VeggieBoards banner

1 - 20 of 26 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
7 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Autistic or not, Grandin is little more than part of a complex killing machine. Despite PETA's praises, she is not working towards animal rights. She is employed by an industry that murders millions of animals in order to make their task more efficient and therefore more profitable.<br><br><br><br><a href="http://www.abolitionist-online.com/article-issue04_animals.lost.in.translation_dr.coral.hull.shtml" target="_blank">http://www.abolitionist-online.com/a...ral.hull.shtml</a><br><br><br><br>
Yet being disappointed in PETA is the same as being surprised that Burger King promotes veggie burgers. Really, it seems as if they could just as easily swap places. Both Burger King and PETA will do what they have to do, if it means gaining approval and support from a wider audience, thereby increasing the organisation's income. But it won't have anything to do with animal rights or welfare.<br><br><br><br>
---<br><br>
Your thoughts?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,227 Posts
I always thought that she was interested in better slaughterhouse design for the same reason that I am - to reduce unecessary suffering of animals that people insist have to die.<br><br>
It's very disappointing for me to hear that she's interested in it because it affects meat quality, and that she's killed a cow herself. I can acknowledge what she's done for animal welfare (albeit in the last hour of their lives) but I can't like her anymore.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
25,067 Posts
Yeah I think her contribution to relieving suffering is valuable even though her attitudes to animals sound pretty disturbing. Being "excited" about killing an animal? That's just sick. Then again, that's what hunters are about too.<br><br><br><br>
But about the new welfarism vs. abolitionism debate, the analogies don't always work for me. If I was living in WWII Germany and I had the choice of trying to convince Nazis that Jews have human rights, and/or trying to influence the design of concentration camps in order to spare the victims even some pain, it might have made sense to do the latter. Likewise, if pedophilia was a common accepted form of sexuality, supported by society and done everywhere, trying to make it less painful etc. would make some sense, despite the obvious view that pedophilia is fundamentally wrong.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,691 Posts
I think she has her place, and if she can make it so that the worst atrocities occur less often, that's something. I think to some extent she puts her message in the language of efficiency and profits because that's the only thing the people who run the slaughterhouses will listen to. If she tried to argue pure animal welfare, she'd be out the door. I don't think having people working to improve conditions from the inside is a bad thing, as long as it's not the ONLY approach.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
226 Posts
I don't know...if she cared so much about animals, she would be trying to <i>stop</i> the slaughter not improve conditions. By the way, there is never going to be an "animal-friendly" method of slaughter. Either way, it's still slaughter. She doesn't care about the animals, she only cares about efficiency. Why she is being praised by PETA is beyond me...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
16,090 Posts
<div class="quote-container"><span>Quote:</span>
<div class="quote-block">Originally Posted by <strong>proctalgia</strong> <a href="/forum/post/0"><img alt="View Post" class="inlineimg" src="/img/forum/go_quote.gif" style=""></a><br><br>
Autistic or not, Grandin is little more than part of a complex killing machine. Despite PETA's praises, she is not working towards animal rights. She is employed by an industry that murders millions of animals in order to make their task more efficient and therefore more profitable.<br><br><br><br><a href="http://www.abolitionist-online.com/article-issue04_animals.lost.in.translation_dr.coral.hull.shtml" target="_blank">http://www.abolitionist-online.com/a...ral.hull.shtml</a><br><br><br><br>
Yet being disappointed in PETA is the same as being surprised that Burger King promotes veggie burgers. Really, it seems as if they could just as easily swap places. Both Burger King and PETA will do what they have to do, if it means gaining approval and support from a wider audience, thereby increasing the organisation's income. But it won't have anything to do with animal rights or welfare.<br><br><br><br>
---<br><br>
Your thoughts?</div>
</div>
<br><br><br>
My thoughts. I think your post is abhorent and appaling. I'm disgusted by this type of thinking... that we should not do anything to help the animals. Temple is out there risking her career and credibility working to improve the life and living conditions of animals who are suffering greatly, and you come on here and call her a killing machine. :spit:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
25,067 Posts
<div class="quote-container"><span>Quote:</span>
<div class="quote-block">Originally Posted by <strong>kpickell</strong> <a href="/forum/post/0"><img alt="View Post" class="inlineimg" src="/img/forum/go_quote.gif" style=""></a><br><br>
and you come on here and call her a killing machine. :spit:</div>
</div>
<br>
I don't think the OP was calling Temple Grandin an industry of animal agriculture.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
125 Posts
Temple Grandin is not for "animal welfare" as "welfare" means "well-being" and the slaughterhouse definitely doesn't do "well-being".<br><br><br><br>
Whats funny is,this Temple Grandin,was presented on Uk television(the BBC) as an "opponent" of the "meat" industry rather than a propagandist of it; and a dedicated "animal rights activist" who "knows what cows think" and deeply cares for them.Thats the mainstream media,forever manipulative!<br><br><br><br>
By the way thats a brilliant article from "Abolitionist online," its the most truest animal rights site,there is.<br><br><br><br>
I hope PETA liquidates out of existence.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7 Posts
Discussion Starter #9
<div class="quote-container"><span>Quote:</span>
<div class="quote-block">Originally Posted by <strong>kpickell</strong> <a href="/forum/post/0"><img alt="View Post" class="inlineimg" src="/img/forum/go_quote.gif" style=""></a><br><br>
My thoughts. I think your post is abhorent and appaling. I'm disgusted by this type of thinking... that we should not do anything to help the animals. Temple is out there risking her career and credibility working to improve the life and living conditions of animals who are suffering greatly, and you come on here and call her a killing machine. :spit:</div>
</div>
<br><br><br>
Thanks.<br><br><br><br>
Those were not my words, but extracts from an autistic doctors' article. But I do share them.<br><br><br><br>
Temple Grandin's aim is not to mitigate animal suffering - if it exists, it's incidental - but to make humans feel better about murdering animals. Her function, whether she is aware of it or not, is to streamline the industrial holocaust that is the 'meat' industry.<br><br><br><br>
I did not say that we should do nothing to help animals. But I believe that we should be smashing up the murder machine, not making them ever more efficient. PETA reveals its true colours, yet again, in supporting this woman.<br><br><br><br>
I (perhaps controversially) think we should back down from this belief that it's 'civil' to give animals a peaceful death - not that Temple Grandin's sick inventions offer that. There is a fine line between being 'humane' and being 'efficient': Temple Grandin does not offer 'kinder' ways to murder animals, she offers *better* ways. Does this serve the animals or does it serve man's hypocrisy?<br><br><br><br>
Denying animals their suffering isn't about industry 'caring' for them, it is motivated by an ethic of rampant denaturing: not only are we stealing their lives, we're cheating them out of their deaths. I'm not saying that animals should suffer, but I am saying that 'neo welfarism', the effort to ameliorate 'suffering', is not much to do with respecting animals - if that were so, we'd stop eating them, which is easy enough - but is much to do with the total commodication of the animal nations. If we deny them their suffering, we are denying them everything: they're just our unfeeling, outwitted tools.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
16,090 Posts
You guys are delusional if you think the whole animal industry is going to disappear tomorrow or anytime in the near 100 year future. If you're okay with letting animals suffer horrendously until the day everyone turns vegan, then that's on you.<br><br><br><br>
This stuff pisses me off so much. So yes, I am pointing the finger. And this time I can't blame the meat eaters -- It's again the ARAs who go out of their way to sabotage anything done to help reduce suffering, because they see it as never ever being good enough to support unless it's some unreachable ideal that will never happen. You and your unattainable ideals are causing more suffering in the world, that's the bottom line.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,670 Posts
<div class="quote-container"><span>Quote:</span>
<div class="quote-block">Originally Posted by <strong>kpickell</strong> <a href="/forum/post/0"><img alt="View Post" class="inlineimg" src="/img/forum/go_quote.gif" style=""></a><br><br>
You and your unattainable ideals are causing more suffering in the world, that's the bottom line.</div>
</div>
<br><br><br><br><br>
I think that's a little bit of an exaggeration kelly.<br><br><br><br>
The suffering is caused by the industries that inflict the suffering, and the people who create demand for those industries. They, and ONLY THEY, shoulder that blame.<br><br><br><br>
I (reluctantly) accept animal welfare measures, but with the (perhaps naive) hope that they are a temporary measure. I cannot wholesale throw my support behind this sort of thing, but I can see the value of reducing the suffering if in fact the industry inflicting it/people creating the demand for it refuse to stop causing it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,660 Posts
I agree with kpickell. Suffering is bad; therefore, whatever can be done to reduce suffering is good, other things being equal. This should not be taken to mean that I agree with everything Newkirk or Grandin might do, but insofar as they are ameliorating suffering in the real world, I applaud them.<br><br><br><br>
ETA:<br><br><br><br>
It's interesting that Dr. Coral Hull, in the "abolitionist" article cited by the OP, cites as one of her sources a thread here on VeggieBoards:<br><br><br><br><a href="http://www.veggieboards.com/boards/printthread.php?t=25525" target="_blank">http://www.veggieboards.com/boards/p...ad.php?t=25525</a>
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
25,067 Posts
<div class="quote-container"><span>Quote:</span>
<div class="quote-block">Originally Posted by <strong>kpickell</strong> <a href="/forum/post/0"><img alt="View Post" class="inlineimg" src="/img/forum/go_quote.gif" style=""></a><br><br>
It's again the ARAs who go out of their way to sabotage anything done to help reduce suffering, because they see it as never ever being good enough to support unless it's some unreachable ideal that will never happen.</div>
</div>
<br>
Um, what is this "sabotage"?<br><br><br><br>
This thread shows two sides, the abolitionists and the (conservative type of) welfarists, misrepresenting each other. On the one hand, we have the view that PETA has no aims of helping non-humans and that Grandin just wants to make people feel better, and on the other hand we have accusations of "sabotage" and "causing suffering".
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
25,067 Posts
Btw, re: PETA and welfarism, I was watching a debate between Eric Schlosser and a McDonald's representative last night. And both the host of the debate and the representative argued against AW criticisms of McDonald's by quoting the thumbs up that they got from PETA after giving in on some small demand they made. To a random viewer, being told that PETA now "supports" McDonald's will do nothing but encourage him/her to shop there with a happy conscience and brush off any possible AW concerns.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,217 Posts
<div class="quote-container"><span>Quote:</span>
<div class="quote-block">Originally Posted by <strong>Joe</strong> <a href="/forum/post/0"><img alt="View Post" class="inlineimg" src="/img/forum/go_quote.gif" style=""></a><br><br><br>
It's interesting that Dr. Coral Hull, in the "abolitionist" article cited by the OP, cites as one of her sources a thread here on VeggieBoards:<br><br><br><br><a href="http://www.veggieboards.com/boards/printthread.php?t=25525" target="_blank">http://www.veggieboards.com/boards/p...ad.php?t=25525</a></div>
</div>
<br>
Hah! I'm glad you included that. My last post in that thread is pretty much what I would have typed here.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
125 Posts
Gary Francione in "Rain Without Thunder" shows clearly that the practical tactics of PETA and their side kick Temple Grandin;doesn't reduce animal suffering or mass slaughterhouse deaths but INCREASES them,because people(who maybe would of gone veggie or vegan)now feel better about themselves with "animal loving" persona.<br><br><br><br>
I would love to see these organizations fall into financial liquidation:<br><br><br><br>
PETA (gives the "meat" industry a "humane" image,gives awards to the slaughterhouse creaters,gives more awards to "pest control" companies)<br><br>
WWF (Supports and funds "hunting",is pushing for chemical vivisection on animals)<br><br>
RSPCA(employs vivisectors on their council boards,has invested in drug and chemical companies that do vivisection,and gives awards to Mcdonalds)<br><br>
IFAW(invested money in the stocks and shares of vivisection companies under the charity "Brian Davies Foundation")<br><br><br><br>
Have i left out any one,please let me know if i have
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
16,090 Posts
I think I understand what you're saying. You want animals to suffer as much as possible BECAUSE that will cause more people to go vegetarian? If animals aren't suffering, then people won't go vegetarian. Right?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
125 Posts
Did i type previously that i "want animals to suffer as much as possible"? No! You did! Your twisting what i typed you "PETA & Slaughterhouse apologist",you the one esteeming the slaughterhouse and the killers inside it; with the aura of "humaneness" you naively give them.<br><br><br><br>
Are your drunk yet on your chronic naivety? If i were to take your fake welfarist logic,i would also have to support the slaughter of cats and dogs because the Chinese government and a fake welfarist group with a "meat" industry side-kick say its "humane" and a "painless death."<br><br><br><br>
I don't support the slaughterhouse or the paid killers inside it,YOU DO,with pretext, hypocrisy of "reducing animal suffering".<br><br><br><br>
The suffering and mass industrial death continues,while you congratulate PETA and their "meat" industry side-kick,for "reducing animal suffering".
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
16,090 Posts
Hey I'm just trying to understand what you're saying, because it definetely sounds to me like you're opposed to animal welfare models that reduce suffering. You quoted some guy that says animal welfare models make people feel better about themselves since animals are not suffering as much. The alternative is that animals suffer a lot more without the animal welfare models, but people don't feel good about it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
125 Posts
There is no historical or present evidence that,what you call,"animal welfare models",help reduce animal suffering or the billions upon billions that are slaughtered Annually.It is not a question of "animal rights" vs "animal welfare"--thats the false opposition,PETA uses."Animal rights" and "animal welfare" are intrinsically related,as "rights" means "protection" and "welfare" means well-being."<br><br>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------<br><br>
Once again,it is impossible for their to be "animal welfare" in a SLAUGHTERHOUSE.<br><br><br><br>
Only in this George Orwell fictionally reality,is there "animal welfare" in the blood stained slaughterhouses across the earth.
 
1 - 20 of 26 Posts
Top