Bullfighter survives goring, what a shame

andyb · Post by **andyb** » Wed Apr 28, 2010 8:19 am

Yes Andy, it's just so, so easy for the Matador...

Up to them....... their choice........ a consciously made descision......

Awsome picture, thanks very much, I hope he is as dead as the mutilated bull in the same photo.

Here are a few more photo's showing a little justice.

http://images.mirror.co.uk/upl/m4/may20 ... 089227.jpg

This one is awsome, looks like he has had his arsehole stretched.

http://www.anvari.org/db/fun/Job/Matado ... rouble.jpg

And him as well.

http://www.resentment.org/misc/other/matador.jpg

And this guy might have lost his manhood, he obviously would no longer be "manly" enough to be a matador any longer.

http://www.leeabbamonte.com/wp-content/ ... atador.bmp

There is one thing you will notice in every one of those photos, the matador caused serious harm for fun and entertainment before he even got injured.

Oh, and of course you can clearly see the 4" shaved off the end of the bulls horns.

I never mentioned "how much" was shaved off of the horns, sounds to me like you know more about this torture and all of the "man vs lame" animal arguments already.

Yes there have been cases of bulls being doped before a fight, it's illegal just as doping racehorses and using drugs in other sports is.

Just because it is "illegal" does not mean that it does not happen very often.

Do you oppose the different form of this blood-sport, where the "blood" is removed from the public display, by the use of a ring of flowers over the head/horns, versus swords stabbed into the live animal as is the common method of torture currently.? Or the reverse of this which is becomming more popular in France, where someone has to snatch the rosette from the bulls head.?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Bull_ ... de_dOr.jpg

You have got to have some serious balls (not bulls) to do this, and the animal is not harmed physically.

Andy

Fayd · Post by **Fayd** » Wed Apr 28, 2010 8:24 am

judge56988 wrote:Fayd - that's not my quote.

i'm aware of that. i was trying to quote someone who quoted you, and truncating the quote got screwed up. i'm gonna fix it now.

danimal · Post by **danimal** » Wed Apr 28, 2010 9:31 am

WARDOZER9 wrote: LOL, I love this guy. Food verus entertainment, good arguement.

just as i thought... animal torture for unnecessary food consumption is o.k., but it's not o.k. to do it for entertainment.

guess what, the human body doesn't need beef in order to sustain itself, so beef consumption is little more than entertainment.

if you eat hamburgers, you've got no business complaining about bull fighting.

andyb · Post by **andyb** » Wed Apr 28, 2010 9:53 am

OFF TOPIC

guess what, the human body doesn't need beef in order to sustain itself, so beef consumption is little more than entertainment.

Your not going to convince many people to be vegitarians by using that argument.

Here is another argument that wont win many vegitarians to re-join the world of omnivorism. The only (likely) reason for rapid human evolution over the last quater of a million years is down to meat, not nuts and soy products but meat. So on that basis you are suggesting that we abandon the reason for having the inteligence to have this discussion with such a wide range of opinions.

I certainly dont advocate un-needed cruelty to animals where it can be avoided, but I wont be giving up meat, eggs or dairy products.

I wont talk about the subject of omivorism vs vegitarianism in this post any more, if you wantto discuss it further, be my guest and create your own post (please dont try a lame "vote-post", an ordinary post will do).

ON TOPIC

If you want to be part of this discussion, feel free to join in, but please dont try to change the subject.

The subject (incase you missed it), is about evil blood-sports like bullfighting, and how anyone can possibly defend such a thing, not about animals for eating that are NOT mutilated and tortured for prolonged periods for fun and entertainment, but are sometimes treated inhumanely because some people cant do their jobs properly.

Andy

judge56988 · Post by **judge56988** » Wed Apr 28, 2010 10:02 am

andyb wrote:
I never mentioned "how much" was shaved off of the horns, sounds to me like you know more about this torture and all of the "man vs lame" animal arguments already.

Andy

I looked on the internet to see where you might be getting your information from - one anti-bloodsports site mentioned the same things you did and talked about the 4". It doesn't alter the fact that the bull's horns seem to be sharp.
I was trying to illustrate how this contest is not as one sided as some people are claiming it to be.

Whatever your views on bloodsports, you obviously take great pleasure in seeing these bullfighters getting serious injuries - that seems pretty damn sick to me. Whether they deserve it or not and despite the fact that they know the risks and get well paid - it doesn't matter.

andyb · Post by **andyb** » Wed Apr 28, 2010 10:16 am

Whatever your views on bloodsports, you obviously take great pleasure in seeing these bullfighters getting serious injuries - that seems pretty damn sick to me. Whether they deserve it or not and despite the fact that they know the risks and get well paid - it doesn't matter.

I dont really care whether people think that I am "sick" because I want to see those people getting injured, mamed and killed (which I do), I dont see that they deserve anything else at all.

I find it "sick" that anyone would actually watch one of these things and not feel the slightest for the bull, this is animal torture that we are talking about, and I have no problem seeing the torturer being tortured, mamed killed whatever.

You can and obviously do think that I am "sick", and as far as I can tell from your posts I think that you are also totally "sick" for watching this "entertainment" and not caring about the bull, the very animal that is being tortured for your personal amusement.

Now we have got all of the name calling out of the way, lets continue like adults.

I looked on the internet to see where you might be getting your information from - one anti-bloodsports site mentioned the same things you did and talked about the 4". It doesn't alter the fact that the bull's horns seem to be sharp.

You are right, the bulls horns do seem to be sharp, I saw a TV program (about 10-years ago) about what they do to bulls (I thought it was in the USA, but it could have been Mexico), and learned that fact.

I was trying to illustrate how this contest is not as one sided as some people are claiming it to be.

It is still one sided, totally one sided. Does the bull "never" get tortured.? Do some bulls somehow manage to gore their tormentor before getting a sword in the back.? Does that bull then get rewarded with freedom.? I suspect the answer is NO, NO, NO. The bull ALWAYS loses, it gets tortured and then it dies, there is no winning for the bull, full stop.

As Wardozer has pointed out several times, the matador "choses" to be a matador, the bull gets "chosen" to be in the ring being tortured.

I dont believe that there is a single argument that you can offer that shows this bloodsport in a good light, feel free to try and prove me wrong.

Andy

judge56988 · Post by **judge56988** » Wed Apr 28, 2010 1:23 pm

andyb wrote:
I dont believe that there is a single argument that you can offer that shows this bloodsport in a good light, feel free to try and prove me wrong.

Andy

I can't prove you wrong because there is no wrong or right about this, it's a matter of opinion.
The acceptability or not of bloodsports depends on the place and the time.
Things that were perfectly normal and acceptable in England 200 years ago are not acceptable these days just as what is acceptable in Spain now is not acceptable in many other countries. Do you think that you would feel the same if you'd been born in Spain? What I mean is, is it your own mind that is determining your feelings or is it your upbringing and the environment that you live in? It is however the national sport of Spain, although there are many Spanish who do disagree with it and bullfights are no longer shown live on TV, so maybe opinion is slowly changing there too.

Peoples views and opinions change over the years; as said in a previous post, throwing christians to the lions is no longer allowed. (although going by some of your previous posts in other topics, you might like to see it reinstated)
Maybe in another 10 years, coarse fishing will be banned as fox hunting has been and in 50 years our grandchildren might be horrified to think that fish were treated in such a way. Society is becoming more and more removed from nature and our thinking towards animals is changing... much less so in rural areas but certainly in the cities.

All I can say is that when I have watched bullfights I have been completely enthralled. At the same time I know it is barbaric and cruel.

I've no further comment to make.

andyb · Post by **andyb** » Wed Apr 28, 2010 2:56 pm

I can't prove you wrong because there is no wrong or right about this, it's a matter of opinion.
The acceptability or not of bloodsports depends on the place and the time.
Things that were perfectly normal and acceptable in England 200 years ago are not acceptable these days just as what is acceptable in Spain now is not acceptable in many other countries. Do you think that you would feel the same if you'd been born in Spain? What I mean is, is it your own mind that is determining your feelings or is it your upbringing and the environment that you live in? It is however the national sport of Spain, although there are many Spanish who do disagree with it and bullfights are no longer shown live on TV, so maybe opinion is slowly changing there too.

I fully agree with your statement.

I've no further comment to make.

So we can agree to disagree, I am happy with that, as I am quite sure that we both understand and now accept each others opinions on this matter. It has been a good and interesting discussion, thanks for your contribution.

Andy

danimal · Post by **danimal** » Thu Apr 29, 2010 7:58 am

andyb wrote:
guess what, the human body doesn't need beef in order to sustain itself, so beef consumption is little more than entertainment.
Your not going to convince many people to be vegitarians by using that argument.

WRONG ...again.

i'm not a vegitaritan, and i don't give a rats ass what you eat.

i'm just pointing out the logical fallacy of your overopinionated hypocriticism.

you, andyb, pay mega-corporations money for packing animals in pens and cages, feeding 'em garbage, basically torturing 'em for their entire existance, then you come out here whining about a pampered range-fed bull that is tortured for a few hours at the end of it's life.

this isn't about "people who can't do their jobs properly", it's about torture on a scale of millions of animals, vs. a few bulls.

WARDOZER9 · Post by **WARDOZER9** » Thu Apr 29, 2010 8:45 am

danimal wrote:
andyb wrote:
guess what, the human body doesn't need beef in order to sustain itself, so beef consumption is little more than entertainment.
Your not going to convince many people to be vegitarians by using that argument.
WRONG ...again.

i'm not a vegitaritan, and i don't give a rats ass what you eat.

i'm just pointing out the logical fallacy of your overopinionated hypocriticism.

you, andyb, pay mega-corporations money for packing animals in pens and cages, feeding 'em garbage, basically torturing 'em for their entire existance, then you come out here whining about a pampered range-fed bull that is tortured for a few hours at the end of it's life.

this isn't about "people who can't do their jobs properly", it's about torture on a scale of millions of animals, vs. a few bulls.

And once again someone fails to realize this is food versus entertainment. GOD put the animals here FOR US TO EAT !! Not to slowly murder for entertainment.

judge56988 · Post by **judge56988** » Thu Apr 29, 2010 9:08 am

Since this is not a bullfighting comment I'm not going against what I said earlier about no further comment...

1. God is well and truly done to death in another topic.

2. IF god exists, and I don't believe he does, how do YOU know that he only put animals on this planet for us to eat and not for entertainment purposes??

thejamppa · Post by **thejamppa** » Thu Apr 29, 2010 9:39 am

Bullfighting doesn't serve any purpuse and its not fair fight "mano a toro" but multiple person against single bull. Bull is going to die anyway so why bother for sadistic display where bull has no change of surviving? Put single man vs. single bull, no helper's and winner walks out of ring free, wether man or bull... Fair fight if people want to see blood.

IMHO: Bible said God put man on top of planet and animals to take care of this world and its animals, not to abuse them senseless and pointless show's or destroying this planet for greed.

Human's were created to live in harmony with nature, till point devil corrupted human and here's the result.

andyb · Post by **andyb** » Thu Apr 29, 2010 10:09 am

WRONG ...again.

i'm not a vegitaritan, and i don't give a rats ass what you eat.

i'm just pointing out the logical fallacy of your overopinionated hypocriticism.

you, andyb, pay mega-corporations money for packing animals in pens and cages, feeding 'em garbage, basically torturing 'em for their entire existance, then you come out here whining about a pampered range-fed bull that is tortured for a few hours at the end of it's life.

this isn't about "people who can't do their jobs properly", it's about torture on a scale of millions of animals, vs. a few bulls.

Create your own post, and we can discusss such things over there.

Since this is not a bullfighting comment I'm not going against what I said earlier about no further comment...

1. God is well and truly done to death in another topic.

2. IF god exists, and I don't believe he does, how do YOU know that he only put animals on this planet for us to eat and not for entertainment purposes??

As Judge says, that is another topic (several actually), feel free to pick it up there.

Andy

danimal · Post by **danimal** » Thu Apr 29, 2010 10:51 am

WARDOZER9 wrote:GOD put the animals here FOR US TO EAT !!

prove it.

danimal · Post by **danimal** » Thu Apr 29, 2010 10:55 am

andyb wrote:Create your own post, and we can discusss such things over there.

your inability to articulate a response speaks volumes about the failure of your claims.

andyb · Post by **andyb** » Thu Apr 29, 2010 11:53 am

your inability to articulate a response speaks volumes about the failure of your claims.

If you want to be childish we can have this game.

I assume you actually want me to respond to this.

you, andyb, pay mega-corporations money for packing animals in pens and cages, feeding 'em garbage, basically torturing 'em for their entire existance, then you come out here whining about a pampered range-fed bull that is tortured for a few hours at the end of it's life.

Let me start by Quoting myself.

I certainly dont advocate un-needed cruelty to animals where it can be avoided, but I wont be giving up meat, eggs or dairy products.

Now I will give you a couple of examples of how things can (and are) done correctly and not.

Chickens, the picture there pretty much shown a perfect example of right and wriong.

http://www.hennet.org/

Cows/Bulls.

This is how its done all over the UK without exception that I know of.

http://gonewengland.about.com/library/u ... ldcows.htm

This also happens as well.

http://www.beenthere-donethat.org.uk/eppingforest3.html

Do they eat "crap".? I know rabbits do (their own), but they are not "farmed" anymore in the UK.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cattle_feeding

Cant find anything about the "crap" that chickens eat, feel free to enlighten me.

And the whole life of torture sounds totally true in the example of battery hens, but not for other animals, and certainly not for all egg-hens and chickens farmed for meat.

So you were saying something about "the logical fallacy of your overopinionated hypocriticism". As I am sure you understand you also fit that description as well, but far more than I do, and I will tell you why.

Right from the beginning my point was that bullfighting and other blood-sports are done for FUN and ENTERTAINMENT, animal farming when done correctly is a better life than many humans have right up until the end. The animals that have an entire life of torture are NOT tortured for fun and entertainment, they are tortured for higher profits and a total lack of respect for the welfare of those animals, NOT for fun and entertainment.

If you cant grasp this very very simple difference between torture for fun and entertainment, vs callous farmers looking to fill their pockets with cash regardless of the suffering of their animals then you are very far from being a clever person.

A side question for you Mr/Mrs/Ms/Dr/Rev danimal. Which country do you hail from, the ether to my knowledge is not a country, it might help knowing whether your country tortures livestock more or less than mine does, the perspective would be very useful.

Andy

danimal · Post by **danimal** » Thu Apr 29, 2010 2:35 pm

andyb wrote:
you, andyb, pay mega-corporations money for packing animals in pens and cages, feeding 'em garbage, basically torturing 'em for their entire existance, then you come out here whining about a pampered range-fed bull that is tortured for a few hours at the end of it's life.
Now I will give you a couple of examples of how things can (and are) done correctly and not.

Cows/Bulls.

This is how its done all over the UK without exception that I know of.

http://gonewengland.about.com/library/u ... ldcows.htm

lol... what an idyllic scene... but this is more like how cattle ranching is done in england:

"Farmer jailed for animal cruelty

Investigators who raided a Cheshire farm after a tip-off from worried farm workers said they discovered horrific scenes of "truly gothic proportions".

David Dobbin's farm in Backford, near Chester, was raided by Trading Standards and Defra officers in 2007.

They found a herd of 500 cattle - twice the number he could sustain - "some almost dead on their feet".

Dobbin admitted disposing of bovine carcasses and animal cruelty and was jailed for four months on Friday.

The farmer, who had previously claimed Trading Standards and Defra had carried out a "witch hunt" against him, was also banned from keeping animals for 10 years. "
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/engl ... 469616.stm

andyb · Post by **andyb** » Thu Apr 29, 2010 5:03 pm

danimal

You Sir, need to get a serious grip of yourself.

You ask for people to get onto your side, yet you want to push them away...

You have some of them, me included, I have been honest, you have not.

Why do you want to cause a fight/row/argument.?

Especially with me, who will likely argue WITH your points, if your points are both clear and NOT vindictive. The examples you have given are weak, very weak, think before you post in the future, otherwise the cock on your forhead will be longer than you can reach with both hands........

Andy

PS: You might have caught my "drift" if you were not either "stupid", "a cock" or "otherwised engaged in politics".

Fayd · Post by **Fayd** » Thu Apr 29, 2010 9:36 pm

well that's just, like, your opinion, man...

Fayd · Post by **Fayd** » Thu Apr 29, 2010 9:40 pm

andyb wrote: This is how its done all over the UK without exception that I know of.

http://gonewengland.about.com/library/u ... ldcows.htm

This also happens as well.

http://www.beenthere-donethat.org.uk/eppingforest3.html

wide open picturesque pastures, perfect animals grazing lazily in a field.

explains all your problems with mad cow disease.

methinks your methods of ranching aren't quite as idyllic as you like to believe.

judge56988 · Post by **judge56988** » Thu Apr 29, 2010 11:45 pm

Well as we've gone right off topic I'll chip in with my thoughts...

It's easy to find examples from both ends of the spectrum.
So long as there is a great demand for cheap meat there will be battery farming. If the public were concerned enough then they would only buy free range products; the problem is the cost. A quality free range chicken can cost between 2 and 3 times as much as a battery farmed one.

I firmly believe that humans have evolved to be omnivores and there is a great deal of evidence to suggest that the success of homo sapiens at the expense of other bipedal apes that were wholly vegetarian was due to their meat eating habits that enabled them to obtain more protein and calories for less effort. This extra nutrition helped brain development and gave them "free time" to spend making tools and developing a social system which almost certainly included the development of language. A positive feedback loop developed that resulted in the increasingly rapid evolution of our species at the expense of the competition. There is a wealth of information about this available on the internet.

There is also a feeling amongst scientists and nutritionists that we, as a species, now eat far more animal protein than we actually require. The average height of people in developed countries has been increasing rapidly since WW2 and rationing ended; again there is a great deal of evidence for this.
Therefore in my opinion there is no reason why there is a need for so much cheap meat to be produced - we could eat less of it and consequently produce it in a more humane and environmentally friendly way. Like many things it is a case of educating the masses.

Post by **NeilBlanchard** » Fri Apr 30, 2010 3:56 am

We have had mad cow disease here in the USA, and in Canada.

If more people knew about factory farming, then things would change.

Bullfighting is wrong, as is dog fighting, crush videos, and even cock fighting is quite distasteful.

Big oil spills, coal mine accidents, and factory farms "benefit" all (or many) of us. This only makes the deaths they case worse; because we take them for granted.

Fayd · Post by **Fayd** » Fri Apr 30, 2010 4:31 pm

we have, but it was never to the degree that it happened there. our dependence on soybean and corn based cattle feed saved our beef

thejamppa · Post by **thejamppa** » Sat May 01, 2010 12:02 pm

Cruelty towards any living being is not justifiable... Ever... If you going to fight, better make it fair and square.

Fayd · Post by **Fayd** » Sat May 01, 2010 6:15 pm

thejamppa wrote:Cruelty towards any living being is not justifiable... Ever... If you going to fight, better make it fair and square.

hmm... i dont particularly care when snails cross my snail poison. though i'm thinking it's probably absurdly painful for them when they sizzle out and die.

bonestonne · Post by **bonestonne** » Sat May 01, 2010 6:50 pm

I'm a little confused here....

So, can I just *officially* take this thread Back To Topic and ask:

Why is it a shame that the bullfighter lived?

I'm not saying anything about DNR wills or whatever, because I think that a person's will to live can change a lot...

andyb · Post by **andyb** » Sun May 02, 2010 7:12 am

Why is it a shame that the bullfighter lived?

Because if "true" justice really existed, then the justice for the bullfighter would have been death for all of the reasons that I have already pointed out.

Andy

Post by **NeilBlanchard** » Sun May 02, 2010 4:50 pm

So, Andy -- is the matador to blame for the existence of bullfighting?

colm · Post by **colm** » Mon May 03, 2010 3:14 am

NeilBlanchard wrote:So, Andy -- is the matador to blame for the existence of bullfighting?

this thread is hilarious.
who plays "tea time" in this thread

ya know, I could guess bull fighting began when the bull really does have a bad attitude and farmers really had to fight them. It is so basically primitive. then when won, there is a ton of meat feeding men who get healthier.
I could guess it turned into a friendly contest. Man version. Does andyb know what a manly contest is? I bet he'd yell at a lumberjack, while sitting in his wooden chair eating a cow burger.

damn man, back off the matador.

andyb · Post by **andyb** » Mon May 03, 2010 5:23 am

So, Andy -- is the matador to blame for the existence of bullfighting?

Amusing point. Of course not, bullfighting existed before this particular matador, and as Colm has suggested probably before andy Matador. But yes to a degree all Matadors are to blame for the continued existance of Bullfighting, and so are the paying crowds, and all of the support staff, the people who run the stadiums etc etc. The only party not to blame is the bull, out of all of the party's involved, the Bull is the only one not choosing to be part of this barbaric form of entertainment.

who plays "tea time" in this thread

????? Is this some form of reference to a Terry Pratchett character.

I could guess it turned into a friendly contest.

It has been, replace the swords with rosettes for example.

Man version. Does andyb know what a manly contest is? I bet he'd yell at a lumberjack, while sitting in his wooden chair eating a cow burger.

A manly contest is one where both party's are equal (roughly), and both party's are willingly involved. Bullfighting is totally cowardly, pathetic, and not in the slightest manly, quite the opposite. Fell free to explain what the rest of the above quote actually means.

damn man, back off the matador.

Why.? You notice I dont have any problem with human vs human violence where the person has chosen to do "manly" combat with another willing person. My problem is with cowards who use animals for violent pointless entertainment. A bullfight I wouldnt mind watching was one where there was just the bull and the man in the ring, no swords, no flags, that would be "manly".

Andy