Jump to content

Your views on Foie Gras

Thomas Micklewright

By Thomas Micklewright
in The Lounge

 Share

Recommended Posts

DaveR

DaveR

Posted
Posted

It was a thoughtful article, although he accepts that he has essentially no new insight to add to that of Orwell, 75 years ago:


"Yet one couldn't help feeling, like Orwell, that it was a shame, and that more than poverty was to blame ? which must also be true now, because it can hardly be price alone that drives low-income families towards high-fat, processed food when the price of processed foods has risen by 36% over the past five years, more than any other food category. A fact may have to be faced: some people like it, and, given the huge power of the food business, coaxing them in a healthier direction may be no easier now than it was for society ladies in the 1930s."


The expression 'food poverty' begins to sound a bit misleading when it is accepted that it has little to do with poverty per se, but appears rather to be the result of a complex correlation between income, education, class etc. Put bluntly, just as it is misleading to say that there are many people in the UK who cannot afford to eat enough, it is equally misleading to say that there are many who cannot afford to eat healthily. Rather, there appear to be many people who do not eat healthily, and current economic circumstances appears to be causing that number to increase.


I would be interested to see if there is any research into what happens when people's financial circumstances change - do they gravitate from pies to salad, or plummet from halibut to hamburgers, as income changes?


I should add that this is not an argument against immediate support for families or individuals in crisis who genuinely cannot buy food and pay the bills at a given time, but this doesn't seem to me to be the wider issue that these articles are concerned with.

Alec John Moore

Alec John Moore

Posted
Posted

I see it a bit differently and I think we agreed earlier that poverty needs a complex definition to be meaningful and useful if it is to be addressed. For me, the articles we are referring to are placed and read in the context of "Austerity Britain" as we might expect newspapers like The Guardian to do. But, just as it is annoying to see a simplistic or direct link between low income and unhealthy eating habits, we are unlikely to see a correlation between increased income and healthier eating.


I don't accept the speculation of the public health expert quoted by civilservant that there's a perception that the state will look after us regardless of how reckless our behaviour is. Hogarth's image of Gin Lane springs to mind:


http://www.historic-uk.com/CultureUK/Mothers-Ruin/

  • 3 weeks later...
Marmora Man

Marmora Man

Posted
Posted

Parkdrive Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Lets hope any of you that enjoy this odious

> product never have a funnel shoved down your neck

> and are force feed. Disgraceful.



Unlikely. I plan to enjoy some tonight with a good Sauternes from G&B.

Parkdrive

Parkdrive

Posted
Posted

Marmora Man Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Parkdrive Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > Lets hope any of you that enjoy this odious

> > product never have a funnel shoved down your

> neck

> > and are force feed. Disgraceful.






>

>

> Unlikely. I plan to enjoy some tonight with a good

> Sauternes from G&B.



I hope someone sticks a funnel down your throat and feeds it to you, and see how much you enjoy that. Have a good Christmas.

Marmora Man

Marmora Man

Posted
Posted

Parkdrive Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Marmora Man Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > Parkdrive Wrote:

> >

> --------------------------------------------------

>

> > -----

> > > Lets hope any of you that enjoy this odious

> > > product never have a funnel shoved down your

> > neck

> > > and are force feed. Disgraceful.

>

>

>

>

>

> >

> >

> > Unlikely. I plan to enjoy some tonight with a

> good

> > Sauternes from G&B.

>

>

> I hope someone sticks a funnel down your throat

> and feeds it to you, and see how much you enjoy

> that. Have a good Christmas.


I'd respect you more if you could come up with a better insult.

Loz

Loz

Posted
Posted

Parkdrive Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Lets hope any of you that enjoy this odious product never have a funnel shoved down your neck

> and are force feed. Disgraceful.


Let's hope that anybody who likes boiled potatoes never have their skin peeled off them and then dropped into boiling water.


Now can you see the inanity your argument?

Loz

Loz

Posted
Posted

Alan Medic Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Explain the important issues Loz then? You know them do you? I doubt it.


What?? Are you saying that banning Foie Gras is one of the most important issues facing the world today? Really? Wow.


On a scale of 0 to 10 (where 10 is really important), foie gras scores about a 0.00000000000000000000001

maxxi

maxxi

Posted
Posted

Parkdrive Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Lets hope any of you that enjoy this odious

> product never have a funnel shoved down your neck

> and are force feed. Disgraceful.



Or have the misfortune to be raised in a field, then slaughtered and eaten - oh, wait.. that's organic farming too aint it? See parky, thing is, imagining oneself as livestock has a limited effect - 'slike anthropomorphism - it just doesn't work when dead piggy/ducky/moo-cow/lambsy/chick-chick or goosey-goosey is delicious.


As for the human race going 'to pot when they don't think this is wrong' that is liberal whiney nonsense. Given the farming methods of our forefathers, and how we have become more and more humane over the years, such a practice is a throwback so maybe it is a backward glance on our way FROM pot to wherever it is we end up but nothing to hate oneself for (unless one is a vegan natch).

maxxi

maxxi

Posted
Posted

aquarius moon Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Loz, you are comparing a 'live' duck with a

> potato?

>

> Shame on you, if you can't see the difference.



Now you know why it took hours to pluck that bloody spud...



ETA: I know - I really shouldn't persecute the veggie-minded, it must be a particularly trying time of year when beast and fowl are being consumed with gluttonous glee and their juices run down our fat smug faces whilst butcher-dodgers contemplate another nut roast or tofu surprise.

Loz

Loz

Posted
Posted

aquarius moon Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Loz, you are comparing a 'live' duck with a potato?

>

> Shame on you, if you can't see the difference.


You compared a duck (actually it's generally a goose) with a human, so you started it. Also, humans have a gag reflex whereas ducks and geese don't, so your original comparison was useless anyway.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing

East Dulwich Forum

Established in 2006, we are an online community discussion forum for people who live, work in and visit SE22.

Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...