View previous topic | View next topic


Page 1 of 3
Goto page 1, 2, 3  Next

Do you support fox hunting?
 18%  [ 7 ]
 64%  [ 24 ]
Don't Know
 2%  [ 1 ]
Don't Care
 13%  [ 5 ]
Total Votes : 37

Ian Dunn
179043.  Wed May 30, 2007 8:15 am Reply with quote

Fox hunting is a controversal subject, and several people have protested over it.

One of the most unusual happened just recently, when performance artist Mark McGowan ate what he claimed to be a corgi, as a protest against the way the royal family treat animals, including foxes. PETA gave their approval to the protest.

He did the protest due to his concern about the way Prince Philip allegedly mistreated a fox after a hunt, although the RSPCA claimed it did not suffer.

McGowan ate the corgi with apples, onions, seasoning, which was minced and turned into meatballs. He claimed that it was, "It's disgusting. It's really, really, really disgusting. It's stinky, it's white-looking, it's not like any meat I've ever seen."

BBC coverage of event

179101.  Wed May 30, 2007 10:20 am Reply with quote

At all?

Ask a sheep farmer at lambing time (although crows are a bigger killer I think) or a chicken farmer.

I've not shot a fox, or at one for that matter, and I'm not particularly inclined to (except when they scream in the night and keep me awake) but I can't see why this shouldn't be allowed. Cute, yes. Part of the rich tapestry of life, yes. Killers, yes.

179103.  Wed May 30, 2007 10:25 am Reply with quote

i don't think anyone in their right minds is seriously opposed to killing foxes to be honest. the question is how you kill them? you can shoot them, trap them, poison them, whatever - they're all fairly effective and fast methods of killing them. on the other hand, sending dogs after them for miles and miles and then having them torn apart is neither effective nor fast. that foxes are vermine is the stupidest excuse for fox hunting that's out there really. most times the fox is not even killed, so what's the point except terrorising one animal? it is perfectly possible to uphold the tradition of fox hunting without actually torturing foxes, practices in other countries (my own experience from germany for instance) prove that.



179111.  Wed May 30, 2007 10:56 am Reply with quote

Anyone who derives some kind of ghoulish pleasure from seeing an animal hunted down and killed should be hunted down and killed themselves.

Just my 2p worth.

179119.  Wed May 30, 2007 11:20 am Reply with quote

Oscar Wilde wrote:
The English country gentleman galloping after a fox - the unspeakable in pursuit of the uneatable.
A Woman of No Importance (1893)

179122.  Wed May 30, 2007 11:26 am Reply with quote

costean wrote:
Oscar Wilde wrote:
The English country gentleman galloping after a fox - the unspeakable in pursuit of the uneatable.
A Woman of No Importance (1893)

"inedible" actually, at least according to my copy of his collected works. i prefer your formulation, though, the parallel works well. my favourite aspect of that sentence has always been that lord illingworth used it to describe the common english notion of "healthy", the silliest word in the english language. while lord illingworth was an asshole of the highest order i can't help agree with him there on all counts. "healthy" in that sense is an extremely word and has done untold amounts of damage to people.



179127.  Wed May 30, 2007 11:40 am Reply with quote

Have just checked - the full quotation is:

'LORD ILLINGWORTH. [health] Silliest word in our language, and one knows so well the popular idea of health. The English country gentleman galloping after a fox - the unspeakable in full pursuit of the uneatable.'

Inedible doesn't really work as the rhyme is lost. Anyway, I misquoted it originally - it should have been 'full pursuit'.

179132.  Wed May 30, 2007 11:51 am Reply with quote

whoops, you're right! i just consulted my copy of it and it is indeed "uneatable". way better because of the rhyme, yup! dear oh dear, i'm getting lax about oscar, what next?



179142.  Wed May 30, 2007 12:03 pm Reply with quote

Well the hunt is still going strong around here. They just don't go in pursuit of a fox any more. Although if one does happen to get scented by the hounds...................

There was huge outrage at the ban in these rural parts. I am surrounded by sheep and chickens so foxes are NOT welcome. The whole village went on the Alliance march in London. They hired a coach.

To be perfectly honest I have no idea if the fox suffers more by being hunted. I've been convinced by both sides. Shooting is all very fine but what if you don't get a clean kill? The hunt takes out the old and infirm.

I do think it was seen as class thing and that made the knobs a bit cross. It's also seen as a town versus country split.

No one is banning fishing and yet that pursuit is cruel too. Farmers and those around them tend to have a different view of life and death. I stare at the cattle I may one day eat; feeding them juicy grass from the garden and talking to them (I'm quite sane really) We take the eggs from under the chickens and bottle feed orphan lambs through the night in March, only to send them to the butchers a year later. You have to look at the whole thing in context.

As for the Corgi stunt. That's just sick. I don't even see the point he was trying to make.

179185.  Wed May 30, 2007 4:14 pm Reply with quote

My Grandfather Shanks' motto was 'eat what you kill'.
What did he know, he was only a servant of the gentry.
He tended their horses, drove their carriages, and poached their lands to feed his family. Poaching is a crime, isn't it?

179200.  Wed May 30, 2007 5:10 pm Reply with quote

If you're caught.

179220.  Wed May 30, 2007 6:13 pm Reply with quote

There is a story of an English landlord out walking his estate whe he comes across a local poacher. Not recognising the poacher for what he was, the landlord engages him in conversation

LL. 'Ah my good man, you are out early'.
P. 'Aye sur, as are yerself'.
LL. 'Yes, getting an appetite for my breakfast'.
P. 'Ah well sur, I be out looking for a breakfast for my appetite'.

179225.  Wed May 30, 2007 6:25 pm Reply with quote

A family member who shall remain anonymous was once aquitted of poaching as the local GP gave evidence that he was passing by his surgery unarmed mere minutes before the offence was deemed to have occurred.

The opinion within the family seems to be that the GP didn't realise how fast my ancestor could move when he saw a pheasant.

179250.  Thu May 31, 2007 3:58 am Reply with quote

Hummingbird wrote:
There was huge outrage at the ban in these rural parts. I am surrounded by sheep and chickens so foxes are NOT welcome.

I have no problem with killing foxes. If they are a threat to people's livestock, then by all means do away with them. However, I fail to see how having loads of people in silly costumes trampling across people's fields in pursuit of one animal is really going to curb the fox problem.

Hummingbird wrote:
The hunt takes out the old and infirm.

In other words, the ones that are the least threat to your livestock. Far better, in my eyes, to simply use gamekeepers to shoot the buggers.

Hummingbird wrote:
Shooting is all very fine but what if you don't get a clean kill?

Then the gamekeeper walks over to the fox and finishes it off with another shot. The fox suffers for a few minutes, as opposed to the hours of persecution and stress it'll suffer during a hunt.

Though, as I said, I'm not too bothered about the fate of the fox. I agree with what you said about the slightly detached attitude to life and death of animals that's more prevalent in the country.

I eat meat, therefore I am responsible for animals being killed. I am comfortable with that idea because it provides me with a nutritious source of food and because that's what my digestion system was evolved to cope with. However, whilst the thought of animals dying doesn't upset me, it doesn't excite me either. My biggest problem with fox hunting is the idea that people taking part in a hunt get some weird thrill out of watching a living thing being killed. I really don't want to share my society with people who need to watch death to get their kicks.

Ian Dunn
180021.  Sun Jun 03, 2007 2:44 pm Reply with quote

I was trying to find the collective name for a group of foxes.

According to Wikipedia, it is a "Skulk" of foxes.

However, according to Mr Hartston's Most Excellent Encylopedia of Useless Information: The Supreme Miscellany of Fantastic Facts by William Hartson, it is a "Leash" of foxes.

Does anyone know what it really is? Or is it both?


Page 1 of 3
Goto page 1, 2, 3  Next

All times are GMT - 5 Hours

Display posts from previous:   

Search Search Forums

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group