Jump to content

Jamie Oliver Killer of cute baby chicks


Amy
 Share

Recommended Posts

i think someone said that if slaughter houses had glass walls we would all be vegetarians. migh be an overstatement but it would make a lot of people think twice about what they are eating. and really that was all he did. of course it's murder but at least he isn't trying to cover it up like other chefs (important: i am not defending jamie oliver in any way, he sucks donkey boner)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fair play to him for acknowledging the truth about egg production and bringing it to wider public attention.
It's plain murder.

Well obviously.

 

Most people are still unaware of the slaughter of male chicks as part of the egg industry.

 

It goes on whether Jamie Oliver partakes in it or not.

 

He highlights how food is really produced, and most people will listen to someone like Jamie Oliver rather than a vegan.

 

He did a similiar stunt - I think it was him, maybe some other celebrity chef - where he slit a lamb's throat on TV. At least they admit how food is really produced and try to bring that to wider public attention.

 

I know his intent is not to make people go vegan, but as a result of such actions appearing on mainstream TV, I think some people will consider more how their animal products are really produced and some of those will consider and attempt vegetaranism and veganism as a result.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fair play to him for acknowledging the truth about egg production and bringing it to wider public attention.
It's plain murder.

Well obviously.

 

Most people are still unaware of the slaughter of male chicks as part of the egg industry.

 

It goes on whether Jamie Oliver partakes in it or not.

 

He highlights how food is really produced, and most people will listen to someone like Jamie Oliver rather than a vegan.

 

He did a similiar stunt - I think it was him, maybe some other celebrity chef - where he slit a lamb's throat on TV. At least they admit how food is really produced and try to bring that to wider public attention.

 

I know his intent is not to make people go vegan, but as a result of such actions appearing on mainstream TV, I think some people will consider more how their animal products are really produced and some of those will consider and attempt vegetaranism and veganism as a result.

I know what you're saying but I bet you wouldn't talk that way if he tortured some kids to show the influence of the rich parts of the world towards the poor.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know what you're saying but I bet you wouldn't talk that way if he tortured some kids to show the influence of the rich parts of the world towards the poor.

He is showing the reality of egg production.

 

Torturing children in some hypothetical and disturbing TV stunt is not really the best way – in fact I fail to see any link - of highlighting the influence of the rich over the poor.

 

So no I wouldn’t talk that way Ping as your example is not really a valid comparison nor is it ever going to happen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know what you're saying but I bet you wouldn't talk that way if he tortured some kids to show the influence of the rich parts of the world towards the poor.

He is showing the reality of egg production.

 

Torturing children in some hypothetical and disturbing TV stunt is not really the best way – in fact I fail to see any link - of highlighting the influence of the rich over the poor.

 

So no I wouldn’t talk that way Ping as your example is not really a valid comparison nor is it ever going to happen.

OK, let's say if some American gased jews in 1940 in a TV show to show how fucked up the Germans are. Isn't that comparable? I don't mean to be offense but I really cannot see how one can view his action in any positive way.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK, let's say if some American gased jews in 1940 in a TV show to show how fucked up the Germans are. Isn't that comparable? I don't mean to be offense but I really cannot see how one can view his action in any positive way.

It's OK, you’re not coming over as offensive.

 

The thing is most people do not regard the mass murder of people and the mass murder of animals for human consumption as comparable. They want to eat meat, eggs and milk and have few qualms about the killing of animals necessary to provide their chosen diet.

 

I’m not looking at this as a vegan, I’m looking at this from a wider perspective, and have no problem with Jamie Oliver on TV re-enacting to non-vegans what normally goes on behind closed doors. If some people as a result reappraise their eating of animal products and change their diet then that’s positive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK, let's say if some American gased jews in 1940 in a TV show to show how fucked up the Germans are. Isn't that comparable? I don't mean to be offense but I really cannot see how one can view his action in any positive way.

It's OK, you’re not coming over as offensive.

 

The thing is most people do not regard the mass murder of people and the mass murder of animals for human consumption as comparable. They want to eat meat, eggs and milk and have few qualms about the killing of animals necessary to provide their chosen diet.

 

I’m not looking at this as a vegan, I’m looking at this from a wider perspective, and have no problem with Jamie Oliver on TV re-enacting to non-vegans what normally goes on behind closed doors. If some people as a result reappraise their eating of animal products and change their diet then that’s positive.

The thing is that the main differences between normal campaigns and this one are:

He doesn't want to change it.

He kills beings instead of using footage.

He is no vegan.

What I've read here is that it's good he doesn't tell us the story from an activist's point of view and I agree. But the fact that he doesn't want to change anything has influence on the people's conclusion, I guess. But still, even if he'd like to show people the reality he could use footage and comment on it. Killing beings live is nothing we should ever consider nor appreciate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The thing is that the main differences between normal campaigns and this one are:

He doesn't want to change it.

He kills beings instead of using footage.

He is no vegan.

What I've read here is that it's good he doesn't tell us the story from an activist's point of view and I agree. But the fact that he doesn't want to change anything has influence on the people's conclusion, I guess. But still, even if he'd like to show people the reality he could use footage and comment on it. Killing beings live is nothing we should ever consider nor appreciate.

Jamie Oliver has never claimed to be a vegan and obviously has no vegan symapthies.

 

I have much more respect for anyone that consumes animal produce if they can actually bring themselves to do the killing themselves.

 

He uses animal produce - makes no odds to me if he did the killing personally or somebody else did it for him on his behalf. The animals are still going to be killed and he's still going to cook them regardless.

 

I appreciate he doesn't want to really change things - although he is a big campaigner for improved conditions in battery farms - and yes people will be swayed by what he does or doesn't do, but my point is that inadvertently he will change things for some.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have much more respect for anyone that consumes animal produce if they can actually bring themselves to do the killing themselves.
*sighs* I wouldn't say respect, but what I'd be fine with is searching and hunting (stealing etc.) animals in the wild, but anything with animals (factory) farm is wrong in my eyes.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not sure of Tarz's point of view, but the way I see it is that it's obviously unforgivable that billions of animals are killed for food. However, it's better for the killing to be displayed, so that people understand what's wrong with it. It would have been worse if that animal went to the slaughterhouse and was killed behind closed doors - like all other animals. I'd prefer animals to be killed in the street right up close and personal with the people who are buying them, rather than slaughterhouses.

 

It isn't a 'good' thing to publicly kill an animal, its just better than doing it secretly, because at least some kind of benefit can come out of it

 

Similarly, if a child is abused and nobody knows about it and it goes on for years, I'd say that's far worse than if it happens in public and people are made aware of it. Clearly it's not good in either way, but the more people who know the truth about the situation, the better. People are now talking about this 1 animal which was killed by Oliver, but nobody is talking about all the animals that are constantly killed in slaughterhouses, because they never see it and never have to think about it.

 

But for somebody to kill an animal as part of a campaign against cruelty to animals is insane. Just use footage of it. Oliver isn't a campaigner, and I think the point is that something productive can come out of it, even though clearly he shouldn't have killed the animal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have mixed feelings about this. On the one hand, something positive may come out of it indirectly (ie. people seeing the killing, and then going vegan). And it seems that Oliver's intentions are good (even if his actions are deplorable). But I somewhat doubt the idea that if all people were aware of slaughterhouse conditions they'd automatically become vegan. I mean, people throughout history have raised and slaughtered animals and have been aware of inherent cruelty in the process. The thing is, people have an amazing ability to rationalize and justify negative and destructive behaviors (in all aspects of life), in my opinion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

what richard said

 

 

x2

 

The only criticisms i have are these.

 

1. he chose a method that is not the norm for killing animals.

2. he could have used footage for the stunt. I understand the idea of bonding with an object through tactile contact and it brings a much more strong emotional reaction. But as a vegan i would have liked to not ad to the suffering and show previous suffering.

 

/vegan

 

that being said as someone who would not be vegan and not constrained by the ethical implications therin i would say that he did what he felt he should do to increase awareness of ones own eating habits. He is guilty from a vegans standpoint of atrocities everyday just by his eating habits so one can say that he at least understands this and wishes others to be cognizant of their own choices.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1. he chose a method that is not the norm for killing animals.

He chose one of the main/normal ways of killing chicks - gassing - the other method being minced alive, so he's not sanitizing or hiding anything.

 

The whole program was about egg production, so he's not going to start killing chicks in the same way you would cattle or pigs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If he wanted to show the audience the horrors of factory farms their are plenty of videos out there that do just that. he did not have to hurt more animals....how does killing animals prove that killing animals is wrong??

 

Also there may have been vegan/ vegetarians in the audience....if I had been their live this would have caused me severe physical and emotional pain...I would have been traumatized. I have never seen an animal die besides of natural causes and I don't need to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He never did it to show that killing animals is wrong, he did it to show the reality of egg production.

 

These male chicks weren't specially produced for this show. They were always going to die. The chick doesn't know that it's Jamie Oliver rather than anyone else about to kill it, nor does it matter to the chick whether it is killed on TV or in an egg production unit/facility.

 

The outcome is still the same.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He never did it to show that killing animals is wrong, he did it to show the reality of egg production.

 

I don't get it..doesn't he use eggs in his recipes...seems like he just wanted to pull a stunt to get ratings....the kind thing to do would have been to try to find the chicks good homes and tell the audience what would have happened to them on the farm. I think people that can kill animals are sick. I don't have it in me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He never did it to show that killing animals is wrong, he did it to show the reality of egg production.

 

I don't get it..doesn't he use eggs in his recipes...seems like he just wanted to pull a stunt to get ratings....the kind thing to do would have been to try to find the chicks good homes and tell the audience what would have happened to them on the farm. I think people that can kill animals are sick. I don't have it in me.

 

I doubt anyone care if you just tell them.

 

I'm sure the shock factor and actually experiencing it did more than words ever could have.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If he wanted to show the audience the horrors of factory farms their are plenty of videos out there that do just that. he did not have to hurt more animals....how does killing animals prove that killing animals is wrong??

 

Also there may have been vegan/ vegetarians in the audience....if I had been their live this would have caused me severe physical and emotional pain...I would have been traumatized. I have never seen an animal die besides of natural causes and I don't need to.

 

I don't know Jamie Oliver's motivations, and he is clearly wrong to kill an animal. However, I prefer for that animal to be killed in front of people rather than it happening where nobody is even paying attention.

 

Killing animals is on such a large scale, and it's done in private where most people will never see it, so it's a shock when we're confronted with it in this way. But I think it's important to remind ourselves that this does go on constantly, every day, for a huge number of animals. It's horrible, and it's horrible that this animal was killed on the show, but I feel worse about all those animals that die with no recognition.

 

Obviously, ideally he wouldn't have killed the animal, and he wouldn't be making non-vegan food.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't get it..doesn't he use eggs in his recipes...seems like he just wanted to pull a stunt to get ratings....the kind thing to do would have been to try to find the chicks good homes and tell the audience what would have happened to them on the farm. I think people that can kill animals are sick. I don't have it in me.

Yes, he uses eggs in his recipes, but at least he is conceding and acknowledging the true cost of doing so.

 

I don’t think he was chasing ratings – he’s already very famous, sells a ton of books, lots of people watch his shows. Makes no odds to him if x million or y million watch his show from a personal point of view, but I assume he wanted as many people as possible to watch this program so they’d be aware of the reality of egg production.

 

Jamie Oliver is not asking you or anyone else to kill animals – he is raising awareness that when people eat eggs, that somebody will be killing male chicks in the process.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...