Cow Fighting, Combats de Reines, Aproz

According the Cambridge Encyclopedia of Human Evolution, the Human digestive tract is that of a carnivore, being far closer to that of a Lion than most other Primates.

It is thought that the increased meat content in our ancestor's diet lead to dramatic changes in brain size and intelligence. As may be noted, most predators tend to be more intelligent than their prey.
And your point is?

Everyone is aware of our early evolutionary path and/or development.

However, as we move forward as a species...that dosn't mean we should remain the SAME and continue with the same diet, etc...for future stages in our on-going step up the ladder.

What served us well in the 'primitive' era...may not be applicable (or necessary) for success in later, higher levels...as both our environmental and psycho-socio needs change over the millenium, etc.

Caveman was primarily a hunter/gatherer......220,000 years later we became farmers/growers/traders, etc (approx 11,000 years ago)....and now > > >

I'm not going to eat meat...just because my ancestors 200,000 or 50,000 years ago needed to ;)
Hi, KEVSPHOTOS.

My point is that we are practising carnivores and that has been dictated by our physiology. The reason for that change, in relation to our predecessors, is that our abnormally large brains are the single largest drain on our metabolism and that, meat and fat have the highest content of protein and sustained energy release available of any food. Ever wondered why it is sooo satisfying to tuck into fat, juicy steak? It's the bodies way of letting us know what a good thing it is! Well...perhaps not for a Vegan. ;)

The stomachs of browser and grazers are, of necessity, quite large and would be unsuitable in a creature with our bipedal mode of locomotion. Just ask any heavily pregnant woman how her back feels! ;)

There may be some evolution/change to modern man's digestive system taking place at the moment due to the large amounts of highly processed foods Western populations consume at present. Our bodies aren't designed to cope with our current diet and hence we see the modern epidemics of morbid obesity, cancers, diabetes etc.

Whilst it is your right to choose to avoid animal proteins, against the dictates of your body, it is my choice (and , I suspect, most of Humanities choice, where possible) to consume said proteins etc. I do not see any moral dilemma in the killing of any animal for the purposes of consuming that animal by our species. However, as you have alluded to, being more "civilised", I feel it is encumbant on us to do such killing as humanely as possible. Like most people I do not enjoy seeing cruelty directed at animals.

And just to get back on topic, I think the OP posted a great series of images and I thank you for that. I learnt something about that culture that I was previously unaware of. Thanks again!

Peter.
 
My point is that we are practising carnivores and that has been dictated by our physiology. The reason for that change, in relation to our predecessors, is that our abnormally large brains are the single largest drain on our metabolism and that, meat and fat have the highest content of protein and sustained energy release available of any food. Ever wondered why it is sooo satisfying to tuck into fat, juicy steak? It's the bodies way of letting us know what a good thing it is!
Sorry, but steak never did anything for me...even back in my younger days when I did eat meat. To be quite honest I have always prefered the taste of a vegetarian based diet. I find it far more satisfying because of it's array of different spices, herbs used and also the rich ingredients.

I suspect that most people who are completely pro meat...really haven't eaten much of the great international vegetarian based cuisine that is available around the world today. The selection and variety of veggie cusine is staggering.

And besides, even amongst cultures that do eat meat regular...the amount (per ratio) is only about 15-20% of total food staples consumed. Approx 80% of the human diet is already non-animal based.

In the caveman days we probably consumed around 90% animal products...due to our social environment/surroundings, etc...plus we needed to 'have' that aggressive edge....necessary for survival and all the rest of it.

Now, as a comparative "genteel" creature ...the applicable need to BE a carnivore...is diminishing from both a nutritional-physiological standpoint...and a psycho-socio one.

WE don't require to kill/eat animals to survive well today. So doing so "just because we like it" is no longer moral justification.

KEV
http://kvincentphotography.ca/stackedimages
http://kvincentphotography.ca/designerflorals
http://kvincentphotography.ca/macro
 
The ironic thing about all these conversations about vegs vs. meat and the compassion and moral ethics that ensue is that they are almost exclusively the realm of inhabitants of First World countries, where it's easy to have such great freedom of choice about what you consume simply because of your First World status. Most First World countries however, became First World typically because of exploitation and a lack of ethics and compassion when dealing with lesser cultures in the past and present. So I find it funny when someone makes the case that being a vegetarian is somehow more ethically righteous when the very ability to make that choice is/was built on exploitation and a lack of ethics or compassion.

--
http://www.emasterphoto.com
http://www.flickr.com/photos/emasterphoto/
 
The ironic thing about all these conversations about vegs vs. meat and the compassion and moral ethics that ensue is that they are almost exclusively the realm of inhabitants of First World countries, where it's easy to have such great freedom of choice about what you consume simply because of your First World status. Most First World countries however, became First World typically because of exploitation and a lack of ethics and compassion when dealing with lesser cultures in the past and present.
I totally agree with you on this...and that exploitation by First World nations continues today.
So I find it funny when someone makes the case that being a vegetarian is somehow more ethically righteous when the very ability to make that choice is/was built on exploitation and a lack of ethics or compassion.
You are missing the real issue here, and not seeing the sub-set premise analytical reasoning point.

Regardless of why/how 'we got' to this status with the ability to choose (which if one looks back throughout human history will include a wide range of negative social influences, etc over the centuries)...the real issue here is.....what 'choices do we now make at this given time'...

Do we continue upon a primitive path which belongs to an earlier stage of our evolutionary development....or, as a more intelligent species...do we change the way in which we view the universe, and interact/behave with it?

The bottom-line is...

WE are no longer cavement that require a meat based diet to survive. WE can live perfectly healthy and great lives without meat at all. So, knowing that...do we kill and eat other sentient beings...just because we like to ...or do we take a more caring, compassionate...according to our higher level of social consciousness, etc?

The past is done, it's what we do from now on that counts...

KEV
http://kvincentphotography.ca/stackedimages
http://kvincentphotography.ca/designerflorals
http://kvincentphotography.ca/macro
 
I'll bet you never figured this thread would get such long legs... :)

It's really impressive the tenacity shown by Kavzphoto to advocate mankind to exist on rabbit food

I'm sort of happy he's grouped meat eaters with primitive man, it seems to have increased my virility .... Grrrrr....

You might be bored with the OT, but you keep checking in....:)

me too
--
Rags
 
It's really impressive the tenacity shown by Kavzphoto to advocate mankind to exist on rabbit food.
This comment alone...shows us, that you really have absolutely no idea what vegetarian cuisine actually is....or how varied and diverse it has become over the past 4-5 decades.

Nuff said...

KEV
Are you so thin-skinned that you respond to any comment opposite of your beliefs and preferences? After all, you hijacked this topic. From some interesting photo’s of cows doing what they do naturally, a great teaching aid for children and adults, you turn this into a diatribe against those who don’t agree with your views on how to live.

If I were the poster I would be annoyed with you. It’s one thing to criticize the technical aspects of the subject, it’s another to criticize the subject.

--
(i)lmtfa added to amino acid for molecular biological studies
 
VERY SICK PEOPLE.

I look forward to watching one or two, or more being attacked by the cows.

I thought the Spaniards were bad enough!
Hi

I attended yesterday the "Combats de Reines" (cow fight), a pretty typical event in Switzerland.

Here a few photos of the event:

1
D3s, AFS70-200/2.8 VR2, 1/1600s f/2.8 at 155.0mm iso400



2
D3s, AFS70-200/2.8 VR2, 1/3200s f/3.5 at 200.0mm iso200



3
D3s, AFS70-200/2.8 VR2, 1/5000s f/3.2 at 200.0mm iso200



4
D3s, AFS70-200/2.8 VR2, 1/3200s f/3.5 at 155.0mm iso200



These and more are under http://www.pbase.com/tcom/combatreines2011

--
Dominique

http://dschreckling.zenfolio.com
http://www.pbase.com/tcom
http://www.flickr.com/photos/dschreckling/
--
Bryan

Canon 40D, etc etc

iMac i7

Still looking for a digital back for my Box Brownie.
 
You are missing the real issue here, and not seeing the sub-set premise analytical reasoning point.
It's not missing it as much as it's understanding it on a subtler level.
knowing that...do we kill and eat other sentient beings...just because we like to ...or do we take a more caring, compassionate...according to our higher level of social consciousness, etc?
Wants and needs carry no inherent ethical value in and of themselves. Doing something because you need to is inherently no more ethical than doing something because you want to; the context is key, and people pick and choose the context as it suits their needs. i.e. you choose to not eat meat because it's not necessary and therefore ethically superior in your eyes, and yet you choose to use a computer "because you like to" when the fact is that the infrastructure required to manufacture it and operate its supporting services (internet) has a far greater impact on the animals you highly value, with additional effects on humans and plants as well. You don't need a computer or the internet to survive, and arguably could have better/more valuable social interaction and connection without them, so are you willing to take a step towards the future and evolution and give them up? Likely, not because you enjoy them and they provide a value to you that outweighs whatever reservations you might have regarding their negative aspects. Does that make you an amoral caveman stuck in the past? I think you know the answer to that.

Anyway, all good natured fun, but time to move on.
--
http://www.emasterphoto.com
http://www.flickr.com/photos/emasterphoto/
 
Well, without explanations I can understand the reactions here. I should have added some explanations about this event to put the photos into context.

Unless bullfighting where man fights against a bull, this cow fighting here is cow against cow.

Hérens cows do have a strong and aggressive temperament. Each time they meet for the first time or when they have not been in contact for some time, most cows will fight. The cows are neither prepared nor trained to fight; they fight naturally to determine the dominance within the herd. In a herd of 100 cows it is not uncommon to record 10 fights a day of cows wanting to take over the dominance of the herd. This behaviour of this breed gave the idea for this event back in the 1920.

In this event, the cows choose herselves their own successive opponents. The fight mostly consists in pushing against each other. The fight stops as soon as the defeated turns away. It is a bloodless fight and injuries do remain rare.

I do hope I put this event in a bit a different light than what the photos alone might give as impression.

--
Dominique

http://dschreckling.zenfolio.com
http://www.pbase.com/tcom
http://www.flickr.com/photos/dschreckling/
It's instinctive for cows to fight, because they have a "pecking order". I know this because I grew up on a dairy farm. Once the order is established, they won't fight. They will, of course, dish out some not-so-gentle reminders to the lower-ranked cows, to let them know who is boss.

Perhaps you could say that the bad part here is that humans are purposely putting strange cows together, to intentionally get the cows to fight one another. It is also true that cows are very tough. But there can be some damage from the horns.
 
tcom, nice pictures and I appreciate the info regarding the background of this event.

For the rest of you with tight sphincters (you know who you are), PLEASE do us

a favor and take a chill pill !! This is a photography forum last time I checked.
Please leave your preaching and your 'ways of life' at the door !! We REALLY
don't give a crap.

Thank you !

PS: I was going to have Eggplant Parmesan for dinner on Sat, but now after reading
this, I really think it's going to be a trip to our local steakhouse ;)

Cheers !
 
Y'know, I've just realised I prefer the 'when / what' D800 threads.

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
90% of good photography is just being there
 
...excellent serie !

I just wanted to tell you to forget the negative comments !

One thing sure is that NEVER a cow has died and RARELy severely injured in the "fights" ! Nothing to see with spanish "corridas" !

Now, for the pollitically correct people thinking that it's a "scandal", just ignore them: we are supposed to look at and critisize -if ever- the quality of the images, not their content...

Never mind, I liked your shots and although "queen cow fight" is not my cup of tea (I could easely live without), it exists, like boxing, speed-racing with motor engines, rodeos and a lot more subjects I wouldn't mention because in some chosen countries people wouldn't understand that the rest of the world can't understand !

...like eating a good horse-steak for example ! Go trying to explain that a HORSE is MEET just a nice and juicy -if not more- than a beef-steak ! ...and WHY can't we kill horses for food if we can kill beef, goats, porks, fish, etc... ? IMO, no blØØdy difference at all !

(Hooo...never mind... I just had my 2 minutes of rant !)

Cheers,
J-P.

Photo Galeries at http://www.pbase.com/scherrer - Spherical Panoramas (360x180°) at http://www.360cities.net/profile/jps
Equipment list in profile
 
...aren't you ever ashamed to KILL those poor tomatoes, salads, carrots and all the vegetables ??? (never heard the last breath of a green pea when you plunge him in boiling water ?)

I bet you never eat FISH, do you ? Think of the pain they must have when thei're taken out of the water !!!

...and how about EGGS ? Don't you ever imagine the despair of hens when someone take their eggs away from them (not even talking about the PAIN they feel when they lay them eggs, for your pleasure !?!?)

...perhaps it's the lack of meet that makes you so bitter and narrow-minded !?!

;)
J-P.

Photo Galeries at http://www.pbase.com/scherrer - Spherical Panoramas (360x180°) at http://www.360cities.net/profile/jps
Equipment list in profile
 
...so many people go to assist to these "fights" ! They all are waiting and hoping that the cows will turn against the crowd and kill as many spectators as possible !!

...just like when EVERYWHERE around the world go to see the trapezists at the circus, just hoping -unconciously of course- that one misses the swing and FALL ???

;)
J-P.

Photo Galeries at http://www.pbase.com/scherrer - Spherical Panoramas (360x180°) at http://www.360cities.net/profile/jps
Equipment list in profile
 

Keyboard shortcuts

Back
Top