wider society, you just have to look at this thread to see it, "good show" "they were very mature" etc. And when they grow they'll think the same and maybe will have their kids raise a lamb and send it off to the slaughter to see where meat comes from. Its groupthink and its a certainty that people in the past were completely unenlightened. We've only had the pretense of a democracy in existence for 300 years.

 

[JustKate]

^ On what basis, John, do you assume that the Trek BBS - more specifically, the Trek BBS reaction in one single thread, and not even a very long thread at that - is typical of the wider society?

I know for an absolute fact that my attitude isn't typical. I know far more farmers than the average member of the wider society. I in fact married a guy who grew up on a farm, and there aren't many of those around these days. So I'm definitely not typical.

 

[ShamelessMcBundy]

Unbalanced how?

As in they had no problem naming and befriending an animal they were going to slaughter. I've been a meat cutter, so the act doesn't bother me, it's the processes leading up to it.


J.

I don't find it odd at all, actually. Granted they didn't know beforehand what was going to happen, but they know enough to send it to the abattoir so yay for them knowing the process.