Re: Setting the record straight / How we kill what we eat

[Guest guest]

--- In , " Nenah Sylver " <nenah@b...>

wrote:

> ,

> About 10 years ago I visited some pagan friends in California. One

of the men had just butchered a lamb. He cuddled it in his arms and

sang to it just before he drove a knife cleanly through its throat.

He told me that the animal had absolutely no fear, and looked him

straight in the eye just before it was killed.

>

> Of all the grass-fed, natural, organic meat I've eaten, this lamb

was absolutely the most delicious I have ever tasted. The energy was

great -- it felt as though I were eating some raw food, still alive

with enzymes.

>

> How we kill and honor what we eat matters. It was so evident to me

with this one experience, I don't think I will forget it.

>

> Best,

> Nenah

Dear Nenah:

I was particularly touched by your account so that I felt tears

coming to my eyes. One second later, however, I was reminded of ...

how can I put it? Because I don't want by any means to disparage the

beauty of your experience ... the irony of the situation. Singing to

someone you are about to kill, as if it were a lullaby. Well, I

couldn't help remembering an expression we have in our language, for

which I ignore the English equivalent: the tears of a crocodile, who

is said to cry while killing his prey.

Thanks for sharing this and please don't be upset by my untimely

interference.

Best regards,

José

>

>

[Guest guest]

Message: 1

Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2005 12:39:46 -0400

From: " Nenah Sylver " <nenah@...>

Subject: Re: Re: Setting the record straight / How we kill what we eat

,

About 10 years ago I visited some pagan friends in California. One of the men

had just butchered a lamb. He cuddled it in his arms and sang to it just before

he drove a knife cleanly through its throat. He told me that the animal had

absolutely no fear, and looked him straight in the eye just before it was

killed.

Of all the grass-fed, natural, organic meat I've eaten, this lamb was absolutely

the most delicious I have ever tasted. The energy was great -- it felt as though

I were eating some raw food, still alive with enzymes.

How we kill and honor what we eat matters. It was so evident to me with this one

experience, I don't think I will forget it.

Best,

Nenah

===================================

I want to pipe in here. We raise and slaughter our animals. In every case, with

every animal that is destined to go into the freezer, I start on the first day

telling them their fate. I tell them they will be honored in recipes. I do not

want to lie to my food!

In the meantime, I tell them, they will have a wonderful life here and be

treated with respect. On the day that they are to be slaughtered, I tell them

what is going to happen and thank them for their service to us.

To me, it is an important aspect of raising food animals humanely.

Sharon in Vt

[Guest guest]

I want to pipe in here. We raise and slaughter our animals. In every

case, with every animal that is destined to go into the freezer, I

start on the first day telling them their fate. I tell them they will

be honored in recipes. I do not want to lie to my food!

>

> In the meantime, I tell them, they will have a wonderful life here

and be treated with respect. On the day that they are to be

slaughtered, I tell them what is going to happen and thank them for

their service to us.

>

> To me, it is an important aspect of raising food animals humanely.

>

> Sharon in Vt

Sharon, that is beautiful...i'm so glad you posted this.

laura

[Guest guest]

Hi Sharon:

Oh I want to agree with . And add that it is a shame that you live

so far away. I was wondering if I could order that meat from you, but

really the distance is an obstacle.

Anyway I think I may start talking to my hens. That is a good idea.

Could I also ask them to lay more eggs for a change?

Is it true that when a carnivore (a lion) kills a prey in nature, a

sort of hormone is released by the prey that makes death less painful

or even pain-free? I think someone told me about this, but I can't

remember when and who.

José

> I want to pipe in here. We raise and slaughter our animals. In every

> case, with every animal that is destined to go into the freezer, I

> start on the first day telling them their fate. I tell them they will

> be honored in recipes. I do not want to lie to my food!

> >

> > In the meantime, I tell them, they will have a wonderful life here

> and be treated with respect. On the day that they are to be

> slaughtered, I tell them what is going to happen and thank them for

> their service to us.

> >

> > To me, it is an important aspect of raising food animals humanely.

> >

> > Sharon in Vt

>

> Sharon, that is beautiful...i'm so glad you posted this.

>

> laura

[Guest guest]

> > Sorry - sometimes I think that this list is so full of flakiness that

> > I may give up and become a vegetarian.

>

> Not respecting your food animals results in factory farming. The Native

> Americans built (several) whole culture(s) out of respecting their food

> animals. I don't really see what's flaky about that. It strikes me as

> one important way that cultures can stay in touch with sustainability.

>

> Lynn S.

The way I see it: if it gets a rise out of Gene, you're doing

*something* right.

B.

/welcome back, Gene

[Guest guest]

Hello to you:

Since I feel in part responsible for this " flakiness " I want to

respond to this.

I take " flaky " to mean " eccentric " in your piece. However, from my

point of view, what you call " flakiness " could also be translated

as " sensitiveness " . I don't see how this could annoy you, moreover

because nobody seems to want to impose it as the ultimate truth.

Peole also talk to plants, and there are even those who believe that

trees have a soul and shouldn't be cut down without a ritual or

something.

This may sound weird if you are a novice in these matters or a

materialist, which is your right of course.

Nobody has the right to convert you, and we have even to thank you

for your spontaneous reaction and courage to put your cards on the

table.

But at the same time you sort of reminded me of the urchin in the

fable by Andersen - The Emperor's New Clothes - who called out to all

the people that the Emperor was in fact parading naked.

What Andersen doesn't tell us is that the boy who made all the

subjects laugh at the vain Emperor was probably wearing rags, and

rags can be more offensive than the naked body.

And here is a good place for you to start, in case you decide to

become a vegetarian: www.navs-online.org/

Cheers,

Hello you:

> > > I want to pipe in here. We raise and slaughter our animals. In

every

> > > case, with every animal that is destined to go into the

freezer, I

> > > start on the first day telling them their fate. I tell them

they will

> > > be honored in recipes. I do not want to lie to my food!

> > > >

> > > > In the meantime, I tell them, they will have a wonderful life

here

> > > and be treated with respect. On the day that they are to be

> > > slaughtered, I tell them what is going to happen and thank them

for

> > > their service to us.

> > > >

> > > > To me, it is an important aspect of raising food animals

humanely.

> > > >

> > > > Sharon in Vt

> > >

> > > Sharon, that is beautiful...i'm so glad you posted this.

> > >

> > > laura

> >

> Sorry - sometimes I think that this list is so full of flakiness

that I may give up and become a vegetarian.

>

>

[Guest guest]

>

{ ] This may sound weird if you are a novice in these matters

or a

> > materialist, which is your right of course.

> >

[implode7] this may sound as if you simply don't understand the point

being made, which is YOUR right, of course.

> > Cheers,

> >

> >

# Well, now I understand you much better. Your first post was very

laconic. Till further order, what you are saying is quite passable.

Thanks for the clarification.

José

[Guest guest]

> > > I want to pipe in here. We raise and slaughter our animals. In

every

> > > case, with every animal that is destined to go into the

freezer, I

> > > start on the first day telling them their fate. I tell them

they will

> > > be honored in recipes. I do not want to lie to my food!

> > > >

> > > > In the meantime, I tell them, they will have a wonderful life

here

> > > and be treated with respect. On the day that they are to be

> > > slaughtered, I tell them what is going to happen and thank them

for

> > > their service to us.

> > > >

> > > > To me, it is an important aspect of raising food animals

humanely.

> > > >

> > > > Sharon in Vt

> > >

> > > Sharon, that is beautiful...i'm so glad you posted this.

> > >

> > > laura

> >

> Sorry - sometimes I think that this list is so full of flakiness

that I may give up and become a vegetarian.

>

sorry to offend you. laura

[Guest guest]

--- In , Lynn Siprelle <lynn@s...>

wrote:

> > Sorry - sometimes I think that this list is so full of flakiness

that

> > I may give up and become a vegetarian.

>

> Not respecting your food animals results in factory farming. The

Native

> Americans built (several) whole culture(s) out of respecting their

food

> animals. I don't really see what's flaky about that. It strikes me as

> one important way that cultures can stay in touch with sustainability.

>

> Lynn S.

>

>hear, hear. laura

[Guest guest]

> > Respecting animals so that you treat them humanely is one

> > thing. Talking to them so that they understand you're going

> > to kill and eat them, but that you appreciate their " service "

> > is another. It is not necessary to believe that animals

> > understand English in order to treat them humanely, is it?

>

> The flaw in your underlying premise is that you assume that the

> verbal/cognitive component of the communication is the only thing

that is

> being communicated.

>

> Words are frequently the smallest information containing portion of

any face

> to face communication.

[Guest guest]

> > Respecting animals so that you treat them humanely is one

> > thing. Talking to them so that they understand you're going

> > to kill and eat them, but that you appreciate their " service "

> > is another. It is not necessary to believe that animals

> > understand English in order to treat them humanely, is it?

>

> The flaw in your underlying premise is that you assume that the

> verbal/cognitive component of the communication is the only thing

that is

> being communicated.

>

> Words are frequently the smallest information containing portion of

any face

> to face communication.

Hello Ron:

Sorry this time. I have just sent an " empty " reply. I happened to

click on the send button before typing my answer.

Here it is:

I partly agree with you. It is not only through words that we

communicate. Everything counts: the facial expression, the posture,

the look, the tone, the pitch, tears, smiles, patting, etc...

Sometimes you can even have an insight into what is being said in a

foreign language if you can read all those elements, because they

seem to be universal. Words, by the way, can often be deceiving, but

all in all we need them - in the end. As a confirmation. As a

ratification. That is why I think that words, while not being the

only channel for communication, are the most important one.

Perhaps the only significant exception for this is music. A great

composer is able to convey a lot through sound, but then again he

needs to give a name to his composition.

So maybe what " implode7 " is trying to say isn't far-fetched or

flawed. There is something in there.

Welcome back.

José

[Guest guest]

> You make an interesting point about music, and being a musician, I

am tempted to raise the following off-topic question. Do you really

think that a composer is (necessarily) trying to convey something at

all? Cannot the music be the message?

>

>

[Guest guest]

>

> Of course, my points are always incorrect. What better way to point

that out than by simply stating it?

>

Gene,

I don't think you're always wrong--not at all! I just think you're

usually ill-tempered. I meant it when I said welcome back. I, for

one, missed you.

B.

[Guest guest]

On 7/14/05, Nenah Sylver <nenah@...> wrote:

> About 10 years ago I visited some pagan friends in California. One of the

> men had just butchered a lamb. He cuddled it in his arms and sang to it just

> before he drove a knife cleanly through its throat. He told me that the

> animal had absolutely no fear, and looked him straight in the eye just

> before it was killed.

>

> Of all the grass-fed, natural, organic meat I've eaten, this lamb was

> absolutely the most delicious I have ever tasted. The energy was great -- it

> felt as though I were eating some raw food, still alive with enzymes.

Interesting, but lambs are notorious for willingly going to

slaughter-- which is why the lamb is typologically associated with

Christ. My friend and I slaughtered one of his lambs together once.

We shot it in the head first, amidst all of the other lambs, and they

were running around together and after being shot-- a few seconds

later-- one of them just fell down. The other lambs didn't notice.

He went up to bleed the lamb. The others didn't notice. You would

expect them to fear someone whom they just witnessed kill one of their

herd, but they don't. It's like they're oblivious.

Chris

[Guest guest]

On 7/15/05, implode7@... <implode7@...> wrote:

> The flaw in your underlying premise is that you assume that I don't

> understand that. In which case someone could emphasize that they treat the

> animals humanely, and even speak to them in a soft voice. However, the

> communication to a cow in a soft voice talking about Barry Bonds, and the

> communication to a cow thanking it for its service is functionally

> identical.

Wouldn't there be more subtle inflections in tone and nuances of

facial expression that are beyond our conscious control that are

affected by how WE understand what we're talking about?

For example, often times someone can see through a lie because the

person lying knows what they are saying is a lie, despite that they

are trying to effect an honest appearance.

Chris

[Guest guest]

>

> > About 10 years ago I visited some pagan friends in California.

One of the

> > men had just butchered a lamb. He cuddled it in his arms and sang

to it just

> > before he drove a knife cleanly through its throat. He told me

that the

> > animal had absolutely no fear, and looked him straight in the eye

just

> > before it was killed.

> >

> > Of all the grass-fed, natural, organic meat I've eaten, this lamb

was

> > absolutely the most delicious I have ever tasted. The energy was

great -- it

> > felt as though I were eating some raw food, still alive with

enzymes.

>

> Interesting, but lambs are notorious for willingly going to

> slaughter-- which is why the lamb is typologically associated with

> Christ. My friend and I slaughtered one of his lambs together

once.

> We shot it in the head first, amidst all of the other lambs, and

they

> were running around together and after being shot-- a few seconds

> later-- one of them just fell down. The other lambs didn't notice.

> He went up to bleed the lamb. The others didn't notice. You would

> expect them to fear someone whom they just witnessed kill one of

their

> herd, but they don't. It's like they're oblivious.

>

> Chris

Hi Chris:

That was an interesting observation. In fact, it seems that sheep are

one of the most defenceless animals. That is maybe why they need a

shepherd to protect them from predators.

It also seems that one sheep can't exist in isolation. Like fish.

Maybe they don't have self-conscience, but only group-conscience.

Goats are a lot more independent and fiercer, aren't they?

José

[Guest guest]

> >

> > > About 10 years ago I visited some pagan friends in California.

> One of the

> > > men had just butchered a lamb. He cuddled it in his arms and

sang

> to it just

> > > before he drove a knife cleanly through its throat. He told me

> that the

> > > animal had absolutely no fear, and looked him straight in the

eye

> just

> > > before it was killed.

> > >

> > > Of all the grass-fed, natural, organic meat I've eaten, this

lamb

> was

> > > absolutely the most delicious I have ever tasted. The energy

was

> great -- it

> > > felt as though I were eating some raw food, still alive with

> enzymes.

> >

> > Interesting, but lambs are notorious for willingly going to

> > slaughter-- which is why the lamb is typologically associated with

> > Christ. My friend and I slaughtered one of his lambs together

> once.

> > We shot it in the head first, amidst all of the other lambs, and

> they

> > were running around together and after being shot-- a few seconds

> > later-- one of them just fell down. The other lambs didn't

notice.

> > He went up to bleed the lamb. The others didn't notice. You

would

> > expect them to fear someone whom they just witnessed kill one of

> their

> > herd, but they don't. It's like they're oblivious.

> >

> > Chris

>

> Hi Chris:

>

> That was an interesting observation. In fact, it seems that sheep

are

> one of the most defenceless animals. That is maybe why they need a

> shepherd to protect them from predators.

>

> It also seems that one sheep can't exist in isolation. Like fish.

> Maybe they don't have self-conscience, but only group-conscience.

>

> Goats are a lot more independent and fiercer, aren't they?

>

> José

And I forgot to add this: Goats and sheep are rather similar in

shape, but their respective temperaments are strikingly different:

while the lamb is often associated to Christ, as you said, the he-

goat (the buck) is often associated with the Devil, isn't he?

JC

[Guest guest]

> >

> [implode said] And I'll just point out that people who explain their

relationship with cows as one of explaining to the cows that they

appreciate their service, when after all, if there were the slightest

hint of understanding by the cow, then killing it and eating it would

be quite a barbaric act. It is simply a ritual, and if it makes

someone feel better that's fine. But if someone explained to me as if

someone it was not so much a ritual for the human being, but for the

cow, I'd think it was rather strange. And I do. Sorry. I get some

valuable info from this list, but I'd sure as hell be embarassed to

recommend it to friends, who almost certainly who classify stuff like

that as flakey. And it is just ridiculous to believe that you have to

explain to animals what you're going to do to them, in order to treat

them humanely. And is also just ridiculous to claim that we need

ritual in order to do so. I think that it's rational to do so.

>

I've been called numerous things over the course of my life, but

flaky, never. lol.

Anyway, I never said that my telling the animals their fate was a

ritual. Basically, I just don't want to lie to my food. And it does

make me feel better about killing them. It seems rather obvious to me

that if we respect the crops we raise, be it vegetables or animals,

then the final product is more healthy.

Flaky, indeed.

Sharon in VT

[Guest guest]

>

> > And I'll just point out that people who explain their

relationship

> > with cows as one of explaining to the cows that they appreciate

their

> > service, when after all, if there were the slightest hint of

> > understanding by the cow, then killing it and eating it would be

quite

> > a barbaric act.

>

> This statement really made the hairs stand up on my neck. I

wouldn't

> like the cow to understand what I was saying at all. However, this

is

> made me put myself in it's position. If there were some other

> intelligent being that wanted to eat me and farmed me and explained

it

> all to me.....? eeew...how would I feel about that? I've tossed

it

> around in different scenarios and I think I would prefer the gentle

> approach rather than finding myself at the end of a pistol (or

whatever

> method of killing), suddenly realising what is about to happen. I

don't

> know. Maybe I would want to be blissfully unaware. It's a close

call.

>

> Sheesh. Sorry for the flakeyness.

>

>

, you're not flakey. i consider being called 'flakey' is

judgmental. one man's flake is another person's kind, loving,

compassionate person, and to me you are kind, loving and

compassionate. i'm sure it's easier to close up one's heart and mind

and harden them to prevent any feeling at all when killing an

animal...and anyway, guys seem to be less emotional than women

anyway, so maybe this is more a gal thing that guys can't understand.

anyway, i for one really appreciate and admire your point of view,

and i'm sure i'm not the only one!

God bless you.

laura

[Guest guest]

>

> This is absolutely hilarious reasoning.

GLAD YOU FIND IT FUNNY. HOPE YOU GOT A LAUGH. IT'S IMPORTANT TO

LAUGH. IN FACT, I'M LAUGHING SO HARD RIGHT NOW I THINK I'M GONNA GO

THROW UP.

I assure you, that there are plenty

> of intelligent, rational, women who would find that the notion that

you need

> to tell animals that you're going to eat them or you're lying them

and not

> respecting them, and that if you don't believe this that you

are 'hardened'

> and that this is a 'male' thing, totally ridiculous.

I SHOULDN'T HAVE SAID ANYTHING. I HATE TO ARGUE. I JUST DON'T LIKE

NAME CALLING ON ANY LIST, MAYBE ESPECIALLY ON EMAIL LISTS. PEOPLE

DON'T KNOW IF YOU'RE SERIOUS OR KIDDING OR GOOD NATUREDLY RIBBING AND

IT'S IMPOSSIBLE TO TELL IF IT'S MEAN SPIRITED OR NOT. I'M JUST

WEARY OF MEAN SPIRITED PEOPLE IN GENERAL. THAT'S WHY I'M 50 AND A

SEMI HERMIT. I DON'T ENJOY BEING INSULTED AND I DON'T THINK ANYONE

ELSE DOES EITHER.

>

> This is why I would never, never, recommend this list to anyone to

whom I

> wanted to educate on this kind of diet.

GREAT, THEN DON'T RECOMMEND IT.

My educated friends, who are

> environmentalists, and compassionate human beings, would find this

> absolutely hysterical, and pretty much discount this list as full

of flakes,

> not to be taken seriously. At times, it really makes me question

the whole

> notion of eating this way...luckily for me, I had already come to

these

> dietary conclusions.

WHY DON'T YOU START YOUR OWN LIST, MODERATE IT IN SUCH A WAY THAT YOU

CAN CONTROL WHAT POSTS GET POSTED AND THEN YOU CAN JUST PREVENT THE

FLAKEY PEOPLE SUCH AS MYSELF AND THE OTHER ONE OR TWO PEOPLE YOU

CALLED FLAKEY FROM POSTING. IT'S A FREE COUNTRY; YOU CAN DO THIS IF

YOU WANT TO.

EVERYONE IS IN A DIFFERENT PLACE, MENTALLY, EMOTIONALLY, SPIRITUALLY,

HUMANLY, INTELLECTUALLY. COMPASSION AND UNDERSTANDING AND LOVE ARE

SORELY LACKING IN THE WORLD AND JUDGEMENTALISM AND HATRED AND INSULTS

AND RUDENESS ARE RIFE. LIKE I SAID I'M 50 AND I'M HAVING A HARD TIME

COMING TO GRIPS WITH THE FACT THAT THE WORLD IS AN UNPLEASANT PLACE

WITH HIGHLY UNPLEASANT PEOPLE; I TRY TO AVOID THEM LIKE THE PLAGUE.

WE NEED TO START TEACHING MANNERS IN PRESCHOOL. THE POINT OF MANNERS

IS TO MAKE PEOPLE FEEL AT EASE, IN AWKWARD SITUATIONS, ETC. MANNERS

IS A KINDNESS. KINDNESS IS ALMOST LOST. IT'S ALMOST A LOST

CONCEPT. WE'VE LOST MANNERS AS A NATION, I BELIEVE, AND INSULTING

PEOPLE AND BEING RUDE IS BECOMING AN ACCEPTABLE PART OF OUR CULTURE

UNDER THE GUISE OF 'SELF EXPRESSION' OR FREE SPEECH OR SOMETHING.

OUR WORDS MATTER. WE CAN USE WORDS TO UPLIFT PEOPLE, ENCOURAGE

PEOPLE, SOOTH PEOPLE, HELP PEOPLE. WE CAN ALSO USE WORDS TO HURT

PEOPLE, MAKE THEM FEEL LIKE JERKS, AND MAKE THEM FEEL WORTHLESS AND

STUPID AND, OH, YEAH, FLAKEY. AND I GOTTA TELL YA, I'M REALLY TIRED,

I MEAN REALLY TIRED, WEARY, EXHAUSTED, OF THE LATTER NEGATIVE IMPACTS

IN GENERAL, DIRECTED TOWARD PEOPLE IN GENERAL.

WHATAVER HAPPENED TO THE GOLDEN RULE...TREAT OTHERS AS YOU WANT TO BE

TREATED.

DO YOU LIKE BEING CALLED FLAKEY? OH, THAT'S RIGHT, YOU'RE NOT

FLAKEY. EVER. YOU'RE A PERFECT PERSON, I'M SURE. I HAVE NO DOUBT.

DO YOU ENJOY BEING INSULTED IN ANY WAY, SHAPE OR FORM?

>

> One can have a respect for nature, and be humane with believing the

> gibberish that I'm seeing here.

LIKE I SAID PEOPLE ARE IN DIFFERENT PLACES IN THEIR LIVES.

YOU WANT THIS TO BE A PLACE THAT JUST EXCHANGES INFORMATION IT SOUNDS

LIKE. OR YOU JUST WANT THIS LIST TO BE WHAT YOU WANT. YOU WANT THIS

LIST TO BE WHAT YOU WANT IT TO BE AND IT SOUNDS LIKE YOU DON'T CARE

WHAT OTHER PEOPLE WANT, HOW OTHER PEOPLE THINK, OR YOU DON'T CARE

ABOUT PEOPLE WHO ARE DIFFERENT FROM YOU. IT SOUNDS LIKE YOU WANT IT

TO BE EXCLUSIVE SO ONLY THE PEOPLE YOU AGREE WITH OR THE PEOPLE YOU

LIKE OR THE PEOPLE WHO THINK LIKE YOU ARE HERE. SINCE NOT EVERYONE

IS JUST LIKE YOU, THAT EXCLUDES A LOT OF US. SOME OF US LIKE TO BE

SOCIAL AND TALK TO EACH OTHER. SOMETIMES IT'S GOOD TO TAKE SOCIAL

STUFF OFF LINE BUT OTHER TIMES IT'S NOT.

LIKE I SAID, WHY DON'T YOU START YOUR OWN LIST AND MAKE IT WANT YOU

WANT. THEN MAYBE YOU'LL BE HAPPY.

LAURA IN NJ

[Guest guest]

On 7/16/05, Gene Schwartz <implode7@...> wrote:

> " Wouldn't there be more subtle inflections in tone and nuances of

> facial expression that are beyond our conscious control that are

> affected by how WE understand what we're talking about? "

>

> Well, perhaps, but you're losing the point (as usual?). The point isn't

> that

> if you, in reality, loathe animals and wish that you could be torturing

> them, there might be some possibility that they could sense your 'vibes',

> but that the actual content is irrelevant as long as you feel this

> 'respect'

> (I'm just not sure this is the correct word). And it is also true (isn't

> it?) that I can actually enjoy killing animals because I hate them, and

> tell

> them how much I appreciate their " service " to humans because I find it

> amusing. This whole argument you're making is a distraction from the point,

> and I won't get into a pointless, endless debate with you. You are capable

> of understanding the subtleties here, so make an effort. I won't argue with

> YOU.

Did I say something offensive, or are you just holding a grudge?

Chris

[Guest guest]

> You speak of manners, yet you shout throughout your entire post.

I WAS USING CAPS TO DISTINGUISH BETWEEN YOUR WORDS AND MINE LIKE I AM

DOING NOW.

>

> I think that, yes, if I am being silly, I'd prefer that someone

point it

> out. Someone may be a good person, and have some pretty wacko ideas.

>

> This is a list, which I presume, is supposed to be about a way of

eating

> that has a rational and scientific foundation. As such, when people

post

> things that call the credibility of the list in general into

question, I

> think that they should be called on it.

>

> You, or anyone else can worry about lying to animals or trees, that

> confessing one's plan to an animal before slaughtering it will make

it taste

> better (perhaps this could be scientifically tested) and think that

people

> who think that this is nonsense are insensitive, male, boors, don't

care

> about nature.. Personally, I find this line of reasoning to be more

> offensive than the notion that certain stuff, well, is just plain

silly.

>

> What do I really think about some of these ideas being expressed.

Well, I've

> said what I think, not out of any express purpose to be cruel.

However, this

> isn't just a personal discussion between friends, this is a public

list,

> where (in my opinion) notions that anyone who doesn't think that

cows

> understand English, and that not describing what one is about to do

to them

> is lying to them, and that such lying to animals makes them taste

not as

> good....is a typical male who is insensitive, and doesn't " respect "

nature,

> is just absolutely, fantastically, ridiculous, and sexist to boot.

>

I DIDN'T TAKE PART IN THE CONVERSATION MUCH REALLY IF AT ALL...I WAS

JUST COMMENTING THAT I LIKED WHAT SOMEONE ELSE HAD TO SAY. OBVIOUSLY

A MISTAKE; I SHOULD HAVE KEPT MY OPINION TO MYSELF. I WANTED TO

PRAISE SOMEONE FOR WHAT THEY SAID...BECAUSE IT REALLY TOUCHED ME IN A

DEEP WAY AND I WANTED TO TO CONVEY TO THE PERSON THAT I REALLY

APPRECIATED WHAT THEY HAD TO SAY.

MY WHOLE 'THING' IS, I GET VERY UPSET WHEN I SEE PEOPLE INSULTED

ONLINE WHETHER IT'S ME OR ANYONE ELSE. THAT'S ALL.

LAURA

[Guest guest]

> Did I say something offensive, or are you just holding a grudge?

Queer, I read it as peculiar, Gene-esque flattery.

B.