Jump to content

Your views on Foie Gras

Thomas Micklewright

By Thomas Micklewright
in The Lounge

 Share

Recommended Posts

TheArtfulDogger

TheArtfulDogger

Posted
Posted

Sigh


I like these people (click through if you dare)


freedom to eat what I want is what I demand locally (and not just tripe)


Please don't take away the pleasure of good Foie Gras from those who like it, and also know how it is produced. It's a personal choice and one that shouldn't be removed because someone else doesn't like it..


.. Imagine the horror if someone said we should get rid of all dogs because they don't like them, why I would be running around in circles until someone rubbed my belly better.


as was mentioned earlier by david_carnell, stop dictating to others (please)

karter

karter

Posted
Posted
My view on this- The Palmerston served steak with Foie Gras and chips, it was amazingly tasty and heart stoppingly rich. Hats off to Thomas for trying this and maybe he should roll it out nationwide if he wants mpz to take notice:)). Maybe the ducks liked being over fed depending on the procedure...
Thomas Micklewright

Thomas Micklewright

Posted
  • Author
Posted

I dont believe the world should revolve around humans. Just because something is legal (although Foie Gras is illegal to produce in the UK, dont understand that?) doesnt make it right.


I can't agree with the championing of taste buds over animal welfare. Just as I wouldn't agree with business profit over human welfare ie the slave trade - which was once legal in this country.


Im not dictating, to dictate you need power to rule, Im just politely suggesting. If I was dictating then all the restaurants wouldn't be serving FG would they?

Annette Curtain

Annette Curtain

Posted
Posted

Loz Wrote:

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

> Well humans seem to like being overfed.

>

> http://www.dimensionsmagazine.com/dimtext/kjn/peop

> le/syager.jpg

>

> Why shouldn't geese?



Talking of Geese


She looks like she's just been Goosed


* imagines state of her lady garden *



:(

maxxi

maxxi

Posted
Posted

???? Wrote:

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

> So. To summarise this thread.

>

> East Dulwich's bleedin heart, liberal, ethical,

> morally snug principles are just skin deep, right

> on stances as long suspected. They don't even go

> as deep as their tastebuds.



Did you mean smug or are these morals those that fit the individual so perfectly as to be indistinguishable from say a snakeskin leotard or a fur mankini?

Frankito

Frankito

Posted
Posted

I love those pics, such a contrast.... The before shot: bowl cut, girl guide uniform and a winning smile.


Cut to a few years later and she has bagged herself a cheeky job as the face of Apple. You can't see the latest ipod she is sporting as it's neatly tucked into one of her folds that doesn't produce sweat.. How they got her legs to 180 degrees is pure camera magic.

Huguenot

Huguenot

Posted
Posted

From the OP:


"Le Chardon is still serving this horrible dish, and it would be wonderful if we could encourgae them to remove it from the menu.


"Franklins, EDT and Beauberry House have all agreed to stop serving Foie Gras.


"What do people think about this?"


Apart from the unsettling use of 'we' that smacks of Orwellian doublespeak, it seems fairly clear that this is an underhand and manipulative unilateral attempt to control other people from doing what you disapprove of. It's essentially morally corrupt, and is an incredibly arrogant strategy.


It also staggering that such tactics would be claimed to have equality with the ending of the slave trade. The slave trade was ended through reason, democracy and social engagement, not the guerrila targeting of those who considered it reasonable.


TM hasn't actually tried to 'persuade' anyone of the rights or wrongs of foie gras, which would be entirely reasonable. Instead he has chosen to reject the terms and arrangements of normal free society (of which persuasion is one) and opted for direct action without any social mandate at all.


This approach has closer moral equivalence with animal rights terrorists than it does with William Wilberforce.


I'm surprised that this debate has revolved around foie gras - it seems entirely separate to the real issue, which is whether it's at all acceptable for a minority special interest group (only around 100 of ED's 5,000 residents it seems), should be rejecting the views of society and trying to force people to conform to their point of view.


It seems obtuse that Micklewright should consider himself a hero, when his actions are those of a tyrant.

Huguenot

Huguenot

Posted
Posted

Thanks mate, read all of it.


I'm not sure what your point is?


I think later on Micklewright tried to make the case against foie gras, but that was AFTER he'd already pursued a unilateral strategy of trying to prevent it being available to the public.


The fact that his method was a chat with the restarauter is irrelevant - he's in a minority, other people don't agree with him, and instead of respecting their views he tried to step around them and prevent them getting access.


It doesn't matter that it's foie gras, and Mickelwright's end goal is banning the sale of meat full stop. The fact is that when he couldn't persuade people to agree with him, he tried to impose his opinion on them.


Frankly, what on earth does he think gave him the right to do that?

Huguenot

Huguenot

Posted
Posted

Was that as lacking in irony as it appeared? ;-)


Hunt saboteurs are as wrong as ALF terrorists are and as wrong as Mickelwright is.


If you want to ban fox hunting you get public opinion on your side, you persuade a majority of people to support you, and push legislation through parliament.


That's the way society and democracy work.


If Mickelwright wants people to stop eating foie gras, he should persuade them not to buy it, not force them not to buy it.

Bellenden Belle

Bellenden Belle

Posted
Posted

For years fox hunting continued despite hunt saboteurs. Nothing changed until the law was changed. It was debate and canvassing of public opinion that ultimately made the difference. I agree with Huguenot here - why should a minority attempt to speak for the rest of us.

And welcome back H.

????

????

Posted
Posted
Luckily for the Guardian readers of SE22 Fox tastes shite if not your stomachs would no doubt create some sort of Guardian backed argunment for that particular obscenity. Foie Gras is revolting..... and crap about the law and infringement on your civil rights shows what a spoilt load of bourgeois you are. Principles and idealism until it imterfere's with your cozy bourgoeis lifestyles....what a surprise. Eat it if you want, it's legal after all but spore me lectures on moral justice etc in the future.

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...