565
I don't know how to feel but I know I'm laughing
(startrek.website)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 17 Oct 2023
565 points (89.8% liked)
Funny: Home of the Haha
5717 readers
965 users here now
Welcome to /c/funny, a place for all your humorous and amusing content.
Looking for mods! Send an application to Stamets!
Our Rules:
-
Keep it civil. We're all people here. Be respectful to one another.
-
No sexism, racism, homophobia, transphobia or any other flavor of bigotry. I should not need to explain this one.
-
Try not to repost anything posted within the past month. Beyond that, go for it. Not everyone is on every site all the time.
Other Communities:
-
/c/TenForward@lemmy.world - Star Trek chat, memes and shitposts
-
/c/Memes@lemmy.world - General memes
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
To be fair, these are very young animals. Lamb is just a name they use for "baby sheep" to make it more palatable. It's the same with "veal".
I eat lots of animals, but I don't like eating the baby ones. Haven't had one in at least a decade, and I really don't think I'm missing out on anything.
The reason for the name isn't to make it more palatable, at least originally. The name for the animal comes from the peasants, speaking old English, and the name for the food came from the nobility speaking French, who didn't have to deal with the animals. We call adult sheep meat mutton, for example, not to make it palatable, but because of the history of the language. Same for deer/venison, pig/pork, cow/beef, etc.
Edit: actually I don't know if this is true for lamb, but for veal and the rest it's true.
In my language, which is very distant from the english/frank dicotomy, we never had that distinction between peasant and nobility food and still we get a lot of words to distinguish between meats.
Mutton is either carneiro/ovelha (ram/sheep) or just chanfana (this word is used to denote the meat comes from a fully matured animal, over a minimum of two years old, usually around four or five).
Lamb can either be borrego (most commonly used word) or anho (a less used word, alledgely tied to the time we were under moorish occupation).
The words are imperative and not there to make things more palatable; these can't be thrown around to designate the meat solely, as the meat designates the animal and vice versa.
To be fair, they taste delicious.
Lol yeah they could have gone to college or cured cancer.
The lambs typically live longer than chickens.
Thats about animal lifespan, and has nothing to do with the conversation.
They also live better than chickens though.
The person I was replying to was referring to not wanting to eat baby sheep because they're young, I was pointing out that another meat they probably eat has an even shorter lifespan. Point being, if you're against eating baby sheep because they're young, you should also probably be against eating chicken, because they're younger and have an even worse life.
Thats completely and entirely dependant on the farm, not their being chickens.
Again, "younger" is relative to the lifespan of an animal. We dont eat chicks.
And the quality of life for a chicken is not based on its age or net time spent living, but by the type of farm who owns them.
You dont have a point or statement here.
No. We just breed them such that they grow so much muscle mass the chicken couldn't live much longer than its harvested lifespan. It will be unable to stand up, and rot to death on the spot. Other breeds of chickens have much longer lives, 5-10 years, but meat chickens only live 6-7 weeks.
I do have a point, you just can't accept that you're a little bit more ignorant in these matters than I am.
Which, again, is breed and farm owner specific, and has exactly zero to do with age of the animal on both a species specific tims span and net time alive.
Do you think I, a farm worker, do not understand the nuance of farm animals? Or are you just too pig headed to admit you were wrong and are now trying to pretend that any and every issue with farm animals is secretly about the amount of time they are alive before we eat them?
Yes, dependant on the breed - like I already said. We're talking about meat chickens here, and the longest I can find is about 24 weeks. That's still a lot shorter than 5-10 years. In terms of conditions, the best kept chicken is probably about on par with sheep. So conditions for chickens are worse overall.
Edit: found a couple that take a year to grow. But also, these are specialty chickens, not the kind of chickens that most people eat. /e
I've made my point very clearly, now you're tying to say I've said something different. All because you can't stand the fact that it is a valid point - meat chickens generally have worse and shorter lives than lambs.
Egg laying chickens are another matter, of course, but then that's more or less comparable to sheep kept for wool.
You're clearly the pig-headed one here. You're not trying to reason with me, you're just being an ass.
Yet again, none of this has anything to do with eating the animal before it has matured, which was the original comment you responded to.
I dont know if you just cant read, or what, but nothing youve said is eating chicks before theyve reached adulthood. I can repeat this for you as much as you like until it clicks, but there isnt a way to dumb it down any further than already done.
Ok, I see where you're coming from. Yes, the chicken has grown its adult feathers and size, while the lamb still has some growing to do. But in terms of the portion of its feasible life span, and in terms of being "mature" enough to eat, where the quality of the meat would drop off afterwards, the average commercial meat chicken reaches meat maturity quicker and misses out on more of its life than your average lamb does. The commercial meat chicken generally has a worse life than a lamb does. Yet people feel more sympathy towards cute little lambs than chickens.
Even if the lifespans and conditions were exactly the same, the point I'm making is that people feel more sympathy towards one type of animal when another should be at least just as worthy of it. The fact that it's a "baby" is irrelevant, because the justification for feeling that way about babies is that it hasn't had the chance to live a full life.
Saying it's ok to kill a chicken but not ok to kill a lamb is like saying that it's ok to send an underage man off to war because he hit puberty early.
What if we breed an animal to be mature at birth? Is that more or less ethical to eat than a lamb?
Also I'd like to apologise for saying you were being an ass - I was clearly the one doing that. It's been a pleasure chatting with you overall.
Literally no hard feelings, we are faceless strangers arguing on a platform designed to encourage sass, a mood thats 90% tone.
Nah, you were fine.
Very palatable