Full of bullFollow

Yeah, I think most non-Spanish Westerners are going to be on the side of the bull here. Knowing pre-history, ancient history, sliding up through the last 10,000 years, I can see and appreciate the last lingering reasons why bull-fighting is seen as heroic, honourable, even a religious, communal experience, and why bull-fighters are revered by many Spanish. I'll be happy when it's finally laid to rest, along with other old paradigms.

I have to say that the first two are absolutely riveting photographs, hypnotic in their subject matter and composition. I am not afraid to say I love those photos, even as I am revolted by the subject matter, and am made bleakly, bitterly sad by the blood running down the side of the bull, evidence of the knives buried deep in its flesh.

I am a proud, happy omnivore, but I don't want my food origin animals tortured before-hand. The bull and the man here suffer in mutual assault, but the photos are beautiful and I respect and admire the photographer's skill of capture.

Yeah, I paused longer than I should of at the second picture. I, too, was staring at the blood soaked thingies in the bulls back. I wondered if the white terry-cloth soaking up the blood was simply a visual effect, or if the length of soakage was a measure of the effectiveness of the bull-fighter.

Why? We shared baseball with them. They can give us some bull fighting.

Vick, International franchises will go on sale Tuesday, June 2, 2010.

Or hamster fighting. We can poke at them with little plastic drink swords until they submit and get back on the wheel.

Good lord. That was awful. :(

Seems pretty stupid to place no value on something's life but be so righteous about its suffering to me, but hey.

This isn't anywhere near as good as t5he one where the bull jumps from the arena into the crowd, crushing several people.

Yeah, the poor bull :(

Thank you, you fucking moron, I am not living in western society and so I've never encountered this before. I'm so grateful you took the time to enlighten me.

I don't. If you think of an animal as more than a biological machine, which have to to accept that they can suffer, then to view its life as worthless is monstrous. When you not only accept that an animal can suffer but pour self-righteous indignation on people that cause said suffering for their pleasure you become an idiot. You're valuing the events of its life above the life itself. You are saying that the suffering the animal feels is not worth the pleasure of bloodsport, but that their life is worth less than the equally transitory pleasure of consuming its flesh.

Well, actually you're saying their life is worth less than any possible reason for killing them, but I felt like speaking specifically about meat eating.

I went to a bull fight in Madrid and saw a matador get gored not once, bot twice, but thrice! After the third time, he had to be caried out of the ring, and another matador took his place (and fared considerably better).

That's fine, if you are a vegetarian. As someone who is extremely ill, and had to fiddle around with my diet a lot, I've had to become an amateur nutritionist in consultation with doctors. This has taught me that only extremely healthy, attentive and energetic individuals can afford to go on a time-consuming vegetarian diet without becoming nutritionally deficient in the long run.

Secondly, as a very amateur biologist, who watches weekly documentaries, it is clear that the majority of animals end their lives, not of old age, but of being eaten alive. Circle of Life thing. Unless you are a lucky Apex Predator, in which case dominance or territory fights, injury or illness is likely to take you out after a brief life full of starvation periods and semi-endless hunting.

I consider a humanely, properly treated ranging domestic animal in a varied and interesting environment who is killed as fast as possible before being eaten as having had a more valuable life than a wild animal who goes through the whole eaten alive to death thing.

I don't believe we're making a choice between letting an animal live in the wild and live in captivity, are we? Even if that were the choice, your argument would be weak; the ecosystem requires animals live and die within it, humans do not require that animals be killed so they can eat them. Even assuming you need to eat meat, the vast majority do not.

Being eaten alive isn't painful, for most prey animals. Their brain is flooded with endorphins and they stop moving. I think you're placing far too much import on a few moments of pain, anyway.

As I said, although I disagree with it, I at least find the view that (most) animals are biological machines (and thus we ca do whatever) somewhat palatable and internally consistent.