|Topic Review (Newest First)|
|09-07-2017 09:02 AM|
|09-07-2017 06:28 AM|
|cow whisperer veggie||
Cows don't have husbands
Dear oh dear...you really ought to read about cows. As much as they do like to be petted, brushed and treated lovingly, they do not have same emotions about 'luuurv' as humans. A cow goes in season few weeks after giving birth. This means that she is ready and willing to mate to become pregnant again. If she does not get pregnant, the same hormonal cycle brings her back to season some weeks later, again and again until she gets pregnant. She will be willing only for few fours and this is important to a farmer to know, as any other time she will not get pregnant. The farmer needs to watch this time to take the cow to a bull of have her artificially inseminated. A cow mates with any bull, young bullock or and old veteran, as her hormones and instincts guide her to fulfil er natural purpose, to breed.She does not think or plan to have babies, and an idea of an bull-boyfriend is an alien thought to her too. If the bull lives with the herd, he mates will all his ladies, once a year, one after another when they are ready but does not pay attention to his offspring. All cows are single mothers while their 'husbands' have fun with other ladies in the field. In the wild, cows and other hoofed animals like antelopes, buffaloes and so on, have a calf every year. The calf stays with his mother for about a year till a new calf is born. If the older calf is female, she will join the herd but if it is a bull calf, he will be chased away from the herd and will have to fend for himself. Usually young bulls find other bulls and join together to form a wandering teenage herd, or maybe a 'gang'. In both cases year old calves will be pushed away from their mother quite brutally and will feel vulnerable. They cannot understand why there is a new calf and why their mum only has eyes for her. So here you have it. If a cow does not get pregnant she will moo and make a lot of noise, jump over fences to escape to find any bull to mate. Nothing she can do about this, it is her nature. And when in modern agriculture cows are artificially inseminated, they also are in season in the right time and will willingly accept the procedure. However, the cow is a big beast and some are nervous, especially young heifers and they have to be restrained for their own and others' safety. Most cows are not bothered really but stand quietly, some are more anxious, but that does not mean that they are forcibly 'raped' like Peta likes to inform. There is point in 'raping' a cow,(sounds disgusting) as she would not even get pregnant. Cows are often restrained for normal everyday reasons as vets inspections,TB testing and hoof care. They are used to the restrainer but naturally do not like it.
|06-03-2016 02:53 PM|
|@rno||Are you a psychow?|
|06-03-2016 09:04 AM|
|ifer lyf||I'm pretty sure cows can't have romantic feelings though, and cattle don't couple for life, or even at all. They can be friends with the ones that they have mated with I guess, but that's as far as it can go, and the males don't take care of the calves.|
|04-28-2016 08:38 AM|
|04-26-2016 03:59 PM|
Animals must enjoy intimate relationships like humans do. Some animals stay together for life.
Making cows artificially pregnant ensures an endless supply of milk, for the farmer. That is translated into profit$. He has no emotional connection to the animals.
If you ask the cow, she would prefer a nice dinner, some dancing, and a candlelight evening. Not the farmer standing back there.......
|04-26-2016 02:03 AM|
Again, I understand that all forms of animal exploitation are problematic. But to me these breeding practices do not rise anywhere near the level of outrage connoted by words like bestiality or rape. If rape is the word for what they do to cows, then rape is what they do to pandas and show pugs or a nearly extinct white rhino. These other animals don't have their young ripped away from them right after birth, but the insemination process itself is the same for them as for the cows, with as little "consent" given by the animal.
|04-26-2016 01:06 AM|
|Pirate Huntress||It also seems like a type of bestiality, doesn't it? If people were inserting things into other animals, they would not be very approval of that. I guess because it's a cow and they want dairy from her, it's okay in their eyes.|
|04-25-2016 12:42 PM|
|ifer lyf||Well, while I don't think something is immoral if it doesn't harm, I do get you guy's point of view. I know that what comes after insemination (like having a baby so big that you have to get it out by C-section, or having your child taken away from you) And I guess the cow would rather be mounted by a bull, but I don't think the process of insemination is a problem for them, though they suffer in many other ways. But, now that I've tought more about it, I agree that it is a disrecpectful and wrong thing to do, just like if it was done on a corpse, a sleeping person, etc.|
|04-25-2016 12:15 PM|
What non-human animals tend to have, rather than what humans would deem consent, is estrus. In estrus she acts like she wants to get busy. This very much includes cows. A cow in the pasture will be mounted by steers and other cows (out of pity, pretty much) if she's in estrus. I see this behavior all the time in the pasture that borders my yard. A cow is far more cooperative in the insemination process than if she weren't in estrus. Some ranchers will place rub-off stickers on the backs (toward the rear) of their cows. When the sticker designs have been rubbed off they know she's getting mounted in the pasture and that's how they know she has come into season. If insemination of a cow is like rape, it's like rape committed on someone who is sexually aroused. Which doesn't happen so much with humans. I'm not saying any of this to defend dairy or cattle ranch practices; I don't eat meat or dairy, OK? But to explain why I don't think the concept of sexual consent translates so well between human and nonhuman species.
|04-25-2016 11:13 AM|
|Pirate Huntress||I would say so, because they didn't consent to it. If it's the truth, we shouldn't worry if omnis think we're crazy.|
|04-25-2016 10:59 AM|
Using rape as a metaphor for inseminating cows is one thing, there are enough points of similarity that it's easy to see where someone is coming from if they say "in some ways insemination is like rape." That's like saying "in some ways death is like the end of a long train ride." In other words, not really equating the two things being compared. To say that insemination is really the same thing as rape is equating, and that's where the argument loses the listener almost every time. Rape is the heinous transgression it is because of actual and/or potential damage to the human victim: pregnancy, disease, bruising and tearing, traumatic scarring that might be linked to trust, shame, and sexual impairment. Then there's stigma, and the after-effects of any threats, choking, punching, kicking, stabbing or pistol-whipping, as well as the rape itself. In the aggregate, those things are why human society takes rape as seriously as it does.
What makes rape a crime, besides the penetration without consent, is guilty intent on the part of the rapist. A rapist knows he's not supposed to be raping people. If someone sexually assaults a cow or a goat, commits an act of bestiality, that would be much closer to "the same thing as rape," and unlike an inseminator, the cow or goat assaulter acts in secret (unless there's more than one person involved, and anyone there is bound to secrecy), and knows he'll be outed as a deviant and punished as a sex offender if he's ever caught. None of that applies to insemination, or to manually stimulating a bull to make it ejaculate. They mean the animals no harm, they act openly, there's no particular pathology in the individual involved, it's just one more way society condones exploiting animals: more intrusive than some exploitations, less so than others. To object to exploitation is to be against insemination of animals, but calling the inseminator a rapist is like calling the slaughterhouse worker a murderer. You might think they are, but it never helps to say you think they are. That line of dialog just brings you to the divide that makes each person look unreasonable to the person standing on the other side of it.
|04-25-2016 09:26 AM|
|vegetaliano||All the above is true and I agree, but as Kiwibird says, perhaps the "insemination is rape" tag is not improving Omni perceptions of vegans. Would "systematic animal womb abuse" make it more meaningful for omnis? Probably not, but the rape issue certainly gets vegans arguing among themselves. On the Vegeweb forum in France there is an extended thread on this subject which sets the Christian vegans against the atheist vegans (the latter are the majority on the forum..) and this aspect of animal suffering is high among our persistent concerns on the forum. I'd give you a flavour of discussions if it did not mean translating a whole thread!|
|04-25-2016 06:18 AM|
I think that using the term rape does us no favors in the eyes of omni's who already think vegans are "crazy"., but I do believe that the artificial insemination of cows is rape. Just because they are used to it and don't appear to protest it doesn't make them willing participants nor does it imply consent. Victims of prolonged sexual torture often reach a point they no longer "protest", but that doesn't mean they consent either. I also strongly disagree that it does no harm- it does a lot of harm.
If someone took a female human against her will (maybe even raised her from birth for it), locked her in a tiny cell in horrendous living conditions with inadequate food and medical care, then repeatedly artificially inseminated her without consent for the explicit purpose of stealing her babies immediately after birth to torture, kill and eat then take her and chain her up to a breastmilk pump so they could drink her milk, then artificially inseminated her again and again and again until she was to weak and riddle with infection to live before slaughtering her for food, people would be rioting in the streets calling for the death penalty for the sick and twisted perpetrator. Why does a female cow have any less right to choose her mate and raise any resulting calf than a human female? And why is something that if it happened to a human female it would be considered a criminal offense of the upmost evil (including sexual torture and rape) be completely acceptable to do to a female cow? It's not. It just is not. And there is no other definition besides rape for the part where the female cow is penetrated and inseminated without her consent.
|04-25-2016 12:32 AM|
|@rno||I think a cow would like to make love or be loved. And also to find her own "soulmate". Not a "Schwarzenegger" who would make her calves heavier and heavier. (In which case the birth have to be a cesarean.)|
|04-24-2016 09:19 AM|
the definition of rape is sexual penetration without consent, regardless of any percieved harm.
I don't like the use of rape applied to breeding animals for food, even though I feel it's a perfectly correct use of the word. Rape is a prosecutable offense in cases of people in comas, mentally impaired enough to not understand it's significance and with the use of drugs.
Animals sex lives don't involve emotions as we understand them, and I dislike judging one species against another qualities. You only need to stop at the words "without consent" to see how wrong breeding, enslaving, and every other exploitation of animals is to realize it should not happen.
|04-24-2016 08:58 AM|
Is Insemination Really Like Rape?
I mean, it does fits within the definition as the animal's consent is not really important to farmers, but is there any psychological damage done to them that way? I've seen some videos of cows being inseminated and, while I found it to be really gross, it didn't seem like the cow was protesting in any way. I'm going to learn about the way animals express discomfort and try find videos where they are not only seen from behind to make sure, but most if not all animals do not see sexuality the same way humans do, so it doesn't seem likely that insemination is one of the way farmed animals suffer, except for turkeys wich have to be turned upside down to be inseminated. The reason I think it's important to know that is that, if insemination does not in itself harm animals, I think we shouldn't really talk about rape in our advocacy...