The hunter becomes the prey...

[Atilla]

Vegetarians read no further, but for fellow carnivores here, I wonder if there is a certain amount of hypocrisy going on when we criticise the Spaniards for this kind of thing, knowing that our eating habits are responsible for the deaths of thousands of innocent animals probably every day. Yes, they are killed "humanely" (I am probably one of the few people here who have witnessed it - when I was quite young actually - wouldn't be allowed nowadays), but it's still pretty nasty. (More will have seen it probably on "Kill it, Cook It, Eat it" on Channel 4, but that's not quite the same as being able to smell it and hear a lot more of the animals' complaints than they would have allowed on TV).

I have no intention of stopping being a carnivore. I believe it is what we evolved to be, but nevertheless, the killing of animals to support our "habit" is one of those taboo subjects that most of us don't like to think about, and dwarfs bull-fighting and bull runs (ha!) for body count. Does killing animals for sport make it any worse than killing to eat? Possibly, but it makes little difference to the animal, I would say.

I don't particularly agree with fox-hunting, but the campaign to outlaw it was a huge waste of resources IMHO, especially as it was used by Blair to divert attention away from really important issues.

I don't have the same level of abhorance of fox hunting as I do bull fighting. My reasoning is that a fox will kill more than it needs unlike most other animals. If it brakes into a hen yard it will not take one or two for its need but kill the lot of them. It is a wild animal. Also, the end, torn about by a pack of hounds is likely to be quick.

Whether it is killed by a pack of hounds or poison or a trap is neither here or there if numbers are need to be maintained.

Bulls fights on the other hand not quite the same pros and cons to me.

As for the food chain and discussion between carnivores and vegetarians that is really a heavy topic. I have learnt a lot from one of many of my Hindu friends as well as Budhist philosophy and I admire their way of life and how they perceive life. I am increasingly eating less meat these days but I do like meat and used to even like it more in the past. But as long as animal farming and husbandry treats animals with a degree of humanity as we recognise it I find it difficult to argue against carnivores.

 

[Splitlink]

I'm with Montmerency on this. If somone wanted my vote to ban it, they could have it. Otherwise, it's another of innumerable problems that need resolving. I'm not going to get on a soap-box and shout "ban bull-fighting" when there is so much other cruelty around that we can't sort out. Remember Baby P? It's still going on in both our countries, probably in our own neighbourhoods, right now.

 

[redart]

By total accident, I stumbled across a clip from a horrific viral video the other day, and have since also lost faith in mankind!

DONT watch the video, the wikipedia entry is bad enough and that's just words!:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dnepropetrovsk_maniacs

Its a sick world.

 

[elitejets]

.... we might remember that a human being is lying in hospital severely wounded. He was wounded in the course of carrying out a legal activity that is actively supported by millions of people.

They might be wrong, and we might disagree with the activity, but that is hardly a reason to rejoice over a man being horribly injured.

1. He knew the risks.
2. Wasnt Hitler actively supported by millions? Doesnt make it right does it?
3. I dont think anyone is rejoicing about a man being horribly injured, but what about the bull? He isnt even horribly injured..... HE'S DEAD.

 

[maiden22]

1. He knew the risks.

Indeed. What significance does this have?

2. Wasnt Hitler actively supported by millions? Doesnt make it right does it?

Indeed it does not. What significance does this have?

3. I dont think anyone is rejoicing about a man being horribly injured,

Actually, it did seem that certain people were very happy about it.

but what about the bull? He isnt even horribly injured..... HE'S DEAD.

HE'S ALSO A BULL

.

 

[Mr. Charts]

For me, someone who deliberately tortures an animal for pleasure is not a subject for my personal sympathy or "understanding".
Richard

 

[Splitlink]

The Spaniards seem to have a thing about bulls.

What do all you outraged bull supporters think about the Pamplona bull run?

Bloody stupid! Those who get caught, deserve it. Nevertheless, young people do get in more dangerous sports these days.

 

[maiden22]

For me, someone who deliberately tortures an animal for pleasure is not a subject for my personal sympathy or "understanding".
Richard

I too would have no sympathy for someone injured in the course of such an action.

However, I don't think that bullfighting qualifies as torturing an animal for pleasure. I think it is supposed to be a display of courage and skill, and the danger and bloodshed is I would guess an inherent part of it.

As I say, I wouldn't attend a bullfight again and can see little justification for the practice. That said, the matador was taking part in a legal activity that many Spaniards view as perfectly fine - indeed, perhaps an important part of their cultural heritage. Now they may be wrong, but there is no justification for labelling him an animal abuser.

There is much about the spectacle that is unpleasant, particularly the wounding of the bull before the contest begins. Even that though I would suppose is neccessary, because otherwise I would think facing a half-ton animal would be a fairly uneven contest.

At the end of the day, the matador is a human being, and there are plenty of people who are not evil animal-abusers who support bullfighting. If we wish to talk about animal cruelty, we might look at the source of much of our own meat before passing judgement on foreigners.

 

[redart]

killing for sport and fun is just cruel, isn't it? Legal or not.

 

[Mr. Charts]

A great deal depends purely on what someone accepts as being reasonable and what they are used to socially and culturally.
Human sacrifice used to be regarded as reasonable in ancient cultures; that didn't make it right.
Moral acceptability of other cultures is relative, not absolute, but for me, killing an animal humanely for food is, regrettably, necessary. Killing for pleasure never is. It debases those who do it. And to make your living out of it is even worse in my view.

 

[Atilla]

I too would have no sympathy for someone injured in the course of such an action.

Why do you have sympathy for someone who waves red to torment an animal?

However, I don't think that bullfighting qualifies as torturing an animal for pleasure. I think it is supposed to be a display of courage and skill, and the danger and bloodshed is I would guess an inherent part of it.

Depends on your opinion. What do you call tormenting, exhausting and inserting swords in to key areas of an animal? Ritualistic death?

I some times why people go to an event to see the end which they know. In the hope the end is an unusal surprise perhaps?



As I say, I wouldn't attend a bullfight again and can see little justification for the practice. That said, the matador was taking part in a legal activity that many Spaniards view as perfectly fine - indeed, perhaps an important part of their cultural heritage. Now they may be wrong, but there is no justification for labelling him an animal abuser.

The slave trade was legal once upon a time and now it is not. This is the whole point discussion and change to better humanity, no?

There is much about the spectacle that is unpleasant, particularly the wounding of the bull before the contest begins. Even that though I would suppose is neccessary, because otherwise I would think facing a half-ton animal would be a fairly uneven contest.

I didn't know this point about wounding the bull. Would that be animal cruelty or good fair sport??? Terms like illegal and unpleasant just doesn't add up!

At the end of the day, the matador is a human being, and there are plenty of people who are not evil animal-abusers who support bullfighting. If we wish to talk about animal cruelty, we might look at the source of much of our own meat before passing judgement on foreigners.

It is not about us or foreigners - it is simply a matter of debating a subject matter.

 

[maiden22]

A great deal depends purely on what someone accepts as being reasonable and what they are used to socially and culturally.
Human sacrifice used to be regarded as reasonable in ancient cultures; that didn't make it right.
Moral acceptability of other cultures is relative, not absolute, but for me, killing an animal humanely for food is, regrettably, necessary. Killing for pleasure never is. It debases those who do it. And to make your living out of it is even worse in my view.

I did not mean to imply that because something is acceptable in certain cultures it is right. I merely made the point as I think it is something to consider before condemning the matador.

I agree wholeheartedly that killing for pleasure is wrong. However, I have never seen any examples of this, and I have been shooting and fishing many times, and deer-stalking twice.

The problem with much of our farming practice (I mean globally rather than in the UK, where I understand that standards tend to be relatively high) is that it is not humane, nor is it necessary - people could if they wish eat much less meat.

 

[maiden22]

It is not about us or foreigners - it is simply a matter of debating a subject matter.

 

[Adamus]

Sorry to be boring but i seriously think there's no point in having strong opinions on this - it's up to the Spanish, it's their country, it's their bulls. If they were really heinous, we could think about some collective action nation vs nation - all just stop going there or something.

But we can't even work out our own national ethical position on fox hunting.

On a hit list of ethical issues in the world today, I think bull fighting comes quite a long way down the list.

Top of my list would be child labour, environmental destruction and torture. Maybe landmines (the only European issue in my top ten probably).

 

[Splitlink]

I did not mean to imply that because something is acceptable in certain cultures it is right. I merely made the point as I think it is something to consider before condemning the matador.

I agree wholeheartedly that killing for pleasure is wrong. However, I have never seen any examples of this, and I have been shooting and fishing many times, and deer-stalking twice.

The problem with much of our farming practice (I mean globally rather than in the UK, where I understand that standards tend to be relatively high) is that it is not humane, nor is it necessary - people could if they wish eat much less meat.

Farming practice can one thing but I think that the slaugtherhouses are a lot worse. Those in Chicago were a national disgrace.

 

[maiden22]

killing for sport and fun is just cruel, isn't it? Legal or not.

Killing for fun is cruel, although the point about most "bloodsports" (at least those that I have experienced) is not killing.

Field sports such as shooting and fishing have huge conservation benefits and are enormously beneficial for the quarry species. They also provide humane and effective control methods for predators and pest species - have a look at what the Government's own Burns report said about the likely effect of the foxhunting ban.

Field sports are also a crucial part of the rural economy, the most humane way of obtaining meat, and vital for maintaining the countryside in a sustainable and commercially viable way.

 

[Mr. Charts]

"I agree wholeheartedly that killing for pleasure is wrong. However, I have never seen any examples of this"

Sorry I must be missing something, but isn't bull fighting exactly that?

"Field sports such as shooting and fishing have huge conservation benefits and are enormously beneficial for the quarry species."

I take that point, but it's probably what the aliens would say about human over-population if they wanted to colonise Earth

 

[Splitlink]

"I agree wholeheartedly that killing for pleasure is wrong. However, I have never seen any examples of this"

Sorry I must be missing something, but isn't bull fighting exactly that?

"Field sports such as shooting and fishing have huge conservation benefits and are enormously beneficial for the quarry species."

I take that point, but it's probably what the aliens would say about human over-population if they wanted to colonise Earth

You could say that bullfighting gets rid of the nasty ones.

 

[temporarilylight]

You could say that bullfighting gets rid of the nasty ones.

Only when the bull 'wins'

 

[Splitlink]

Only when the bull 'wins'

Of course.

Those Andalucian bulls are magnificent animals and fear absolutely nothing. It's a shame to see them tormented like that.