I can't believe this happened!

[ColoradoDVM]

Advertisement - Members don't see this ad

I agree wholeheartedly with you. And I agree that watch must be kept.

However, this does not negate that fact that AR by definition seeks to abolish ALL human, not only use, but interaction, with animals other than other humans. Except for Peter Singer, who thinks human-animal sex is just fine. Tell that to the abused animals.

It also does not negate the fact that AR groups use the good they've done to get people to do exactly what you are doing - say, oh, well, they're not that bad...they do some good things....

And so they get your money and your support and use it to further their ultimate goal - a petless, meatless society. Don't fall for it. Support the animal welfare groups that are doing the same thing without fire-bombing laboratories or, like PETA, taking dogs from shelters "to adopt" and then killing them in the back of their van. Disgusting.

Actually, they don't get my money or my support. Point is, they have some legitamate points but it doesn't mean I, or many others just go ahead and drink the cool-aid. I agree with your point that AW, not terrorist acts, should be supported.

 

[No Imagination]

...it’s obvious that there are AR extremists out there. By being an AR supporter, it doesn’t automatically make you an extremist that will commit terrorist acts and destroy property. I know that not all AR advocates support PETA or other groups that resort to terrorist acts.

Please stop thinking that there is a spectrum of AR supporters out there (Moderates, conservative, Left, Right, ect.) AR = AR.

There is not a single Animal Rights group in existence that does not conflict with the basic tenants of being a veterinarian, either in philosophy or practice.

Please educate yourself as to what Animal Rights means, or what being a Veterinarian entails before you post again, because you just keep putting your foot in your mouth.

 

[ColoradoDVM]

.

 

[Angelus9]

Actually, they don't get my money or my support.

I should've said, get "one's" money and support - sorry about that!

 

[rugbychick16]

Please stop thinking that there is a spectrum of AR supporters out there (Moderates, conservative, Left, Right, ect.) AR = AR.

There is not a single Animal Rights group in existence that does not conflict with the basic tenants of being a veterinarian, either in philosophy or practice.

Please educate yourself as to what Animal Rights means, or what being a Veterinarian entails before you post again, because you just keep putting your foot in your mouth.

I agree completely and was just going to post something like this. Animal rights means you support animals having the same rights as humans and that we should not use them in any way. There is no middle ground on this. No meat/dairy/egg eating=no honey=no fur=no leather=no horseback riding=no pets=no zoos=no products with any animal part in them whatsoever=absolutely no animal testing at all

I also second what DVMdream said-please educate yourself on animal rights vs. animal welfare. Read some Temple Grandin, PETA literature, AVMA literature, whatever it takes. Its obvious you don't know much about it, and I'm horrfied you got this far along in the pre-vet process without understanding the difference.
Do it for yourself, so if you ever have a vet school interview you can properly answer questions and at least defend yourself and your views, and not be laughed out of the interview room after calling youself an animal rights supporter. Also, get some good experience with a food animal vet and don't be afraid to ask them questions.

 

[rugbychick16]

PS-And if there is a slaughterhouse on your campus (and therefore I assume an animal science program, some research buildings, etc.) then there is a veterinarian on campus associated with IACUC who oversees the regulations, care of animals, and makes sure that the strict guidelines are followed, proper animal care is in place, etc. Look them up, schedule a meeting with them to learn more and discuss your views.

(I worked in an on campus large animal research facility for four years)

 

[kayakman28]

Just to lighten the tone of this thread a little bit......

 

[sumstorm]

Just a couple of comments: the easiest way to know whether the meat/grower you are eating was raised to the standards you believe in is to KNOW the producer/grower. I have shown up to the farms of those I buy food from. Even just driving past the front of a farm can tell you some things about it...and if I have concerns/questions, I respectfully ask if I can visit their place sometime.

Also, at some schools, facilities like teaching farms are self-sustainable; ours must produce enough $$$ to cover it's own costs...which includes teaching us. The OP may need to look at the schools financials and/or discuss this with whoever is in charge to determine how much $$$ she contributes vs how much is contributed by donors and/or by tax payers and/or other students (who are in the programs to learn about things like slaughtering.) If I objected this much, I would have chosen a school to attend that didn't teach animal science. My school didn't, though I wouldn't have cared if it did (hey, we did educate the last american spy that served russia!)

As far as ethics being confronted in vet school, I do believe it will happen. In so many different ways, but I believe that happens in life, and vet school is just another aspect or part of life. I don't believe in gestation crates, and that isn't a popular belief here, but we are mature enough to discuss it, express ourselves, and agree to disagree if need be. I challenged the 'only way to do it' in our teaching farm, and our instructor admited that he use to be rabid about 'one true way-ism' but has since explored some methods used in Europe and is dealing with figuring out how to improve a situation that he was adament was the best way until recently. We have a student researching organic treatments for mastitis. We are trying different things in the poultry barns to reduce loss and increase gain (including decreasing numbers) with success. These are significant changes that can help producers and animals, but none of these would have ever been tried if people ignored the problems, didn't answer to their own beliefs, and communicate carefully and respectfully with others. so, yes, throughout life things will happen that will challenge my beliefs and ethics, and these will affect me, even in vet school. Hopefully, I will grow from such experiences.

 

[gilch]

 

[Myotis]

I really think people on here need to figure out better ways to convey the differences between AR and AW, as there are differences and they need to be understood, but, especially among young people who are coming into their own, it can be difficult to understand the differences. Yes, many AR groups (perhaps all, I really haven't looked into it) are considered terrorist groups, HOWEVER, many of the followers don't know this. They see the pretty pictures of the cute animals on PETA's website, and the name PETA (people for the ethical treatment of animals, which sound wonderful, I'm all for the ethical treatment of animals) can get people to believe in cause. No, it doesn't take much research, but not everyone does the research. I was lucky enough to take a class that taught us the differences in a way that would not offend AR supporters or make them feel attacked and disrespected. But, anyway, the moral of the story is that, while AR groups have harsh stances against pets/vet med/etc etc, I'm willing to bet that most supporters aren't aware of this, and if the information is presented in a way that doesn't make them feel attacked, they are much more receptive to change. But, really, the whole thing is just like religion. The church says one thing, but that doesn't mean everyone in the church feels that way. A little sensitivity and understanding go a long way.

 

[jpeterman13]

But, really, the whole thing is just like religion. The church says one thing, but that doesn't mean everyone in the church feels that way. A little sensitivity and understanding go a long way.

uh oh! the "r" word. 😛 (kidding)

 

[Whyevernot55]

uh oh! the "r" word. 😛 (kidding)

 

[Angelus9]

especially among young people who are coming into their own, it can be difficult to understand the differences..

Point taken but by the time you are applying to veterinary school you are an adult, an educated adult (presumably).

HOWEVER, many of the followers don't know this. They see the pretty pictures of the cute animals on PETA's website, and the name PETA (people for the ethical treatment of animals, which sound wonderful, I'm all for the ethical treatment of animals) can get people to believe in cause.

This is exactly our point.

If the information is presented in a way that doesn't make them feel attacked.

Which frankly is almost impossible to do, and because it almost always does no good to present it that way. A reality check is what is needed most.

I do appreciate the kindness of this forum - it's amazed me for the 3+ yrs. I've been a lurker here - and I think with the vast majority of people in the pre-vet forum posting exactly as you say, why, me and nyanko are necessary for balance. (Not in any way putting myself on the same level of wit as nyanko by any means - uh UH!).

The OP came through great - opened mind to totally new thoughts and agreed to be more exploratory. You can't ask for a better, healthier response from anyone! S/he will then decide which way they swing on the AR/AW issue and that's their right.

 

[laurafinn]

I somewhat agree. I haven't seen anything but chickens, so that's all I can comment on, but the factory farms that I have seen with the least human involvement have treated the animals the most humanely. If everything is monitored mostly by computers, such as temperature, egg belts, feces belts, food belts, and alarms if something is wrong, then the company can pick a couple people to monitor the houses that really care about the animals instead of having to hire anyone who will work in that type of an environment, i.e. immigrants. They don't come here because they like animals and want to work with them, they come and look for jobs because they need to, so their quality of work and commitment to the health of the animals is extremely low, there are of course exceptions.

I would say that this is an interesting take on things, and one that I find myself subscribing to, more and more. I've rabbitted on about how students at my vet school have to do 14 weeks of farm work to graduate, and boy is it eye opening. New Zealand doesn't have the immigration issue with regards to farm workers, but farms do tend to treat their workers pretty poorly, and the hours are long, almost inhumanly so. So you get the bottom of the barrel of the workforce.

Robotic milking is the thing that seems to be coming down the pike here, and I can't help but think it will be a massive improvement in animal welfare.

It's worth noting that sheep, beef and dairy farms here are generally family-owned and free-range. Yet I have seen appalling things. Not only situations where I have thought, "Wow, that's a little over the line" but just terrible stuff. To the extent that when I saw the video of the treatment of downer cows in Chino, I thought, well, that doesn't look that bad.

I don't know what the answer is. I know that I am much closer to the animal rights than the animal welfare perspective than when I started vet school. And I don't believe that the public definition of animal rights is as rigidly defined as the veterinary definition of animal rights. I think that a lot of time. people do mean animal welfare, and I don't think that it helps any cause for vets to get all up in arms about terrorists and the like, and jump down generally well-meaning people's throats. It just alienates the profession from the general public, and takes away from vets' moral authority vis-a-vis companion and food animal treatment.

 

[sumstorm]

And I don't believe that the public definition of animal rights is as rigidly defined as the veterinary definition of animal rights. I think that a lot of time. people do mean animal welfare, and I don't think that it helps any cause for vets to get all up in arms about terrorists and the like, and jump down generally well-meaning people's throats. It just alienates the profession from the general public, and takes away from vets' moral authority vis-a-vis companion and food animal treatment.

I think we would all agree that the average citizen doesn't have any idea what the average AR organization idealizes, but if no one ever points out what they are supporting, they probably will never examine those organization any closer, and quite honestly, while vets and labs and such are paying for care of animals, research, and expenses other than marketing, AR organizations put donations into marketing, publicizing, and does a great deal of work through volunteers.

The picture in DVM 360 said it all to me: Peta protesters literally half naked on the ground obecting to the AVMA. Other protesters with signs with DOGS on leash. Vets entering a building to spend hours and $$$ learning to improve skills and knowledge to assist the animals and the humans protesting the AVMA and the profession. To me, AR is about squeekiness, not substance. I personally spend so much time figuring out how to improve things for animals that I don't have time to contradict my beliefs and my organization's purpose by protesting while I keep an animal captive.

However, in this case, the assumption is the OP has at least 2 years of college education and has been obtaining experience and knowledge in hopes of obtaining a veterinary education. I certainly hope that means the OP has more knowledge on these topics than the average citizen.

I have seen many, many vets, vet students, and pre-vets even on this board, explain the differences, provide references, and guide people with a great deal of patience and kindness, particularly when the individual is outside of the field and isn't antagonistic or insulting (refering to Brody on that one, not the OP.) In this case, the OP is in the field (works as a vet assis, applying to vet school, studying as a pre-vet) and seemed to expect generage outrage at an injustice, which isn't, to many of us, any more of an injustice than those vets attending the AVMA were commiting injustices.

 

[NYCVetToBe]

The world does not give a crap whether one person eats meat or not. One vegetarian (or even a group of vegetarians) is not going to change the eating habits of millions of people....
That mode of thinking bugs the crap out of me. There are people on this planet who are starving, and all some people can think about is how much better they are than others because they have the option of being ridiculously picky about what they eat.

I really don't know what to say about this post other than it made me very sad. I am looking forward to learning as much as possible from both herbivores and carnivores at school, and I truly hope that I end up in an environment in which I can be respected for choosing either side.

 

[jpeterman13]

I really don't know what to say about this post other than it made me very sad. I am looking forward to learning as much as possible from both herbivores and carnivores at school, and I truly hope that I end up in an environment in which I can be respected for choosing either side.

I think that Marsala was referring to the vegetarians that push their ways on others and scold those who do not subscribe to their suggested lifestyle. I've never seen a non-vegetarian belittle a vegetarian for their choices, but I've definitely seen it the other way around.

 

[cowgirla]

I think that Marsala was referring to the vegetarians that push their ways on others and scold those who do not subscribe to their suggested lifestyle. I've never seen a non-vegetarian belittle a vegetarian for their choices, but I've definitely seen it the other way around.

Agreed.

I was a vegetarian at one point, simply because the food at school was horrible. Pretty much lost my appetite for red meat for about 2 years, and chicken was blah too, so I stuck to my veggies.

Then I moved off campus and lived on a horse farm. Slowly rediscovered meat, would eat it if there was nothing else, but still tended to avoid it. We had a cow, too. I HATED that cow. He liked to knock me over and drag me around.

He sure tasted good after that!

So, do I make fun of vegetarians? Absolutely not. Do I make fun of vegans? Nope, only my mother who has recently converted, because that's my given right as her eldest child.

Do I get harrassed because I know the name of the cow in my freezer? You betcha.

 

[sunshinevet]

The reason why I don’t like that the slaughter happens at my university is because I’ve invested so much into my school, and I shudder to think that my tuition money and fees have actually contributed to the slaughtering. It is a public university, but I have not been able to find budgeting records yet. I guess it’s hard to escape the whole budgeting issue b/c I shop at grocery stores that supply meat, eat at restaurants that prepare meat, etc..

Ok chickpea... I don't know what its like in the US, but every single vet school in Australia has a slaughterhouse on campus. They require a rotation through an abboitor, so you understand and can get hands on experience in the meat quality control business. Here at Murdoch, some vet students are involved in raising and training steers for the local ag show... so they can be auctioned off and slaughtered. Are you now not going to go to a vet school that has a slaughterhouse? What about ones that use cadavers to teach anatomy? What about ones that have an actual functioning farm on campus, which results in the slaughter of animals?

Although many of you have challenged my beliefs and have made me re-evaluate myself, you have been really harsh. You can’t expect me not to be overly defensive, when many of you had tried to tear me apart! It’s funny that many of you have accused me of being “morally superior” and arrogant, when many of you have been that same way.
I never wanted to debate the issue of animal slaughter and cruelty. I used the slaughterhouse situation as an example, but my main question was if any of you were concerned about the ethical/moral issues you may face as a vet (or in vet school). Like I said, I have my beliefs, and you all have yours. For the future, being hostile does not help you get your point across. It only makes people more defensive and hostile in return. I’m also not stupid; the vet schools I applied to didn’t need the lab. But I thought it would be an important class to take. And again with the snap judgements, some of you have assumed that because I’m a vegetarian that I’m unhealthy. It is possible to be healthy with a meat-free diet.

I am positive every single person on this forum has considered the potential ethical dilemmas they will be faced with in the veterinary industry. It's almost impossible to get into vet school and NOT have thought about it - you will almost DEFINATELY be asked to discuss your viewpoint on an ethical dilemma in an interview. You sound really young, and really really new to this - if you start sprouting such radical opinions such as " I dont like that my uni has a slaughterhouse" I think its going to be hard for a vet school to take you seriously. Because it sounds as though you cannot DEAL with the ethical dilemmas that you face, that instead you jump up and down and don't try to work through it.

I mean, take this lab for instance - instead of using it as an opportunity to educate yourself on the university's slaughter practices and perhaps campaign for change if you found them unacceptable, you just ditched the class.
Those animals must think you're making a cracking difference. 👍

And really, at some point in vet school, you are going to have to learn food animal medicine, whether you like it or not. You're probably going to have to go out on farms, and face slaughter. I would be asking yourself very, very seriously if this is something you should actually be doing.

 

[NYCVetToBe]

I think that Marsala was referring to the vegetarians that push their ways on others and scold those who do not subscribe to their suggested lifestyle. I've never seen a non-vegetarian belittle a vegetarian for their choices, but I've definitely seen it the other way around.

Yes, I can see that now that you point it out.

I'm generally considered a vegan (though I'm not really because I still have leather shoes and belts and undoubtedly consume/use animal products all the time without realizing) who tries to blend in as much as possible with my friends at steakhouses and burger joints alike. I don't see any benefit to my friends thinking veganism is a major drag that requires you to sit at home wallowing in your own tofu, and I don't think it's wrong for humans to love and eat meat. I actually can't wait to learn more about the many great farms with which my future classmates have been involved.

I've strongly considered hiding my semi-veganism completely when I first meet my classmates because of the hostility I have received (yes, I do actually get confronted when people notice I'm whispering to a waiter, etc.) from people that I assume I feel morally superior to them. I certainly don't! For the most part, however, this thread has made me feel better about my potentially unhidden eating habits.

 

[Minnerbelle]

I've never seen a non-vegetarian belittle a vegetarian for their choices, but I've definitely seen it the other way around.

soooooooo not true! you have no idea how many times i've been belittled and scoffed at for my dietary choices to the point where it was hostile.

i don't preach to others and tell them they should be vegetarian (esp because i know that my consuming dairy/eggs is totally hypocritical if i were to preach ideologies). in fact, i don't bring it up like EVER unless it comes up. however, if someone asks me why i don't eat meat, then i explain it. my reasons are simply that based on what i know about factory farming, i can't justify a lot of what happens (battery cages, debeaking, gestation crates, etc...) with my cravings for meat. sometimes i give in and eat that yummy bacon, but a lot of the time i just feel too guilty.

i've only encountered a handful of people who have been totally respectful of that in my experience. a surprising amount of people seem to think that it's some sort of mental defect. for some reason, it's totally okay to be vegetarian for sustainability reasons... but sooo not cool if it makes you seem like an "animal rightist"

 

[evenstar7139]

Wow...I read this WHOLE thread. That took awhile o.0

I have something to say... This is for those of you who still have hard feelings toward Zuneski.

What is it you WANT from Zuneski? Is it for s/he to be an open-minded, non-hostile person that listens to and considers our point of view? Is it for someone who is willing to research and decide for themself? It is, yes?

Then why on earth are you discouraging that?!

You may think you don't want to be nice to Zuneski but if you want Zuneski to listen you want to be nice. You need one to get the other!

So my point is, if you're mean to Zuneski, and your goal isn't for Zuneski to completely despise and ignore you, what you're doing is counterproductive.

I've heard intelligence defined as the ability to manapulate your environment so it is giving you what you want to get out of it. The environment is this post, what we want is Zuneski to leave educated and having chosen an informed opinion. Can you achieve this? Where's that big brain of yours? Use it! 🙂

 

[Angelus9]

Don't equate honesty with meanness.

But since you do, why aren't you telling zuneski the same thing?? After all, it was z who wrote (and these quotes are only from the FIRST post z made):

"What made me sick"

"a place that actually slaughters animals!"

"I was so enraged"

"nauseated by the environment that I just left."

"I couldn't believe how sick my classmates were!"

"This whole event was incredibly upsetting and sad to me."

"I am...an animal rights supporter."

"I just have very little tolerance for animal cruelty." [Thereby branding animal slaughter as cruelty - by definition.]

Maybe zuneski should've been a little more tactful, eh???

 

[Angelus9]

And I don't believe that the public definition of animal rights is as rigidly defined as the veterinary definition of animal rights. I think that a lot of time. people do mean animal welfare,

That's pretty much what this entire thread has been about. 🙄

I don't think that it helps any cause for vets to get all up in arms about terrorists and the like, and jump down generally well-meaning people's throats. It just alienates the profession from the general public, and takes away from vets' moral authority vis-a-vis companion and food animal treatment.

Bull.

Sorry, laurafinn, but I am actively involved in animal welfare and keep close tabs on every AR organization I can find. You have no idea how brutal, how dangerous, how pervasive, these groups are, and it is becoming such common knowledge that there is no longer any excuse for people to be ignorant of this fact. As the ARs themselves say, AR and AW are non-compatible. You're saying because people are ignorant, to point out their ignorance is mean and alienating and "takes away from vets' moral authority." Vets must join the chorus blasting the AR agenda for what it truly IS. I disagree that it is alienating the general public. I think the tide is beginning to turn and the general public is learning the truth.

 

[jpeterman13]

soooooooo not true! you have no idea how many times i've been belittled and scoffed at for my dietary choices to the point where it was hostile.



i've only encountered a handful of people who have been totally respectful of that in my experience. a surprising amount of people seem to think that it's some sort of mental defect. for some reason, it's totally okay to be vegetarian for sustainability reasons... but sooo not cool if it makes you seem like an "animal rightist"

My post was referring to my own personal experience-- hence my preface "I've never seen..."- I have quite a few friends that are veg NEVER have I seen them scoffed at for not eating meat. A few of them have ethical dilemmas, a few of them health, and one of them I remember won't say why she doesn't eat meat--she's actually vegan. They will be the first to tell you that their dietary choices are completely catered to on a daily basis.

 

[Marsala]

I think that Marsala was referring to the vegetarians that push their ways on others and scold those who do not subscribe to their suggested lifestyle. I've never seen a non-vegetarian belittle a vegetarian for their choices, but I've definitely seen it the other way around.

Thanks, jpeterman, that is exactly what I meant.

 

[sumstorm]

They will be the first to tell you that their dietary choices are completely catered to on a daily basis.

During orientaton at the cvm, our first meal was a 'bbq.' I assumed there would be veggie burgers...or at least buns, tomato, and lettuce. Fried chicken, coleslaw and potato salad with unknown ingredients, and baked bean with ham chunks.

Needless to say, I was suprised. I don't do deep fried anything. I ended up skipping the meal, and was a bit disappointed with the awareness of the staff on our first day. However, other than a comment on the evaluation form, I didn't make a fuss.

I certainly know vegans/vegetarians who push their view....and I also know meat consumers who do as well. And folks in both classes that judge each other...but I honestly believe that most of the folks in vet school could really care less whether thier fellow students eat meat or animal products or not.

 

[CatVet2Be]

Don't equate honesty with meanness.

Maybe zuneski should've been a little more tactful, eh???

"The fact that you immediately and automatically equate food animal slaughter unequivocally with "cruelty" is misguided, unfair, and frankly, just plain stupid. Ok, let's be nice and say what - ignorant? uneducated? misinformed? all of the above? - on your part."

"silly-willies like you are hard to take. "

"You sound like a typical AR (as opposed to animal welfare advocate): No idea of reality."

Ah yes, because you've been the epitome of tactfulness throughout this thread right? And you're right on one thing, honesty does not = meanness but insults veiled as honesty do.

I've read through most of the thread and Zuneski didn't come out attacking others for their opinions. He/she came out with an emotional reaction to something he/she had seen and was expressing an opinion to. You can disagree with it or not but it's hard to see the validity behind any argument when it's being voiced abbrasively.

Zuneski you handled the opposing viewpoints well and I'm sure you've learned how heated a topic AR and AW can be. Hopefully you've been able to see the other side of the coin on these subjects, it doesn't mean you have to change your mind on anything but it's hard to have a well-founded opinion when you don't consider the arguments against it.


And Angelus, don't worry about being mistaken for having Nyanko's wit, honesty and humor. I'm pretty sure you're safe from being accused of having any of those things.

 

[BlacKAT33]

Kayakman - maybe you can insert another comic to lighten the mood again? lol

 

[evenstar7139]

Don't equate honesty with meanness.

But since you do, why aren't you telling zuneski the same thing?? After all, it was z who wrote (and these quotes are only from the FIRST post z made):

"What made me sick"

"a place that actually slaughters animals!"

"I was so enraged"

"nauseated by the environment that I just left."

"I couldn't believe how sick my classmates were!"

"This whole event was incredibly upsetting and sad to me."

"I am...an animal rights supporter."

"I just have very little tolerance for animal cruelty." [Thereby branding animal slaughter as cruelty - by definition.]

Maybe zuneski should've been a little more tactful, eh???

I see that you can't be reasoned with. I understand now that you are not making any attempt to get them to listen to you, you just want to throw stones. I have nothing more to say to you.

 

[Angelus9]

[zuneski] came out with an emotional reaction to something he/she had seen and was expressing an opinion to.

So was I.

Although actually, my response wasn't emotional; it was quite factual.

Person A is all right because they're "expressing an opinion"? But Person B, who is also expressing an opinion, is not? Makes no sense.

Sorry that the reality of what AR is has got some noses out of joint on here. Very interesting that it's perfectly ok to be horrified and say horrible things about hard-working university students and call them "sick" as well as other things - guess that's ok, CatVet2Be? - but it's not ok to object to such treatment?

 

[Angelus9]

I see that you can't be reasoned with. I understand now that you are not making any attempt to get them to listen to you, you just want to throw stones. I have nothing more to say to you.

"I" can't be reasoned with?

evenstar, I know from your other posts you must be quite young, but, please, read the beginning of this thread again. Throwing stones could not be farther from the truth. It boggles my mind that it's perfectly ok for ARs to say horrible, horrible things - that's just fine with some of you - but when someone provides them with a) an alternate viewpoint, and b) multiple quotes directly from AR groups themselves proving said viewpoint, you totally discount it, not because it's not true, not because it's not valid, but because you didn't like their TONE.

The people not able to reason are not who you think.

 

[Angelus9]

"Ah yes, because you've been the epitome of tactfulness throughout this thread right?

I admitted straight up I wasn't "tactful" or *****-footing around about this issue, and left others on SDN to be so. I work too much with AR issues to know that tactfulness is not their strong suit. btw, the abrasive insults all came from zuneski, not me.

"You can disagree with it or not but it's hard to see the validity behind any argument when it's being voiced abbrasively.

Why? You admit that you can't ascertain the validity of someone's arguments based on the facts and information they provide? That's an interesting admission.

You tell zuneski:

but it's hard to have a well-founded opinion when you don't consider the arguments against it. .

Agreed.

 

[CatVet2Be]

I don't recall anyone saying AR statements are perfectly ok. In fact most people have agreed that AR voewpoints are extreme, dangerous, and contrary to what most of us believe. The issue isn't the alternate viewpoint or the quotes supporting it, it's the attack mode in which they're presented. I probably agree with som eof your viewpoints but you present them in such an abbrassive manner that it's difficult to even want to agree with you on anything. The person that said

"I don't think that it helps any cause for vets to get all up in arms about terrorists and the like, and jump down generally well-meaning people's throats. It just alienates the profession from the general public, and takes away from vets' moral authority vis-a-vis companion and food animal treatment."

is absolutely correct. Unfortuntately for many communication requires a certain amount of tact regardless of what you're communicating and it's a fact that people will be less likely to listen to your message if you can't get it across in a tactful, reasonable way whether you're correct or not. Diplomacy even in the face of things you disagree with is a very useful skill to learn prior to becoming a vet.

 

[CatVet2Be]

You admit that you can't ascertain the validity of someone's arguments based on the facts and information they provide? That's an interesting admission.

Yup. If the person is so annoying that my attention is diverted from the topic at hand to their obnoxious personality, then yeah I have a hard time focusing on the words coming out of their mouth or in this case being spewed on a website. It's like watching a skit by Carrot Top. The monologue may be funny but the guy annoys me so much I probably won't pay attention anyway.

 

[Angelus9]

Yes, you're right about diplomacy.

I do think, though, that when people on SDN are discussing (arguing?) issues among their peers here on SDN or any internet msg. board I don't automatically assume that's the exact same way they'll speak to a client in a consulting room. Exactly this point has come up over the years on here - people are arguing, joking, venting, whatever, and then people come on and say 'I hope you never talk to your clients that way' 🙄 Of course they wouldn't.

I guess what I keep trying to make people on here see (and obviously not succeeding at it - LOL) is that it was ok for the AR to say horrible things. That was ok and was an opinion, yet no one said it was an "attack." Why not? (Actually, on looking over the thread, the vast majority of people on here got it right - and hey, why aren't you blasting the person who said, "Look, chickpea" - which personally I thought was hysterical. So go blast them).

When I responded with facts and AR quotes and said you'd better look into what you're doing, you are way off the mark (remember, zuneski proclaimed h/herself to be an AR), that was considered an attack.

It's quite the double standard.

 

[zuneski]

Again, thank you for the comments. I have gotten really great answers that will help me figure out where I fit in the whole animal rights/animal welfare situation. I posted this thread because I obviously wanted help putting things into perspective. I wouldn't have made this post if I didn't see that I had conflicting beliefs and goals. Based on the replies, I've seen that it's so easy to gang up on someone and attack them when you can see a fault in them. I don't really care that many of you have done this, because I know that it's not personal. You only see my screen name and know this one thing about me. I'm not ashamed to admit that I don't know absolutely everything about this career, just like no one else does.

CatVet2Be, your post was helpful, and I agree that I needed to hear the other side before I established my opinion.

I see that you can't be reasoned with. I understand now that you are not making any attempt to get them to listen to you, you just want to throw stones. I have nothing more to say to you.

Angelus9, this totally sums up what I think of you. You've made your point several several times and we obviously won't ever agree...you're just getting more and more obnoxious...why do you keep posting???

 

[CatVet2Be]

The only objectionable thing in Zuneski's first post was calling some classmates "sick". He/she did mention that they were laughing and joking previous to this and we don't know the nature of the jokes that preceeded this opinion. For example, I have a classmate that's joked that he has an easy way to fix feral cat populations, shoot em with a pellet gun. I'm not sure how much of that is a joke but I find it distastefull from all angles, largely because I'm obviously biased towards cats. Granted, I robably would not result to namecalling or forcing my opinion onto him because that doesn't do anyone any good. It's only going to irritate me, make him not listen to anything I have to say, and probably reinforce that "cat people" stereotype (something I try really hard to stay away from because frankly some of them scare me).

Angelus9 I get that you're very passionate about this subject, but just to play devil's advocate is there anything at all from those with an opposite point of view than yours that you could understand the reasoning behind? Like in my case, my push button issue is declawing, I'm vehemently against it, I won't ever perform one but I understand why people do and why some choose it. I may not agree with the reasons but I can at least try and see things from another angle. Being able to entertain other points of view makes me more comfortable about my own perceptions of something and in many cases has even modified my viewpoint.

 

[BlacKAT33]

I think everyone should just stop posting in this thread.

There were MANY people who made comments that may have sounded rude or come off the wrong way because of the wording of the OP's first post. Maybe some weren't necessary, maybe some were great for a reality check. Either way, i hate it when people gang up on each other. And I'm not just talking about people ganging up on the OP, im talking about singling out Angelus. It is really hard to tell how harsh words are when they are just in print. I think both the OP and others on this thread made some mistake. Some people apologized, others didn't due to the poor wording of the OP's first post.

Zuneski- I know you are extremely new to SDN, and IMO you shouldnt tell someone to stop posting unless they are bat **** crazy like Bodiatrist and other trolls who come to stir up trouble. even though angelus's posts seemed a bit harsh, they were actually just trying to paint a real view of the situation

Evenstar- you are also extremely new to SDN and i hope that you realize as these types of threads come that it is a completely different situation when you are interacting with the thread from start to finish. to post your harsh opinion towards angelus when you werent even involved in the thread at the beginning is a little uncalled for. Everyone admitted after zuneski finally responded that there was complete miscommunication, especially when he/she referred to themselves as AR supporters and did not fully explain dropping the class. i think the big time gap between zuneski posts were a reason the thread starting spinning in a different direction


im not taking sides. i understand everyones view and i think both have valid points. lets just end this thread now that the answers to the OPs questions are finished

 

[zuneski]

Yes, you're right about diplomacy.

I do think, though, that when people on SDN are discussing (arguing?) issues among their peers here on SDN or any internet msg. board I don't automatically assume that's the exact same way they'll speak to a client in a consulting room. Exactly this point has come up over the years on here - people are arguing, joking, venting, whatever, and then people come on and say 'I hope you never talk to your clients that way' 🙄 Of course they wouldn't.

I guess what I keep trying to make people on here see (and obviously not succeeding at it - LOL) is that it was ok for the AR to say horrible things. That was ok and was an opinion, yet no one said it was an "attack." Why not? (Actually, on looking over the thread, the vast majority of people on here got it right - and hey, why aren't you blasting the person who said, "Look, chickpea" - which personally I thought was hysterical. So go blast them).

When I responded with facts and AR quotes and said you'd better look into what you're doing, you are way off the mark (remember, zuneski proclaimed h/herself to be an AR), that was considered an attack.

It's quite the double standard.

There is no double standard. All of those quotes you picked out of my posts portrayed my overall feelings of the situation. The only thing that may be considered an attack was when I said "I couldn't believe how sick my classmates were". I haven't really seen that many people react that way when looking at cow heads and bodies hanging up. A few people said that people make jokes in uncomfortable situations...I have not thought about that. But it was disturbing, nonetheless.

On the other hand, you personally called me out and called me names ("ignorant", "uneducated", blah blah blah). How is that not an attack? It was not the content you presented, it was the way in which you presented it. There are too many people to even call out for attacking me, including the person that called me a "chickpea". But whatever...keep attacking me if you want! 👍

 

[Angelus9]

You've made your point several several times and we obviously won't ever agree...you're just getting more and more obnoxious...why do you keep posting???

Why do you? 🙂

We "obviously won't ever agree"? - except that we actually do now. You yourself posted that you now realize you are actually an AW advocate and not an AR, and that you are going to explore the other side of things. AS I POSTED previously, I said I thought that was great.

 

[CatVet2Be]

stop posting unless they are bat **** crazy like Bodiatrist and other trolls who come to stir up trouble.

Ah, I miss him. He made for great cheap reading, like a poorly written soap opera.

 

[Angelus9]

There are too many people to even call out for attacking me

Ah, I see, too many people. So I'm the designated scapegoat then. All righty by me.

On behalf of all the SDNers, "too many to even call out" (which ought to tell you something right there, if you could only see it ), on behalf of all the people, I accept the position of designated scapegoat.

http://encarta.msn.com/dictionary_1861727114/scapegoat.html

Although I already did banish myself for an entire day to the wilderness of the Pre-Allo forum, so we're good!

 

[CatVet2Be]

I could pick on other people but frankly Nyanko scares me. 😀

 

[DickVetPlease]

Happy dance!

 

[Angelus9]

ROTFL!!! Very funny!

Glad to help (clinks glasses of favorite beverage with CatVet2Be).

 

[BlacKAT33]

Ah, I miss him. He made for great cheap reading, like a poorly written soap opera.

with my stress level for interviews...i could do w/o him lol well, ASSUMING its a he...because i could not see a girl writing/arguing like he does haha
actually, once he comes back i would like to rub it in his face that i got 3 interviews (so far) and i KNOW i will be an AMAZING vet *sticks tongue out with angry face*

 

[rileyroo]

the title of this thread should be renamed "i can't believe this conversation is still going on"

 

[Electrophile]

Ah, I see, too many people. So I'm the designated scapegoat then. All righty by me.

On behalf of all the SDNers, "too many to even call out" (which ought to tell you something right there, if you could only see it ), on behalf of all the people, I accept the position of designated scapegoat.

http://encarta.msn.com/dictionary_1861727114/scapegoat.html

Although I already did banish myself for an entire day to the wilderness of the Pre-Allo forum, so we're good!

Having now read the thread, I'll call you out, alright. On being 110% right and completely owning the OP!

 

[badcats]

*****-footing around about this issue

Really SDN? REALLY? O censorship