Animal Advocacy Temple Grandin and her PETA Proggy Award

[Second Summer]

In 2004, Temple Grandin receive PETA's Proggy Award in the Visionary category:

Renowned animal scientist Dr. Temple Grandin doesn't seem like the sort of person who would receive PETA's Proggy Award. An associate professor of animal science at Colorado State University, Dr. Grandin consults with the livestock industry and the American Meat Institute on the design of slaughterhouses! However, Dr. Grandin's improvements to animal-handling systems found in slaughterhouses have decreased the amount of fear and pain that animals experience in their final hours, and she is widely considered the world's leading expert on the welfare of cattle and pigs.

Recently, following a PETA undercover investigation, Dr. Grandin's expertise was instrumental in securing significant improvements in the treatment of animals at AgriProcessors, the world's largest glatt kosher slaughterhouse. Noting that incompetent kosher slaughterers and shoddy quality control at AgriProcessors are giving shechitah a bad name, Dr. Grandin said about the abuses at AgriProcessors, "I thought it was the most disgusting thing I'd ever seen. I couldn't believe it. I've been in at least 30 other kosher slaughter plants, and I had never ever seen that kind of procedure done before."

Source: http://www.abolitionistapproach.com/media/links/p1511/2004-peta.pdf

When killing humans on industrial scales - I guess the only example is the Holocaust - the deception involved by making the people think they are just going to have a shower etc, is widely considered an aggravating factor. Just saying.

How do you feel about this sort of "animal welfare"? Do you think PETA was right in giving Grandin the award?

 

[Blobbenstein]

no, the whole thing always seemed sick to me.

 

[thefadedone]

Absolutely not. She is not a hero or worthy of any awards.

no, the whole thing always seemed sick to me.

Agreed.

 

[Mischief]

No. What she did was to make the meat industry more efficient and therefore more profitable. Yes, there is some benefit to the individuals if they experience a few minutes' less terror (whether we're talking about non-human animals or humans going to the slaughter), but mercy has nothing to do with it - it's all about efficiency and making the job of the killers easier.

 

[Second Summer]

Agreed. So what could have been PETA's reasoning or motivation for giving her the award? Are they just plain crazy, or was there some rational argument for this? Was it the usual motivation of trying to make headlines?

 

[Mischief]

I wouldn't want to try to speculate on what PETA's reasoning might have been, since so much of what they do either doesn't make sense or is inconsistent.

 

[Tom L.]

I honestly don't want animals' deaths to be any worse than they have to be, but...

...for one thing: I'm apprehensive that putting the meat industry in a good light, making it appear to be kinder and gentler, will lessen some people's motivation to go vegetarian or vegan...

...and for another thing: I just don't see how "humane slaughter" can work. I get that Grandin's suggestions for the slaughter process might make meatpacking run more smoothly and efficiently, but... expect people to really care about the welfare of animals whose very purpose for existence is to be eaten?... care about a being whose body they see as sandwich filling?...

I've never understood how that could work, and don't think I'd understand it even if I had no problem eating animals. I can only see Dr. Grandin's efforts as putting fancy wallpaper over crumbling plaster and rotten wall studs. It's mostly cosmetic rather than substantial.

In this case I don't understand either Dr Grandin or PeTA.

 

[Clueless Git]

And the winner of the Amnesty International award for most humane human rights abuser of the year is ...

 

[Danielle]

Killing is still killing, even if you were "nice" to them right before you took their lives -_-

 

[Blobbenstein]

I've said it before; maybe an animal should be scared before it dies, maybe it prepares it for the afterlife...and they say the meat tastes worse if the animal is scared-well it should.

 

[Blobbenstein]

that might not be true of putting down a pet down(for eg)....but a slaughterhouse isn't interested in a cow's well being, so there would be a murderous atmosphere, perhaps unlike at a vet,......well there are differences.

 

[Danielle]

that might not be true of putting down a pet down(for eg)....but a slaughterhouse isn't interested in a cow's well being, so there would be a murderous atmosphere, perhaps unlike at a vet,......well there are differences.

Didn't have that in mind but obviously killing to ease suffering is different than killing because you want to eat the animal's flesh.

 

[Mischief]

I've said it before; maybe an animal should be scared before it dies, maybe it prepares it for the afterlife

Frankly, I find this kind of thinking repulsive.

Experiencing terror is no less awful than experiencing agony.

Perhaps we should burn everyone alive, to prepare them for the afterlife.

 

[Dedalus]

I can only see Dr. Grandin's efforts as putting fancy wallpaper over crumbling plaster and rotten wall studs. It's mostly cosmetic rather than substantial.

Well put.

I am vehemently opposed to these trendy efforts to put a friendly face on eating meat / killing animals. I don't want people to feel good about it - ever - because they shouldn't. The slaughter of the animal is only one part of the horrible conditions they have endured in their short lives. It's like going back to the days when our parents told us 'Don't worry - they don't feel anything.' Everyone knows it is wrong but they want to feel better about doing it. ********. It's murder and there is and always will be blood on the hands of all meat-eaters.

 

[Blobbenstein]

Frankly, I find this kind of thinking repulsive.

Experiencing terror is no less awful than experiencing agony.

Perhaps we should burn everyone alive, to prepare them for the afterlife.

I think it is important that an animal gets to a good afterlife.....I really don't know if lulling an animal into thinking it is safe, and then bolting its brain to smithereens stops that, but maybe it does interfere.

DO you believe in the after life?

 

[Mischief]

I think it is important that an animal gets to a good afterlife.....I really don't know if lulling an animal into thinking it is safe, and then bolting its brain to smithereens stops that, but maybe it does interfere.

DO you believe in the after life?

No, I don't believe in an afterlife.

However, I do believe that thinking that terror and suffering is necessary for someone to have a good afterlife is a perverted, sick way of thinking. Anyone who truly believes that has the right to implement that belief for themselves by ensuring that their own death is as pain and terror filled as possible, but NO ONE has the right to make martyrs of others, or to even suggest it should be done.

 

[Dedalus]

I think it is important that an animal gets to a good afterlife.....I really don't know if lulling an animal into thinking it is safe, and then bolting its brain to smithereens stops that, but maybe it does interfere.

DO you believe in the after life?

I like to entertain belief in an afterlife. But my only critieria is that a person/animal is dead - there should be no bearing on how an animal dies and whether or not it feels pain; or otherwise needs the benefit of 'preparation.' Pain is a part of this world - not an attribute for getting to the next one.

 

[Mischief]

Well put.

I am vehemently opposed to these trendy efforts to put a friendly face on eating meat / killing animals. I don't want people to feel good about it - ever - because they shouldn't. The slaughter of the animal is only one part of the horrible conditions they have endured in their short lives. It's like going back to the days when our parents told us 'Don't worry - they don't feel anything.' Everyone knows it is wrong but they want to feel better about doing it. ********. It's murder and there is and always will be blood on the hands of all meat-eaters.

Agreed. There's nothing "humane" about killing anyone for our own purposes.

That being said, there are more awful and less awful ways of killing, and I'm not going to advocate that the worse ways be maintained on the off chance that some people will stop eating meat because of the terrible ways animals are killed. Frankly, I don't think that people who pride themselves on buying "free range" "humanely slaughtered" meat would refrain from eating meat otherwise - these are, after all, people who have thought through and accepted that the animals on their plates have a range of emotions, and yet they place more importance on the momentary satisfaction of their taste buds than on the life taken.

 

[Blobbenstein]

I think maybe it was partly seeing Apocalypse Now, where one of the guys say:

"Chef: This Colonel guy? He's wacko, man! He's worse than crazy. He's evil. It's fuckin' pagan idolatry. Look around you. ****! He's loco... I ain't afraid of all them fuckin' skulls and altars and ****. I used to think if I died in an evil place, then my soul wouldn't be able to make it to Heaven. But now? ****! I mean, I don't care where it goes, as long as it ain't here. So whaddya wanna do? I'll kill the ****."


It's just a train of thought; I don't know what happens when people, or animals die, but slaughter houses aren't nice places.


edit: and as slaughter houses are evil places, the animal might have a bit of a struggle ahead of it, so maybe it should be forewarned.

As I said, I don't know.....if you don't believe in such things, then it's all a lot simpler.

 

[Blobbenstein]

well, maybe I'll just give up the idea, I'm a bit OCD/black&white with some ideas.