The first octopus farm – should it go ahead?
bbc.com
bbc.com
There is controversy around farming octopi, as if there is any significant moral difference an octopus and a pig? It’s schizophrenic reasoning.
We shouldn’t be farming _any_ animal that has the capacity to suffer. I’d almost prefer if folks who eat animals just ate everything and didn’t try to justify to themselves why some animals are okay to farm and others aren’t. At least then we’d have even an iota of consistency.
And yes, I know the dietary preferences of westerners do not reflect dietary practices worldwide, but every culture does indeed engage in ridiculous, nonsensical partitioning of the tree of life into edible and inedible animals for no good reasons other than “culture” or “tradition”.
Is an example of how you need to support scientists for a LOT of time, so they can bring you lots of money in return. The common chunks ranging between one-three years are useless.
> Should it go ahead?
Capital uppercase YES. We are trying to save millions of sentient and really smart animals in the planet that could die from famine if we don't bring real solutions.
Oh yeah, we will save millions of lives by eating octopus - which is viewed as an exquisite dish, grouped with the rest of sea food enterprise. /s
Extremely efficient, and totally not to cut costs. /s
In fact Pescanova is known for it's quest to end world hunger. ( even more /s)
You may had heard about an organization called FAO. For some reason, they think that seafood is important for humans.
But if you don't like it, or this is not in your culture, this is perfectly OK. Just don't eat it and problem solved for everybody.
Well, certainly not the octopi.
You know, considering they are bred in captivity and killed prematurely against their will and all.
I doubt FAO is talking about the upper classes eating Octopus or Lobster in some restaurant, so yeah, that argument doesn't stick.
>But if you don't like it, or this is not in your culture, this is perfectly OK. Just don't eat it and problem solved for everybody.
That's just the crappiest argument:
"Oh you don't like that dolphins are gathered in a bay and clubbed to death in Japan? Don't eat dolphin, problem solved. It's just culture."
"Don't like to eat dogs? Don't eat dogs, problem solved. It's culture."
"Don't like to eat bats? Don't eat bat, problem solved. It's not your culture."
"Don't like to see bulls getting fucked up in bullfights? Don't watch it, problem solved. It's culture in some places".
If culture was justification for anything, slaves would still be a major work force in every developed country. It was just culture after all, right?
I see. So the problem is that at this moment, somewhere, a rich could be eating well and having a lot of fun... and this is unacceptable and outrageous for some reason.
Or that you want to play the envy card, and convince us to start a revolution? Send us to take the capitol dressed as captain shrimpmurica, Qmejillon, or something?.
I don't think so.
Bad news for you. I'm adult, and not impressed by such dumb attempts of emotional manipulation. In your little world only royals eat octopus and lobsters? Really? You obviously never has been in a Mediterranean country. Or in Southern Asia. Or in South America.
Let me get you back on track:
You were saying FOA deemed sea food as important, like that was some argument that justifies breeding yet another animal with high levels of cognition.
I said that Pescanova wasn't trying to save the world from hunger, they sell to retail and restaurants, so this is just a way to cut costs.
And you went on some non-sense bullshit about culture - which of course doesn't justify wrong doing am I right? I broke it down to help you understand it giving you examples.
Now... you're trying to flip this around, bridging from FOA - which you mentioned in some stupid attempt to justify eating octopus and lobster - to me being jealous of those who can afford to pay for such foods.
You are owning yourself with your own arguments man, we just need to sit back and watch you.
>I'm adult, and not impressed by such dumb attempts of emotional manipulation.
Well you're not behaving like an adult, but more like a teen that's grasping for arguments after he paddled bullshit and got caught.
>You obviously never has been in a Mediterranean country. Or in Southern Asia. Or in South America.
I'm from the south of Portugal my guy, you know, one of the cultural groups you were talking about. We have plenty of octopus and lobster - we also have bull fighting just in case you didn't know.
Yeah... that's a wrap.
Great. Then you should be able to grasp a few really basic concepts.
1) Some countries need to trust in seafood to feed their population. Portugal for example.
Remove cod overnight and a lot of Portuguese will have problems to feed their family accurately. Do we want that? Do you think that octopus are "smart" and cod are "dumb" so one is kosher and the other not? Well... This is pseudo-religious thinking, neither based in logic, nor supported by real biological knowledge.
2) In the market, more offer leads normally to a decrease in prices.
So is easy to understand that more affordable prices benefit mostly the lower classes (aka poor people). People that weren't able to buy some food can now eat it.
3) Alleviate the excessive predatory pressure over a species is a desirable outcome.
Alleviate the pressure over the wild fisheries of octopus is good for the species of octopus, not bad. Think in all the octopus children that will survive now instead being killed in their tender infancy while sucking an ice-crab cream (eh, emotional manipulation is a lot of fun. I should use it more).
The farmed octopus? would not live otherwise. In my book living a short live is better that non living at all. Specially when you are a short lived species and a year means like 50 years in human time.
And you should support the "sad women octopus that avoid now a cruel and painful dead starving for months while crying in a dark crevice after being raped by an evil male". Don't you? Facing a quick painless death after living a happy life in a place without predators or diseases and with plenty of food and home rocks doesn't look so bad now.
Who knows? Maybe this solitary creatures will finally have time for developing Philosophy, shell's art or playing Squidspeare in the park
What the hell. Have we become so cruel to eat animals alive? This just ruined my day.
These are things that are done millions and millions of times a year around the entire world.
Let’s not pretend only the people that chew animals while they’re alive are reprehensible.
I'd react exactly the same about anyone who eats animals alive, whatever their skin color. There is nothing racist about my comment. Please don't imagine or project.
It would have seemed less racist if you had specified that your day was ruined by the discovery of people eating animals alive - exactly as you have in your follow up. Without it, the sentence is ambiguous as to whether your day was ruined by the particular country’s people, their practice, or any eating of animals. The English language isn’t as precise as I would like it to be so again I apologize.
Follow up question: How do you feel about your distant ancestral blood relatives eating animals alive?
The comment was clear about what they found upsetting. The only racism is whatever you have imagined.
I don’t feel anything about my ancestors. It just feels icky that there are people today, who enjoy chewing animals that are alive. This is not Stone Age and we are not Komodo dragons or pythons. I am against eating meat in general, but that is a topic on its own.
There was another discussion here recently about boiling lobsters. That sounded horrific too. What is the point of inflicting this level of cruelty?
I am thoroughly enjoying this conversation though.
One point of rationalization I have been able to articulate is that I find it just as icky to chew plants that are alive (or boiled) as I find it to chew animals/insects that are alive (or boiled). So all else equal I will eat what is tastier to me.
Besides ethics, a good reason to inflict a quick death is because a slow death may change the taste of the meat.
The point of inflicting that level of cruelty is to cook the meat and make it fit for human consumption. Stabbing it with a knife properly prior to boiling is just as cruel to the lobster because it ends its life. The cruelty is the loss of life, arguing about the cruelty of the method of taking the life is really splitting hairs.
Those that don’t condone this level of cruelty and don’t partake are commendable.
Those that acknowledge the cruelty and thank the dead animal for its contribution and take steps to not waste any part of the dead animal are also commendable.
If you were to be killed, would you rather take cyanide for a quick death or be boiled alive? One can be humane even when taking a life.
The fact that we humans value our taste buds more than the suffering of the animals we kill for food, shows how cruel we are. There is absolutely no reason for us to be this cruel, in my opinion.
Is there a different term for a lion that takes the time to make sure it’s prey is dead before eating it? Or does it not exist.
The word to describe both a human enacting that “cruelty” and a lion enacting that cruelty are the same. Primal, natural, etc.
Humans are the only predators that are apologetic about it. One could argue that because we have the ability to know the difference, we should do something about it.
That is a little too much thinking for the typical home chef though so you have lobsters boiled instead of stabbed and boiled. That extra second wasn’t worth the lessened net cruelty. That is how most humans are, you are an exception. This is how all animals are.
Humanity is a whole different beast. Except when it isn’t.
The cruelty that happens in meat factories is well hidden from the general public, unless they are specifically looking into the issue (google ag-gag laws), my guess is many people don't even realize how bad it is. They might have second thoughts about supporting meat industry if they are made aware.
It is obvious we look at this topic from completely different angles. I respect your opinion, but I strongly disagree. Maybe we can just leave it at that :)