It used to be that everyone just ate everything. I mean, if you went walking through the woods and you saw something
move, you shot it and cleaned it and ate it. No one talked about how the animals felt about it. It's just the way it was and
we liked it that way!!!
Then folks started worrying about it. It started to occur to people that maybe a deer walking through the woods didn't
want to get shot and eaten and have its head hung up on the wall. Folks got this notion because of a movie called
Bambi.
Bambi had an advantage over other deer in that he could talk. I mean, being a cartoon and all, he didn't have a problem
representing his own interests. And so now, whenever anyone goes hunting, folks always bring it up...You wouldn't shoot
Bambi, would you? You wouldn't eat Bambi, would you?
I don't think those folks saw the movie. First of all, everyone uses the name Bambi for girls and strippers and stuff,
but Bambi was a guy. Second of all, Bambi never got shot; his mom did.
Anyway, I have my own theories about deer and I like to believe that deep down inside they like to get shot,
eaten, and hung up on walls. You know like how Klingons fight over honor and always say "It is a good day to die." I think
deer are kind of the same way. It's their purpose, their honor, it's how they define themselves.
The point is, fewer and fewer people these days hunt or eat wild game. I guess they think it's barbaric or something.
But at least the deer and the rabbits and the bear have a fighting chance, at least more than a cow does of dodging a sledgehammer
while standing in a four foot pen.
And that brings us to the next stage, which is not eating meat at all. Because once folks got into their heads that hunting
was bad and wrong, the next step was obvious, that eating any kind of animal was wrong. Because animals have feelings. Animals
have rights. Animals are people, too.
Sort of.
Now, I can respect this point of view even though I don't share
it. At all. Because I don't believe that animals think or feel the same way that we do. And since they don't communicate with
us, I doubt that I will ever be convinced otherwise. But be that as it may, I respect vegetarians and believe that they are
(or can be) sincere and honest in their beliefs. Even though I think they're total doofwads.
Now all of this is well
and good, and I respect someone with a sincere desire to look out for and protect animals that can't look out for or protect
themselves. But there are people who couldn't give a crap about animals, and just don't eat meat because it's not good for
you. Which is also true, I suppose, especially if you're into eating huge marbled steaks like all those old John Ford Westerns,
or hamburgers all the time like that roundy Wimpy guy from Popeye cartoons. Still, it's something I can respect. Sort of.
But
this just brings us to the next stage, which is what they call "vegans" who not only don't eat meat, but animal products of
any kind. This includes milk, butter, cheese, eggs, whatever. This is kind of hard to get your head around, until you realize
that the word "vegan" is just a code word for "anorexic". It's not that these folks object to eating animals or animal products;
it's that they object to eating anything at all.
I think it's all self-serving in a really twisted way. What I mean
to say is, I don't think these folks are really trying to help animals at all. If they are, they're failing miserably. If
they were, they might consider for half a second that if no one eats beef or chicken or pork products, and if no one eats
eggs or milk or cheese, then there's really no reason for anyone to go on raising chickens or cows or pigs.
So then
what happens? They all go wild and live in the forests and jungles, in trees and caves, and their populations explode and
wreak ecological disaster on the environment, exhausting all our resources. Either that, or they die off and go extinct and
in 100 years little Billy is standing in a museum next to a stuffed cow, holding his father's hand and crying "Whatever happened
to all the cows, daddy?"
So, we started off eating everything. Then we stopped eating wild game. Then we stopped eating
meat. Then we stopped eating all animal products.And now you start to hear about folks who won't eat anything that's ever
been cooked. This almost sounds kind of primal, but I don't know if these are the kinds of folks who would eat a pound of
raw bacon and wash it down with six raw eggs in a glass; I think they're more the type who eat raw carrots and celery.
I
don't know what's next. The next step could be that you start hearing about people who refuse to eat anything that was ever
alive. No meat, dairy, eggs, or even plants. I don't know what that leaves? Salt? Rocks? Vitamin supplements? I can't help
thinking, though, that when you hear people say things like "She eats food like it's going out of style," that maybe food
really is going out of style.
Of course, it could be the opposite. There could be some kind of macho backlash where
people refuse to eat anything but meat. And not just meat, but raw meat. And not just raw meat, but actual living animal flesh.
Like you have to rip out the still-beating heart from a chicken before you devour it raw.
Anyway, just a thought.
(From The Mailbag, March 10)
OK Hi, I always like your writings and have never disagreed with you on any of it, because Its hilarious and true,
unless your just making s*** up and then its not. Anyways, I really disagree with you on the fact that animals dont have feelings
like us. I eat meat, all kinds of meat, and I'm not against hunting or anything of the sort,but animal do have feelings. I
own lots of them and you can see that they do. I'm not pissed off at you for what you believe, but its kinda aggrevating.
I read this vet book once and it stated that not to long ago scientists didn't think animals had feelings either and that
they only cried when they were hit kinda like a natrual reaction. So they used to nail dogs up to the wall and disect them
while they were still alive, to prove that it didn't hurt them and when the dogs would scream, they said it was a natrual
reaction and that the dogs didn't feel it.I think its proven that a dog who has been beat by its owner will respond with anger
and I dog who is treated with love will not. I think mabye you should study this more, before making a conclusion that animals
dont feel.
So if I'm just making it up, then it's not hilarious or true?
Actually, this would be a valid criticism, if it's what I had actually said. I never said that animals don't feel anything,
like they don't have nerve endings in their skin and teeth that transmit sensory data to receptors in their brains. I never
even said that animals don't feel things in an emotional sense, like anger or sadness or fear. I just meant that the things
they value, and the things that motivate them, may be completely different than what we value, or what motivates us.
Remember the old Starkist ads with the gay tuna who was always trying to get caught so that he could be put in a can?
And the guy would say "Sorry, Charlie, Starkist doesn't want tuna with good taste; it wants tuna that tastes good." It was
like the tuna wanted to be eaten. As humans we may not understand that, how tuna may define themselves this way, because we
flee from death, unless it's an honorable or noble one. To the tuna, though, this just may be their honor. It may be the same
thing with deer, or chicken.
I'm not saying they don't feel. The text says "Because I don't believe that animals think or feel the
same way that we do." I hope you can see the difference.
|