Fra_Diavolo

"Bullfighting is the last serious thing."

-- Garcia Lorca

Aduchamp1

The hypocriscy is that the killing is done for you and away from your sight, thus msking it acceptable.

Bullfighting is a cultural spectacle with ancient roots. There is the theory of relativism, what is cultural for one, should not be the scorn fo another.

It is amazing that 35,000 Americans die annually in automobile accidents, over 11,000 die due to guns, but the concern is over bulls.

Fra_Diavolo

"Bullfighting is the only art in which the artist is in danger of death and in which the degree of brilliance in the performance is left to the fighter's honour."

-- E. Hemingway

nona1

Adu you are making me laugh now..what have car accidents and guns got to do with anything in this thread! lol...

The fact that a bull can be dangerous is irrelevant. This is not a fight between equals. The bull is not a willing participant any more than someone who is attacked but tries self-defense willingly enters the fight. You might as well justify having armed men fighting lions, or buffalo, or tigers, or trained pitbulls or anything dangerous if that excuses it. Boars are dangerous too - we eat pork, why not have pig-fighting bouts as well?

If you want to say, yes I admit it's cruelty, but I don't care, I just enjoy it, fair enough I can't argue with that. At least that's honest. Some people enjoy watching dogs and cocks and other animals fight to the death as well.

But to come up with silly comments that seem to say that bulls deserve it because they can be dangerous, some nonsense about car crashes, and to compare it to anything that happens in an abbatoir is ridiculous and dishonest.

Fra_Diavolo

It is not meant to be a fight between equals. It is often referred to as an art, or tragedy, rather than a sport. It is true that many people cannot see this aspect of the corrida, or they may understand but not think it justifies the undeniable cruelty. However that may be, is not a simple exercise in torturing an animal to death.

Cimbrone

You can call it an art or tragedy (that part I agree with) or look at it through whatever self-serving prism you choose. It's still torture.

longboatkey

Adu, In the case of the rabbits, poultry and lamb we consume; those who use the food participate in the processing, at least that is the agreement we have with my friends and their humanely raised food animals. The thought is do not remove people from the food source; so they think a nice steak comes neatly plastic wrapped from the self-serve case in the trendy supermarket.

wasleys

It is not just bulls that are subjected to cruelty. Picadors' horses are often gored by the bulls and suffer deadly injuries.

Padraig

Aduchamp1 wrote: "Bullfighting is a cultural spectacle with ancient roots."

So were throwing Christians to lions, and gladiator fights to the death.

longboatkey

In the 20th century Nazi Germany had Cultural Spectacles too!!!!!!!

Fra_Diavolo

Well, the torture question involves a good deal of anthropomorphizing. How an animal experiences pain is an open question. So too is the particular experience of the fighting bull, which has been bred to fight for I believe over a thousand years. That bull enters the ring looking for a fight. It spends the last few minutes of its life in a blind rage. How much pain it feels is hard to guess, even from a human perspective. (I understand that most of us very civilized people on the Fodor's board have never experienced fisticuffs. Trust me on this, sometimes you don't feel pain.) It is also worth noting that the bull leads an enviously free life up until its final hours, unlike say, beef cattle.

The tragedy is the death of the bull. The emotion of the fight comes from the matador's exposing himself to death and injury. This is not a refined spectacle such as ballet. Some people may in fact be too refined to tolerate it, and perhaps that speaks well for them. Those of us with cruder sensibilities take away something of value from it, and would hate to see it banned. This by no means derives from the suffering of the bull, but from the performance of the matador.

Probably nine out of ten bullfights are poor to disgraceful, but when you see the real thing you will recognize it immediately. It is an art and exhilaration which you may not understand at first will follow. To assume that the form caters to simple sadism is too sell it very short.

Padraig

Fra_Diavolo wrote of "the fighting bull, which has been bred to fight..."

That's a specious argument. The bull was never consulted. The only fighting quality that is innate in bulls is fighting to breed, and such fights are generally not to the death.

wasleys

<i>How much pain it feels is hard to guess</i>

In other words you don't know, so it might be a lot.

To accept the death of any creature after exposure to possible pain and fear for one's own 'exhilaration' sounds pretty close to 'simple sadism' to me.

<i>That bull enters the ring looking for a fight</i>

Maybe it does but it's almost certainly been weakened by maltreatment before being allowed into the ring. It's probably had its vision impaired by foreign matter being put into its eyes. Also it's probably had its horns filed down, an act believed to cause pain.

thereyet

&lt;&lt; (I understand that most of us very civilized people on the Fodor's board have never experienced fisticuffs. Trust me on this, sometimes you don't feel pain.)&gt;&gt;

Tis true, tis true.

thereyet

Fra_Diavolo

&quot;To accept the death of any creature after exposure to possible pain and fear for one's own 'exhilaration' sounds pretty close to 'simple sadism' to me.&quot;

That is because your eye is on the bull, and mine is on the matador.

Aduchamp1

The comparisons to the Nazis is of course trite and overused.

I always hope those who compalin about the death of bull complain about the treatment of humans.

No matter how your dinner is slaughtered, it is slaughtered. They call it a sluaghter house, not a spa. Justification for the means of death reeks of self-righteousness.

If you believe in capital punishment the method matters little. The end result is the same.

nona1

the apologists are just sounding plain silly now...um, how many irrelevant things can they mention?

Aduchamp1

As usua, people see the shortcomings of others rather than their own.

longboatkey

Adu...No self-rightousness....The food animal is going to a higher use. Why do you think the Sioux Nation thanks the animal it has just killed, and is reverential in the treatment of the living animal as well as with the meat obtained from same. So, with your weak argument, I hope you do not kill any flys, ants, mice, roaches, etc. that you find along your way!!!

Aduchamp1

Now we have people living in Florida hunting the reverential buffalo.