Taken today at my Chinese in-laws family farm outside of Shanghai. Normally my in-laws raise geese just for their eggs (they are free-range and allowed to wander). But as Lunar New Year (Spring Festival) holiday is this week, a celebratory feast was in order. Soon as my father-in-law grabbed the goose in the middle, it began making that horrible goose noise. The other geese suddenly appeared out of the woodwork and violently attacked my father-in-law. After he set the goose back down, the others formed this protective barrier around it and wouldn't let any humans get close. We decided to forgo the feast :)
I guess he learned his lesson, it doesn't matter what colour the goose is, they all have the temperament of a Canadian pissed off Geese.
No one ever messes with Geese, or it is lights out.
WE MUST PROTEC, WE’RE NOT SNACC
if they won't sacrifice one... they all must die. it is written.
They look like they're about to drop the hottest rap album yet
Them lads look staunch as fuck.
I think Canadian is the wrong name for geese. They are not polite. There should be a more fitting name...
Looks like a big flock you to your in laws.
If you have a problem with Canada gooses you've got a problem with me and I suggest you let that one marinate.
Animals do not ‘give’ their life to us, as the sugar-coated lie would have it. No, we take their lives. They struggle and fight to the last breath, just as we would do if we were in their place.
-- John Robbins
No slaughterino pls
I assume they’re ladies, since OP said his in laws normally just raised them for eggs.
I mean you're not wrong, but why share this if you still eat meat?
You're right, they're called Canada geese!
... them lads look staunch as fuck.
Replace eating meat with literally any other unethical action and you will realize how absurd that line of reasoning is.
Since I was 4 I have only had one rule for life and that's don't Fuck with Geese.
I think the issue here is a difference in value. Most people simply don’t think an animals life is as valuable as a humans. Therefore the hypocrisy isn’t as obvious as you claim it is. I think most people, if faced with either killing an animal or a human, would save the human and kill the animal. Now quantifying the difference in value and using that as a measurement of what is and is not acceptable is much harder. We can all agree, barring a few, that animal torture is bad, because there is nothing gained from the destruction of value inherent in the animal. But meat eating is harder. Is the value lost in the animals death outweighed by the value gained by the consumer? I don’t know. Just like how we can rationalize the death of insects for a pest free home though, some rationalization is required here. It’s just much harder than the previous example because the difference in value for animals and humans is, in my opinion and others’, smaller than that between animals and insects. There’s needs to be a quantification if value and benefit before either side can clearly draw a line I think, and both sides going “my idea is obviously correct and you’re an idiot” probably isn’t helpful.
They really really are not
Geese are so sweet.
Umm, if you read it I said “mostly” not totally. Sorry, I should have put it in bold for you.
The all or nothing attitude. Loved by meat selling corporations everywhere
I've never heard anyone say that any animal willingly gives their life to us.
You shouldn't be dictating other peoples lives
Says the person dictating that an animal must die, solely for your taste preferences. How people cannot see this hypocrisy is amazing to me.
"Don't try to force me to not eat animals" forces animal to be killed for no reason
And we're not even dictating, we're just saying that it would be a bloody good idea to stop eating animals