A little word abstruse to start. That just means that if you look at it right, we are faced with two radically different attitudes, from the same people, their relationship to the same subject: the animal.
Well, let's start with our relationship to animals we eat. Our modern societies we save, in most cases, the killing of the animal that we will "consume". Except perhaps for the oysters, which I love, who are alive when we chew. Ah! It's disgusting! Some even swallowing it whole, leaving it with hydrochloric acid our stomach pains to slay. But why eat oysters if not for taste in the splendor of their iodized taste, metallic and sticky consistency, watery. Me, when I kiss, I put the language!
short, after this digression full of spray, looking a little the heart of the problem. The British and other nations also have solved the problem linguistically. Pig means the pig (animal) and pork meat we eat, for example. In English, pez is the fish wriggles into the sea and pescado that they will enjoy. But today, with battery farming of most animal species that we eat, we no longer distinguish between the small and silly what is on our plate ... and died.
The result is that nobody is shocked to know or see live animals - can we live it appler - in concentration camps, intended to feed us. I say "concentration camps" because in his excellent investigative report on junk food, William Raymond ( Toxic , Editions J'ai Lu ) finds that the only way out is the entry of slaughterhouse. Between dying of hunger or be stuffed with junk food, even his own shit, what's the difference?
short, with a few vegetarian and / or hippies animal advocates - which are taken as enlightened as there are many other problems to solve on this planet - almost the entire population is moved does not absolutely atrocious conditions to produce the meat we eat.
Paradox
And that's where I'm coming. Between these animals have no souls, which are only "flesh sausage "(to paraphrase the" cannon fodder "which is actually not that far) and other animals to which we lend a soul, there is only our eyes.
Yes, look around you: how many of us have pets that "it lacks that speech?" We fed them with love, it comes out even in the rain or cold for a walk, it flatters them, they speak, they spoke words of love, we even feel that they understand us. Oh, they are so cute ...
But what difference is there between a cow submitted 24/24 trafficking, with all diseases ensuing, and a doggie his granny? They are animals. Non-humans with many genes in common with us, too. And yet we totally deny those we eat. It even denies their "animal".
I was shocked, yes, when I saw an ad touting chicken thighs with a picture of a peasant in the middle of the meadow with chicken thighs on the leg. Yes, shocked, because the animal no longer counts: it became a consumer product. We will not even see it as it "alive".
I once shocked (my turn!) My in-laws, Catholic handy when, after their prayers of love and peace before feast, I made a prayer aboriginal, who thanked the animal that will eat from being born, having lived and be dead for food. Yep, when you think, this was his destiny from the beginning. And the least we can do is to respect the living who will feed us and allow us to live a little longer.
And here I confess I do not understand how anyone could point to be schizophrenic in our relationship to the animal. And I feel, without being able to explain why, that our humanity is amputated as well. That something is amiss when one manipulates life at this point. When we look away to avoid seeing these animals that are ready are the same soul that "student" in appalling conditions, without blinking, as commodities.
Waste
And yet, I do not even talk about nutritional quality of stressed animals, desperate, unhappy, drugged and sick. I only say it is not necessary to eat much meat, or a physiological point of view or a perspective environment. Meat, it takes lots and lots of water and energy: it is a huge waste, so to speak, if abused. And abused, then it's useless.
short, something is wrong with the law of profit. We have contradictory attitudes, right? There are so many pet owners, we would expect a little more affection for these animals who go through hell to feed us. It is still us who eat them, right? Or who consume is perhaps more accurate.
0 comments:
Post a Comment