The Catalans take a step forward

Bullfighting ban on the way:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-10784611

and not before time, IMNSHO.

 

I went to an international technical conference in Madrid a few years back
as guests of a major multi-national electronics manufacturer. The conference
proper finished at lunch on all 3 days and 'social events' were laid on in
the afternoons. Some were fascinating, some not. One however was a
bullfight. This was tipped as a major must-see event by the Spanish members
of the host company. Apparently ticket prices were £LOADS.
Interestingly this caused quite a split, with only the Spansih and some of
the South American delegates, about 30 people in all, actually going to the
bull fight. Nearly all of the rest of us, the other 180+ delegates and
staff, said thanks but no thanks (or words to that effect) and buggered off
to do some industrial strength tapas bar hopping, all paid for by the much
embarrassed hosts.

JB

 

Grimly Curmudgeon escribió:

I hate the "sport". Good friend of mine is a big time supporter of it. He
goes on about what a lovely life the bull has up until that fateful day when
they drug it and stick pins in it and push it into a bullring, all dizzy and
confused to be tortured to death. He's right, they do have a nice life
roaming around a field shagging like rabbits. Great life, then go out with a
blaze of glory (Joe Jackson). He also says that they have the choice - they
don't have to fight. Aforementioned pre-drugging of course, means that the
poor creature isn't exactly fit to make that decision. He says "there
wouldn't be toros bravos if it wasn't for bullfighting". Correct - and so
fucking what.

They stopped showing the bullfighting in at least one pub here due to my
cheering the bull whenever it stuck one on the dandy tosser. People got a
bit upset. But bless 'em - it's part of their culture. Along with throwing
donkies off cliffs and hanging dogs from trees.

I quite like the manolas though...

 

Hehe - I can imagine. Did any of them get the point though?

 

I prefer this version:

http://www.the-languedoc-page.com/tourism/languedoc-camarguaise.htm

The bull is unharmed, but the bloke stands a good chance of gaining a
new arsehole...

 

AONTL, I can't stand it either. I even object to it being shown on TV when
it's on. My view doesn't go down well with the in-laws though.

 

I don't eat meat. There are numerous reasons that I don't need to get
into here, but I wonder how many of you meateaters who decry
bullfighting also object to the meat industry and the products you buy
in a butcher shop. The bulls who go into a ring are treated at least
as humanely as the cattle slaughtered in an abattoir. It seems more
than a bit hypocritical to quibble about how an animal is killed if
you end up eating it anyway.

Last month I went to a bullfight in Seville. It was an eye-opening
experience. For years, I thought bullfighting was disgusting. Then I
met Gerardo, a Mexican friend who spent 7 years in a bullfighting
school. I have a new appreciation for the "sport" now. Part of that
comes from watching a bullfight in Sumatra years ago. In Sumatra,
bulls fight bulls, not men. Farmers bring their work animals to a
local sports field and stake them out away from each other. People
make bets, wagering on their favorite animal. Eventually, 2 bulls are
led by their nose rings to the middle of the field. People crowd
around close. The farmers bring the bulls nose to nose, then nature
takes over. They each fight for dominance, locking horns and pushing
their weight around. Fights rarely last more than 30 seconds before
one bull realizes he's not as strong as the other and he turns tail
and runs away, scattering the crowd. Of course, the big difference
there is the animals are too valuable to kill and eat, but the display
of "bull-headedness" is startling. It is part of what makes a bull a
bull, and it was just as obvious when the bulls charged into the ring
in Seville.

 

<coughs>

http://www.irekisource.com/haizegoa/index.php/HACERSE_UNA_MANOLA

 

There's a difference between killing cattle for meat and killing bulls for
pleasure.

There is a lot of skill in being a bullfighter without a doubt but it's the
torturing of the animal that displeases most people, IWHT. In Portual or France
where they don't kill the bulls, there is an equal amount of skills applied
to the "sport".

IIRC, bulls that "win" are used as stud animals.

I heard a horrendous fact about bull fights in Madrid some time ago. They go
through thousands of the beasts every year. I wish I could remember the actual
number, but it was an appaling figure.

 

Your eating habits are up to you, but this lie devalues your argument.

 

"Ivory enema"

Cheers,

Nick

 

It's a fairly typical view of a veggie, though, that ill treatment of
meat animals is endemic. Loada bull, of course.

 

I once worked on a chicken ranch. We started with chicks that weighed
mere ounces. They lived in raised cages with wire flooring. They ate
pellets and drank a liquid concoction. Nothing in the long list of
ingredients for the pellets or the liquid comes close to what you'd
call food, yet the animals grew to several pounds in weight. The
chickens we sent to market were plump and ready to eat, but were mere
caricatures of wild chickens. I have no first hand experience with the
beef industry, but I'd bet it's not too different.

As for the "pleasure" bit, I see a connection to the long history of
how we get our food. I think it's important to know and come to grips
with what we eat. Before we domesticated animals, man had to do what
matadors do to kill beef. What many people think is torture (the
picadors and banderillos,) are really just to weaken the animal and
get it to lower its head so it is possible to kill it. I'm not fond of
the picadores who are mostly out of any danger when they work, but if
the back muscles aren't weakened, you can't reach the spinal cord with
a sword. In abattoirs, cattle are given an electric shock, then their
throats are cut. If man insists on eating cattle, I don't see much
wrong with a ceremonial ritual that shows how he got there.

Six bulls every Sunday in the corrida. It's a pittance compared to
abattoirs.

 

What is untrue about it?

 

The meaning conveyed by the juxtaposition of the words contained in the
sentence.[1]

[1]don't get obtuse with me sonny.

 

That last sentence is bollocks.

I'm a meat eater. I know how a lot of UK-produced meat is produced,
from farm to table as they say, as supervising it was part of my job
for half my life.
I see no problem in killing an animal 'for pleasure' if it goes to be
used in the same way as a farmed-to-be-eaten animal and is killed in
the same swift, humane way. I have problems with those who torture
animals, subjecting them to periods of pain and/or fear before finally
killing them.

Historically, I wouldn't have thought that a sword would come into it.
Deadfall traps, spears, perhaps arrows, driving cattle off cliffs, that
sort of thing. No nancing around, that's for sure.

Cattle are not given electric shocks in my experience. They are taken
from a lairage area (not neccessarily for humane reasons, but that
'relaxed' meat is much better than taut, stressed meat) into the
abbatoir. There the 'humane killer' (a captive bolt pistol) is
deployed, shooting a solid bolt into the front of the skull. The beast
is instantly rendered unconscious in every case and usually killed. To
ensure no life remains, the 'pithing stick' is deployed, being thrust
in through the hole made by the captive bolt and agitated - this breaks
up the brain and ensures that death has occured: this is very quickly
done. Only then is the dead animal attached to the lift by its hind
feet and raised up so that the jugular can be cut.

Poultry is stunned by means of electric shock, then the feet are bound
and the bird is hoisted up onto the line and it immediately passes
through the killing point where small rotating knives cut the jugular
and carotid. Death follows very quickly.

I would say that you are confused or have been misinformed.

It is a pittance because you would never fulfil demand for meat with
six beasts a week.

 

That's not how most chicken is raised in the UK these days.

It's very different - in that beef cattle largely live outside and feed
on grass.

As Pip says - bolt gun, mash the brain, slit the throat. Although I'm
fairly sure the site I visited skipped the mashing bit.

It takes a brave man to do the throat slitting bit, as the (brain) dead
cattle don't half kick when you hoist them.

I'm going to see the chickens being 'done' in a couple of weeks.

 

I think all the reaction to that sentence is more emotional than
rational. What it boils down to is 6 pricks in the minutes before
death.

One thing is certain, those bulls _never_ feel fear.

There is more than one way to skin a cat, and to kill beef or
chickens. You know (or should know,) the method you used is not
universal. Some jurisdictions mandate an electrical stun for cattle,
others forbid it. (Speaking of torture and electrics, is the use of
electric prods as prevalent in the UK as it is elsewhere?)
Consciousness is an arbitrary term, and if you have to scramble its
brains to make sure it's dead, I'm even more convinced the difference
in treatment between an abattoir and a bullring is a quibble.

 

You are fucked in the head, son.

 

More modern poultry slaughterers use a tank of inert gas. The chook is
lowered into it, and conks out very quickly.