Milk and Dairy

thecomedian

auspicious wrote: »

The bond and flow of chemicals conducive to it begin in pregnancy as in any mammal.

No its not.
Straight after birth can be tricky sometimes. Generally they are ok.
They are not they same as humans.

Donald Trump

auspicious wrote: »

Nope. It does not promote pet ownership. It promotes a solution to the problem of neglect and abandonment and crowded shelters which continual shopping causes by creating a demand which causes more and more to be bred.
Rescue cats. Massive feral population in Ireland. Tend to their needs and neuter as many as possible to solve the problem. Many get sick and and they have a detrimental impact on native biodiversity. People need to care more.

How would you feel about a hypothetical world where cats are not kept "imprisoned" for human pleasure and we also rid the world of feral cats?


Suppose we could neuter them all. How would you feel about that? It would be possible with enough buy in from the public (Mao was able to get the Chinese to kill nearly all the swallows for example......didn't end up too well but how and ever that is a different matter). If there were no more cats then there would be no more cruelty to cats.

Donald Trump

auspicious wrote: »

The bond and flow of chemicals conducive to it begin in pregnancy as in any mammal.

The calf doesn't know. Anymore than a newborn child who is given to adoptive parents would somehow know it wasn't it's real parents.


A calf is hungry. It drinks milk. It forms what you refer to as a "bond" with whatever or whoever gives it milk!

thecomedian

Donald Trump wrote: »

How would you feel about a hypothetical world where cats are not kept "imprisoned" for human pleasure and we also rid the world of feral cats?


Suppose we could neuter them all. How would you feel about that? It would be possible with enough buy in from the public (Mao was able to get the Chinese to kill nearly all the swallows for example......didn't end up too well but how and ever that is a different matter). If there were no more cats then there would be no more cruelty to cats.

Actually replace cats with people and all problems solved.

onrail

auspicious wrote: »

All seems to be forgotten. There is no way of knowing that. And since she can't tell you to stop it just happens again and again until killed at a young age.

It's your choice to be changed to your laptop.

Any experienced farmer knows when a cow is stressed/in pain, or content. People with no experience of farms don't always realise this.

auspicious

Cats are gorgeous but they are domesticated and therefore invasive in many parts. . Their needs and the population must be managed humanely.

gozunda

onrail wrote: »

Just stumbled on this thread. Full disclosure, I come from a farming background, but moved away years ago.

Just my opinion - on balance, Irish dairy cows have a bloody brilliant life. They are out in fresh pasture in the good weather, protected from the elements in poor weather, fed and watered to their heart's content.

It's not all positive obviously - the separation of calves from their mothers is a very obvious drawback, but all seems to be forgotten in a week or two. Having observed Dairy cows Vs Sucklers (who keep their calves to about nine months), do I think the sucklers and calves are more content? Not obviously.

The 'imprisonment' argument is fairly weak imo. Far better than the rest of us who are chained to our laptops and desks for 40 years in the hope of a brief retirement when your body is wrecked!

Welcome to the discussion

Some very interesting points

I've seen it written that supposedly all these 'farmers' 'torture' their animals as well. I believe the other usual accusation is 'murder'

Oddly enough I was at my neighbours place this morning to watch him lock up a couple cattle in a 10 foot square cell. They didn't meet their bail conditions obviously.

He then took another and subjected it to some gratuitous water torture because you know that's the kind if thing that happens. He then went on a murder spree. All perfectly normal you know ....

Edit: Before being attacked again and to clarify no I do not find any issue such as murder torture or imprisonment in any way 'funny'. I do however find the emotive use of such language to be deliberately disingenuous and a gross and deliberate misrepresentation of normal farming practice here.

The thread title is a very good example of this

Lady Haywire

But don't these theoretical cats have animal rights as mentioned earlier on?
Perhaps they don't want to be neutered.
One miaow for the snip, two miaows for no snip?

gozunda

Lady Haywire wrote: »

But don't these theoretical cats have animal rights as mentioned earlier on?
Perhaps they don't want to be neutered.
One miaow for the snip, two miaows for no snip?

Apparently not. Some animal 'rights' extremists believe that pets are better off dead.

In the US PETA were found to be involved in a campaign of stealing peoples pets and killing them - then dumping the bodies to get rid of the evidence

Killing Animals: PETA's Open 'Secret

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/killing-animals-petas-open-secret_b_59e78243e4b0e60c4aa36711

Please note. Do not open link if you think you will be upset. I know I was after reading it...

Btw I only mention it because farmers are often accused of 'murdering animals. I think there is a lot of duplicity in such accusations.

auspicious

Lady Haywire wrote: »

But don't these theoretical cats have animal rights as mentioned earlier on?
Perhaps they don't want to be neutered.
One miaow for the snip, two miaows for no snip?

It's for their own protection and to protect biodiversity. Many many feral cats live a wretched existence and that is all our fault
Yes it's unfortunate but needs must.

Theoretical? They are very real.

gozunda

auspicious wrote: »

It's for their own protection and to protect biodiversity. Many many feral cats live a wretched existence and that is all our fault
Yes it's unfortunate but needs must.

Theoretical? They are very real.

Genuine question - do these animals consent to such procedures?

auspicious

gozunda wrote: »

Genuine question - do these animals consent to such procedures?

What's your solution?

Lady Haywire

auspicious wrote: »

It's for their own protection and to protect biodiversity. Many many feral cats live a wretched existence and that is all our fault
Yes it's unfortunate but needs must.

Theoretical? They are very real.

I say theoretical as I don't personally know of many feral cats around this area.

So certain 'rules' can be broken because these animals are seen as pets? Yet if we do it with farm animals we're evil & abusing them.

auspicious

Lady Haywire wrote: »

I say theoretical as I don't personally know of many feral cats around this area.

So certain 'rules' can be broken because these animals are seen as pets? Yet if we do it with farm animals we're evil & abusing them.

And so we come to the crux of the thread.
Animals farmers do what they do for profit. Managing the feral cat population is done out of emphaty for them and the environment.

gozunda

auspicious wrote: »

What's your solution?

I dunno. Was asking do you think the animals consent?

I don't think they do.

I've seen it often described that animals can't consent and that such procedures are supposedly 'cruel.

Donald Trump

auspicious wrote: »

It's for their own protection and to protect biodiversity. Many many feral cats live a wretched existence and that is all our fault
Yes it's unfortunate but needs must.

Theoretical? They are very real.

Feral cats are well able to look after themselves.You say domesticated...but they are far more independent than a modern cow breed!


The issue with them is their effect on other wildlife!!!! Cats are too successful as predators and using human environments to their advantage.

The kill so many other animals and decimate bird populations.



I have a good friend who is hardcore vegan/environmentalist etc. She explained it to me. She supports movements that want to eliminate all cats from nature.

Thelonious Monk

Donald Trump wrote: »

I have a good friend who is hardcore vegan/environmentalist etc.

LOL

sunnib

Hi, what about organic dairy products? Organic cattle farmers claim to observe animal welfare.
I very much enjoy eating buttter, sometimes use mayo instead, but I could not do without cheese. Vegan cheese is too expensive
(I know - "you don't know what you can do until you have to.. " but if there was a win-win option ..)

Donald Trump

Thelonious Monk wrote: »

LOL

What's the funny part to you?


That I have a friend?


Or that she is a vegan?




Do you only have friends who are vegans? No non-vegan friends? Or is it the concept of having a friend that you don't really understand?

Dizzyblonde

Mod note:

As of now this thread needs to stay on topic. Personal attacks, trolling and bickering have all got to stop or there will be consequences. Consider this your warning.

NcdJd

Dizzyblonde wrote: »

Mod note:

As of now this thread needs to stay on topic. Personal attacks, trolling and bickering have all got to stop or there will be consequences. Consider this your warning.

Thread title guarantees the conversation will be anything but civil in my opinion.

ganmo

sunnib wrote: »

Hi, what about organic dairy products? Organic cattle farmers claim to observe animal welfare.
I very much enjoy eating buttter, sometimes use mayo instead, but I could not do without cheese. Vegan cheese is too expensive
(I know - "you don't know what you can do until you have to.. " but if there was a win-win option ..)

Animal welfare is not a black and white thing. Its poor animal welfare to put a healthy dog down but if that dog is suffering then it is good animal welfare.

auspicious

Jjameson wrote: »

If a landowning farmer was motivated just by money he/she would let it or sell it.
I love my animal and I also love to eat them.
There is no profit in anything but the best animal welfare.
The happier and more comfortable the animal the better the thrive.
The more humane the slaughter process the better the efficiency,quality and yield of meat.
Emotive terms such as “torture” “babies”
may carry water among your peers but don’t change logical facts.

"The happier and more comfortable the animal the better the thrive" . That goes without saying. ...

Torture and babies I would see them as descriptors rather than emotive terms. Babies, I may have used but that's just go to common vernacular. Torture I would use in context as when I used it to describe the treatment of the pigs the the Irish factory farming video posted earlier in the thread.
Though if I forcibly impregnated a female human against her will repeatedly for personal gain she would describe it as torture.
But if it happens to a cow it's not?

Other than those two examples I can't remember using those descriptors.

Lady Haywire

Is it just A.I that you don't like?? A bull in the field is ok but the choosing of specific bulls for a cow is not?
(there are many different reasons for choosing frozen semen bulls over using a bull in the field)

And I've seen cows break through hedges/fences to get to a bull, heard them roaring the shed down to get a bull to hear them & a bull about a half KM away responding in kind once he heard the cow.

Donald Trump

auspicious wrote: »

Though if I forcibly impregnated a female human against her will repeatedly for personal gain she would describe it as torture.
But if it happens to a cow it's not?

Farmers shouldn't do such barbaric things of course. Not in this day an age. They should allow the cow and bull to choose.

And of course, after the bull brings her out on a few dates, and she is satisfied to choose him as a partner, they can of course sign a legal consent agreement to make sure that consent is gained before doing the deed. We don't want any retroactive claims of #metoobulled. The contract will protect both willing partners.



Of course, she will also be facilitated in her access to whatever types of birth control she would like, just in case for example, she doesn't want to get pregnant at that point in time. It might not suit her career etc.

auspicious

Lady Haywire wrote: »

Is it just A.I that you don't like?? A bull in the field is ok but the choosing of specific bulls for a cow is not?
(there are many different reasons for choosing frozen semen bulls over using a bull in the field)

And I've seen cows break through hedges/fences to get to a bull, heard them roaring the shed down to get a bull to hear them & a bull about a half KM away responding in kind once he heard the cow.

Your second paragraph. And??
That's nature for you.
Though it is different when you intentionally place the bull and cow together. Your intended purpose is personal gain. That's what exploitation is.

auspicious

Donald Trump wrote: »

Farmers shouldn't do such barbaric things of course. Not in this day an age. They should allow the cow and bull to choose.

And of course, after the bull brings her out on a few dates, and she is satisfied to choose him as a partner, they can of course sign a legal consent agreement to make sure that consent is gained before doing the deed. We don't want any retroactive claims of #metoobulled. The contract will protect both willing partners.



Of course, she will also be facilitated in her access to whatever types of birth control she would like, just in case for example, she doesn't want to get pregnant at that point in time. It might not suit her career etc.

Why secure the cow while forcibly impregnating her? Why doesn't she happily back up to the pipettes?

Lady Haywire

auspicious wrote: »

Your second paragraph. And??
That's nature for you.
Though it is different when you intentionally place the bull and cow together. Your intended purpose is personal gain. That's what exploitation is.

Yes, and if a heifer was to break away to a bull which is too big for her there will be complications at birth. Hence why frozen semen is used with a smaller breed of bull which may not always be available in the local area.

I don't run a farm to have pets. A cow has to pay her way to stay here. You say exploitation, I could also say she's an employee of sorts.

auspicious

Lady Haywire wrote: »

Yes, and if a heifer was to break away to a bull which is too big for her there will be complications at birth. Hence why frozen semen is used with a smaller breed of bull which may not always be available in the local area.

I don't run a farm to have pets. A cow has to pay her way to stay here. You say exploitation, I could also say she's an employee of sorts.

The cow was put there. It's captive.
Yeah when you keep slaves you gotta put them to work don't ya!

Donald Trump

auspicious wrote: »

Why secure the cow while forcibly impregnating her? Why doesn't she happily back up to the pipettes?

So you want to change the goalposts from the concept of impregnating the animal to the method of impregnation? Interesting.



If the cow wasn't "secured" then you'd be fine? Easily enough done. I mean it's done for the safety of the person. But all you need to do, even if the cow wouldn't stand, is to put a bucket of meal in front of the cow even if she won't stand. She'd be so distracted eating that she wouldn't notice the "procedure".