Anyone else get annoyed about the "conflict diamond" thing?

[Imdanny]

Re: Anyone else get annoyed about the "conflict diamond" thi

One of the best writers I ever met on the internet and the man was a genius said two things I'll never forget.

He was a Vietnam war vet. He was like the super-masculine Rolex guy on the watch forums- "the man".

I knew him for, well, it's eight years now. He sent me an email last Christmas. I should send him one for New Year's.

He told us this story one day about how he had an affair with a man, the brother of one of his girlfriends, when he was a young man.

The group of us, you know, we were writers, we were artists. We roll with the punches. None of us was particularly surprised and not one of us was the least bit upset.

But the folks at this other forum, a Rolex forum, gave him a hard time about it. That is not what they expected nor what they wanted to hear from this guy.

He told us their reactions didn't bother him because, he said, "Life is based on predation."

That will always stay with me.

The other quote of his I loved was, "All men's hearts beat in the same universe."

That will always stay with me too.

The world is a terrible place and we are "life" on a small planet in a vast universe.

I hate to see suffering, a person's or another animal's, and yet, yes, I eat meat, buy products from unethical corporations, etc.

We can only do the best we can. I guess that these people who get this kind of simplistic "conflict diamonds!" idea in the minds just want surety in an uncertain world. I can't blame them for that. I'd like to revise my comments to say that they probably mean well. It's just that the way they go about it is not a way that would ever satisfy me personally.

So, I'm going to change my answer from yes, to Kenny's answer. Yes and no.

 

[packrat]

Re: Anyone else get annoyed about the "conflict diamond" thi

As the wife of a trapper and hunter and the daughter of a trapper and hunter and having lived 37 years in the Midwest where trapping and hunting is common--not all fur is bad and killed slowly and painfully and tortured to death. If you are a proper trapper/hunter you do what you can to do it right. There are laws for trapping and hunting. You have to by law (here anyway, not sure of other states) check your traps every 24 hours and the DNR will fine you-that's part of their job to check on the traps and the trappers. They make snares that don't cut off the circulation of the paw caught-that's why they chew. When JD checks his traps (as he is doing as I type) the animals are just sitting there, or sleeping. They aren't clubbed to death, they aren't poked w/a big stick-it's a one and done shot to the back of the head and it's over.

Has anyone ever seen an animal w/mange? Or distemper? Both painful sicknesses/diseases that are extremely spreadable. With large numbers of animals comes diseases and sicknesses. It's nature's population control. That's just how it is. JD has on numerous occasions dispatched animals that were sick, to put them out of their misery, rather than let them roam around and infect other animals which just perpetuates a slow and painful death.

You know what's illegal and is done ALL the time? Poisoning. Farmers do it ALL the time b/c it's easy to do w/out getting caught and it's a cheap way to protect your crops. When there are too many of an animal and they get into and ruin crops Farmers will take care of it themselves. That's what happens when trapping gets a bad rap. Talk about a horrible death, yes? And you know what happens to the animal poisoned? Nothing. It lays there and rots. I'm not even sure coyotes would eat a raccoon if it's been poisoned. It's wasted. Good thing it died a really nasty death to just lay there. When animals are allowed to breed unchecked, that's what happens. Disease or poisoning. Unless someone comes up w/a way to develop animal birth control, breeding cannot continue unchecked. There needs to be a checks and balances system in place to control animal numbers. That's life. If you want it to continue w/out controlled human intervention, that's great..until you open your eyes and see the horrible ending Mother Nature has in store, or the illegal poisoning Farmer Joe dishes out. But so long as you don't have to actually see fur on anyone walking down the street, you'll sleep ok.

Fur is not the evil thing many make it out to be. There's good and bad in everything and about everything. Attacking someone for wearing fur, ruining the fur they are wearing-how does that solve anything? Does the wearer go oh crap yanno, I should wear thinsulate instead? Nah...the wearer says thanks a lot dumb ass, now I have to go buy a new one....and more fur will be needed. The fur industry probably likes it when people ruin fur out of some misplaced righteousness-it keeps them in business.

This isn't sunshine fairy land where glitter falls from the sky and everyone runs around throwing daffodils all day. Humans have domain over the Earth and we need to treat it and the animals that inhabit it properly, not let things go unattended b/c we feel sad for the cute little fuzzy animals and it hurts our poor feelings to see them die.

ETA-there is a mink farm here. Been here for generations. Every now and again people get a wild hair and want to "free" the mink. You know what happens to mink that have been bred on a mink farm for generations and are let go? They don't run off the farm while a chorus of angels sings Hallelujah and spend years living in the forest regaling the wild mink w/tales of their harrowing escape. They have no survival skills and if they make it to the end of the week alive, it would be a miracle. So..those farm raised mink are let go into a strange habitat they've never experienced and they have minimal survival instincts. And then the mink farm will need to go buy *more* farm raised mink to start all over..it's a circle.

 

[Missy]

Re: Anyone else get annoyed about the "conflict diamond" thi

Leather is a good way of utilising the part of an animal which would have otherwise been discarded once the meat was eaten.
Animals raised for food are, also, unfortunate. Frequently the conditions are not significantly better than animals raised for their skins/furs.

Still, we make choices as we can. Taking a life merely for the skin/fur seems more wrong than using the skin after the meat of the animal was eaten. I cannot convincingly say why this is so. But the sight of baby harp seals being clubbed to death is magnitudes worse to me than watching a cow having its arteries severed with a sharp blade in the jewish method of butchering.

When I was young, I thought hunting was cruelty defined. Now I know that it better approximates an animal's right to live in the wild and be taken as game whilst in its prime. Kind of like the ultimate in free range.

I guess I'm trying to say that as we age we perceive differently. Perhaps none of us actually perceive correctly. Yet by stages, many of us hopefully strive to improve the choices we make.

None of us are perfect, and if we change for the better in any way. Even a small way, it is already an improvement.

The statement that you need to be perfect before you point a finger is extremely silly. I hope we ALL strive to be better people making better choices, in little parts.

2% is still a lot of diamond. Furs are still cruel. I wish I could be vegan, but I have been unable to stop eating meat. But I skip sharks fin, I buy free range, I prefer livestock raised by farms with better husbandry methods where I have a choice of knowing my meat's origin (e.g. some of the very well managed Japanese beef farms).

Nothing I do should be applauded. But I still strive to do more. Perhaps that is all we can do.

I totally agree with you Tristan. Every change for the positive counts. Little steps add up and we all do the best we can.

Packrat, attacking someone who wears fur is not much better than wearing fur IMO. Attacking violence with violence, no thank you. Two wrongs do not make a right no matter the wrong. It is a complex topic and the point I was making is that no matter your feelings on it is that there really is no way to justify murdering an animal so you can wear your vanity fur. Period. Not talking about overpopulation, mother nature, hunting etc. I would be happy to discuss all these topics and more if someone desires to and starts a thread.

 

[TristanC]

Re: Anyone else get annoyed about the "conflict diamond" thi

Packrat, I'm glad that your husband as a trapper does the best he can for the animals. That is in line with my sentiments on how we as individuals make the most of what we do. Regardless of the career we have, sometimes the choices we make are more important. I'm sure he is a fine person and I'm also glad that the animals he gets to are dispatched mercifully. I do wish there wasn't a need for an occupation like that, unless he is trapping for food, but the world is what it is.

As to the parts of your post regarding overpopulation etc, nature would regulate the populations eventually. That isn't a role that falls on trappers. Regarding overpopulation the topic isn't as cut an dried as that.

As to the seals being clubbed to death being far more merciful, and as a champion for woman's rights - if you honestly feel that way, then logically you would think that whenever there is widespread famine or starvation (like in certain parts of Africa) that the best solution would be for the UN to send in say 100 burly guys with clubs and they can start to mercifully dispatch the little girls who are never going to be fed enough with a number of blows to the head and face?

The 'culling' is done for fur value. Otherwise why cull only babies? Adults are the ones that reproduce. But they have no commercial value as they have no fur. Native populations of harp and fur seals are factually lower than they were at earlier points in time. The rest I'll leave to conjecture.

Treehuggers and conservationists always paint the most one sided picture of the 'evils' of the world. Others do the opposite. Somewhere in the middle we hope that everyone finds common ground. The stories are not so cut and dried, and nothing is so simple.

My point is simply that of the ones amongst us that care, hopefully we perpetrate less wrongs and try to do more rights. Again, the whole point is for us to try to improve where we can, as we can in this short span of time that we were given

 

[Black Jade]

Re: Anyone else get annoyed about the "conflict diamond" thi

I repeat that anyone concerned about the suffering of mink should not be eating eggs or chicken.
No offense. I am sorry to sadden anybody, but this is a fact.
Of course if you are concerned about all 'sentient' beings you are guilt-free--but you have also probably starved to death.
Interesting fact I once heard-- more tiny little animals are killed when farms are cleared to plant vegetables or grains (which those who are vegans eat) as opposed to the one big animal (cow, for example) being killed for beef.
We are made to eat meat. Look at our teeth.
And I repeat that I like to be warm and that I don't think anyone else has a right to pour paint on my coat because of their personal beliefs.

 

[packrat]

Re: Anyone else get annoyed about the "conflict diamond" thi

I don't go for clubbing seals-that's not something we do here in Iowa, even tho it's colder n' shit here in the winter, we're seal-less. Even if we did have them, I think it's disgusting.

Nature does deal w/over population-but in Nature's way, it's not fun/pretty/nice, is what I'm saying. When populations are down, hunting/trapping is regulated until the population is back up. That's why there are seasons for certain animals and limits for some. Hunters take note of animals they see, they fill out forms, they help keep track of animals, along w/the DNR. There aren't many fox around here anymore..b/c the coyote population has exploded beyond measure. Their only predator around here is us, and the few mountain lions around. The flooding we had last year, the biggest flood in about 50 or more years, happened right at the time of Spring when female animals were having their babies-so a lot of animals that couldn't get away from the water, pheasants for sure, are down. And w/the coyote population so enormous, that number is going to go even lower, quickly.

There are vaccines to control diseases for humans, but they aren't 100% effective, and if someone isn't vaccinated and contracts a disease, it's very easy to spread it to other unvaccinated people, and the ones that are vaccinated do still stand a chance of getting it. There are no vaccines to give wild animals for their diseases. If the coon population is way way up and one gets mange, there will be a *lot* of sick animals, not just raccoons, and it's a pretty shitty way to go.

Just a funny side note..a few years ago there was a huge uproar in and b/c of a town named Spearfish. North Dakota, I think. PETA got involved and it was this HUGE to-do, b/c the name was anti animal rights. The town had been named Spearfish like, 100 or whatever years BEFORE, by Native Americans-b/c there's a big lake and that's what they DID to survive..they speared fish. PETA and the ones so horrified by this-and apparently by what people back in the day did to survive, demanded the name be changed. Someone mentioned that if the NA's hadn't speared the fish to have food, they'd have died..so it could just have been named Starvin' Indian.

There are people who rely on wild animals to be their main source of meat-some rely on wild animals b/c food is expensive. Here there is a program to donate wild game to those in need. The fur..yes there are other things that could be used now...the poor people in super cold places, Siberia, Russia, Arctic Circle that probably kill the animals themselves and make the clothes (fur inside for better warmth)..they wear Land's End Thinsulate? Granted it's more figure flattering and comes in pretty colors but I think they're more concerned about being warm than making sure it comes in Fern Green. Personally, I would rather they invent something super thin w/the warmth of real fur on the inside-I hate being all bundled up like Nanook of the North in the winter when it's 40 below and my nostrils freeze shut.

Honest to Pete, nothing is 100% ethical 100% of the time to 100% of the people. Torturing people=bad. Torturing animals=bad.

 

[Circe]

Re: Anyone else get annoyed about the "conflict diamond" thi

Oh, seal clubbing is totally done for profit - human beings are not an altruistic species. And, don't get me wrong - I'm not saying it's how I like to spend my Saturday nights, or that I myself would ever buy sealskin. But I do think that humanity eliminated all their natural predators, and now functions as the last check in the system. Despite the fact that they profit by it, I do think it's a kindness to keep seals from dying slowly of starvation and plague.

For what it's worth, I also think kosher slaughtering is horrifying - it doesn't serve a practical purpose, and it turns my stomach to think of the confusion and fear an animal must feel during the process, which is somewhat more prolonged then clubbing. At the end of the day, none of the things we do to animals are all that great. We do them anyway, though, for a variety of reasons - food, warmth, profit, God - and we each have to pick the ones that matter most.

The reason I think the analogy to little girls falls apart is, well - people. They're people. We can and should go out of our way to improve their lot in life, and it's doable - what's that quotation from Sally Struthers, "for a dollar a day ...?" How do you improve a seal's lot in life? Reseed the ocean? I wish anybody volunteering for that a lot of luck.

Re-reading this thread, I find myself thinking of a scene from The Things They Carried where the author, a Vietnam vet, recalls an occasion where his platoon stumbles across a baby water buffalo and, enraged by their circumstances, slaughters it where it stands. He describes it graphically, too - its big brown eyes, how it lows in pain, etc.

And then two pages later he addresses the reader directly and says, what is wrong with you people? You've been reading my memoir, about how barely-out-of-childhood men were sent to slaughter not-yet-out-of-childhood children, and you're getting upset over a cow, which, btw, I made up? I mean ... dudes. I am a great big animal lover, and yet, I am fascinated by how the sidetrack is proceeding along exactly the lines predicted early on ....

 

[Imdanny]

Re: Anyone else get annoyed about the "conflict diamond" thi

I once participated in a surreal thread on another forum in which rich, elitist New York City residents told each and every one of us that if we chose to have a car, you know, like to get to work, little things like that, we were 'against' the environment for not making the choice to use public transportation.

I tried to explain that 'they' ripped up all of the streetcars. No luck.

I tried to explain that the whole country was laid out on a highway grid as a military project. No luck.

I tried to explain that many people can not afford to live and work in the same place. No luck.

I tried to explain that not everyone can afford to move to a large city. No luck.

You get the picture.

Well, today I rode the bus for four hours and walked for six miles.

I hope my old friends are happy with me now.

Boy, I 'saved' the environment.

Yes, I breathed car exhaust, truck exhaust, and jet fuel for five hours, and my bus certainly was not paid for with the riders' $2 a day bus passes, but hurray for me for being an 'environmentalist.'

Yes, it seriously makes me want to roll my eyes- I wish my old friends could have been in my shoes today.

 

[Missy]

Re: Anyone else get annoyed about the "conflict diamond" thi

Yep, intellect is basically the dividing line for me.


Oh, seal clubbing is totally done for profit - human beings are not an altruistic species. And, don't get me wrong - I'm not saying it's how I like to spend my Saturday nights, or that I myself would ever buy sealskin. But I do think that humanity eliminated all their natural predators, and now functions as the last check in the system. Despite the fact that they profit by it, I do think it's a kindness to keep seals from dying slowly of starvation and plague.

For what it's worth, I also think kosher slaughtering is horrifying - it doesn't serve a practical purpose, and it turns my stomach to think of the confusion and fear an animal must feel during the process, which is somewhat more prolonged then clubbing. At the end of the day, none of the things we do to animals are all that great. We do them anyway, though, for a variety of reasons - food, warmth, profit, God - and we each have to pick the ones that matter most.

The reason I think the analogy to little girls falls apart is, well - people. They're people. We can and should go out of our way to improve their lot in life, and it's doable - what's that quotation from Sally Struthers, "for a dollar a day ...?" How do you improve a seal's lot in life? Reseed the ocean? I wish anybody volunteering for that a lot of luck.

Re-reading this thread, I find myself thinking of a scene from The Things They Carried where the author, a Vietnam vet, recalls an occasion where his platoon stumbles across a baby water buffalo and, enraged by their circumstances, slaughters it where it stands. He describes it graphically, too - its big brown eyes, how it lows in pain, etc.

And then two pages later he addresses the reader directly and says, what is wrong with you people? You've been reading my memoir, about how barely-out-of-childhood men were sent to slaughter not-yet-out-of-childhood children, and you're getting upset over a cow, which, btw, I made up? I mean ... dudes. I am a great big animal lover, and yet, I am fascinated by how the sidetrack is proceeding along exactly the lines predicted early on ....

I do not see why you cannot be upset with both Circe. It doesn't take any more energy not to buy fur than it does to buy it. I mean, it isn't all or nothing. Remember "perfect is the enemy of good". Baby steps. Do what you can. Each little step does count. As I wrote before if everyone felt the way you do then we would all be paralyzed about most deserving areas of need and just give up. So spend all your extra energy fighting for women's rights but darn it Circe, just say NO to fur. That's all I am trying to say. No good reason to wear it and fuel the fur industry further. There are too many deserving charities/subjects etc to count but even this small gesture makes a difference.

As for your intellect dividing line that's fine. But I ask you to consider people with disabilities. I spend my time working with developmentally disabled adults and children. Many who are severely disabled. They still feel happiness, pain, joy, sadness and love. Do they not deserve a place on this earth? Don't they have rights that matter? This is also the way I feel about the defenseless animals who cannot stand up for themselves and protect themselves for a future. I guess I have a soft place in my heart for all those who are defenseless and innocent. They deserve to have a life too. Not just the best and the brightest among us. We keep evolving yet we are so lacking in humanity it terrifies me. Again, that quote by gandhi just sums it all up for me.

"The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated”.

"Until we have the courage to recognize cruelty for what it is - whether its victim is human or animal - we cannot expect things to be much better in this world... We cannot have peace among men whose hearts delight in killing any living creature. By every act that glorifies or even tolerates such moronic delight in killing we set back the progress of humanity."

Rachel Carson

"One day the absurdity of the almost universal human belief in the slavery of other animals will be palpable. We shall then have discovered our souls and become worthier of sharing this planet with them."
Martin Luther King Jr.

As human beings we have been given the right to make choices. Let's take responsibility and make humane and compassionate choices for all living beings that share this world with us.

 

[Circe]

Re: Anyone else get annoyed about the "conflict diamond" thi

Gotta run to the dentist (totally the way I want to spend NYE!), so just a drive-by post with two things:

1) Missy, I DO say no to fur! I've said it 4 or 5 times in this thread! Personally speaking, I don't buy it - but I think the issue is a lot more complex than FUR BAD for reasons like those I mentioned in the seal tangent.

2) Human intellect - including that of the developmentally challenged - is impossible to compare to that of chickens. Human rights, in general cannot be compared to animal rights - it's not an apples to apples comparison. I would do (and do try to do) whatever I could for a person, but at the end of the day, I'm a carnivore with only so many hours in the day, so, sorry, edible creatures of the world.

I get what you're saying, Missy - you can be philosophically opposed to multiple things. What I am saying is that, philosophy aside and getting down to brass tacks, if I want to actually address the practical concerns that matter to me, something's gotta give, and for me, it's tracking down organic food, even if I do have issues with factory farming.

 

[Missy]

Re: Anyone else get annoyed about the "conflict diamond" thi

Hi Circe, I get what you are saying also. Thanks for taking the time to respond.
Good luck at the dentist's today and happy New Year!

Best,
Missy

 

[Circe]

Re: Anyone else get annoyed about the "conflict diamond" thi

Thanks, hon - happy new year to you as well, and to all of you! Okay, now I really AM leaving. Stupid teeth ....

 

[pwendyp]

Re: Anyone else get annoyed about the "conflict diamond" thi

I hate to see suffering, a person's or another animal's, and yet, yes, I eat meat, buy products from unethical corporations, etc.

Well Imdanny...

I truly do like to read these thought provoking threads, but I really sometimes wonder where reality ends and fantasy begins.

The thread you started the other day, to which I contributed, is now gone. Taken down by admin perhaps, or maybe even requested by you for it's removal. No matter.

I asked you specifically in that other thread 'do you eat meat' to which you replied 'no you didn't'

Above, I see you state that in actual fact you do?

ah well...tis for you alone to know why there is a discrepancy...