'Are cheap chicks chic?' Poll discussion & results

Badger_Lady

Now, although I think James' post above is a bit harsh, I would like to present an analogy: nursing homes (some of them, but most in my personal experience).

People who work in them become desensitised. They forget about the very personal nature of what they're doing and they gradually find it acceptable to, for example, rush all the old folks to bed at 5pm so they can have a nice long tea break. They genuinely don't see what's wrong with that.

The general public think "there are laws, regulations and code to govern nursing homes, so they must be OK. If they weren't, they'd be shut down."

But if you ever have the joy of working there "undercover" (i.e. not long enough to become desensitised yourself), you'll be shocked at:
- People being deliberately left to sleep in their own urine;
- Staff "looking after" residents without even talking to them;
- Doctors and Nurses over-medicating residents to make them easier to control;
- Thankfully less often, physical and mental abuse of elderly people.

So, when someone says about intensive meat farming: "I work there so I know it's OK", or "There are regulations so it must be OK", I do shake my head and think about the above analogy. Wrong and cruel things do exist in this country, and it's all too easy to just ignore them.

eva16006159

After reading my posts back I do appear to have got a bit carried away. I will edit the language slightly in a minute.

One final point that people seem to miss is not that cruelly raised chicken should be prevented by regulation in this country but that the consumers should stop buying it in the first place. If that happens then the supermarkets wont import it.

JCD_Capulet

Tindella wrote: »

Well, I'm sorry you are unwell, but do you seriously think shoving battery reared chicken in you is going to improve your health, with all those chemicals inside it and it having spent its poor, short miserable life sitting in its own sh*t!

And as for "people getting on your back" - don't come on here if you can't take criticism - or are we all suppose to agree with you or shut up! Grow up!

Shoving? I eat with a knife and fork, I don't shove my food.
If it was so full of chemicals it wouldn't be allowed to be sold by law.
Poor short miserable life - and I suppose all organic chicken lives into its twilight years then, yeah?

Yes folk are getting on my back, beyond the point of criticism. The points have been made over and over again. I've explained my stance on the matter yet still feel I'm getting battered for my choices. I welcome criticism, constructive criticism, but after being told that I have no morals, that I laugh at animal cruelty and that I'm an unfit pet owner I think it's gone too far. I suggest it isn't I who needs to grow up.

Tiglet wrote: »

JCDC: I don't think PayPeanuts was singling you out - you just happen to be the one who's put their head above the parapet. Regardless of your budget, though, you have to make a choice. Chicken is not the cheapest food available and, although it may not be your primary reason, there is a tradeoff between animal welfare and a diet including meat.

You both seem to be agreeing that there are cheaper foods than chicken, and it's up to you whether you eat it or not. But there are still people posting on the basis that cheap chicken is an economic necessity for poor people, which is simply wrong.

Ceridwen's point was perfectly fair. Other things being equal, it doesn't matter whether a person's diet contains meat or not. If your health imposes restrictions on your diet, then that makes you different from the average person that this discussion is concerned with. She wasn't trying to make you give up meat against your will - just raising the question, which you have answered.

On a purely factual point, vegetarians do not need to take mineral supplements. Even a strict vegan diet is deficient in only one nutrient, vitamin B12, which is itself available from non-animal sources. Also, the human body is not designed to be carnivorous. We lack the sharp teeth for tearing meat and have flat molars ideal for grinding a mostly vegetable diet.

I can understand that perhaps you're feeling picked on as the "token chicken eater" but I don't think you've done yourself any favours by calling people names and then asking them to leave you alone. People are more likely to treat your opinions with respect if you can do the same to them.

I admit I should have held my tongue regarding another user, however if you look back over the past few pages you will see that, as I mentioned above, I've been told that I'm morally inept and an unfit pet owner. I can't see any respect from the users who've cast me as a bad person, and I doubt very much that by keeping my cool in future (although I will at least try) that I'll gain any respect either. for example, take the comment made my James bellow. Thanks for replying Tiglet.

jamesevans25 wrote: »

People who moan they dont have enough income but spend money on alcohol, cigaretes and sky television.

eva16006159

My comment wasnt aimed at you in particular it was aimed at all people who beleive their is nothing wrong with treating chickens in an inhumane way and use the "im too poor" excuse. Not one comment I have read has been offensive so I can only conclude that you have a guilty concience on this issue and feel the need to justify yourself.

Tiglet

I was going to say that James' comment wasn't intended to be a personal attack but I notice he's said that himself.

Similarly, I couldn't see that anybody said you were an unfit pet owner. I think Ceridwen was saying that the suffering of a chicken, or of 46 billion chickens:eek:, is no different from the suffering of a pet dog or cat and asking why people who can show compassion to a pet appear not to transfer that compassion to farm animals.

Unless I have missed something in one of the posts, I don't think anything was intended as a personal attack on you (even if you read it as such). You've both made it clear where you stand on this, and it's clear that you disagree about how important the welfare of farm animals is, but that's the reason we're having a discussion about it.

I really don't think that people are criticising you as a person. If they disagree with you, I would hope that they would be able to say so without being personally abusive.

eva16006159

Tiglet wrote: »

I was going to say that James' comment wasn't intended to be a personal attack but I notice he's said that himself.

Similarly, I couldn't see that anybody said you were an unfit pet owner. I think Ceridwen was saying that the suffering of a chicken, or of 46 billion chickens:eek:, is no different from the suffering of a pet dog or cat and asking why people who can show compassion to a pet appear not to transfer that compassion to farm animals.

Unless I have missed something in one of the posts, I don't think anything was intended as a personal attack on you (even if you read it as such). You've both made it clear where you stand on this, and it's clear that you disagree about how important the welfare of farm animals is, but that's the reason we're having a discussion about it.

I really don't think that people are criticising you as a person. If they disagree with you, I would hope that they would be able to say so without being personally abusive.

I think you should be commended for your diplomatic skills. I appologise If I have caused offence but it wasnt my intention, I just have strong views on this issue.

competitionscafe

jamesevans25 wrote: »

What a load of crap, Honest farmers dont want to rear chickens this way, they do it because people buy it.

Interestingly a recent poll on the Farmers Weekly website (yes online polls may not be particularly scientific, but it is a publication aimed at farmers) anyway the poll showed a clear majority (69%) thought that intensive poultry farming was "unacceptable" in response to the question
"Intensive poultry production - acceptable or unacceptable?"
http://www.fwi.co.uk/SiteMap/Polls/9/Page1.htm

By the way, for those interested there has been a fair amount of discussion on this already here, with some interesting posts:
http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.html?t=672921

and particularly on the budget/affordability issue, there is another thread here:
http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.html?t=674075

Davesnave

Who says free range is 'expensive?' We had free range quarters yesterday and the meat element of the meal was about 90p each. Considering that the farmer was probably paid pennies, it was a bargain. The majority of the British public do not realise that much of our food is already too cheap to sustain the kind of countryside they want visit at weekends. Meat is a an inefficient source of protein and, with obesity levels soaring, it would probably do few of us harm to eat a bit less of it, especially the water injected, force-fed, hormone-filled crap that those who 'love a bargain at any price' stick gleefully into their systems. I say well done to Jamie et al for putting food quality on the agenda.

isofa

I think the recently Channel 4 programmes were absolutely superb, especially Hugh's and Jamie's, thoughtful, unbiased - and clearly opened peoples eyes, who had no idea. I bet the industry is reeling, most educated people while have known how broiler hens and intensively farmed chickens are kept, but there is no doubt that a large proportion of the population hadn't given it much thought at all, or didn't even know how their food was produced. Let's hope it does make a difference.

This is how I see it - would you happily live from the first weeks of life, from about a year later (until you are dispatched when you are deemed inefficient) in a cramped cage (broiler hens) and never see daylight? If not, why does any human think it is ok do that to another living creature? This is easily extended to intensively farmed hens bread for meat too, in a shed who never seen the light of day - although I'm sure 99% of the farmers do their best to look after their flock, it's still a very poor way for a living creature to exist.

The pressure comes from the greedy supermarkets, constantly trying to batter down prices, and the greedy consumer wanting everything for nothing, which is why we are left with no local specialist stores in the majority of the country. Farmers getting a few pence to rear a chicken is absolutely appalling, I don't know how they make a living, whilst the fat cat supermarket owners line their pockets.

I'm not a vegetarian, but I'm passionate about good food and animal welfare. I'd never buy chicken from a supermarket, I only ever buy meat from a local quality butcher where I know it comes from. Free range certainly isn't expensive either, it's a complete fallacy. People waste so much money on rubbish in shops, if they brought quality rather than quantity, there would be a wind of change.

It appears there will always be the minority that believe it is truly ok to treat other creatures in this way for food (proved by the survey here) - but you'd have to have been a hardened individual not to be opened up to the wider picture. Presumably these people don't treat their children or pets in this manner though - you can say that is a ridiculous argument, but what gives us the right to treat other living creatures in this way?

Intensive farming of any creature is totally wrong. Organic free range is the only way to go in my opinion.

two_sheds_2

JCD_Capulet wrote: »

I eat the cheapest of chicken whenever I can find it and will continue to do so untill I have more than five pounds per week to spend on food shopping to sustain myself.

As the old saying goes, beggars can't be choosers.

I'm a beggar. I choose to eat beans and pulses for protein... much cheaper than any chicken, and the beans aren't maltreated

How can people be "too poor" to spend a fiver on a free range chicken, but happily fork out a fiver for a packet of fags? I don't understand.

"He who is cruel to animals becomes hard also in his dealings with men. We can judge the heart of a man by his treatment of animals."
--Immanuel Kant

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