I'm fairly sure the butcher shop weren't the first to coin that phrase.
Sweeney Todd's defence counsel used it way back...
Facebook's billionaire boy genius, Mark Zuckerberg, is a confessed killer – and he's proud of it. "The only meat I'm eating is from animals I've killed myself," Zuckerberg told Fortune. "So far, this has been a good experience." Among Zuckerberg's victims have been a lobster, chicken, pig, and goat. The lobster met its maker …
I have to take the knife and properly clean "professionally killed" meat (especially poultry) at aleast 2-3 times out of 10. 10 out of 10 for turkeys. Same for ducks - in 50% of the cases the professional "butcher" (quotes intended) could not be bothered to properly clean the bile out of the liver so it will taste disgusting.
In any case, butchering stuff is not that difficult and the meat is fresh too. It is not rocket science and there is no point to make rocket science out of it. It also tastes better than animals that have been transported half the way across the country to be electrocuted for the supermarket.
It is human hypocrisy at its best. Shipping fish alive and having it live in front of you in the supermarket so you can tell the fishmonger "this one" is somehow inhumane while doing the same to the animals is.
However it could simple be that he cannot or does not want to eat (or freeze) a whole goat/lamd/cow.
In the UK any meet that is to be sold on to the public must be butchered by a qualified butcher. I would not be surprised if the US has very similar rules.
I would also add that his statement;
"I don't have an issue with anything people choose to eat, but I do think they should take responsibility and be thankful for what they eat rather than trying to ignore where it came from."
I the first (and possible last) time that I 100% agree with him, I have always been discusted by people who discard meat products. Probably because in their tiny little minds nothing died as they got it from Tesco.
I upvoted your post because you said "Dumb Fuck".
That should be appended to the end of the article as it seems to fit this whole Facebook/Zuckerberg anomaly. Perhaps anything related to Facebook and Zuckerberg should have it appended. Thanks your for money "Dumb Fuck", thanks for logging in "Dumb Fuck", thanks for your personal info "Dumb Fuck".
Add Facebook to your PHP strings!
$YourString .= ' "Dumb Fuck"';
Its good Zuckerberg is making jobs, employing a butcher and an "animal killer trainer" is good stuff... Don't you think so, "Dumb Fuck"!?
Like many townies, he's just late to the party.
I shoot game when in season (Pheasant, Duck etc.) & vermin all year round (rabbits).
When you skin & butcher an animal it's never pleasant & you do appreciate the work involved to achieve kitchen ready status. You also have to be aware of animal health issues so not to eat diseased meat.
Killing an animal with a knife might be done peacefully on a single animal, but if it was humane then slaughter men wouldn't use rifles for humane dispatch. A bullet to the brain is lights out instantly.
As regards eating meat, I went to a lecture by David Attenborough many years ago & he was asked his views on vegetarianism. As he stated, we have the physiology of an omnivore, we're not designed to eat just meat or just plants.
> Exactly. #
>> We're not designed.
A goat or a cow or even a pig can live off of things we cannot.
If your back garden is big enough, it's more than enough to sustain a cow. You can't say the same for yourself.
If you engage in clueless vegetarianism, you will hurt yourself.
The more humane way to kill a lobster is to first stab it between the eyes. The lobster will taste better too.
Killing mammals by cutting their throats is not a very humane way either. It is way better to shoot them in the brain. There has been significant research showing that it takes a considerable period for a mammal to die with the kosher throat cutting method.
You only have to trawl through Youtube looking for religious slaughter methods to realise that slicing a conscious animal's throat open is neither humane, peaceful or painless. Why do you think such slaughterhouses get an exemption from animal cruelty laws in the UK? I think maybe he interpreted the goat's struggling as a kind of play. "Hey, lookit all this red stuff pissing out of me!"
Still, at least he's not a hypocrite who cries at Bambi and then goes home to tuck into a nice dish of veal.
(yes I'm veggie, precisely because I won't kill the things myself)
How do you know Bags isn't a particularly talented and determined sheep? Born to wooly parents, he looked at his brothers and sisters and decided that their grass-chomping, mint-sauce-ending destinies were not for him? He may indeed be responsible for his own position at the top of the food chain.
(by the way, who says we're the top of the chain? Don't folks sometimes meet sticky ends in tiger enclosures etc?)
"He cut the throat of the goat with a knife, which is the most kind way to do it"
I rather doubt it. (Though the statement is grammatically ambiguous) If she's suggesting that bleeding to death is better than instant unconsciousness (i.e., by bolt stunner)...
Just struck me as a really stupid thing to say.
"And she knows from what, personal experience??"
Ever cut yourself and not noticed until you actually looked? People who have suffered large blood loss have reported not feeling much pain (typically here in Oz shark attack survivors). Direct visual observation is not a good indicator of sensation.
Experiments for the objectification of pain and consciousness during conventional (captive bolt stunning) and religiously mandated (“ritual cutting”) slaughter procedures for sheep and calves.
The investigations had the following results:
a) For slaughter by ritual cut:
1. After the bloodletting cut the EEG initially is the same as the EEG before the cut. There is a high probability that the loss of reaction took place within 4 – 6 seconds for sheep and within 10 seconds for calves.
2. The zero line in the EEG was recorded no later than after 13 seconds for 17 sheep and no later than 23 seconds for 7 calves.
3. Thermal pain stimuli did not cause an increase in activity.
4. After the cut the heart frequency rose for calves within 40 seconds to 240 heart actions per minute and for sheep within 40 seconds to 280 heart actions per minute.
b) For slaughter after captive bolt application:
1. After captive bolt stunning all animals displayed most severe general disturbances (waves of 1-2 Hz) in the EEG, which almost with certainty eliminates a sense of pain.
2. The zero line in the EEG was reached for 4 calves after 28 seconds.
3. For two sheep the cerebral cortex activity only stopped in one half of the brain, whilst it continued in the other in the –region (up to 3.5 Hz) until the bloodletting cut.
4. The bloodletting cut resulted for all animals in a brain activity (e and d waves).
5. Thermal pain stimuli caused an increase in activity in one sheep.
6. The heart frequency rose directly after stunning to values above 300 actions per minute.
That Summary Report reminds me of the Microsoft "Get the facts" "report".
I am sure you have some report too on how kosher is more tasty, healthy and religious.
Kosher is big business and a sort of monopoly too. Will not disappear soon.
It is funny how easy old and no choice stuff with absolutely no religious value is bolted onto religion.
I suppose stoning was not OK as it requires too much labor.
If you ask a kosher believer how he would "choose" himself to die he will call
you anti this and that, and a damned nazi.
It is also funny how some of this religious ballast is accepted or not accepted.
Luckily circumcision of girls is backed bye a very week lobby or we would have to read about
all the advantages of that too, and feel bad if we do not agree.
But fyi, there are people required to eat kosher/halal food that have looked into modernized methods, such as stunning followed by throat cutting - as opposed to desperately trying to justify the status quo. However, their various religious leaders generally weigh in to say "nope, not 'proper' enough"
As a person who no longer eats meat, I wish more people would behave like him. Yeah, bet you did not expect that.
I believe everyone should have to kill a least a bit of what meat they eat. That's why I stopped eating meat, as I thought it was hypercritical, since I would not be able to kill any of the meat I was eating. I think people would have to kill an animal every so often (once a year maybe) to earn the right to eat those animals.
Those nice packets of meat in the supermarket came from somewhere and if you cannot stomach being confronted with where it came from, might I direct you to the meat substitute section in the supermarket.
One of the reasons I gave it up. I knew it came from a "factory" and when I started looking into how it ends up nicely packaged on the supermarket shelves, to excuse the pun, I couldn't stomach it anymore. The other reason was to control my weight. I am 6ft tall and I had reached 24 stone in weight and I was desperate to shift it. As soon as I got off my, literally, fat arse and started exercising I wanted another way to shift the weight, so I stopped eating fatty meat. I found I was eating shitty, supermarket meat because of what it was soaked in, BBQ, breadcrumbs, etc,. I know good quality meat has a very nice taste and it very good for you, but the mass produced, factory farmed shit that sells in shops is just that, utter crap.
After 5 years not eating eat or anything with meat byproducts in it ( gelatine, etc ) , can't say I miss it and am I down to a more healthy 17st and still falling. I love the smell of cooked bacon though, and sausages and steaks on a BBQ almost tempt me back, almost but not quite. Despite being a brick outsized bloke, riduculous as it sounds, I still can't stand to eat anything with a fluffy face I'm afraid.
My Missus and I are veggies but our kids aren't we let them eat what they like, they have to make their own choices when they're ready to make them. Unlike most people, veggie or carnie, I am not forcing my choices on anyone, not even my own kids, I made a choice myself, for myself but I respect everyone for the choices they make, one way or the other.
(See, not all veggies are palid, drawn waifs forcing their choice on everyone! )
While I understand the reasoning and think it's reasonable, I personally don't care.
However, from an animal welfare perspective, surely someone properly trained would be able to do this quicker and with less suffering? Let's face it, the same 'guilt'-reduction exercise could be achieved with Zuck standing next to said expert...?
Do people have to be involved in killing animals to eat them? Not so sure. But I agree that people should certainly have an appreciation of how that nice steak (let alone that not so nice burger) starts the journey from pasture to plate.
I don't plan on giving up meat eating soon, I like it too much, but as someone who used to live next to a farm I think that actually having real proper contact with the animals we use in society is a good idea.
that you should not be a be able to eat meat if you do not have the stomach to deal with where it comes from.
So should you have to kill everything you eat a la Zukkerburg, no that would be unworkable today. But I do think that people who want to eat meat should at least have to kill an animal every so often. Bit like taking a driving test. Every couple of years go to an abattoir (so the thing you kill would not have to suffer more than normal, by your lack of experience) and do your 'meat certification'.
I also think PETA and other animal rights groups should be behind this idea, as I think that there are a lot of people out there eating meat who would not have the stomach to kill anything, so the ranks of veggies would increase as a by product, though we would have a new phenomenon of the 'grudging veggies'.
It all comes down to can you look the nice fluffy lamb in that face and takes it's life, if you can I have no problems with you, enjoy your lamb and mint source. If you can't, like me, I have a big problem with as a person who cannot look the animal in the face, but are quite happy to eat it's flesh afterwards, that's cowardly in the extreme.
> It all comes down to can you look the nice fluffy lamb in that face and takes it's life,
Not sure about Mary's lamb but I have no problem with poultry or rabbits. I see ducks and rabbit and I think "dinner" not "pet". If the meat yield on the yard rabbits weren't so small, I might be inclined to have one of them for dinner.
Yes, having the experience is good, but *only* eating things you've killed yourself is not the best path. I believe that finding, catching, killing, and dressing an animal is an experience that everyone should have - as is raising a garden from seeds, harvesting a crop, and canning/freezing/storing that crop.
However, experiences don't equate to permission. If you don't want to eat cows because they're too cute, by all means, don't eat beef. But don't expect anyone else to participate - unless you're also willing to forgo the Internet because you can't build an IPv4 packet from scratch, movies because you haven't directed them yourself, and living indoors because you've never built a house.
I don't think people should only eat meat they killed themselves, or veggies they grew from seeds. If I ate no vegetables or fruit but those that I grew myself, I'd be eating a lot of tomatoes and squash, but no cauliflower or carrots. I may have a garden, but I still eat vegetables out of season, just like I'll still have a nice steak at a restaurant without worrying how the bovine was killed.
Never said people should have to kill 'everything' they eat, but most people have not killed 'anything' they have eaten, that's what I think is very wrong. Zuckerberg's approach is an extreme one, that I would not recommend, but his hearts in the right place.
And it is a completely false equivalency to liken it to not being able to use the internet until you have built a packet or any of the other hyperbolic things you tried to equated it too. There is no one who would not be able to stomach creating a packet or directing a movie in given the opportunity, time and tools to do so, unlike silting the throat of a cute doe eyed critter.
Zuckerberg is only eating animals he's killed personally, yes? And this is, in part, response to his neighbor, who is a mindful-eating proponent. Which, in turn, boils down to "You should know what had to happen for you to eat that."
Personally, I think people should know what has to happen for a thing like the Internet to work, what has to happen for grown food to end up on your plate, etc. However, Zuckerberg is taking a good idea - know what's happened with/to your food - and turning it into a stunt. Maybe he has his reasons, but my quibble is that "not eating meat I haven't killed myself" is, frankly, creepy. Kill a deer/cow/goat/chicken/whatever once for the experience, sure, I'm good with that. Only eating meat you've killed by hand? Creepy. Going that far out there may lead to my alleged hyperbole.
Why restrict it to meet? Why not let him forage & cut all his veg too?
It's like those bleeding vegetarians, "oh cuty-wooty baby animal eyes, can't eat them" and then mindlessly kill all manner of magnificent plants. Damn green creeping bastards overgrowing my lawn all the time.
Maybe it's because I hate plants so much that it's the only thing I eat.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019