• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

Mexican female bullfighter gored

Potoooooooo

Contributor
Joined
Dec 4, 2006
Messages
7,004
Location
Floridas
Basic Beliefs
atheist
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-latin-america-30623367
_79967006_9cc8e2b2-f236-4283-bcc8-b87f1009c3b5.jpg

Mexican bullfighter Karla de los Angeles sustains cuts to her thigh and gluteal muscles as she is gored by a bull at a fight in Mexico City.
 
For there is surely nothing more beautiful in this world than the sight of a lone woman facing, single-handedly, a half a ton of angry pot roast.

[YOUTUBE]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9nm3IzCT088[/YOUTUBE]
 
I hate to admit it, but I find it deeply satisfying when any of those professional animal torturers gets seriously injured.
 
I hate to admit it, but I find it deeply satisfying when any of those professional animal torturers gets seriously injured.

I don't find it satisfying, but I don't feel any horror or sympathy for their pain either. The snarky part of me chalks one up for the bull.
 
I think a lot of women are finding out that getting the same "rights" as men is not all its cracked up to be.

As if the women didn't know. :rolleyes:

- - - Updated - - -

I hate to admit it, but I find it deeply satisfying when any of those professional animal torturers gets seriously injured.

I don't find it satisfying, but I don't feel any horror or sympathy for their pain either. The snarky part of me chalks one up for the bull.

Ditto.
 
I think a lot of women are finding out that getting the same "rights" as men is not all its cracked up to be.

wait_what.jpg


Is this another one of those "men are the real victims" comments?

So, a woman getting gored by a bull is giving you a major hard-on*, but my silly joke is...I don't know...offensive to women?

* I hate to admit it, but I find it deeply satisfying when any of those professional animal torturers gets seriously injured.

Oy, vey! [Sorry if that's racist against Jews. Please try not to link me to pictures of Holocaust victims this time. I've seen them already.]
 
Last edited:
I hate to admit it, but I find it deeply satisfying when any of those professional animal torturers gets seriously injured.

Do not fall on the trap of "Hating in the name of love", that is definitely not a moral high ground.

Bullfighters have been getting injured for centuries, pretty much since the spectacle was invented. Like accidents during motor racing, nobody admits it but I believe it is even part of the show, in a very morbid way of course.

I do no think that bullfighting is moral or inmoral, but rather amoral. Death is a certainty for all living things, including that bull. And there is no way we can make that bull's death "morally acceptable". Please understand this sad fact: Animals cannot die peacefully of old age. First of all, that almost never happens in nature because old animals usually get eaten by predators, and big animals like the bull tend to have slow, painful deaths at the hands of their natural predators because they are simply too big to get killed swiftly. Actually we humans are probably the only predators that have developed methods fast enough to kill such large animals with little pain. The bullfighter is an exception in our modern world of cattle farms and slaughterhouses, like the natural predators of large animals, bullfighters infringe a slow painful death to the bull. Is it necessary? I think not, but then again the animal, iike all living things in this planet, will die someday.

And in second place, even if you let the bulls reach old age in a big ranch without any predators so that one day they die naturally, they will still suffer: The experience of ageing is also one of constant pain and fear for the animal. You cannot "explain" to a bull that he is getting old and he will die one day. All animals want to live on, they are hardwired to hang on to life as long as they can, but their bodies decay and the experience is, in my opinion, worst than a death brought by predators (or humans). So in short: Grandpa/grandma time, with medical care, supporting family members and eventual hospices where people die loaded with painkillers surrounded by loved ones is a modern human construction. Animals cannot experience this.
 
I hate to admit it, but I find it deeply satisfying when any of those professional animal torturers gets seriously injured.

Do not fall on the trap of "Hating in the name of love", that is definitely not a moral high ground.

Bullfighters have been getting injured for centuries, pretty much since the spectacle was invented. Like accidents during motor racing, nobody admits it but I believe it is even part of the show, in a very morbid way of course.

I do no think that bullfighting is moral or inmoral, but rather amoral. Death is a certainty for all living things, including that bull. And there is no way we can make that bull's death "morally acceptable". Please understand this sad fact: Animals cannot die peacefully of old age. First of all, that almost never happens in nature because old animals usually get eaten by predators, and big animals like the bull tend to have slow, painful deaths at the hands of their natural predators because they are simply too big to get killed swiftly. Actually we humans are probably the only predators that have developed methods fast enough to kill such large animals with little pain. The bullfighter is an exception in our modern world of cattle farms and slaughterhouses, like the natural predators of large animals, bullfighters infringe a slow painful death to the bull. Is it necessary? I think not, but then again the animal, iike all living things in this planet, will die someday.

And in second place, even if you let the bulls reach old age in a big ranch without any predators so that one day they die naturally, they will still suffer: The experience of ageing is also one of constant pain and fear for the animal. You cannot "explain" to a bull that he is getting old and he will die one day. All animals want to live on, they are hardwired to hang on to life as long as they can, but their bodies decay and the experience is, in my opinion, worst than a death brought by predators (or humans). So in short: Grandpa/grandma time, with medical care, supporting family members and eventual hospices where people die loaded with painkillers surrounded by loved ones is a modern human construction. Animals cannot experience this.

At least slaughter houses are quick and we don't torture the animal first.
 
Turambar: That is the most logical post I have ever read in a thread about bullfighting.

At least slaughter houses are quick and we don't torture the animal first.

Actually that is not often true. Slaughter houses have some pretty terrible conditions for the animals. For example, the amount of chemicals pumped into them.

Bullfighting may be bad to some people but at least the bull has a chance to wound or even kill its attacker. They can't do that in a slaughter house.
 
wait_what.jpg


Is this another one of those "men are the real victims" comments?

So, a woman getting gored by a bull is giving you a major hard-on*, but my silly joke is...I don't know...offensive to women?

* I hate to admit it, but I find it deeply satisfying when any of those professional animal torturers gets seriously injured.

Oy, vey! [Sorry if that's racist against Jews. Please try not to link me to pictures of Holocaust victims this time. I've seen them already.]

Your silly joke belittles the fact that our society is unfair to women and the fact that some people complain about it.

My ugly comment belittles people who torture animals.

That you see these two things as equal suggests some fairly unpleasant things about you.
 
I think a lot of women are finding out that getting the same "rights" as men is not all its cracked up to be.

Maybe the fact that bullfighters get gored is some sort of surprise to some women who sit around reading stories like this(seriously, to whom is this news?), but I think women who actually seek to get into male-dominated fields probably do learn about as much beforehand about the occupational hazards inherent to those fields as anyone else would.

The thing they may not be as prepared for is the additional set of burdens that come with being a minority, like having all their mistakes magnified and attributed to their gender, and being practically alone, with very few role models or people who can relate. I can imagine plenty of people wanting to just be a "normal" member of a given profession because it's something they have a passion for, only to eventually end up demoralized when all the other reindeer refuse to let them forget that their sex/race/etc. makes them some sort of aberration who'll never be truly welcome.

Karla de los Angeles seems not to be deterred, though, seeing as how she apparently has another bullfight planned for January 18th.


Is this another one of those "men are the real victims" comments?

So, a woman getting gored by a bull is giving you a major hard-on*, but my silly joke is...I don't know...offensive to women?

Don't feed it. I mean, come on, why are you demeaning yourself by responding to a fucking image macro and a strawman? You may very well be speaking to a bot.
 
I hate to admit it, but I find it deeply satisfying when any of those professional animal torturers gets seriously injured.

Do not fall on the trap of "Hating in the name of love", that is definitely not a moral high ground.

Bullfighters have been getting injured for centuries, pretty much since the spectacle was invented. Like accidents during motor racing, nobody admits it but I believe it is even part of the show, in a very morbid way of course.

I do no think that bullfighting is moral or inmoral, but rather amoral. Death is a certainty for all living things, including that bull. And there is no way we can make that bull's death "morally acceptable". Please understand this sad fact: Animals cannot die peacefully of old age. First of all, that almost never happens in nature because old animals usually get eaten by predators, and big animals like the bull tend to have slow, painful deaths at the hands of their natural predators because they are simply too big to get killed swiftly. Actually we humans are probably the only predators that have developed methods fast enough to kill such large animals with little pain. The bullfighter is an exception in our modern world of cattle farms and slaughterhouses, like the natural predators of large animals, bullfighters infringe a slow painful death to the bull. Is it necessary? I think not, but then again the animal, iike all living things in this planet, will die someday.

And in second place, even if you let the bulls reach old age in a big ranch without any predators so that one day they die naturally, they will still suffer: The experience of ageing is also one of constant pain and fear for the animal. You cannot "explain" to a bull that he is getting old and he will die one day. All animals want to live on, they are hardwired to hang on to life as long as they can, but their bodies decay and the experience is, in my opinion, worst than a death brought by predators (or humans). So in short: Grandpa/grandma time, with medical care, supporting family members and eventual hospices where people die loaded with painkillers surrounded by loved ones is a modern human construction. Animals cannot experience this.

At first, this seems very reasonable. Animal rights activists often have a very naive, unscientific, and romanticized view of nature. Natural animal death via predator or old age is more painful than almost anything humans due to animals, whether for eating, science, or sport.
However, the problem with Bullfighting is not the level of suffering the Bull experiences, but rather that it is done entirely for people to reap pleasure directly from watching that suffering. IF the same act was done because that was somehow an effective way to kill an animal for food, and the pleasure taken was in the food but not in the suffering causing process itself, then it would not be immoral. However, the directness of the link between the animal suffering and our pleasure makes all the difference.
Animals drown in nature and fall off cliffs. The suffering they experience is amoral. However, any sensible person is disturbed by a person who drowns puppies or throws them off cliffs in order to derive pleasure from watching the animal suffer. If a people intentionally triggered a volcano on an island merely in order to entertain themselves with the sight of it inhabitants fleeing, suffering, and dying, it would be among the most immoral acts imaginable under any defensible ethical system. Yet, nature erupts volcanoes all the time and has repeatedly wiped out people's in such painful ways. Thus, by your argument, if we caused this to happen for our entertainment, it would not be immoral. This is a form of the naturalistic fallacy in which your argument is basically, "If it happens in nature, then it cannot be bad for us to cause it for whatever frivolous reason we dream up.
 
Turambar: That is the most logical post I have ever read in a thread about bullfighting.

At least slaughter houses are quick and we don't torture the animal first.

Actually that is not often true. Slaughter houses have some pretty terrible conditions for the animals. For example, the amount of chemicals pumped into them.

Bullfighting may be bad to some people but at least the bull has a chance to wound or even kill its attacker. They can't do that in a slaughter house.

Chemicals? What chemicals?

The bull has zero escape whether it wounds its attacker or not.

If the game was honest, after injuring his attacker, the bull would then 'win' the match and be awarded his life.

Nope, he's killed anyway after being tortured, slashed and harassed.

Slaughter houses are much faster and more humane.
 
Turambar: That is the most logical post I have ever read in a thread about bullfighting.



Actually that is not often true. Slaughter houses have some pretty terrible conditions for the animals. For example, the amount of chemicals pumped into them.

Bullfighting may be bad to some people but at least the bull has a chance to wound or even kill its attacker. They can't do that in a slaughter house.

Chemicals? What chemicals?

The bull has zero escape whether it wounds its attacker or not.

If the game was honest, after injuring his attacker, the bull would then 'win' the match and be awarded his life.

Nope, he's killed anyway after being tortured, slashed and harassed.

Slaughter houses are much faster and more humane.

By chemicals he is probably referring to the use of rBGH and antibiotics used in the modern beef industry. Both are pretty bad for the cow.
 
I understand that is a common thing for the afición to petition that a victorious bull be pardoned. Said bull is retired to stud.

Eldarion Lathria
 
Back
Top Bottom