portland independent media center  
images audio video
newswire article reposts global

animal rights | health

"If slaughterhouses had glass walls, everyone would be a vegetarian."

Music legend and activist Paul McCartney delivers a powerful narration of this must-see video. Watch now to discover why everyone would be vegetarian if slaughterhouses had glass walls.
 http://youtu.be/ql8xkSYvwJs

Learn more:  http://www.meat.org/

But that is NOT true 30.Apr.2014 07:30

Mike Novack

What might be true:

1) If people (who eat meat) were required to see how most of their meat is (currently) slaughtered:
a) Some of them would give up eating meat slaughtered by any means.
b) Some of them would insist that the meat they eat be slaughtered differently.
c) Some wouldn't care.

2) It is the "a" category that might lead people to become vegetarians. For that the correct experience is NOT the abysmal conditions of most commercial slaughtering but having the experience of witnessing slaughter under optimal conditions and accepting the blood on their hands.

Look, I agree with you, making people watch the abysmal conditions of most commercial slaughtering would probably reduce the number of people eating any meat and reduce the amount of meat eaten by some of those who continue to eat meat (although available, meat slaughtered under better conditions is quite expensive).

But what is NOT true is that watching this would make all people vegetarians.

nope 30.Apr.2014 09:10

iu

If this were true, then or ancestors would never have evolved the way they did.

You hunt and kill and butcher your own food from the time you are a child, then its as natural as washing off a head of lettuce.

years ago a woman I worked with who was raised in Vietnam told me that her Sister-in-law (also Vietnamese) was upset because they had prepared a huge spread of food for The Tet holiday and she wanted to take a photo to send back to Vietnam to show her family that she was still holding to the traditions she grew up with. The problem was, the chicken didn't have the claws on it.
Her sister-in-law said she couldn't send a photo of a claw-less chicken back. (the assumption was that the claws ID the skinned animal, and without the claws you could be eating a cat, etc.)

She told her sister, you find a store that sells chickens with the claws and I'll buy it! Then she asked me "Why don't they sell them with the claws". I told her that its because Americans have the Fillet-O-Fish syndrome. They don't want to be reminded of what it is they are actually eating. A fried brick of fish looks nothing like a live fish. Its not staring back at you as you bite into it. Hence the no claws on the chicken. In Asia, the claws are always on the bird. The hooves are always on the pig, cow, sheep, etc. Its how you are raised as to how you look at your dinner.

In some cultures the process of butchering the animal makes people hungry because they have been conditioned to know that soon they will be dining high on the hog as it were. So ripping the intestines out of a deer you just shot may gross some out, or may make you hungry. Its really one of those First World problems. Much of the world wishes they had something to be grossed out over.

animal rights proselytised like religion 30.Apr.2014 14:51

u need nu tactic

The result: a black and white understanding of why people eat meat and the assumption eating meat is always exploitive.

The irony is this being posted on a PORTLAND indy newswire, where ethical meat options in town(free range, organic, kosher) abound.

Also, ditto on these points.

>>>>What might be true:

1) If people (who eat meat) were required to see how most of their meat is (currently) slaughtered:
a) Some of them would give up eating meat slaughtered by any means.
b) Some of them would insist that the meat they eat be slaughtered differently.
c) Some wouldn't care.

>>>But what is NOT true is that watching this would make all people vegetarians.