Mmm, steak.

Recommended Videos

PurpleRain

New member
Dec 2, 2007
5,001
0
0
As many previous vegetarian topics circulating the Escapist have shown that people believe we are carnivorous. Raised to at one thing and one thing only... meat (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yxA9QOi9vOE). Though we are not. We are omnivores, meaning we have a choice of what to eat. We can gain our nutrients from meat or plant.
While I'm not going to complain about why people should quit eating meat (that is not my choice), I'm going to show how people still have choice in their steaks. You see, the meat industry is like one of those villains people joke about; they kill innocents and babies to churn out a profit. Again, before you pounce on me saying that I'm spreading propaganda, keep on reading.
I feel however that that is one aspect of the meat industry. That is the side that anti-globalization and environment and animal welfare groups attack. There is another side where cows are treated right and are not as damaging to this world and to you as the alternative. Organic fed and free-range cattle. I want to show you how you have a choice and can be more open into actually doing something for the environment and people then supporting this Glukkon run meat giant.
(Also, it helps if you're approached by those radical activists, to tell them how you eat your meat)


Above show problems that cows are likely to get through poor treatment such as caging.

Firstly:
Ask If It Is Local Stock

Cows are major produces of methane gases as well as the fact land is cleared to set down grazing areas for them. To now add on the petrol used to transport the cattle from one place to another seems more and more damaging. Locally bred animals are great for the reasons that the cost of transport is lowered, as well as the fact that they may be culled on the farm or nearby and not across the state.

Secondly:
Make Sure It's Free Range



Every time you eat you have a choice. You have a choice of which company to support. You have a say! Some people don't know that they have an effect to everything they do.

Bovine are animals. Living and breathing. Meat companies don't like to see this but instead see profit through their meat.

Cows can gain many problems such as lameness and foot diseases from being tethered and caged without being able to roam.



Thirdly:
Make Sure It's Natural

Through genetically modified organism and genetic manipulation, we can create fast growing cows and crops. With more livestock, we can make more profit. Of course you would have to forget all of the above and the fact that transportation and the environmental damage would increase majorly. But 'pifft' to all that! Use humans are greedy bastards.
Okay, sarcasm aside for a sec; doesn't it bother you however that the stake you could be consuming isn't... well, normal? I mean, you've have scientists probing that thing to see if people can even eat and AND the fact that some countries have banned it. Now think how you're about to put it in your mouth.

See this image:



See it? That is the symbol of what people should hate.

Why? This is the company that is like those mad scientists on TV. The ones where they both own a huge company making millions of dollars which they use to create an army of mutants. Hear, Monsanto uses recombinant bovine somatotropin (rBST) or recombinant bovine growth hormone (rBGH) in their cows to make more milk and meat while sucking the money from them.
The cows given the hormones had increased health problems such as clinical mastitis and lameness.
While the hormones don't survive the process to humans and have not yet caused any health risks, Canada and Europe have banned its use over suspects of having amounts of IGF-1, the drug used in rBGH. IGF-1 is a biologically active hormone associated with breast cancer (correlation shown in premenopausal women), prostate cancer, lung cancer and colon cancers.

In 1998, Phil Angell, Monsanto's director of corporate communications had said, "Monsanto should not have to vouchsafe the safety of biotech food. Our interest is in selling as much of it as possible. Assuring its safety is FDA's job."
Even Fox News was hit by this company creating a lawsuit against two reporters who had uncovered documents from Monsanto, which showed that they failed to turn over health concern information to the FDA about rBST. This company belittles, what many hear would see as a great evil.

Japan, Australia, New Zealand, Canada and the European Union banned hormone enhanced milk and many companies fail to store it such as Starbucks and Safeway.
But really? Even if it were safe, is it morally right, and would you want to be supporting this company?
 

PurpleRain

New member
Dec 2, 2007
5,001
0
0
Glefistus said:
I saw Monsanto and assumed you were ranting about the evilest corporation to ever "grace" the Earth, but I was let down. You only covered it in half of your essay-ish post.
I could rant more about their evilness and how they should have been burnt to the stake at ye olde Salem during the witch killings.
(Disclaimer: I'm aware they didn't actually burn anyone at Salem. Just stoned one and hung 'em a bunch.)
 

El Poncho

Techno Hippy will eat your soul!
May 21, 2009
5,890
0
0
I may seem heartless but I don't really care if it's free range, but I guess if I ever see it and it's around the same price of a badly treated one then I will buy that instead.
 

PurpleRain

New member
Dec 2, 2007
5,001
0
0
poncho14 said:
I may seem heartless but I don't really care if it's free range, but I guess if I ever see it and it's around the same price of a badly treated one then I will buy that instead.
Do you know why or would you care to explain? It's just one of those things to me: On one side you have a normal steak (perhaps a bit more juicy and tender I have heard) and on the other, you're supporting an industry openly torturing animals.

I only imagine people don't care seeing as cows have little use in our society. People would get pretty picky if it were another type of animal.
 

Starnerf

The X makes it sound cool
Jun 26, 2008
986
0
0
I eat chicken. Steak is too expensive. But regardless of that, I don't think I've ever heard anything good about Monsanto.
 

El Poncho

Techno Hippy will eat your soul!
May 21, 2009
5,890
0
0
PurpleRain said:
poncho14 said:
I may seem heartless but I don't really care if it's free range, but I guess if I ever see it and it's around the same price of a badly treated one then I will buy that instead.
Do you know why or would you care to explain? It's just one of those things to me: On one side you have a normal steak (perhaps a bit more juicy and tender I have heard) and on the other, you're supporting an industry openly torturing animals.

I only imagine people don't care seeing as cows have little use in our society. People would get pretty picky if it were another type of animal.
The lazyness of checking if it's free range or not. When they get badly treated eh I don't know, I guess i've just not thought much of it but it's one of those things where i'd see it think oh shit thats bad , buy organic stuff then forget a few months later.
 

EMFCRACKSHOT

Not quite Cthulhu
May 25, 2009
2,973
0
0
If the cheaper stuff tasted as nice then i would buy that. I really couldn't care less about the animals. They are just food after all.
Of course, when i eat steak, i only eat the best. And the best tasting stake is the stuff that has been brought up free range and ethically and all that crap. Its te same with most meat unfortunately.. The exception of course beeing veel. That stuff is so nice. mmmmmm, i want some now
 

BehattedWanderer

Fell off the Alligator.
Jun 24, 2009
5,237
0
0
As a fan of steak, I say this: Free Range tastes just as good as penned (not caged, check your diction), and costs more. Yes, it's exciting to see cows standing out in an open field, doing absolutely nothing but standing there or maybe walking a few feet to the next spot. But ya know, penned animals get the same experience. They're out of the pens during the day, given bales of hay and a boring old field to eat in/of, and are put back in the pens for the evening, for nap time. Hell, the ones in the pens actually get around to getting more, better food (vitamin enriched grains and such)than those that just get a field. Sure, their life is less exciting, but guess what--They're cows. They don't exactly go sky diving (unless this is The Far Side). The epitome of their existence is a grand ole routine, eat-poop-eat-sleep-repeat. Beyond that, the risk of cows getting out, and say, walking onto a highway, is much greater when they're free range--and if that doesn't worry you, know that an 18-wheeler is about the only thing on the road that can hit a cow and sustain only moderate damage.

I always love threads like this, especially when it's started by those who don't actually get out and around cows that much, and I get the distinct feeling that there's a bit of a gap between you and your field of free range cows, no?
 

PurpleRain

New member
Dec 2, 2007
5,001
0
0
Starnerf said:
I eat chicken. Steak is too expensive. But regardless of that, I don't think I've ever heard anything good about Monsanto.
Same thing really... apart from the growth hormones. But to make up for that, they do tend to starve chickens at times to increase the rate or quality of eggs? One or the other. I should look further into this.

poncho14 said:
PurpleRain said:
poncho14 said:
I may seem heartless but I don't really care if it's free range, but I guess if I ever see it and it's around the same price of a badly treated one then I will buy that instead.
Do you know why or would you care to explain? It's just one of those things to me: On one side you have a normal steak (perhaps a bit more juicy and tender I have heard) and on the other, you're supporting an industry openly torturing animals.

I only imagine people don't care seeing as cows have little use in our society. People would get pretty picky if it were another type of animal.
The lazyness of checking if it's free range or not. When they get badly treated eh I don't know, I guess i've just not thought much of it but it's one of those things where i'd see it think oh shit thats bad , buy organic stuff then forget a few months later.
So it's sheer laziness to look at packets or ask one person if it is free range or not.

People can make choices, good and bad. Though people fail to make those choices and resume to stay ignorant of things.

EMFCRACKSHOT said:
If the cheaper stuff tasted as nice then i would buy that. I really couldn't care less about the animals. They are just food after all.
Of course, when i eat steak, i only eat the best. And the best tasting stake is the stuff that has been brought up free range and ethically and all that crap. Its te same with most meat unfortunately.. The exception of course beeing veel. That stuff is so nice. mmmmmm, i want some now
Veal and lamb I really can't digest (metaphorically and literally). They're babies. It's like wearing harp seal fur and whatnot... only in your stomach.

BehattedWanderer said:
As a fan of steak, I say this: Free Range tastes just as good as penned (not caged, check your diction), and costs more. Yes, it's exciting to see cows standing out in an open field, doing absolutely nothing but standing there or maybe walking a few feet to the next spot. But ya know, penned animals get the same experience. They're out of the pens during the day, given bales of hay and a boring old field to eat in/of, and are put back in the pens for the evening, for nap time. Hell, the ones in the pens actually get around to getting more, better food (vitamin enriched grains and such)than those that just get a field. Sure, their life is less exciting, but guess what--They're cows. They don't exactly go sky diving (unless this is The Far Side). The epitome of their existence is a grand ole routine, eat-poop-eat-sleep-repeat. Beyond that, the risk of cows getting out, and say, walking onto a highway, is much greater when they're free range--and if that doesn't worry you, know that an 18-wheeler is about the only thing on the road that can hit a cow and sustain only moderate damage.

I always love threads like this, especially when it's started by those who don't actually get out and around cows that much, and I get the distinct feeling that there's a bit of a gap between you and your field of free range cows, no?
Research:
Lameness.
Foot diseases.
Stress.
Bloatedness (if that is a word?)
Etc.

Penned animals don't experience the same as free range cows. Not by a long shot and there is no arguing that.

And also, don't people eat-poop-eat-sleep-repeat as well (throw in some paper money and TV)? I don't understand your point.
 

Puzzles

New member
Aug 9, 2009
793
0
0
If I am a better predator than the cow, the meat is mine for the taking.

If cows hate it so much they should fight back. Until then, I eat meat.
 

Aardvark

New member
Sep 9, 2008
1,721
0
0
You would agree, by and large, vegetarians are communists. And, as we all know, communism is the very definition of failure.
 

Semitendon

New member
Aug 4, 2009
359
0
0
I don't care if a cow isn't "happy" with it's life right before it is cut down to make steak. Actually, I don't care if any "food source" animal is "happy" before it dies. As far as free-range nonsense goes, I am NOT going to pay extra money so that the cow was "happy", I am going to buy a government certified FDA steak. And I am going to enjoy it.

Maybe genetic manipulation is a bad thing. Sure, by using genetics we are producing more food to help starving people, but fuck them, the cows aren't "happy".

Maybe hormones and chemicals and artificial vitamins should be removed from our food and water. Of course, many of those things have been added to the food to ensure things like pregnant women will get all their vitamins, and keep serious birth defects from forming. But fuck the kids and women, THE COWS AREN'T HAPPY!!!
 

PurpleRain

New member
Dec 2, 2007
5,001
0
0
Puzzles said:
If I am a better predator than the cow, the meat is mine for the taking.

If cows hate it so much they should fight back. Until then, I eat meat.
Aardvark said:
You would agree, by and large, vegetarians are communists. And, as we all know, communism is the very definition of failure.
I am honesty depressed how let down I am about these responses. I had researched this issue for the past year. Because of my disagreement with the meat industry I had turned vegetarian. Because I agree that people have the right to eat what they want, I only offer up reasons why people should choose a better alternative. And yet I get answers like this.

I'm starting to think that you all don't get it. Where I work concerns a lot of meat, but the managers there choose to only output free range. The people who shop there choose to by and eat supporting free range. Everyday people have a choice in everything that they do, whether walk or bus to work, etc, and each choice has consequences. Everyone has a choice of what they eat and what it is that they are supporting, for both their health and the industry surrounding it. And here I am wanting to show the alternatives and people make boring jokes on how vegetarians are communists and how cows should fight back.

*Sigh*
 

Silva

New member
Apr 13, 2009
1,122
0
0
There was a lot of thought put into this topic, and poignant points have been made. Free range is the best. I don't care about the cost, you treat animals ethically.

Aardvark said:
You would agree, by and large, vegetarians are communists. And, as we all know, communism is the very definition of failure.
Oh dear. Please, please tell me you're not serious.

If you are, please try to read a political textbook before you start using the word "communism" for things completely unrelated to it.
 

PurpleRain

New member
Dec 2, 2007
5,001
0
0
Semitendon said:
I don't care if a cow isn't "happy" with it's life right before it is cut down to make steak. Actually, I don't care is any "food source" animal is "happy" before it dies. As far as free-range nonsense goes, I am NOT going to pay extra money so that the cow was "happy", I am going to buy a government certified FDA steak. And I am going to enjoy it.

Maybe genetic manipulation is a bad thing. Sure, by using genetics we are producing more food to help starving people, but fuck them, the cows aren't "happy".

Maybe hormones and chemicals and artificial vitamins should be removed from our food and water. Of course, many of those things have been added to the food to ensure things like pregnant women will get all their vitamins, and keep serious birth defects from forming. But fuck the kids and women, THE COWS AREN'T HAPPY!!!
'producing more food to help starving people' Where? I understand that it is great in 3rd world countries but in places like American and England how is it helping?
Also, on the case of the pregnant females, I think it's the exact opposite of what you are saying.

Also, what do you make of eating locally? The Earth isn't happy but fuck it, right?
 

Housebroken Lunatic

New member
Sep 12, 2009
2,544
0
0
PurpleRain said:
Thirdly:
Make Sure It's Natural

Through genetically modified organism and genetic manipulation, we can create fast growing cows and crops. With more livestock, we can make more profit. Of course you would have to forget all of the above and the fact that transportation and the environmental damage would increase majorly. But 'pifft' to all that! Use humans are greedy bastards.
Okay, sarcasm aside for a sec; doesn't it bother you however that the stake you could be consuming isn't... well, normal? I mean, you've have scientists probing that thing to see if people can even eat and AND the fact that some countries have banned it. Now think how you're about to put it in your mouth.
If it weren't for the fact that enviromental nutcases actively try to put a stop to all genetic manipulation, we could have livestock who aren't able to feel pain or who aren't even awake for their entire lives.

Just imagine. A "meatplant". It's body is composed of bovine meat, but it doesn't feel any pain or discomfort because it's brain has been genetically engineered to not being able to feel such things and even be aware of it's surroundings. Meaning, mankind can continue to eat meat, without having to make aware and active animals suffer for it. We can just harvest our genetically engineered bovine "meatplants".

But because of you health and enviromentalist nuts, along with the fundamentalist religious zealots such a thing will never happen. Because ALL genetic manipulation is by default "wrong" in your eyes. You don't even care about the progress that could be made from it, progress that could spare the suffering of many people and even the livestock we use as a foodsource.

Quite simply, you want to halt progress in order to safeguard your narcissistic preferenses for what's "natural". THAT is immoral!
 

Monkfish Acc.

New member
May 7, 2008
4,102
0
0
You know, I'm not entirely sure, but I think nearly every bit of meat in Ireland is free-range.
I mean, take a five minute drive out of any city, and you'll come across a bunch of fields. The country consists almost entirely of farms. You're actually more likely to come across a well-tended field than you are wild, unowned land.
Also, on every meat package I see, there is large text plastered all over it boasting about how it is LOCAL IRISH, so you better fucking enjoy it or you're a filthy foreign bastard.
But, again, I don't really know for sure. I rarely pay attention to this stuff. I still can't help but view organic products as something rich families get just because they can afford it.
It does sound like a problem, though. I understand the reasoning behind using growth hormones and such to make vegetables bigger, but I'm not sure I'd want someone mutating a living, breathing creature just so people can eat something they like.
And the whole idea behing mistreating livestock has always confused me. Don't happy, healthy livestock generally provide better meat? What's the point in locking them up in a cage and treating them like crap?
It's probably a money thing, I know. But better meat stands to make a better profit. There's a pretty popular saying in business that goes "you have to lose money to make money", right? So why isn't it adhered to here?

Buh. Sorry if all that sounds kind of stupid. I'm ridiculously tired.
Hopefully it at least makes a bit of sense. And hopefully I haven't made an idiot of myself.
You know. Again.

[small]Disclaimer: Everything in italics is almost purely hyperbole.
Obviously.[/small]
 

Puzzles

New member
Aug 9, 2009
793
0
0
PurpleRain said:
I'll take boring jokes over boring preaching any day. I'd go to church if I wanted that, but I'd still rather go to hell than waste my sundays on... Whatever it is they are trying to do.

I just think people care about silly things these days, and sometimes it seems like a good war, or even better; a famine, would stop people complaining about things like this. The cow doesn't neccessarily know any other world besides its farm/cage life, what makes you think it has any idea it is being treated badly.

You start giving cows rights, and soon they'll be votin' like them thar fee-males (of course, I am not serious, I just don't see the point of getting worked up by a cows life so I'll throw in a lame joke.)
 

Semitendon

New member
Aug 4, 2009
359
0
0
PurpleRain said:
Semitendon said:
I don't care if a cow isn't "happy" with it's life right before it is cut down to make steak. Actually, I don't care is any "food source" animal is "happy" before it dies. As far as free-range nonsense goes, I am NOT going to pay extra money so that the cow was "happy", I am going to buy a government certified FDA steak. And I am going to enjoy it.

Maybe genetic manipulation is a bad thing. Sure, by using genetics we are producing more food to help starving people, but fuck them, the cows aren't "happy".

Maybe hormones and chemicals and artificial vitamins should be removed from our food and water. Of course, many of those things have been added to the food to ensure things like pregnant women will get all their vitamins, and keep serious birth defects from forming. But fuck the kids and women, THE COWS AREN'T HAPPY!!!
'producing more food to help starving people' Where? I understand that it is great in 3rd world countries but in places like American and England how is it helping?
Also, on the case of the pregnant females, I think it's the exact opposite of what you are saying.

Also, what do you make of eating locally? The Earth isn't happy but fuck it, right?
Yes, because the genetic research and production in 3rd world countries is fantastic!
America is one of the largest suppliers of food to the world, 3rd world countries included. That's why it's neccessary in America.

Actually, if stopped looking at Peta propaganda and did some research in say. . . the medical and science fields, you would realize that a great many things have been added to food and water for our benefit. And in a few of these "free-range" animal farms those all important things have been taken away. A little more research on your part, and you would also find that many of these "free-range" products, aren't "free-range" at all. No, they are made by giant companies who slap a label on it and sell it at an increased price, so that they can take advantage of all the bleeding heart, delusional, people out there who look at a cow, and see Bambi. So, no I don't have it wrong, you do. Please look it up.