EnviroLink Forum

C'mon Cobie ...... Not even these animal are well kept in the end. And you offer, as an example, an authentic French place in the Perigord area of France. Imagine how the industry is taking shape in other countries. They are not even well kept in French countries.

How do you know? Have you been there? I have. Janet Whatshername visited a mom and pop farmlet as far as I could see. They were, it seems, happy if not proud to show off what they had and did, and may have hoped the lady would understand. Instead, they got someone who has never been near a real adult duck, or on a small farm, as far as I could tell. A small farm with ducks, not geese; and small farms look after their animals because each one of them is live money. As is the case for big farms. Is feeding through a tube cruel? Given how a bird's esophagus can expand, not necessarily. Is it abnormal for a bird to "get stuffed"? As many a farmer who grows crops will tell you, a flock of geese especially in migration time will completely strip your land, fattening themselves for winter and for the long flights. OK, you do not like animals being used for human food. But unless you have conclusive evidence that the animals here are treated cruelly (in which case, you should notify the police), put up or shut up. Concern yourself with real animal cruelty, of which there is, unfortunately, all too much. As for foie gras, it is fabulous. And so organic....

I know luv. I know. We DO need to avail ourselves to animals for our survival, and sometimes to our tastes. I know about that.

And we are exploring a shift in paradigms. We are exploring a shift in the way. Just as our ancestors dared to question slavery because at the time of slavery, everyone thought it was necessary. Most could not imagine a life without slaves.

I know luv. I know. We DO need to avail ourselves to animals for our survival, and sometimes to our tastes. I know about that.

And we are exploring a shift in paradigms. We are exploring a shift in the way. Just as our ancestors dared to question slavery because at the time of slavery, everyone thought it was necessary. Most could not imagine a life without slaves.

And therefore, it could never be fabulous.
How do you know? Have you been there?

Have you ...

I have. Janet Whatshername visited a mom and pop farmlet as far as I could see. They were, it seems, happy if not proud to show off what they had and did, and may have hoped the lady would understand. Instead, they got someone who has never been near a real adult duck, or on a small farm, as far as I could tell. A small farm with ducks, not geese; and small farms look after their animals because each one of them is live money.
As is the case for big farms. Is feeding through a tube cruel?

Of course it is!

Given how a bird's esophagus can expand, not necessarily. Is it abnormal for a bird to "get stuffed"?

They know when it is okay, Not you.

As many a farmer who grows crops will tell you, a flock of geese especially in migration time will completely strip your land, fattening themselves for winter and for the long flights. OK, you do not like animals being used for human food. But unless you have conclusive evidence that the animals here are treated cruelly (in which case, you should notify the police), put up or shut up. Concern yourself with real animal cruelty, of which there is, unfortunately, all too much. As for foie gras, it is fabulous. And so organic....

Notify the police ... put up or shut up .... Is that your response to geese who are force fed in order to appease taste buds ...

I am so tired of hearing the "we used to think having slaves was OK, but now we no longer do, therefore... " and the associated claim of a "paradigm shift" blah blah- in this case , relating to getting foie gras in the traditional way. Or not being vegan. Slaves, last time I looked, were/are human beings, and therefore, slavery was/is a human right issue, and can never be an animal rights one, let alone be an argument about how we treat animals.

The question about foie gras is not: I don't like the look of it, and you should not eat/use animal products but: Can it be shown it is cruel? You have not advanced any arguments except that birds do not normally get their food through a tube. Sure, but is it cruel to feed them that way? If you can show proof of animal cruelty, then to go to the authorities is a moral and ethical obligation. You know perfectly well what I meant, I am sure - but since you cannot win the argument since only your opinion makes feeding birds "cruel", you try to weasel out of it. Why do you think even Californian authorities have overturned the ban? Do you really think they would have done so if large scale cruelty to animals were involved? You started it, the onus is on you to show I, foie gras producers, and Californian authorities are wrong. I do not have to show I am right, really (Logic 101 again).

And I repeat, foie gras is delicious...

Janet Whatshername? Her name is 'Janet Street Porter' and she had a first hand experience of the mom and pop farm. Her reaction to it was authentic, because it was hers. Her name is Janet Street Porter.



You cannot even admit her name let alone decide whether or not she has ever seen a "real duck". One wonders how far you can tell.



"Animals are live money for big farms too" .... as you go on to say ....





As you will not admit you know the real name of the reporter, you might also not admit that feeding any animal through a tube is also cruel. Of course it is.



It is not abnormal for a bird to "get stuffed", but it is abnormal for humans to satisfy the yen for tasty, delicious, gourmet food to satisfy the sensation of taste, by forcefully sticking tubes down their throats. While it is natural for birds to gorge before their long trips, it is not natural for them to be confined for long periods and then be tube force fed without having to take their flight.



Do the lovely, home-spun, artisan small farmers ONLY feed the geese during their migration times, or when they need the product in order to sustain their operations? The geese must then be slaughtered in order to feed the capitalistically informed public of yet another "product" in the market that they think they need, but is actually completely unnecessary. It is natural for the geese to gorge themselves before long migratory journeys, but not natural for us to contain them and do unto them what they would naturally do. The would NEVER feed themselves in a cage and with a tube. And we do not need their fattened livers, no matter how good they taste.



Actually, that is not true. I see the necessity of animals used for food quite regularly & I have no problem with it when it is reality. Climate and geography often dictate the necessity of eating animals. But cultural habit needs to be questioned, especially when there is such a habitual dependence and unconscious belief that eating meat it is a 'must'. Or that eating fois gras is a 'must'. This is a cultural belief that is firmly rooted in the idea of need, but has much more to do with the advertisers. The advertisers create the illusion of need. And some, such as yourself, will argue that it is delicious.



Coby, I have read the expression "put up or shut up" from you before and it reminds me of what men sometimes say to women. I don't like the expression & I don't really know what you mean by it. It's an aggressive statement. Also, it is silly to say we should "notify the police" about animals cruelty when the police themselves are lunching on fois gras or burgers from McDonalds, let alone shooting people in the streets for no apparent reason other than their skin color. We are not looking to the police for edification about this issue. Of course, you are not seriously saying that we must look to police officers for our cultural and societal problems are you? They are just guys looking for employment
.
And what is "conclusive evidence"? Are you looking for ways that society is cruel in general? What could be more conclusive than the way animals are treated by our society? Do you need a cop to on it out?



I have no idea what you mean by "real" animal cruelty when you cannot even see the inherent cruelty of both the artisan farms nor the bigger farms where they care so much for their "product" ....

Just one example, and even "authentically French"

http://www.animalequality.net/node/659

Put up or shut up may sound offensive to you but it is no more than putting succinctly that unless you can prove your allegations, stop writing about them as if they were proven true.

Do you have evidence that feeding ducks or geese by tube is cruel? Or do you just think so? Note that that is the core question, not whether humans should eat pate foie. If it is cruel, animals should not be subjected to it. Period. And it should not be difficult to legislate against it if so.

Human beings are tube fed in many a hospital; not only are their esophagi far less elastic than birds', humans have strong gag reflexes as well. But is it painful? No. Does it hurt having a tube in? No. Is it therefore likely a bird's much more accommodating esophagus could not accommodate a tube inserted only at the top? I think I can make a guess...

Is is stressful? Well, birds do not swallow rubber hoses; but they do swallow big eels... if they link the tube and tasty food, as they will, is it still stressful? I can guess. What are your guesses? Stressed animals do not thrive, and may die or become sick. Would any farmer risk that in their animals, animals that are their livelihood? Especially on a small family farm as shown in your video? What do you think? Can you prove what you think? Otherwise... but let me not repeat myself.

And as for Ms Street Porter, her whole behaviour on the video shows she rarely if ever has visited a small farm.. well, has she?

humans have strong gag reflexes as well. But is it painful? No. Does it hurt having a tube in? No. Is it therefore likely ahttp://www.envirolink.org/forum/postin ... &p=195742# bird's much more accommodating esophagus could not accommodate a tube inserted only at the top? I think I can make a guess...

But humans are not confined to cages and we do not have tubes stuck down our esphogahses. It is quite cruel to treat animals this way all for a product that we do not need anyway..

Is is stressful? Well, birds do not swallow rubber hoses; but they do swallow big eels... if they link the tube and tasty food, as they will, is it still stressful?

If they ingest the rubber hose, then yes, it must be stressful for them. They arern't ingesting food. And they know it.

Many see keeping pets as cruel and many do not. Many see working dogs or horses as cruel, but others do not. Some see how the animals come to attention when it is time to work as if they were in anticipation of enjoyment. Some see raising chickens in a large enclosure as cruel, other do not. Some see not having chickens protected form predators and potential illness as cruel. Everyone sees things differently and just because some hold a belief does not make it factual for the majority of the people.

Some think women should be seen and not heard, some see them as property, some see them as servants, but not all do that just like every other moral issue.

_________________
With friends like Guido, you will not have enemies for long.

“Intellect is invisible to the man who has none”
Arthur Schopenhauer

"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."
Albert Einstein

Sigh... here I am, arguing against your claims of cruelty by comparing tubing with human practices, and relating it to well-known biological bird facts, and you immediately shift the goalposts: humans are not in cages. How often does one have to argue that being in a cage, or in captivity, for an animal born into it, need not necessarily be cruel? Birds have no insight into being caged; humans have, because of their mental abilities, an insight into what it means to be caged. But we are *not* talking about caging, but about tube feeding. So please, can we stick to the point? I did have a look at that link you sent recently, which contains two very grainy black and white photographs of birds in cages, birds that in the top one look more like chickens... in other words, a classical example of its kind. No reference to what, when and where, but some AR organization still use pictures like that to pretend there is a problem where one has not existed for many decades, if there ever was one in the first place. You can a better picture, and in colour, with a cheap mobile phone! So why nota better one, actually showing the point you want to make? And just having writing accompanying said useless pictures that foie gras production is cruel does not make it so - neither does being French, or being you.

[quote="Cobie"]Put up or shut up may sound offensive to you but it is no more than putting succinctly that unless you can prove your allegations, stop writing about them as if they were proven true

"Put up or shut up" is a statement that is quite inexplicable. I would never say that to you. I am listening.

"Really you have evidence that feeding ducks or geese by tube is cruel? Or do you just think so?"

How does one conflate evidence and cruelty and tubes? How could one possibly manage that? is it not okay to rely on the evidence? If you were a duck, would you volunteer?

"Note that that is the core question, not whether humans should eat pate foie. If it is cruel, animals should not be subjected to it. Period. And it should not be difficult to legislate against it if so".

Cobie. How is it, in your mind, that because it is "legal" it is also "moral"? Have you no moral compass of your own? If you were that duck, would you volunteer to be caged? Is imprisonment not cruel, even for non-human species? Would you welcome a tube down your throat? Do not do to others .... all animals are sentient beings.

Human beings are tube fed in many a hospital; not only are their esophagi far less elastic than birds', humans have strong gag reflexes as well. But is it painful? No. Does it hurt having a tube in? No. Is it therefore likely a bird's much more accommodating esophagus could not accommodate a tube inserted only at the top? I think I can make a guess...

And when you put them in cages for the purpose of fois gras ..... especially when we have no need? Why?

When humans are fed in a hospitable situation, they are being fed for the purpose of life. Having a tube fed to them means caring and they know this. How do you reconcile this attentive care to the mal treatment of birds, who are not so lovingly cared for? It is like comparing a spa treatment to an auschwitz kind of treatment. One is being cared for and treated while the other is being exploited for no other reason than the tradition of yummy. I will put forward that it is not okay to house animals in this way just because they taste good.

You would put forward that it was not okay to house animals in ANY way just because they taste good. You have a conclusion from which you work back rather than looking at the information and drawing a conclusion. It is really that simple when you look at the evidence.

_________________
With friends like Guido, you will not have enemies for long.

“Intellect is invisible to the man who has none”
Arthur Schopenhauer

"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."
Albert Einstein