Kentucky Derby ethics

[dteowner]

As the Bustling Metropolis is not overly far from Louisville, I got bombarded with Derby coverage the past few days. I'm saddened by them having to put Eight Belles down at the end of the race, and it got me thinking just a bit. So, to spur a little discussion, I ask the following:

Given that we run these horses to their deaths (on occasion) for our entertainment, what's the real difference between horse racing and the much-reviled dog fighting? One is considered gentleman's sport while the other lands you in federal prison and yet the impact on the animals isn't all that much different.

[Lucky Day]

All I know is that there hasn't been a triple crown winner in years but in the last few there's been some clear favourites who either suddenly have to be put to stud or suddenly find themselves dead of some mysterious disease.

Sorry, but there's just too much corruption in sports where gambling is too important of a factor.

[Squeek]

Horses like the ones that race in the Kentucky Derby are pampered their entire lives compared to the ones I grew up around in California. They're spirited and prone to hurt themselves. Every precaution is taken to avoid that.

If it's a lead horse, meaning one who prefers to always be in front, then it can be especially prone to hurt itself (and its rider) if it becomes excited.

[Prime Junta]

Hee, you know what the Marxist answer to that is? Yup, one of 'em is a working-class-man's sport, the other is a bourgeois one.

[V7]

I think the distinction is that in racing the intention isn't to harm the horse even if accidents occasionally occur while the dogs are there to savage each other.

And I think racing is traditionally the sport of the upper class rather than the bourgeois ;)

[Kendrik]

Oh boy another debate for me to be Mr Popular in.

Personally I think there isn't a difference - they are both wrong. The horses aren't pampered if they are forced to run (not freely). I think ultimately money comes before the animals welfare and that's wrong. I won't attend horse races or any sport involving animals. It's all exploitation and another example of humankind's self proclaimed superiority.

Oh I think this may get interesting

[zahratustra]

There is a difference dte. Racing horses do occasionaly suffer injuries and deaths but there isn't prior assumption that there will be injuries or deaths. So those accidents are hmmmm.... accidental?... rather than premeditated. The same can't be said about dogfights were injuries and deaths are inextricable part of the "entertaiment" itself.

LOL PJ a while ago John Reid (Health Minister out of all people) opposed total ban on smoking in pubs and clubs because he considered it as "one of the few pleasures the poor have left" :biggrin:

Oh and Kendrick, I have news for you: horses LIKE running. You don't have to force them to run. In fact you sometimes will have more difficulty to slow them down or stop than to make them go.

[Squeek]

Oh and Kendrick, I have news for you: horses LIKE running. You don't have to force them to run. In fact you sometimes will have more difficulty to slow them down or stop than to make them go.Exactly. Mostly what you do is give them plenty of room to run.

When I was growing up, a friend of mine got hurt pretty badly when her horse decided he wanted to run and ended up crashing them both through a wooden fence. She knew how to ride but wasn't able to get him to slow down enough to avoid the accident.

All you have to know in order to understand why race horses are so well cared for is that they're very expensive. Damage of any kind decreases their value.

[curiously undead]

horses like to run and dogs like to fight (wolves have always gone at each other).
there is no difference between either of these and running man except species. people like to bet, and they like like violence when its not their own necks. even people who don't fight their pets can still abuse them. while i'm no card carrying member of peta, i do sympathize with animals, and a large amount of people have it wrong when they think animals are just animals, and have no qualms about being subservient, neglected, or abused. and true horse racing is no bullfighting but if your going to tell me that a horse would rather wear 'shoes' and a rider than neither/either, well something smells besides the livery.

anyone ever see "surving the game"
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0111323/, now that was a disturbing movie and i guess in hindsight that is to be expected from a movie with gary busey and rutger hauer in it...

[dteowner]

Interesting thoughts. I kinda loaded the original question to stir the pot, but I'm not exactly sure where I stand on this one.

Clearly, there's a difference of intent between the ponies and the dogs, as zahratustra points out. Similarly, accidents can happen anywhere, so there's not really unusual risk involved. OTOH, I have a hard time believing that horses in nature will run until they break both front legs. And it's not like this behaviour is entirely natural, either--these horses are bred to race, trained to race, and urged by their jockeys to race. It's not like we can wash our hands of all guilt.

So where does that leave us? Quite honestly, I just don't know. There really appears to be an aspect of social strata hiding in the weeds, but it runs a little contrary to my basic ethos to acknowledge it.

[zahratustra]

OTOH, I have a hard time believing that horses in nature will run until they break both front legs. And it's not like this behaviour is entirely natural, either--these horses are bred to race, trained to race, and urged by their jockeys to race.

Believe it dte. While horse racing (flat and over obstacles) certainly puts animals and jokeys at more risk, horses do occasionaly injure or kill themselfs without any human interference. And jokeys, who get too overzelous in urging their mounts, do get punished by race stedwards. Remember that many race horses are more valuable than jockeys riding them!

[Corwin]

Why not include boxing!! People die from that particular sport. The possibility of death or major injury is present in any sport, so why single out those which involve animals? Aren't human lives just as important? Perhaps we should ban fishing and duck shooting etc. :)

[V7]

I don't feel any need to get morally outraged on behalf of the horses, they've valuable and treated far better than farmed animals. In my view it would be hypocritical for me to condemn racing while eating meat.. and I love meat.

[Kendrik]

Oh and Kendrick, I have news for you: horses LIKE running. You don't have to force them to run. In fact you sometimes will have more difficulty to slow them down or stop than to make them go.

Zahrausta that is not actually news to me I am aware horses like to run not sure if they run in a big circle in the wild however with a person on their back.

One question then if they love running in so much in a forced environment why the whips?

[Icefire]

If someone wants to say that horse racing is immoral, that's fine. But do so on it's own merits. Please don't compare a horse race to dog fighting. It's not even close to the same thing.

"A Kentucky Derby horse has to run a mile and a quarter on a dirt track around two turns by the age of 3. It is the horse equivalent of asking a college kid to play in the Super Bowl."

Sally Jenkins wrote that in yesterday's Washington Post. That's the problem with horse racing. These horses are pushed too hard and too fast. Injuries are occuring because of it.

[zahratustra]

I don't feel any need to get morally outraged on behalf of the horses, they've valuable and treated far better than farmed animals. In my view it would be hypocritical for me to condemn racing while eating meat.. and I love meat.

I agree V7, so let's hijack this thread and discuss something else: I do eat meat but my girlfriend was outraged when she heard that I have eaten horse meat. She is also very angry that people in East and South East Asia eat dog meat.

My position is such: either you are a vegetarian and that you are entitled to be against eating meat of any sort or you are a meat eater and than it's hypocritical to condemn eating of horse or a dog meat.

[magerette]

I've often maintained if I had to kill and butcher my own meat, I'd likely turn vegetarian. How much more so if I had to kill a trusting and totally dependent domestic animal with high intelligence like a dog or horse--though cows also have more awareness than people usually suppose, as you know if you've ever watched one who's been separated from her calf. I imagine even chickens have some sort of feeling of doom and fear when they're hatched into the unforgiving meat factories where most of them spend their short over-medicated, sensory-deprived lives.

Nonetheless, when I'm confronted by a nice char-grilled steak, I somehow am able to put these ethical questions aside and accept the moral evils of being atop the food chain.

zahratustra,I sympathize with your gf, and even though it's illogical, I agree with her. It's having that degree of trust and intimacy with my dinner--I just couldn't eat my pet. :)

[zahratustra]

The fact is magerette that, in South Korea, dogs started being considered pets only very recently and owning dogs as pets is resticted to big cities only. In a countryside dogs are reared for meat just like cows and pigs. Muslems (althrough, of course, they don't eat dogs) don't consider that dog can be a pet either.
Similar story with horses. It is different now but when horses were used as a means of transport and for their pulling power very few would consider horse as a pet.

[blatantninja]

Biggest difference is that in dog fighting it isn't over until one of them is dead.

[Kendrik]

I agree V7, so let's hijack this thread and discuss something else: I do eat meat but my girlfriend was outraged when she heard that I have eaten horse meat. She is also very angry that people in East and South East Asia eat dog meat.

My position is such: either you are a vegetarian and that you are entitled to be against eating meat of any sort or you are a meat eater and than it's hypocritical to condemn eating of horse or a dog meat.

Zahratustra, I am a vegetarian and I completely agree with you. From my perspective (I'm vege on moral issues which I won't be debating here) I see no difference in eating Cow to eating horse or Dog. If you are a meat eater then fine. On a related note it really annoys me when people claim to be vegetarian on moral ground but still eat fish. Everybody is entitled to live how they want but because these fish eaters call themsleves vegetarian then I get offered fish in a restaurant as the vegetarian alternative.

And no I'm not going to enter into an arguement or try to convert people to vegetarianism as it's a personal choice.

[Squeek]

Everybody is entitled to live how they want but because these fish eaters call themsleves vegetarian then I get offered fish in a restaurant as the vegetarian alternative.And then to have to sit there in the same dining room with all those fish eaters actually eating actual fish. What a burden.

Thank goodness we're all entitled to live how we want, like you said, Kendrik. Otherwise, if we were all playing by different rules, it might get ugly.

[Kendrik]

And then to have to sit there in the same dining room with all those fish eaters actually eating actual fish. What a burden.

Thank goodness we're all entitled to live how we want, like you said, Kendrik. Otherwise, if we were all playing by different rules, it might get ugly.

Wow, yeah you kinda missed the point of my whole post but nevermind you got your "clever" reply in, enjoy. I think I'll stop posting for a bit again .. it's not like the old days.

[Squeek]

Considering how your original comment was intolerant of the way restaurants often tolerate and accommodate your exceptional opinions about eating meat, I'm not surprised you don't like my rejection of your opinion either.

[zahratustra]

Squeek, Kendrick have said "vegetarian restaurants" so I can see his point. After all most restaurants aren't vegetarian so whoever fancies a fish supper can't complain over the lack of choice?

Indeed Kendrick. Isn't it interesting that even such an obvious (at least on the face of it) term like "vegatarian" means different things to different people? You have mentioned fish already but I was suprised to find out that a lot of Asians (Tamils, Hindus ect) consider themselfs vegetarians even though they eat chicken!

[Squeek]

Squeek, Kendrick have said "vegetarian restaurants" so I can see his point. After all most restaurants aren't vegetarian so whoever fancies a fish supper can't complain over the lack of choice!Sorry, I don't understand.

Kendrick's point is a familiar one. I wasn't rejecting the point, I was rejecting the way it was made. I thought it was an ugly characterization of other people.

Back on topic, I watched some ESPN coverage of this story, and they're saying that this kind of tragedy is uncommon statistally and that the sport's had a run of bad luck.

A lot of people seem determined to take a close look at all this, though. It'll be interesting to hear what that determines.

[Ionstormsucks]

I'm getting hungry reading this thread!

[magerette]

Here's a little bit more on the main topic, from the Washington Post (http://nbcsports.msnbc.com/id/24458076/), calling Eight Belles' breakdown the "symptom of a problem that is getting worse" :

But Eight Belles was a tragic manifestation of a problem that is more pronounced every year. America's breeding industry is producing increasingly fragile thoroughbreds. They may not break down, but they have shorter and shorter racing careers before going to stud to beget even more fragile offspring.

The facts are irrefutable. In 1960, the average U.S. racehorse made 11.3 starts per year. The number has fallen almost every year, and now the average U.S. thoroughbred races a mere 6.3 times per year. Almost every trainer whose career spans the decades will acknowledge that thoroughbreds aren't as robust as they used to be.

There are at least two good explanations for this phenomenon. In earlier eras, most people bred horses in order to race them, and they had a stake in the animals' soundness. By contrast, modern commercial breeders produce horses in order to sell them, and if those horses are unsound, they become somebody else's problem. Because buyers want horses with speed, breeders have filled the thoroughbred species with the genes of fast but unsound horses.

As this change in the breeding world took place, the sport was allowing the use of pain-killers and other medications that are forbidden in most other countries. They allow infirm horses to achieve success, go to stud and pass on their infirmities to the next generation.

[curiously undead]

semanticly meat, poultry and fish are all different forms of animal meat.
i respect all animals but kendrik, here's the question--do kill kill spiders, do you swat mosquitos, drive a car whose grill impales many an insect? those are animals as well and to me i've choosen to not eat mammals for almost 5 years and haven't faultered once. in my opinion that has more merit than a vegetarian who on occasion eats fish. also there is many more relations between mammals than there are other animals by a long shot. some insects are even larger than many fish. fish, insects, birds lay eggs, and are much more 'simple' life forms in every sense of the word. when you've studied and worked with insects (beetles) as much as i have i guess its only natural that the respect gainined for their existence is raised and the actions they are capable of easily on the level of sophistication as birds and fish who are also "swarm' animals though rarely do they work as proactively together as insects do.

birds fly and fish swim, so their elegance is always going to be higher regarded than insects who are often seen as annoyances at best.

i don't believe however people who eat mammals are bad or in the wrong. to me its like eating those i feel close to. (here comes the barb) to me its like dating a 2nd cousin, which why there's nothing wrong with it, theres better alternatives.

but i'm a paradox myself. i find milk disgusting these days and been drinking only soy for many years. however, soy cheese is disgusting, and i say long live california cheese!

[Corwin]

And I say any meal that doesn't contain MEAT is not a real meal!! :)

[curiously undead]

well, more and more youth will be open and embrace the idea just like doing their part for the environment, and hopefully not for disney style reasons like some do "animals are so cute".
but the reality is the animals, and mammals especially, require far more resources to make a meal out of than plants, etc. so as the worlds resources become scarcer which thankfully is having light shed on the matter now, meat will become more and more a luxury which is more or less how it should be any how, instead of the heavily subsidized industry it is here in the states.

[blatantninja]

I like to think of myself as an environmentalist, but when it comes to meat or no meat, I am willing to sacrifice a little bit of mother nature for meat!