Violence; does it work?

[billy]

The question isn't about morality. does violence work, does it achieve anything. basically anything to do with violence. have you ever wanted to physically hurt another human, animal, etc. is there a solution to rid the (lets hypothesise) home of violence. ..how?
are we all capable of (hypothesising again) murder or torture?
is censorship a form of violence. when you get deep down into violence the water gets a little murky, is retaliation seen as a violent act?

is smacking a child, even lightly too violent an act?

[Touchstone]

It's not politically correct to say so but, yes, violence works. The strong dominate the weak by violence (and the threat of it). That's nature. Not just human nature but nature in all its glory, red in tooth and claw. It's the reason we're the dominant species on this planet. It's never going to change.

[arbil_poieo]

In certain situations violence does work especially for self-defense. Everyone is capable of any kind of violence under the right circumstance, there are crazy psychopaths who commit murder and/or torture as a hobby but there are people who have to. Violence is inevitable and it does achieve something but it may not be an achievement that they were going for like war for instance. All through out history, violence has been at the center of every gain whether it be territory, equality, lack of equality, retaliation, money, revenge, statement etc. Violence is on the television and on video games. Pyschopaths such as "Jack the Ripper" or the "Zodiac" have become infamous and there are people like Hitler who used violence, torture, and murder for his beliefs and for power. Everyone knows that violence is wrong, but at the same time it's either something we have to study at school or it has become glamourous. Obviously violence makes the world go round and if it's not doing that it's entertaining.
As far as violence to a child in any way, shape or form such as smacking a child is wrong, a child cannot defend himself/herself. Spanking the butt is acceptable punishment for a child, Being violent to a child from a very young age could possibly lead the child to believe that it's okay because being violence or getting physical is all they know. There's a difference to punishing a child by being physical and being harsh to a child using violence...that line is clear.
Violence is necessary but it doesn't solve all the worlds problems and it's not always the answer...history has proven all three.

[billy]

if violence is wrong, then am i wrong to resist it.

in his later life, Gandhi didn't use violence, though he did breed it even though he pretended not too.
i'm now thinking that violence doesn't have to be physical, (i know about emotional violence but that's not what i'm on about) instigated violence. i see it all now, Gandhi would decry the violence done to him yet by doing so he'd actually incite real and physical violence by his followers. will come back to some of the other points. but think of it, non violence is worse than violence

[Universalchild]

I am completely against all forms of violence. I think it signifies weakness and fear in a human - it is the product of anger, which is caused by fear and an inability to process that fear into something rational and logical. However, we are human, and nobody is perfect. Everybody lashes out sometimes or tries to use violence to reach an end. I'm not a saint, I've done my share. And even now, if I saw somebody hurting someone else, or if someone attacked me, I cannot say what would happen. Maybe I would have enough self-control, or maybe I would become scared and nervous and aggressive. The last time someone attacked me, I did not respond like that, I was completely calm and rational, and after a bit of yanking and screeching they backed off. But I can't say if it'll always be like that. I know I get aggressive at the idea of someone hurting a loved one, let alone the reality of it. But you can't extend that excuse to malicious violence - like domestic, or murder, or torture. That is violence born from a desire to cause pain. It is not as morally ambiguous.

I would say there are very few situations where violence is not wrong. And violence is rarely right in my opinion - unless an alternative is honestly unavailable, for instance, if somebody is threatening a life (regardless of whose it is) and the only way to prevent it is by hurting them. But sometimes it is in the grey area... I feel empathy with people who use violence in riots when they live in countries who have oppressed and abused them, and with vigilantes hunting rapists and child-molestors, and with soldiers fighting for a real cause. Do I think it is right? No. But I get it. Maybe I would do the same if I had been raped, or my child abused, or my country corrupted.

I would like a world with no violence, but then I would also like a world with no poverty, no money, no government, no police, no war, no countries, no religion, no waste and no pollution. You accept things and deal with it.

However, it's a different matter with children and animals. I think violence against children is always wrong, even smacking. It's just a really crap form of discipline. It's not abuse or anything, I'm not one of those types, but I think it's really childish of the parent. If your child is old enough to understand why they are being smacked, then they are old enough to be talked to and to go through negative reinforcement processes which are shown to be faaaaar more effective. When I see a parent spank a kid I just find myself eye-rolling. I was spanked and I can tell you this for nothing, it did shit all for me. I was terrified of losing my gameboy, I couldn't have given a fuck for being spanked. My brothers were never spanked, and they were much better behaved. Mainly because my parents realized that lots of shouting and physical "discipline" were less effective then talking. Ah well. I'm the tester child!

And with animals... To be honest, as a vegetarian, I will say I think all forms of violence against animals is wrong unless it is neccessary (for instance, people who need to eat meat to live, or need fur because they live in a freezing cold country) - but it's a lesser evil. I won't preach unless people want to be preached to. And I do things that annoy animal activists so I know what its like (I love me some taxidermy, wooyeh roadkill : D)

[billy]

i can see violence as a means to an ends and agree that it does often gets results. i won't argue the morality of violence though. i did at one time in my live enjoy violence, not the hurting but the taking part. mainly through fighting or resisting someone else. i liked and still do like the gladiatorial side of violence. not keen on bullying but again, it would i suppose garner results, how long for, i have no idea. as for hurting animals. needlessly doesn't get the best results, most animal trainers will attest to the fact, though there are some nasty bastards out there. i have no problem with slaughtering animals for food and see no reason why we shouldn't utilise their skins as well as every other part of them. i'd say it's much better to eat domesticated animals than wipe out any more species than we already have. i think marital violence gets the least results as sooner or later the aggressor usually ends up on the losing side. i do believe violence through is sometimes inevitable, and gets results but at what cost? often the price paid isn't vomensurate wuth the gains, often we jump in to late or too soon.

[Paddygirl]

I find this hard to answer! No, I do not agree with violence in the home, bullying, murder etc. but I do not believe LIGHTLY smacking a child in a controlled manner is harmful either, there are times talking just doen't work with some children and the point has to be driven home because thye are putting themselves into a dangerous situation,nor do I disagree with heavy penalties for serious crimes so the threat of violence does appear to work (eg Singapore/death penalty/whipping etc gives this city a VERY low crime rate) I agree with Billy on the domesticated animals for food and leaving other species alone, history proves our meat eating tendencies and it's very yummy! This is one of those situations where if all violence is banned, (disciplining children/retaliation against bullies/protecting your home and family etc) things get out of control and if nothing is done it gets out of control.

[Leanne]

I've met kids who are the product of "don't spank it's bad" parents. They're not pleasant.

But then, I like my steak bloody. I even prefer to have reared it myself.

I really want to know what all the vegetarians plan to do with the cows once they're freed. Let's set them loose on the lentils.

No, wanton violence for its own sake is not useful in any way. Consider intent before preaching.

[billy]

i have to admit to beating my kids, one of them mildly, both turned out extra special. you have to love some of the kids who don't seem to get any discipline. when their pare4nts bring them round to my house they sometimes get shocked. many a time i've asked people to leave cos they;re kids are little twats.

i would love to know what it feels like to machine gun a crowd of people...any people but i know it would be wrong

not to eat cows would probably be the cruelist cut of all (excuse the pun) if vegan was mandated by law, all the farmers would either kill the cows and bury them or just let them die of natural causes (off their property)

[Universalchild]

i can see violence as a means to an ends and agree that it does often gets results. i won't argue the morality of violence though. i did at one time in my live enjoy violence, not the hurting but the taking part. mainly through fighting or resisting someone else. i liked and still do like the gladiatorial side of violence. not keen on bullying but again, it would i suppose garner results, how long for, i have no idea. as for hurting animals. needlessly doesn't get the best results, most animal trainers will attest to the fact, though there are some nasty bastards out there. i have no problem with slaughtering animals for food and see no reason why we shouldn't utilise their skins as well as every other part of them. i'd say it's much better to eat domesticated animals than wipe out any more species than we already have. i think marital violence gets the least results as sooner or later the aggressor usually ends up on the losing side. i do believe violence through is sometimes inevitable, and gets results but at what cost? often the price paid isn't vomensurate wuth the gains, often we jump in to late or too soon.

Well, I think you make very valid points. Violence probably does achieve a lot. Especially when applied lawlessly. I think the cost is too high. I also admit I kind of just look down my nose at it. It all seems very petty and immature most of the time.

That said... I love dungeons & dragons, video games, live action role-playing, martial arts, etc. etc. so maybe I'm just supressing my inner-desire to be violent. I love all forms of faux violence. I get excited when reading Game of Thrones.

On the animals part, while I am anti-killing-for-fun (including pleasure food/pleasure clothes) on a personal level, I don't think it's particularly unacceptable or anything. Just human nature. But that doesn't justify factory farming or mass farming, the former of which is cruel, the latter destroying countless amounts of rainforest, helping global warming, etc.etc. (insert some more hippyshit here) buuut whatever it's not like a boycott really does that much effect, it's more a personal choice. I would feel very guilty personally, but luckily for everyone I'm not everyone.

Oh hoh what a complex thing.

Oh and I'm also pro the cows getting shot for reasons mentioned below. World > Cows in my opinion. Not that killing all the cows will bring the forests back but at least we could convert that land into agricultural farming and get more people fed, maybe.

I find this hard to answer! No, I do not agree with violence in the home, bullying, murder etc. but I do not believe LIGHTLY smacking a child in a controlled manner is harmful either, there are times talking just doen't work with some children and the point has to be driven home because thye are putting themselves into a dangerous situation,nor do I disagree with heavy penalties for serious crimes so the threat of violence does appear to work (eg Singapore/death penalty/whipping etc gives this city a VERY low crime rate) I agree with Billy on the domesticated animals for food and leaving other species alone, history proves our meat eating tendencies and it's very yummy! This is one of those situations where if all violence is banned, (disciplining children/retaliation against bullies/protecting your home and family etc) things get out of control and if nothing is done it gets out of control.

I don't think the problem is eating meat, because you are right, that is natural. The problem is the fact that mass meat farming is causing an enormous amount of damage to the environment (both through gas and also through rainforest deforestation, food and water consumption, and blahblah) - I am not a vegetarian because the idea of killing bambi makes my eyes water, in fact I secretly love the idea of hunting and killing my own food. I also have a thing for taxidermy. But I cannot in good conscience be part of the "machine" of meat farming. And I don't think I could justify killing something now unless I had to. Buuuut life is short and to be enjoyed so I get why most people don't do this. If meat is worth it to you, it's worth it, and that is opinion. I just don't value it that highly.

Just defendin' my corner here, I mean nothing by it.

I've met kids who are the product of "don't spank it's bad" parents. They're not pleasant.

But then, I like my steak bloody. I even prefer to have reared it myself.

I really want to know what all the vegetarians plan to do with the cows once they're freed. Let's set them loose on the lentils.

No, wanton violence for its own sake is not useful in any way. Consider intent before preaching.

I've met plenty of kids who weren't spanked who are wonderful (example - my own brothers : P) and kids who were spanked who are little shits (example - me as a child!) - I don't think spanking has anything to do with it. It's just parenting itself. Plenty of good parents spank, plenty of bad parents spank. To be honest, I don't think it is a big deal. I don't like it, I would try to avoid it, but it's not abuse and it doesn't do damage. It's just one of those things I think.

Oh, and as a vegetarian, I think we should kill most of the domestic meat cows. Bang bang boom dead. The cost of beef farming on the environment isn't worth their lives. I think the world has a priority over any single species. I love cows and think they are beautiful, gentle creatures, but there is a huuuuugely unnatural amount of them in the world, and they are the third biggest contributors to global warming. I'm a veggie with priorities. Also, an enormous amount of rainforest (and general forest) is cleared to make way for fields that grow feed for cows, and also fields for grazing. Personally I find it disturbing that about 40% of agricultural product is fed to animals, with 26% of the worlds non-ice terrain being grazing fields. That is a lot of fields. And with overgrazing causing problems with the soil, they need to continually expand and create more fields. I'm not even touching on the huge amounts of water that go into each animal, nor the amount of waste each beast excretes. Eating meat that you have raised or caught is not an issue. The problem is mass farming.

But people like their beef, so alas, I try to care as little as possible for it. There is no point feeling deep passionate emotions towards a lost cause. I used to really, really care. But over time you learn to deal with it. You just accept that you can only do your best to change things, and sitting there feeling shit or trying to preach to people who don't want to hear it doesn't work. You make small changes and hope. And I believe things will turn out all right in the end. We'll either make it, or we won't, and if we don't, then we don't, and we're dead, and we'll be dead, so we won't care.

Sorry for the splurge, I like to express these thoughts.

[Leanne]

Splurge away!

Australian beef is relatively inexpensive compared with prices in the UK. I've lived on cattle farms, dairy and beef -- because land is not such a rare commodity here, our farms are quite a bit bigger than British farms, for example. There are a few feed lots, which I thought were illegal here but turns out they're not, it's just that the meat is usually for the export market (they're foreign owned, of course, but I consider that no excuse for our allowing such practices on our soil). I continue to support lobby groups who are trying to have these legislated against -- fuck their wagyu beef, I'd rather a good free range Angus sirloin any day.

I'm also highly opposed to city people who buy meat from supermarkets in neat packaging and don't mind scoffing hot dogs, but then turn up their noses at haggis or black pudding or anything that is still in the shape that it was when it was inside the animal. I believe that if you're going to eat meat, you have an obligation to eat as much of the animal as you possibly can and you must be able to make the connection between meat on your plate and on the hoof. I handle my steak with (perhaps too much!) reverence and only buy it from a butcher who opposes unethical farming practices. Fortunately there are several of those in my local area. It's not too much more expensive, especially if you buy the cheaper cuts and learn how to cook with them (though last night, since the kids weren't home, we had some rather expensive Porterhouse steaks and they were bloody wonderful!).

I guess the point of all that is, meat eating is not directly related to violence or cruelty to animals, nor is it necessarily harmful to the environment. There are cattle stations here in Queensland that have cleared virtually no land -- many of them are larger than entire European countries

As a parent, trust me: if your kid is standing over a toaster with a knife in his hand, a stern word will not cut it. You smack the little bugger so that he remembers not to do it again. It's an aversion tactic and as such, if it's overused it's useless, but it's a valid parenting techique and it pisses me off no end to hear non-parents going on about how they'd never touch their child. Every child responds to different things and every parent uses different skills -- to make a sweeping statement that smacking kids is bad parenting, well, that's just a bit ignorant. It's never wise to generalise. Beating kids, now, that's a whole other story. I don't believe anyone has the right to deliberately injure a child.

[billy]

i think violence (apart from butchering ) is completely irrational. and though i don''t want to go into farming or non farming; if we got rid of our domesticated animals we'd simply hunt what fauna there was to extinction. while some rainforests may get damaged due to cows, in general it's agricultural crops and mining that plays the larger part and the need to make furniture from exotic hardwood. but that's not the issue, although i suppose there is an argument for violence to the planet; many do see it as a living breathing entity after all. so instead of meat eating, we'd cut the trees down to grow maize. kids are resilient and need violence in there lives. not the heavy handed stuff but they need to know about it, be opened to what guises it wears. i often think verbal and emotional violence are worse than the punch, kick, or slap though they do all tend to happen at once in cases of wife beating etc. i also think there's a social violence that society as whole employs, racism, bigotry, child labour etc, much of it going unnoticed or at the very least ignored.

[Leanne]

i often think verbal and emotional violence are worse than the punch, kick, or slap though they do all tend to happen at once in cases of wife beating etc. i also think there's a social violence that society as whole employs, racism, bigotry, child labour etc, much of it going unnoticed or at the very least ignored.

Absolutely. I always said I wished my ex had physically beaten me, so people would see the bruises.

[billy]

most of my life has been built up and around violence and i know from experience a slap or punch or bruise will go. other non physical violence can sometimes be carried for ever. but of course as you ay, it' better to have physical evidence to show up people for what they do.. in the case you mention Leanne, it seems to me that emotional violence had a purpose and to some extent success. (obviously one that didn't last) the thing is; sometimes long periods of violence do get a required result. te problem an aggressor has though is the overthrow. when violence is turned back on them.

[Universalchild]

Splurge away!

Australian beef is relatively inexpensive compared with prices in the UK. I've lived on cattle farms, dairy and beef -- because land is not such a rare commodity here, our farms are quite a bit bigger than British farms, for example. There are a few feed lots, which I thought were illegal here but turns out they're not, it's just that the meat is usually for the export market (they're foreign owned, of course, but I consider that no excuse for our allowing such practices on our soil). I continue to support lobby groups who are trying to have these legislated against -- fuck their wagyu beef, I'd rather a good free range Angus sirloin any day.

I'm also highly opposed to city people who buy meat from supermarkets in neat packaging and don't mind scoffing hot dogs, but then turn up their noses at haggis or black pudding or anything that is still in the shape that it was when it was inside the animal. I believe that if you're going to eat meat, you have an obligation to eat as much of the animal as you possibly can and you must be able to make the connection between meat on your plate and on the hoof. I handle my steak with (perhaps too much!) reverence and only buy it from a butcher who opposes unethical farming practices. Fortunately there are several of those in my local area. It's not too much more expensive, especially if you buy the cheaper cuts and learn how to cook with them (though last night, since the kids weren't home, we had some rather expensive Porterhouse steaks and they were bloody wonderful!).

I guess the point of all that is, meat eating is not directly related to violence or cruelty to animals, nor is it necessarily harmful to the environment. There are cattle stations here in Queensland that have cleared virtually no land -- many of them are larger than entire European countries

As a parent, trust me: if your kid is standing over a toaster with a knife in his hand, a stern word will not cut it. You smack the little bugger so that he remembers not to do it again. It's an aversion tactic and as such, if it's overused it's useless, but it's a valid parenting techique and it pisses me off no end to hear non-parents going on about how they'd never touch their child. Every child responds to different things and every parent uses different skills -- to make a sweeping statement that smacking kids is bad parenting, well, that's just a bit ignorant. It's never wise to generalise. Beating kids, now, that's a whole other story. I don't believe anyone has the right to deliberately injure a child.

There definitely are ways to be ethical around eating meat, but it depends on what your ethics are. I think factory farming is repulsive and it is damaging for the environment but it also takes up far less space. Then organic and free-range farming is much kinder on the animal... But unfortunately takes up much more space. It's too late most of the time, though. You can't bring back that forest, at least not in our lifetime. It may as well be used for farming. Australia has lost over 70% of it's natural native vegetation, by the way. Over 46% is for cattle grazing. I just find that really sad. But there isn't anything we can do about it now. And not everyone really feels the way I do about "the world" - I am a real conservationist, but some people see that kind of progression as positive, at least for people.

It's great that you think about where your meat comes from, though. If more people did that, it would make a bit of difference. Luckily there does seem to be a revoloution in the food world where people are not only eating free-range, but also eating less of it. I agree with you around people not eating stuff like haggis, it's so wasteful throwing those parts away, people should eat all of the animal.
Eating meat itself isn't an unethical or unenviromental act. But farming almost always is. The only way to farm without causing damage to the environment would be to raise your own, really, but not everyone can do that, so it's just one of those things. I'm not gonna lie, it's not like I don't have a car. We all leave a carbon footprint. It's just about reducing it as much as possible while still enjoying the things you love.

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn16...costs.html

I get where you are coming from, but I don't think it's bad parenting to not spank kids either. As I said, I was spanked, but my younger siblings weren't, and to be honest, they are much better turned out then me. I don't think it was spanking related at all, but I think that the actual parenting (I am the eldest, so therefore the test child : P ) improved with time. When I have kids I am going to try avoiding it, I think there are others ways of doing it, but I don't judge people unless they are spanking their kids on a regular basis, and then I think it's crap parenting. There are certain situations where I understand it (like the one you mentioned) but I think if you have to do it often, you aren't doing it right.

[Leanne]

That "native vegetation" you're talking about has been lost along the south-eastern coastline, for the most part. The cattle stations I'm referring to are in areas where the only clearing has been for the house block and a bit of an area for drenching etc, the rest is open country. I know, I've been on cattle musters where the only way to get to the stock is via helicopter as they're in the middle of the bush about a hundred kilometres from the station house. When you only look at statistics, it's hard to get a picture of the world -- but I'm lucky enough to have lived there and I know how much attention the decent graziers are giving to environmental impact, particularly to reversing the salination of the water table that resulted from the initial (ignorant) clearing of land. The biggest threat to Australia's environment is not agriculture, it's residential.

*I see you've included an article from "New Scientist" -- never the most credible source and quite well-known for printing highly speculative, non-peer-reviewed articles. By the way, why do these articles always mention hamburgers and not milk?

-- now we're way off topic, my apologies, it's 2:30am, I woke up and can't get back to sleep.

That's not what this thread is about -- I think it's important to draw a distinction that not all death is the result of violence, and not all physical contact is of a violent nature, no matter what some bleeding heart in the United Nations might try to dictate.

---

Choosing not to use physical punishment for your child does not make you a bad parent, you are perfectly right Phaedra. What worries me is that there is a certain "parent-type" who is all warm fuzzy on the outside but whose permissiveness can be detrimental to the child, particularly when it comes to that child having respect for authority figures. And of course it makes no difference what disciplinary techniques you use if you don't model appropriate behaviour yourself. Children mimic adults and behaviour patterns become ingrained from a very early age, whether it's violence, laziness, prejudices, whatever. Of course, they also mimic the positive.

As long as the child is aware that actions have consequences, and as long as those consequences are consistent and commensurate, I don't think it matters a damn what those consequences are.

The worrying thing about violence in society, in my opinion, is the disconnection from the real world. British films are not such a big culprit, but the sooner Hollywood stops making it seem as though you can break a chair over someone's head and the chair comes off second-best, or you can go through plate glass window and the worst that happens is a little scratch on your cheek (not deep enough to permanently damage your profile), the better.

[billy]

i get my meat from a supermarket, if they sell it, i eat it. i have yet to ask for the name and address of a cow or pig, i have yet to ask how they were raised. ethics only apply when someone tells us about them. i said ooh and 'never' when i saw what was going on in Indonesia; probably over a nice piece of meat. (i can't see butchering ethics as being that good here in the philippines either but what can i say, i eat meat.) so my take is that violence with to or because of cows probably does work. killing a cow can't be anything but violent, even if we kill it in it's sleep. violence to vegetables...now that's another story, but it has been shown that plants can and do communicate to each other. (they scream when hurt) once the vegans realise they're hurting the carrots their ways will end. .
violence is often a means to end, and end which they usually don't want or didn't expect. look around the middle east. iraq could turn against the us at a minutes notice. while it does have a pay day, we have to remember that we're (whether we're armies, bullies, wife beaters, which i suppose is the same thing, molesters etc) never going to really be at the top of the food chain

children need a bit of violence in their lives if only to keep them occupied. have you ever seen them deconstruct pet animals, or at least try to we ar violent.. it's who we are.

[Universalchild]

That "native vegetation" you're talking about has been lost along the south-eastern coastline, for the most part. The cattle stations I'm referring to are in areas where the only clearing has been for the house block and a bit of an area for drenching etc, the rest is open country. I know, I've been on cattle musters where the only way to get to the stock is via helicopter as they're in the middle of the bush about a hundred kilometres from the station house. When you only look at statistics, it's hard to get a picture of the world -- but I'm lucky enough to have lived there and I know how much attention the decent graziers are giving to environmental impact, particularly to reversing the salination of the water table that resulted from the initial (ignorant) clearing of land. The biggest threat to Australia's environment is not agriculture, it's residential.

*I see you've included an article from "New Scientist" -- never the most credible source and quite well-known for printing highly speculative, non-peer-reviewed articles. By the way, why do these articles always mention hamburgers and not milk?

-- now we're way off topic, my apologies, it's 2:30am, I woke up and can't get back to sleep.

That's not what this thread is about -- I think it's important to draw a distinction that not all death is the result of violence, and not all physical contact is of a violent nature, no matter what some bleeding heart in the United Nations might try to dictate.

---

Choosing not to use physical punishment for your child does not make you a bad parent, you are perfectly right Phaedra. What worries me is that there is a certain "parent-type" who is all warm fuzzy on the outside but whose permissiveness can be detrimental to the child, particularly when it comes to that child having respect for authority figures. And of course it makes no difference what disciplinary techniques you use if you don't model appropriate behaviour yourself. Children mimic adults and behaviour patterns become ingrained from a very early age, whether it's violence, laziness, prejudices, whatever. Of course, they also mimic the positive.

As long as the child is aware that actions have consequences, and as long as those consequences are consistent and commensurate, I don't think it matters a damn what those consequences are.

The worrying thing about violence in society, in my opinion, is the disconnection from the real world. British films are not such a big culprit, but the sooner Hollywood stops making it seem as though you can break a chair over someone's head and the chair comes off second-best, or you can go through plate glass window and the worst that happens is a little scratch on your cheek (not deep enough to permanently damage your profile), the better.

Newscientest is just a place to see ideas, but they can't outright lie about data as it is pretty well reviewed and someone would catch them out. Some of it is very speculative, but so is a lot of science, we have to base our views on something or not have them at all, which probably isn't a great idea. It's a good idea to look at a lot of sources, though, not just website pages, I can give you book titles if you like, lots of my friends are conservationists and my own mother is an enviromental educator, so I have a lot of great reasources to look upon. Anyway, there are various links on the wikipedia page about it that are worth chasing up, and some more articles -

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environment...production

http://eatdrinkbetter.com/2010/06/24/env...ting-meat/

http://www.fao.org/ag/magazine/0612sp1.htm

In all fairness Australia is probably one of the few places with enough space to have sizable farms without impacting too harshly on the environment. And you also have a lot of kangaroos, which are very environmentally friendly to farm because they cause minimal damage. It is definitely different in places like the UK and America where land is "created" by destroying forests. It would be different if we stuck to small local farming and also spent time rearing ourselves. Even in a small garden you can keep a pig or a couple of chickens. If people just ate less meat and tried either hunting high population animals (like rabbits) or rearing, or at going to smallholdings if they really can't, meat would not only be a more ethical venture, it would also be sustainable. As it is, meat isn't sustainable, as the human population grows the cattle population also does to meet demands, eventually the entire planet is just going to be humans and farms, and then when we start starving due to overpopulation we'll get rid of cattle and be forced into vegetarianism as all the land is needed for agriculture, and then eventually we'll all have to go cannibal and eat each other : P I am being dramatic but seriously, it can't go on like this. Things have to change, or we're buggered.

I think killing something is always violent. Maybe a different level of violence depending on how it is killed, but I don't think you can argue that killing, even for food, isn't violent. It's causing a death by force.

I don't think it is neccessairly a positive thing to have a child respect "authority" but maybe my view is sullied by all of the "authority" I have seen in my career choice. Generally the important thing is to respect people full stop. When I have children I'll ensure they know to keep themselves out of trouble, but I'll also teach them that everybody can be wrong and do wrong. I think children are often taught to just be quiet and listen when actually they should be questioning and thinking too. I remember as a child of eleven telling my class about my holiday in Lanzarote, which is an island off the coast of Africa, although Spanish owned. My teacher told the class I was being stupid, that it was off the coast of Spain. I tried arguing the point but he thoroughly embarassed me in front of my class and made me sit quietly for the whole lesson. Lanzarote is definitely part of Africa : P Geographically, anyway. Don't get me wrong, I have loved almost every teacher I have ever had, and was, despite being naughty and causing trouble, always treated beyond fairly - if anything, a large amount of favouritism was shown to me, including managing to almost never get detention (and if you had known of my capers in school that would shock you) - I had but one, and in that one, my history teacher came along and broke me out of it. But I respected them because they were good people, not because they were my teachers.

I do understand where you are coming from though, there are definitely parents who are too soft on their children and don't raise them with important values. A spoilt child is a spoilt teenager is a spoilt adult, unless something positive happens to intervene. But I still think neglectful/abusive parents are far worse and more deserving of attention. I used to be a residential care worker, which essentially is a carer who works with children who cannot be homed for various reasons (extremely violent, destructive, tendancies with running, suicidal, etc.) and you quickly learn, as you and Billy stated earlier, that the emotionally damaged and/or the neglected children are the worst, almost untouchable. Physical/sexual abuse doesn't seem to have such a big impact - unless they are accompanied by emotional abuse, then they tend to be far worse. After having done what I have done, I must admit, I would rather see a thousand spoilt children then one more abused one. I know that a really badly spoilt child can be just as destructive as an abused child, and not all abused children even do play up, but it's the process I can't handle.

I do think the consequences matter... If the consequence is a beating or starvation or being locked in a cupboard. The consequence should fit the action, always. If you're too soft, then the child isn't really learning anything. If you're too hard, the child is just learning that when you do something wrong, you deserve to be treated badly. Actually, what you should be teaching children, is that it is okay to make mistakes, because that is how you learn, but that you need to keep yurself safe, you need to respect other people (regardless of who they are) and you need to respect life. Everything else is pretty much debatable, I think.

Ugh, I totally hear you on hollywood violence... It's just so unrealistic. I am a disbeliever of the concept of kids copying films/games (except really young children) because I support the catharsis model, but I do think it does glorify violence and teach bad values and even miseducates kids.

i get my meat from a supermarket, if they sell it, i eat it. i have yet to ask for the name and address of a cow or pig, i have yet to ask how they were raised. ethics only apply when someone tells us about them. i said ooh and 'never' when i saw what was going on in Indonesia; probably over a nice piece of meat. (i can't see butchering ethics as being that good here in the philippines either but what can i say, i eat meat.) so my take is that violence with to or because of cows probably does work. killing a cow can't be anything but violent, even if we kill it in it's sleep. violence to vegetables...now that's another story, but it has been shown that plants can and do communicate to each other. (they scream when hurt) once the vegans realise they're hurting the carrots their ways will end. .
violence is often a means to end, and end which they usually don't want or didn't expect. look around the middle east. iraq could turn against the us at a minutes notice. while it does have a pay day, we have to remember that we're (whether we're armies, bullies, wife beaters, which i suppose is the same thing, molesters etc) never going to really be at the top of the food chain

children need a bit of violence in their lives if only to keep them occupied. have you ever seen them deconstruct pet animals, or at least try to we ar violent.. it's who we are.

Well, me and Leanne have both just touched upon the evils of factory farming, so surely now that you are aware of the ethics you now will get your meat from a good source : P

Also, there are actually people who don't eat vegetables because it hurts life... Fruitarians, only eat plant matter which wants to be eaten, like fruit and berries. And of course we have the jains, who don't eat plants which must die to feed them.

I don't think "we are violent" though, in the sense of it being ingrained in our being. I think we raised in a violent world. It doesn't have to be this way. It just is this way.

[billy]

i'll always eat shop bought meat that doesn't cost an arm or leg.
and i've seen slaughter first hand. i used to get my meat from the abattoir. c ruelty to the beef is something that should be stopped. but it doesn't mean i'll stop e3ating animals. i think there are some really good acceptable forms of violence. i love watching mma contests, specially the bloody ones. some of them are truly amazing. it's gladiatorial i agree but it's something i like watching, and i think like abattoirs, it serves a good purpose. as for plant matter that want to eaten, what about cows that want to be milked...though i've yet to hear a carrot say eat me..or an apple. what about seedless things like some watermelons? (why are they called jains) if we were all born in a country without communications and all at the same time, within 15 years we'd be killing each other left right and centre. we'd be holding wars every day. it's who we are.

[Universalchild]

My point isn't that we should stop eating animals, it is that we should change the way we farm animals i.e permaculture, organic farming, self-rearing, etc. to stop cruelty and also to stop damaging the environment to the extent that we do. Buying shop bought or butcher meat without checking where it comes from (is it free-range/organic/etc.) helps to support those businesses thus fund the cruelty and damage. But not everyone can afford good quality meat so it's not always a viable option for people who can't be without it.

Cows don't want to be milked, they want their calves to suckle... They have their calves taken from them (which is a very disturbing process for dairy cows, as anyone who lives near a dairy farm can tell you) and then they need to be milked because they still produce milk. It definitely isn't comparable as we create that situation. I try and buy ethical dairy products from health food shops.

Carrots are vegetables, not fruit, so they don't want to be eaten. However, an apple is a product from a tree, the fruit bears the seeds, which want to be eaten and passed through the gut. Fruit is part of the trees reproduction cycle, and evolved for the intent of being eaten. Watermelons have seeds, unless you mean the GM crop, but I would imagine all fruitarians are against GM food anyway.

Jainism is a religion in India. They believe in complete non-violence.

And actually if you look at history people were relatively peaceful before agriculture/civilization, and in many places of the world where tribes still live people still are peaceful compared to our bigger societies. Battles happened when food was scarce and people needed more territory. We became more violent as we became more civillized for a variety of reasons.

If violence was completely innate, we would not have wholly peaceful societies in existence.

http://peacefulsocieties.org/Society/Nubians.html