Ava ॐ on Nostr: "Like most people, I would like to minimize the unnecessary suffering in the world. I ...
"Like most people, I would like to minimize the unnecessary suffering
in the world. I want to eliminate needless violence and pain, and I
give my support, wherever I can, to a positive approach to this goal.
But like most people I never gave much of a thought to the impact my way of
eating had on the world. Sure, I knew animals were killed for meat, but isn’t
that the way of nature? Isn’t that the way of life’s food chains?
But I’ve learned that the animals used for food in the United States today
are not just killed; something else happens to them. And finding out about it
has changed me forever.
The more I’ve learned, the more I’ve felt that if people knew what really
goes on they would make major changes in their food choices. Major changes
that would go a very long way, not only toward improving their own health,
but toward reducing the suffering in the world as well.
Let’s start with chickens. In order to understand what happens to these
animals, it helps to have a feeling for what kinds of beings they are. Unfortunately, most of us have rather stereotyped visions of them.
The word “chicken” is often used as a synonym for “coward.” But that is a
human moniker. Chickens, while high-strung and quick to startle, are
anything but gutless, timid creatures. Roosters are renowned for their pride
and ferocity and the adamant assertion of their power. Many cultures have
exploited this fact in the so-called sport of cock fighting. And throughout the
world a wide variety of cultures have acknowledged the potent spirit of the
cock by using his name as a synonym for the male penis.
In languages all
over the world the word for the male chicken is also used to signify human
male sexual potency.
Female hens are likewise not the craven creatures we’ve been conditioned to think they are. They can be absolutely fierce in defending their little ones,
even against terrible odds and much larger predatory birds. A scientist who
studied chickens for years, E. L. Watson, watched a mother hen defend her
little chicks against the awesome attack of the dreaded raven.
'I have known one little old hen who reared chicks on the far western
coast of Scotland near clifs where ravens built their nests. On ordinary
occasions, ravens are the terror of domesticated fowls, that fly to
shelter at the first sight of the black wings. They dare not face beaks so
much stronger than their own. (But) this little mother of a brood of ten
would stand her ground with her hackles up, eyes glaring defiance.
Such was her courage that she lost but one of her brood when two
ravens came against her.'
Chickens are not the fearful creatures we have been conditioned to think.
And the generally agreed-upon idea that they are stupid is equally ungrounded
in fact.
Now, I’m not saying that chickens are the most brilliant of animals. But I
do know that our understanding of what constitutes intelligence is utterly
relative. If an aborigine drafted an I.Q. test, for example, all of Western
civilization would probably flunk. We have a very convenient and self-serving way of defining intelligence. If an animal does something, we call it
instinct. If we do the same thing for the same reason, we call it intelligence.
Personally, I wouldn’t be too quick to try to define the intelligence of
chickens. I’d be afraid of judging them by standards that are irrelevant to
them. For the more I’ve learned about the kinds of creatures they are and what
they have been known to do, the more I’ve been impressed by their unique
kind of intelligence.
One naturalist gave a chicken hen 21 guinea fowl eggs he had found, just
to see what would happen. These small, hard-shelled eggs are a far cry from a
chicken’s eggs. But the hen took the task to heart and somehow managed to
tend to all 21 of the eggs without a sign of protest. As a product of our
conditioned conventional notions about chickens, I originally thought she did
this simply because she was too stupid to notice they weren’t her own eggs.
When the chicks hatched, she didn’t seem at all perturbed by the fact that they
weren’t chickens. Their small partridge-like appearance and unfamiliar ways
evidently presented no problem to her. Again, I thought she was simply too
stupid to notice they were not chickens. But I was wrong. She was far more
tuned in to reality than I knew. After a few days of brooding the little guinea
fowl, she took them away out into the cover of some bushes. Instead of asking them to feed on the ordinary mash that was given the chickens, she scratched
in some ants’ nests for the white pupae. Chickens don’t eat such food, but
guinea fowl do! The little ones took to it with instinctive relish.
How could she have known? What form of intelligence was she
displaying? Was she perhaps sufficiently tuned in to have received some sort
of message from their collective psyche? That’s more than man can do!
On another occasion, a naturalist gave a chicken hen some duck eggs. She
tended them and hatched them as if they were her own, yet wasn’t fazed at all
when ducklings emerged from her labors instead of chicks. Utterly undaunted
by the situation, she proceeded to do something neither she nor any other
chicken in the area had ever done before. She walked up on a plank bridging a
stream. Then, clucking, she invited the little ducklings into the water.
It is a mystery to me how these mother hens knew what to do for the
babies they hatched who were of another species. But somehow they did. It
appears that when we speak of being taken under someone’s wing we are
correctly referring to a remarkably caring and sensitive kind of nurturing.
Living as divorced from nature as most of us unfortunately do, we may not
have much personal experience with chickens anymore and so may not know
what wonderful mothers they are. But throughout recorded history the hen has
been a supreme symbol of the best kind of mothering. In fact, the Romans
thought so much of the maternal qualities of the hen that they frequently used
the phrase “son-of-a-hen” to mean a fortunate and well-cared-for man."
— John Robbins, Diet for New America
#IKITAO #GoVegan
Published at
2025-02-16 07:08:33Event JSON
{
"id": "4bb2a5d165c0ac04b05cfaf9026b550bc1dad9aa1ca7b669dc6fc1fa106349f3",
"pubkey": "4eb88310d6b4ed95c6d66a395b3d3cf559b85faec8f7691dafd405a92e055d6d",
"created_at": 1739689713,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"t",
"IKITAO"
],
[
"t",
"ikitao"
],
[
"t",
"GoVegan"
],
[
"t",
"govegan"
]
],
"content": "\"Like most people, I would like to minimize the unnecessary suffering\rin the world. I want to eliminate needless violence and pain, and I\rgive my support, wherever I can, to a positive approach to this goal.\r\n\n But like most people I never gave much of a thought to the impact my way of\reating had on the world. Sure, I knew animals were killed for meat, but isn’t\rthat the way of nature? Isn’t that the way of life’s food chains?\rBut I’ve learned that the animals used for food in the United States today\rare not just killed; something else happens to them. And finding out about it\rhas changed me forever.\r\n\n The more I’ve learned, the more I’ve felt that if people knew what really\rgoes on they would make major changes in their food choices. Major changes\rthat would go a very long way, not only toward improving their own health,\rbut toward reducing the suffering in the world as well.\r\n\n Let’s start with chickens. In order to understand what happens to these\ranimals, it helps to have a feeling for what kinds of beings they are. Unfortunately, most of us have rather stereotyped visions of them.\n\n The word “chicken” is often used as a synonym for “coward.” But that is a\rhuman moniker. Chickens, while high-strung and quick to startle, are\ranything but gutless, timid creatures. Roosters are renowned for their pride\rand ferocity and the adamant assertion of their power. Many cultures have\rexploited this fact in the so-called sport of cock fighting. And throughout the\rworld a wide variety of cultures have acknowledged the potent spirit of the\rcock by using his name as a synonym for the male penis.\rIn languages all\rover the world the word for the male chicken is also used to signify human\rmale sexual potency.\r\r\n\n Female hens are likewise not the craven creatures we’ve been conditioned to think they are. They can be absolutely fierce in defending their little ones,\reven against terrible odds and much larger predatory birds. A scientist who\rstudied chickens for years, E. L. Watson, watched a mother hen defend her\rlittle chicks against the awesome attack of the dreaded raven.\r\n\n 'I have known one little old hen who reared chicks on the far western\rcoast of Scotland near clifs where ravens built their nests. On ordinary\roccasions, ravens are the terror of domesticated fowls, that fly to\rshelter at the first sight of the black wings. They dare not face beaks so\rmuch stronger than their own. (But) this little mother of a brood of ten\rwould stand her ground with her hackles up, eyes glaring defiance.\rSuch was her courage that she lost but one of her brood when two\rravens came against her.'\r\n\n Chickens are not the fearful creatures we have been conditioned to think.\rAnd the generally agreed-upon idea that they are stupid is equally ungrounded\rin fact.\n\r\n Now, I’m not saying that chickens are the most brilliant of animals. But I\rdo know that our understanding of what constitutes intelligence is utterly\rrelative. If an aborigine drafted an I.Q. test, for example, all of Western\rcivilization would probably flunk. We have a very convenient and self-serving way of defining intelligence. If an animal does something, we call it\rinstinct. If we do the same thing for the same reason, we call it intelligence.\n\r\n Personally, I wouldn’t be too quick to try to define the intelligence of\rchickens. I’d be afraid of judging them by standards that are irrelevant to\rthem. For the more I’ve learned about the kinds of creatures they are and what\rthey have been known to do, the more I’ve been impressed by their unique\rkind of intelligence.\n\r\n One naturalist gave a chicken hen 21 guinea fowl eggs he had found, just\rto see what would happen. These small, hard-shelled eggs are a far cry from a\rchicken’s eggs. But the hen took the task to heart and somehow managed to\rtend to all 21 of the eggs without a sign of protest. As a product of our\rconditioned conventional notions about chickens, I originally thought she did\rthis simply because she was too stupid to notice they weren’t her own eggs.\rWhen the chicks hatched, she didn’t seem at all perturbed by the fact that they\rweren’t chickens. Their small partridge-like appearance and unfamiliar ways\revidently presented no problem to her. Again, I thought she was simply too\rstupid to notice they were not chickens. But I was wrong. She was far more\rtuned in to reality than I knew. After a few days of brooding the little guinea\rfowl, she took them away out into the cover of some bushes. Instead of asking them to feed on the ordinary mash that was given the chickens, she scratched\rin some ants’ nests for the white pupae. Chickens don’t eat such food, but\rguinea fowl do! The little ones took to it with instinctive relish.\r\n\n How could she have known? What form of intelligence was she\rdisplaying? Was she perhaps sufficiently tuned in to have received some sort\rof message from their collective psyche? That’s more than man can do!\r\n\n On another occasion, a naturalist gave a chicken hen some duck eggs. She\rtended them and hatched them as if they were her own, yet wasn’t fazed at all\rwhen ducklings emerged from her labors instead of chicks. Utterly undaunted\rby the situation, she proceeded to do something neither she nor any other\rchicken in the area had ever done before. She walked up on a plank bridging a\rstream. Then, clucking, she invited the little ducklings into the water.\r\n\r\n It is a mystery to me how these mother hens knew what to do for the\rbabies they hatched who were of another species. But somehow they did. It\rappears that when we speak of being taken under someone’s wing we are\rcorrectly referring to a remarkably caring and sensitive kind of nurturing.\r\n\n Living as divorced from nature as most of us unfortunately do, we may not\rhave much personal experience with chickens anymore and so may not know\rwhat wonderful mothers they are. But throughout recorded history the hen has\rbeen a supreme symbol of the best kind of mothering. In fact, the Romans\rthought so much of the maternal qualities of the hen that they frequently used\rthe phrase “son-of-a-hen” to mean a fortunate and well-cared-for man.\"\n\n— John Robbins, Diet for New America \n\n#IKITAO #GoVegan",
"sig": "bd7704a0cff54b84ad5b41c13245f25005b757b5270f5212b3ddbd5d89792c27572b6b21d12db3db5325827ac619fd5b9f3c06d1e487b50a01489f7b9544474c"
}