Similar to the comment above, I won’t judge people for eating meat (I did for 35 years). I wonder though, why is it that much more important to offer an animal slightly better welfare so we can murder it?
Welfare is an arbitrary notion. Ultimately we raise these animals and ostensibly care about them, but our goal is only to profit off of their bodies and kill them as children, long before they would die naturally.
I suppose all I’m saying is that it isn’t good welfare no matter how you slice it. These animals are slaves that get murdered in horrifying conditions 99.9% of the time.
I tried to feel okay about it for a long time, but eventually came to realize that the meat I spent 2-4x on for better welfare was only marginally different from the stuff I found came from reprehensible conditions.
I also discovered a lot of small farms which have better welfare on the farm still send their animals places where they’re exposed to completely abysmal suffering and death in their final hours. The depth of how bad these systems get is beyond what I ever imagined.
Anyway, even as someone who used to shoot animals and spear fish, this whole journey made me realize: I don’t think there’s such a thing as ethical meat, and virtually no one is “doing it right”, as much as I was willing to pay for that and I wanted to believe in it. I often wonder why I came to that conclusion and others don’t. I almost feel like a crazy person some days, but I take real comfort in not supporting these systems.
> a lot of small farms which have better welfare on the farm still send their animals places where they’re exposed to completely abysmal suffering
This is still my biggest issue.
In smaller and more 'primitive' human populations of ages past, swiftly killing animals that could eat plants people couldn't in order to get meat necessary to not starve seems like an obvious choice. That is a very, very far cry from what we're doing now. Maybe in the future we'll go back to something similar again for whatever reasons, but it's just not where we're at today.
> I wonder though, why is it that much more important to offer an animal slightly better welfare so we can murder it?
The general view appears to be that gratuitous suffering is bad, but that animal life is not sacred. From the secular perspective, neither is human life for that matter (see: pro-choice), but we have a social contract with each other as persons, and not beings with low or nil consciousness. Indigenous tribes would also tell you that for as much as they respect animals, their death is no object - apropos, would you tell them they should join us and relocate to where heavily fertilized land is?
> These animals are slaves that get murdered in horrifying conditions 99.9% of the time.
Life in seclusion with plentiful food and no predators in itself is less stressful than surviving in the wild, without the important confounding factor that is conditions in large conventional farms. There's no reason to assume the small farm one knows and buys meat from is "horrifying". That's not denying that they can exist, but you can't extrapolate that most farmers are in it to be cruel - this is a conclusion in search of evidence. Have you ever known farmers?
I see a lot of anecdotes and adjectives in these discussions, and not enough evidence.
> I don't think there’s such a thing as ethical meat
Because you object to any and all killing of animals for meat. You made this clear when you opened with "murder".
100% agree. Not proud of eating meat, been vegan 3+ years, but right now my selfish reason is that there are so few moments of pleasure in life, and eating meat is one of them. Hoping to get vegan again if I can find other pleasurable activities to keep me from jumping off a cliff.
Not saying that you actually believe this, but because of mentioning "small farms" I want to highlight the fallacy of believing that in general smaller farms are better for animal welfare: https://www.fondation-droit-animal.org/proceedings-aw/is-ani...
steve_adams_86|3 years ago
Welfare is an arbitrary notion. Ultimately we raise these animals and ostensibly care about them, but our goal is only to profit off of their bodies and kill them as children, long before they would die naturally.
I suppose all I’m saying is that it isn’t good welfare no matter how you slice it. These animals are slaves that get murdered in horrifying conditions 99.9% of the time.
I tried to feel okay about it for a long time, but eventually came to realize that the meat I spent 2-4x on for better welfare was only marginally different from the stuff I found came from reprehensible conditions.
I also discovered a lot of small farms which have better welfare on the farm still send their animals places where they’re exposed to completely abysmal suffering and death in their final hours. The depth of how bad these systems get is beyond what I ever imagined.
Anyway, even as someone who used to shoot animals and spear fish, this whole journey made me realize: I don’t think there’s such a thing as ethical meat, and virtually no one is “doing it right”, as much as I was willing to pay for that and I wanted to believe in it. I often wonder why I came to that conclusion and others don’t. I almost feel like a crazy person some days, but I take real comfort in not supporting these systems.
slfnflctd|3 years ago
This is still my biggest issue.
In smaller and more 'primitive' human populations of ages past, swiftly killing animals that could eat plants people couldn't in order to get meat necessary to not starve seems like an obvious choice. That is a very, very far cry from what we're doing now. Maybe in the future we'll go back to something similar again for whatever reasons, but it's just not where we're at today.
slothtrop|3 years ago
The general view appears to be that gratuitous suffering is bad, but that animal life is not sacred. From the secular perspective, neither is human life for that matter (see: pro-choice), but we have a social contract with each other as persons, and not beings with low or nil consciousness. Indigenous tribes would also tell you that for as much as they respect animals, their death is no object - apropos, would you tell them they should join us and relocate to where heavily fertilized land is?
> These animals are slaves that get murdered in horrifying conditions 99.9% of the time.
Life in seclusion with plentiful food and no predators in itself is less stressful than surviving in the wild, without the important confounding factor that is conditions in large conventional farms. There's no reason to assume the small farm one knows and buys meat from is "horrifying". That's not denying that they can exist, but you can't extrapolate that most farmers are in it to be cruel - this is a conclusion in search of evidence. Have you ever known farmers?
I see a lot of anecdotes and adjectives in these discussions, and not enough evidence.
> I don't think there’s such a thing as ethical meat
Because you object to any and all killing of animals for meat. You made this clear when you opened with "murder".
technoooooost|3 years ago
xashor|3 years ago
The abuse is often just different.