|
CoolCab posted:For lobster at least, this was the case for a very long time in most places- there were places in America that forbade feeding convicts lobster on the grounds it was cruel and unusual punishment. This was in part because dead lobsters "rot" incredibly quickly and become disgusting to eat almost immediately, so only places that could fish them locally could enjoy them. This radically changed once the technology to keep them alive for longer was developed, and then again thanks to freezing technology. Huh, I must admit that I had no idea. In Scandinavia (and we're talking 17-18th century or so) it seems to have been religiously motivated.
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2016 23:13
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 02:06 |
|
|
Josef bugman posted:Even if starving? I agree with steinrokkan here - I simply have no idea. I've had periods in my life where I've been kinda desperate for food, but I've never truly starved so I just don't know. In any other situation I absolutely wouldn't, though.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2016 23:16
|
|
|
Inepta Lacerta posted:I agree with steinrokkan here - I simply have no idea. I've had periods in my life where I've been kinda desperate for food, but I've never truly starved so I just don't know. In any other situation I absolutely wouldn't, though. I think a healthy "who knows" is pretty good for this sort of situation.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2016 23:23
|
|
|
steinrokkan posted:That's a question nobody who hasn't experienced actual starvation can answer honestly. But I think I would be as appalled by the idea of eating my own dog as I would be by eating a human corpse. Humans in general will readily eat their pets, and their neighbors for that matter, if times get bad enough. When severe famine strikes pets are generally the first to go as they trust humans to feed them. People might resist eating their own pets first but if you're hungry enough and the neighbor's dog gets loose, well...it isn't my dog. This is part of why extreme food scarcity destroys societies. As people become increasingly desperate they increasingly do desperate things.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2016 23:47
|
|
|
Josef bugman posted:Even if starving? Case in point, the Paris Zoo took almost a decade to restock their zoo after the 1870 revolution - virtually every animal therein had become someone's supper.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2016 23:47
|
|
|
OK, I guess the question becomes - would you kill a dog to fend off starvation without feeling guilt?A White Guy posted:Case in point, the Paris Zoo took almost a decade to restock their zoo after the 1870 revolution - virtually every animal therein had become someone's supper. People had very different attitudes towards zoos and animals in the 19th century. In contrast German zoos in WWII didn't slaughter their animals, unless forced to do so by bombing raids that hit their grounds. Actually zoos managed to appropriate scarce resources to protect and move their animals to safer locations even during the most critical moments of the war.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2016 23:53
|
|
|
Seems like the workers at the Leningrad zoo went out of their way to keep the animals alive during the blockade: http://englishrussia.com/2013/09/09/saving-animals-of-the-sieged-city/
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2016 00:08
|
|
|
steinrokkan posted:In contrast German zoos in WWII didn't slaughter their animals, unless forced to do so by bombing raids that hit their grounds. Actually zoos managed to appropriate scarce resources to protect and move their animals to safer locations even during the most critical moments of the war. Nazis were weirdly super pro animal-rights. Cats and dogs were 'rescued' from unsuitable owners headed for the ghettos or concentration camps, and placed in appropriate 'good Aryan homes'. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animal_welfare_in_Nazi_Germany
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2016 00:11
|
|
|
steinrokkan posted:OK, I guess the question becomes - would you kill a dog to fend off starvation without feeling guilt? A dog? Sure. It'd be different if it were a dog that had helped me in the past, but if it's just a random dog then I'd probably eat it in a famine situation and feel as much guilt as I do from eating meat anyway. I mean probably, I do feel guilty about lots of things anyway.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2016 00:22
|
|
|
Inepta Lacerta posted:(All that being said - no; I wouldn't eat dog). You aren't missing all that much, to be honest.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2016 00:26
|
|
|
Simple in my house get the lamping dog (whippet x greyhound/saluki) to hunt me some rats/cats/my neighbours small yappy dogs as he is trained to do. No point eating him, he's got no good meat on his bones.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2016 00:26
|
|
|
Babies Getting Rabies posted:You aren't missing all that much, to be honest. Tastes like beef.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2016 00:28
|
|
|
Suspect Bucket posted:Nazis were weirdly super pro animal-rights. Cats and dogs were 'rescued' from unsuitable owners headed for the ghettos or concentration camps, and placed in appropriate 'good Aryan homes'.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2016 00:34
|
|
|
Subjunctive posted:What would be an appropriate price? What a weird question. Cheaper than beef would be a start. Horse is good but not beef good Rutibex posted:I am neutral on rabbits. They are pretty dumb, and serve no useful purpose. I say eat them. Same goes for pet birds less interesting than parrots or hawks, and all fish. You have never eaten rabbit? Eating rabbit is a hypothetical to you?
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2016 00:39
|
|
|
Like birds and fish.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2016 01:23
|
|
|
hackbunny posted:You have never eaten rabbit? Eating rabbit is a hypothetical to you? Rabbit is a weirdly uncommon meat in the US. Which is stupid, because it's delicious and way more sustainable then beef or pork. Ever since the rise of 'The Chicken Of Tomorrow', rabbit seems to have completely fallen off the menu except with farmers and hunters that have access to it, and ethnic populations of Italians, French, and Moroccans for use in their cuisine. I'll bet there are more pet rabbits then people that eat rabbit in the US. Rabbits also make great pets, let's remember. It's a little tricky to navigate my love of living cuddly bunnies as opposed to my love of hassenpfeffer. However, I also love living snorty piggies with their cute noses and fun personalities, and bacon. Farming is tough sometimes. Oh, and 'Chicken Of Tomorrow' is a must watch. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1G0stojwYjI
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2016 01:32
|
|
|
I think most Americans, at least, haven't eaten rabbit. The only meats that are really common are chicken, beef, turkey, and pork. Other things are available, in many places, but where I am right now I know where to get buffalo and alligator but not rabbit. Chicken, incidentally, was an upscale sort of food until around the 20th century -- people kept chickens for egg-laying, and by the time an old hen reached the table she wasn't really tender and tasty anymore, while just up and murdering a perfectly good egg-machine for the sake of roasting it was a thing only people of a certain income level could really afford on the regular. Factory farming leading to increased supply and lower prices, and an ad campaign, made "a chicken in every pot" a real thing in the 20th century.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2016 01:32
|
|
|
Suspect Bucket posted:Rabbit is a weirdly uncommon meat in the US. Which is stupid, because it's delicious and way more sustainable then beef or pork. Ever since the rise of 'The Chicken Of Tomorrow', rabbit seems to have completely fallen off the menu except with farmers and hunters that have access to it, and ethnic populations of Italians, French, and Moroccans for use in their cuisine. I'll bet there are more pet rabbits then people that eat rabbit in the US. Rabbit has fallen out of favor because it has much drier and stringier meat than chicken, which is much more difficult to prepare to be equally tasty. It is also more difficult to butcher a rabbit than a chicken. Both of these things are especially problematic for supermarket and restaurant chains that need to move large amounts of product fast. It makes sense that it would be displaced as consumer behavior moved towards convenience and mass produced goods. steinrokkan has a new favorite as of 01:42 on Nov 27, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2016 01:39
|
|
|
InediblePenguin posted:I think most Americans, at least, haven't eaten rabbit. The only meats that are really common are chicken, beef, turkey, and pork. Other things are available, in many places, but where I am right now I know where to get buffalo and alligator but not rabbit. Username/post
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2016 01:39
|
|
|
Infyrno posted:Username/post I imagine penguin would be very oily
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2016 01:48
|
|
|
steinrokkan posted:People had very different attitudes towards zoos and animals in the 19th century. In contrast German zoos in WWII didn't slaughter their animals, unless forced to do so by bombing raids that hit their grounds. Actually zoos managed to appropriate scarce resources to protect and move their animals to safer locations even during the most critical moments of the war. There's one interesting aspect of Scott and Amundsen's race to the South Pole which relates to their choice of animals. Amundsen brought teams of dogs to pull his sleds with the expectation that he and his expedition were eventually going to have to shoot some of them and use them as food for themselves and the stronger dogs. Scott brought dogs, but planned to rely on ponies to do a lot of the heavy work, and they were obviously not well adapted for Antarctic travel compared to the dogs. But one explanation I have seen (from various Scott biographers and, if you want to be a little uncharitable, apologists) is that it was a cultural issue, because the English were supposedly more likely to view the dogs as friends than the Norwegians, to whom they were just pack animals. When the Far East Party was making its perilous journey back to camp from its trek to the eastern parts of Antarctica, consuming the remains of their sled dogs (particularly the livers) is believed to have contributed to a severe illness which almost killed Sir Douglas Mawson and did contribute to the death of Dr Xavier Mertz.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2016 02:19
|
|
|
steinrokkan posted:Rabbit has fallen out of favor because it has much drier and stringier meat than chicken, which is much more difficult to prepare to be equally tasty. It is also more difficult to butcher a rabbit than a chicken. I disagree. Rabbit is a wonderful meat, not stringy, but certainly a bit more toothsome and developed then chicken. I'd eat it every day if I could. It also lends it's self easily to stewing, roasting, or frying, with a lot more flexibility then chicken due to it's forgiving darker meat nature. Also, I find it easier to butcher rabbit then chicken, especially if you're not taking any care to save the hide. Industrial plucking machines have removed a lot of the labor of chicken prep on the large scale, but you're still having to go over every carcass and pop pinfeathers, which is a pain. Rabbit you can skin and gut pretty darn quick. Here's the fastest way to guy a rabbit. NWS because even I find it a bit disturbing to do it like that. x.x https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mQZ8vPvLfTo . I don't think i'd ever try that myself, seems a good way to burst an intestine and ruin the meat. I'm sure if rabbit was given the same kind of focused development that chickens did, we'd get a rabbit the size of a boston terrier with all the flavor of salted polystyrene easy. Anyhoo, industrial american tastes made the market, as did corporate funding. Suspect Bucket has a new favorite as of 02:37 on Nov 27, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2016 02:34
|
|
|
InediblePenguin posted:Chicken, incidentally, was an upscale sort of food until around the 20th century -- people kept chickens for egg-laying, and by the time an old hen reached the table she wasn't really tender and tasty anymore, while just up and murdering a perfectly good egg-machine for the sake of roasting it was a thing only people of a certain income level could really afford on the regular. Factory farming leading to increased supply and lower prices, and an ad campaign, made "a chicken in every pot" a real thing in the 20th century. It's also kind of hard to find an actual stewing hen in Random City US now. Nearly all the chicken sold in supermarkets is broiler/fryer type, bred to grow fast with lots of meat.. If you want a real stewing hen, you have to know a butcher or scour ethnic markets.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2016 02:40
|
|
|
There may be something to that. Captaing De Long, on his ill fated voyage to the North Pole, was most reluctant to kill his dogs, even when they were near death, and the expedition party was suffering from exhaustion. If anything his men burdened themselves to protect and even pamper their dogs, to which they grew attached and which they described in their diaries with vivid characters. They also made sure to nurse them to health every time they sustained any injuries in the dangerous climate, often facing against Arctic fauna. This is what De Long wrote on an occasion of contemplating having to shoot one of his animals: "Although I know he will never be of use again, I hardly like to have him shot, preferring to give him all of his life that he can hang on to. Occasionally he seems going, as, for example today, when he was lying on an old mattress on the rubbish heap, seemingly at his last gasp. [In the afternoon] I found him gone one hundred yards or so, and as frisky and far from death as ever." About another, whose head suffered a grievous infection from a bear attack: "Poor old Snuffy, having reached such a condition that it would be a mercy to kill him was shot today. ... No doubt, as far as his usefulness was concerned, he could have been killed months ago, but I felt that even a dog was entitled to his life for as long as he could keep it in these uncharitable regions. " After they ran out of meat, the crew was still ordered to feed the dogs with their emergency rations of pemmican, and only old and worn out dogs were to be shot if necessary, and even then only with care so that their death would not disturb the men - even though the dogs were of dubious use in the conditions the men found themselves in, and possibly were a detriment to their survival since they were not able to properly move in the ice slurry that stood in their way during the critical period of their journey.
steinrokkan has a new favorite as of 02:55 on Nov 27, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2016 02:51
|
|
|
Helith posted:In the 17th century American colonies Lobster was so abundant but regarded as garbage meat that it was only eaten by the really poor and was used to feed livestock, indentured servants and prisoners.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2016 05:45
|
|
|
Cumslut1895 posted:I imagine penguin would be very oily It is! The penguins on the falkland islands were nearly wiped out by whalers, not because they ate them, but because they would burn their bodies for fuel.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2016 09:33
|
|
|
Let's step away from the table for a moment, shall we? When Elizabethan theatres are excavated, they usually find the shattered remains of ceramic boxes. The boxes had an opening like a piggy bank, but there was no way to get the coins out. What the theatre managers did was wait until the performance ended, then go into a back room with the principal parties and smash the box. The coins would be counted and properly divvied up. The name of that little room has survived to this day. It's called--box office.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2016 12:03
|
|
|
Josef bugman posted:It is! The penguins on the falkland islands were nearly wiped out by whalers, not because they ate them, but because they would burn their bodies for fuel. Fortunately, they are now protected by a minefield!
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2016 12:06
|
|
|
Khazar-khum posted:Let's step away from the table for a moment, shall we? Do people not usually get the money out of their piggy banks by smashing them? That's what I do.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2016 12:12
|
|
|
meatbag posted:Fortunately, they are now protected by a minefield! This dual fact of burning penguins for fuel and them surviving by being protected by a minefield is probably my favorite QI fact.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2016 12:39
|
|
|
Baron Corbyn posted:Do people not usually get the money out of their piggy banks by smashing them? That's what I do. Modern Piggy banks have a hole on the bottom to get the coins out. Completely defeats the purpose IMHO
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2016 13:34
|
|
|
meatbag posted:Fortunately, they are now protected by a minefield! quote:The animal is also flightless and docile in nature, making them easy to catch. So whenever the fires got low, they simply grabbed a few penguins and threw them into the fire. This made me laugh a lot more than it should have.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2016 13:46
|
|
|
Rutibex posted:Modern Piggy banks have a hole on the bottom to get the coins out. Completely defeats the purpose IMHO They do but if the piggy bank is completely full, the coins block that hole so it's easier to hit it with a hammer.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2016 13:51
|
|
|
CAPTAIN CAPSLOCK posted:This made me laugh a lot more than it should have. Feeling a little chilly. Better toss another penguin on the fire.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2016 14:01
|
|
|
Khazar-khum posted:Let's step away from the table for a moment, shall we? Speaking of theatres https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Old_Price_Riots quote:The Old Price Riots of 1809 (also sometimes referred to as the O.P. or OP riots) were caused by rising prices at the new Theatre at Covent Garden, London, after the previous one had been destroyed by fire. [...] The riots lasted three months, and ended with John Philip Kemble, the manager of the theatre, being forced to make a public apology.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2016 14:04
|
|
|
Shackleton's Endurance Expedition had a great moment while waiting for rescue on Elephant Island. They needed to perform an amputation, and fortunately had chloroform. However, they needed the ambient temperature high enough to allow the chloroform to evaporate. So they heated their shelter by throwing penguin skins onto the fire like the worst sauna.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2016 14:08
|
|
|
Free Market Mambo posted:Pigs are hella smart. Winston S. Churchill posted:I am fond of pigs. Dogs look up to us. Cats look down on us. Pigs treat us as equals. Also, Churchill's writings (books, articles, etc.) are credited Winston S. Churchill, since there was an American novelist who was also called Winston Churchill, and so Winston Spencer Churchill used his middle initial to differentiate himself.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2016 14:33
|
|
|
There's also a fish that's so oily that if you dry it and stick a wick in it you have a candle. Appropriately enough it's called candlefish.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2016 14:44
|
|
|
Alhazred posted:There's also a fish that's so oily that if you dry it and stick a wick in it you have a candle. Appropriately enough it's called candlefish. Mmm. A scented candle, I assume.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2016 14:46
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 02:06 |
|
|
Alhazred posted:There's also a fish that's so oily that if you dry it and stick a wick in it you have a candle. Appropriately enough it's called candlefish.  Thank you for this delightful fact, allowed my to find this image 
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2016 15:00
|
|