What's new

Longest Thread Ever

Cows and Humanity

For the information of casual passersby, I was not raised on a farm, except we did have a milk cow named "Zook" that I milked every night and fed twice a day. I had no philosophical meanderings on the subject when I was a kid except that cats would gather around for a squirt or two, and I got a kick outta it. Warm milk freshly screened through a linen cloth, to remove the flies and other stuff including specks of cowpies, is the best thing. No we didn't boil it or "pasteurize" it, or separate the cream. Oh once in while we'd skim some cream and save it up and then I would churn it to make cheese.

I clearly empathize with those bawling calves who share my opinion on this subject.

But the thing that has been going on in my mind is the sort of psychological journey one must take to deprogram yourself from excessive claims of ideologies, social belief systems of various kinds with some cult parallels, and such, including having been in college for twelve years, besides K-12 in public schools.

I don't really like beef, the fat constituents don't feel good in my blood vessels. I like fish and raw sunflower seeds, but I need some beef for protein too.

cows need some thoughtful care. You can't leave dog food, which is largely "rendered beef waste", out where they can eat it, or they risk getting mad cow disease. If cows don't care to make an issue of it themselves I don't see why we need to make a huge issue of it, except for on the basis of rational science.
 
@Dr. Jones:

I still have that phone number you gave me last year, and I still stop for a few hours once in a while when passing through St. George. Looks like maybe another trip this coming weekend. Main problem is being in St. George during polite social hours without being in a rush to get to either LA or SLC. But I do have a brother there, and if we can hit one of his days off work we will stop to let his youngest daughter play with ours.

"Dr. Jones" of note in my family include Dr. Martha Jones of Dr. Who, and that crazy fool on the airwave hill, Alex, who seems to be a mix of an uneducated hillbilly and someone who actually can document and interpret real info. Anyway, in our world, anyone who tries to tell the truth, or interpret our politicians, is going to feel like a fool sitting on that hill in the old sixties song, singing thoughts while looking down on San Francisco, and all.
 
Much like humans, however, cows do not prefer to be sexually assaulted.

I am a big fan of cows, and that is why I eat them. If somebody's going to eat my hamburger anyway, it's better that I do so rather than some person who has no appreciation for cattle. I include them in my diet to necessitate their existence. Overall, they don't have it too badly. They chill, have sex, get to talk with their friends all day, can eat as much as they want, and then they are killed. Sounds better than most human lives: struggle, struggle, struggle - death.

But I agree with every Hollywood actress, let's stop eating cows. They should be set free so every carnivorous wild animal can feast upon them and play a key role in their extinction.

On the other hand, cows make some excellent commercials. Maybe they can survive in the entertainment business.

One thing I can say about bovine sexuality, from observing them, is that a bull will only be interested in a cow whose pee smells "good". Those pheromones.

A pack of bulls will follow that one cow, and yes indeed she will hightail it into the sage, but nevertheless she will have her calf.

little bulls and little calves are highly experimental, with no issues about "gay" or whatever. Clearly the issue is "fun".

I like that kind of good sense.
 
One thing I can say about bovine sexuality, from observing them, is that a bull will only be interested in a cow whose pee smells "good". Those pheromones.

A pack of bulls will follow that one cow, and yes indeed she will hightail it into the sage, but nevertheless she will have her calf.

little bulls and little calves are highly experimental, with no issues about "gay" or whatever. Clearly the issue is "fun".

I like that kind of good sense.

Ummm..
 
Gonna read this entire thread one day #goals


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Gonna read this entire thread one day #goals


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

High ideals, even noble ones, are like constellations we might never actually get to explore in one lifetime. We should dream much further than we can see, and we should reach for things we can never really grasp. It's the highest human attribute to hope, to desire, to seek much further than what we know or have.
 

uhhhmmmmm. . . . .

. . . . .

I think I may have made you uncomfortable.

Do we have to create labels to create some artificial sense of "identity". We are human. Why create all kinds of "sorts" of humans and make a fuss about our differences?

I've never seen a bull all strung out with self-hate, or apprehensions of what others might think.

Cowboys, when they see two bulls doing some kind of unusual play, call it "Balling around". You don't fundamentally change your nature by having a different sort of idea about what is "fun".

Some scientists have looked for some kind of statistically-significant measure of sexuality. One finding is that phytoestrogens in food containers like pop bottles, the plastic lining inside steel cans, , and a lot of other plastics have caused measureable changes in male distinctions from females on several morphological features.

Somebody tell me, please, why we eat foods full of estrogens and then call it "natural" that men are effeminate?

Estrogens and their agonists, testosterone, determine a lot of things in human development, including differences in brain structures, smell and color centers that dominate our likes, dislikes, preferences, and such.

Also, somebody please tell me why behavior or "comfort zones" in relationships, call for differences in legal standing before the law. Let alone call for new labels we can argue about with one another.

The bovines don't bother with any of that. You are what you are. It's that simple.

a cow is a cow. A bull is a bull.
 
uhhhmmmmm. . . . .

. . . . .

I think I may have made you uncomfortable.

Do we have to create labels to create some artificial sense of "identity". We are human. Why create all kinds of "sorts" of humans and make a fuss about our differences?

I've never seen a bull all strung out with self-hate, or apprehensions of what others might think.

Cowboys, when they see two bulls doing some kind of unusual play, call it "Balling around". You don't fundamentally change your nature by having a different sort of idea about what is "fun".

Some scientists have looked for some kind of statistically-significant measure of sexuality. One finding is that phytoestrogens in food containers like pop bottles, the plastic lining inside steel cans, , and a lot of other plastics have caused measureable changes in male distinctions from females on several morphological features.

Somebody tell me, please, why we eat foods full of estrogens and then call it "natural" that men are effeminate?

Estrogens and their agonists, testosterone, determine a lot of things in human development, including differences in brain structures, smell and color centers that dominate our likes, dislikes, preferences, and such.

Also, somebody please tell me why behavior or "comfort zones" in relationships, call for differences in legal standing before the law. Let alone call for new labels we can argue about with one another.

The bovines don't bother with any of that. You are what you are. It's that simple.

a cow is a cow. A bull is a bull.

Well, I am human, for better or worse, and you stated that you "kinda like that the bulls screwing bulls" is a better life.. loosely interpreted.
I'm sorry, I am not a fun-loving bull.. I am human. And my "ummmmm" was about whether we can make life as simple as a cow when, in my opinion, God gave us our capacity.
 
Well, I am human, for better or worse, and you stated that you "kinda like that the bulls screwing bulls" is a better life.. loosely interpreted.
I'm sorry, I am not a fun-loving bull.. I am human. And my "ummmmm" was about whether we can make life as simple as a cow when, in my opinion, God gave us our capacity.

Then god also gave men a round peg and a round hole, right? If god didn't want men to do that he would have given them incompatible ports don't ya think?
 

Sorta trying to figure out exactly how this fits in. Looked like some street toughs hazing someone, was it an extremely effeminate boy, or someone who was actually a girl?

In the Philippines, when I was there decades ago, some moms would reinforce effeminate characteristics in one of their boys. These "guys" were pretty conspicuous, especially as workers in barber shops who would do nails, for example. It was quite obvious that a lot of kids in the boys-only, or girls-only private schools were pairing up in some sort of affectionate, publicly-displayed, relation.

However, when school days were over, it seemed there was pretty much a heterosexual adult culture. . . .

What I'm sorta saying, or wondering about, is why we want to make a stand of personal identity over some affective phase or another, and why we actually sorta "lock down" on the "identity" and think it is a fundamentally important thing somehow.

My yearling cattle do sorta move on in life, after "playing" a bit. Of course I castrate a lot of them and "create" something called a "steer", which is observably more docile and much less dangerous to deal with, plus is known to yield a more tender. . . . less stringy. . . meat. That is the effect of a hormone on a living thing.

Steers don't stand behind a cow in heat and take such long deep euphoria over the smell of pee. See, hormones affect brain development including pleasure centers.

I think we'd be a smarter society if we took a serious look into our food packaging and other plastics and eradicated estrogenic chemicals like BPA. Bis-phenol A is a "plasticizer" that also strengthens the physical properties of plastics. You can make do with thinner walls in pop bottles, even in aluminum and steel cans. . . .

But you turn your boys into more effeminate speciments of humanity.
 
Well, I am human, for better or worse, and you stated that you "kinda like that the bulls screwing bulls" is a better life.. loosely interpreted.
I'm sorry, I am not a fun-loving bull.. I am human. And my "ummmmm" was about whether we can make life as simple as a cow when, in my opinion, God gave us our capacity.

I don't think governments should have power to legislate our cognitive or behavioral preferences. I like religions, and in particular I see our natures as humans, as men and women, as inherent natural physical, neurological, and functional features. Men and women may prefer different sorts of things, they may fit the "pattern" or choose to differ somehow. That is inherently their business, and I don't favor governmental power being imposed to achieve conformity to any "ideal".

I choose to be religious, and to attribute to God some kind of design, pattern, or life expectations. I don't think a "God" is inherently different from a "human". I see a natural couple having children as very functional, and I think it can be a very happy sort of thing. Two humans who can love someone who is so fundamentally different, and choose to be together and honor one another, obviously, are making an effort that can be viewed as reaching for a higher ideal, as trying to overcome circumstantial problems for the sake of another's welfare, and for the sake of children. I think the effort we make in marriages improve upon our character, talents, skills, and almost any other measure of achievement.
 
Well, I am human, for better or worse, and you stated that you "kinda like that the bulls screwing bulls" is a better life.. loosely interpreted.
I'm sorry, I am not a fun-loving bull.. I am human. And my "ummmmm" was about whether we can make life as simple as a cow when, in my opinion, God gave us our capacity.

Well, for the record. I called it experimental "play" and I observe that it does not seem to be as much "fun" as heterosexual "play". The pieces just didn't fit the same. Things didn't "feel" the same. If I don't castrate a young bull, those pheromones the real cows put out pretty well dominate the bulls decisions.

But my real point here is that I don't feed my cows from plastics laced in estrogenic chemicals. My cattle have not shifted their morphological measurements or their choice of partners. Meanwhile, I allege, we humans as a society have chosen to shift our entire legal/cultural system to avoid seeing the effects of our exposure to artificial estrogens particularly in our food containers. But also in our carpets, our children's toys. . . . you know, the stuff our rugrats suck on all day long between feedings. . . .
 
Then god also gave men a round peg and a round hole, right? If god didn't want men to do that he would have given them incompatible ports don't ya think?

Well, whatever I want to believe as a "religion", I have found I can't produce God as a witness in courts or as a participant in say a scientific investigation of any kind.

I simply observe sexual characteristics in humans and opine that they are functional and healthy for us. I consider the chemicals we use that are having an impact on our sexuality to be negatives we should not really tolerate.

I have no personal agenda to legislate behavior or thinking. I just want people to be aware of the chemistry and biochemistry of food packaging.
 
Back
Top