OK, for a while, Chicago had a ban on Foie Gras. The legal maneuvering that led to this ban was spearheaded by the fearless leader of the 49th Ward, Alderman Joe “Foie Gras” Moore. This is my home ‘hood, and it’s riddled with drug dealing, gang crime, and random street violence (lately, two people who thought they were buying used cars off Craigslist were stuck up at gunpoint in the same alley). Not a single restaurant in his ward even served foie gras, but Moore does represent a lot of pain-in-the-ass holier-than-thou fur-is-murder-yet-I-don’t-shave-my-legs-or-armpits types, and this so this mope got the ban passed by convincing other Chicago alderman, more traditionally interested in kickbacks, lucrative re-zoning and other aspects of the Chicago Way, to go along with it.
And, lo, all our urban woes were solved; we became a shining neighborhood upon a hill. Those champagne-cork drive-bys that were dinging our luxury vehicles were no more. The pate and liverwurst dealers lurking on dark streetcorners fled to less enlightened climes. True, you couldn’t get toast points from that guy by the alley anymore, but we all have to make some sacrifices for the greater good.
Or not. The actual response, besides world-wide ridicule: restaurants across the city gave away foie gras and charged for the salad it came on, became “duckeasies” serving it off-menu, or promoted foie gras sausages they otherwise wouldn’t have bothered selling. Only a handful of joints were ever ticketed, and those that were got more than their money’s worth in free publicity.
In the end, the laughingstock angle took effect, and Mayor Daley used his political muscle to get the ban repealed. There are a lot of problems in the world, and maybe I’ll worry about over-fed geese when we’re out of Iraq, Afghanistan and the pending Second Great Depression. And probably not then.
@95, then I trust you’ll drop everything you’re doing now (you’re a professor, i hear?) and immediately commit 100% of your efforts to solving your 3 top priorities. What’s that? Oh, you’re not? Your “job” is more important? You’re not properly trained to address your top 3 issues? Gee, maybe, just maybe, the same applies to the people who are trying to get duck liver off the menu?
Nah…. you’re right, you and your issues are the Most Important In The World.
@98: so only now that it’s in your area, that you’re noticing it, it matters? As I started off saying, there’s a lack of courage in your convictions, and more than a few contradictions and false information in your statements. And if the bans were as effective as you claim, then production would be down recently, not up, yes? But, well, it isn’t. I think that animal rights activists could be using their time better. I’m not even making an argument about war or the economy- they could serve their own cause better by going after actual egregious abuses that are common (battery farms, for example) rather than a non-mainstream product with a funny name. It’s bullying, and cowardice, to go after foie gras and not other products.
lizzie-where did you get the idea that foie gras was a “mostly Jewish food?” I’d double check your references.
@67 – People eat foie gras because they fear change? Yeah, I find that’s frequently the case for me… I tell you, the night of the election, I got through a ton of the stuff.
@104 Yes, because now that you have a Black President ™ you will NEVER FEAR ANYTHING AGAIN EVER.
@103
Lizzie is an Anti-Semit
Anti-Semit?
Abby, Yes, I only care about making practical local steps to stop a cruel practice when it actually becomes common locally. If it becomes trendy to start shooting pit bulls and barbecuing them, I’ll oppose the practice then. Foie gras isn’t completely mainstream yet, but it could be if we don’t nip it in the bud now.
Over 80% of foie gras production is in France and Quebec, and since they’re not becoming any less nationalistic any time soon, production bans won’t work in other places. We need to stop supporting businesses that sell foie gras and enact foie gras sales bans.
As to the history, I didn’t mean to sound anti-semitic and I’m sorry if I did, but here is a reference about the history of foie gras. The only part that’s really relevant is that foie gras is only recently becoming more and more popular outside of French and Jewish communities, which is why we need to stop foie gras sales in Seattle now.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/3146…
@101: I already commit 110% of my time to my top three priorities. (100% is for the weak.) My classes are nothing but lectures about war and economy. I take speed in order to stay awake 24/7, and when my body finally gives out, I sleep in the abandoned Foie Gras warehouse down by the docks, so I can spend 110% of my money fighting for the causes I truly believe in. You, meanwhile, I suggest you start a demonstration course in how to build All-or-Nothing, False Dilemma and Straw Man arguments. You seem to have the knack.
But now, back to giving my ALL . . .
@100 Do you believe that having an abortion and killing a walking, sentient being are the same thing?
@95, nice way to dismiss an “ad hominem attack” with an ad hominem attack.
My question still stands… What are *you* doing about those issues that concern you so much? Chaining yourself to an army base gate? Organizing Iraq-solidarity groups? Leafleting in downtown Chicago about Guantanamo? Writing your senators? I’m genuinely interested.
If NARN cares about animal cruelty and wants to address the issue (however misguided their protest at Lark may be), what’s it to you? People only get to care about the issues that you deem most relevant?
Why don’t you, for the benefit of humanity, draw up a list of issues that we need to address. Please prioritize it so that we can tackle one issue at a time, in the order you see fit.
“You’re giving a red-herring argument, because being pro-CHOICE doesn’t necessarily mean being pro-abortion”
Well, being pro-freedom to eat fois gras, doesn’t necessarily mean you want to eat fois gras yourself. It’s all about choice and freedom right?
Or not……
My 3 yr old can argue better, these vegans must be lacking something in their diet.
“Do you believe that having an abortion and killing a walking, sentient being are the same thing?”
Are you talking about a late term abortion, say at 7 months and say a 7 month old baby that is allowed to be born and live? Yes, they are the same thing.
And why walking? Since a baby can’t walk, we can kill it? Or what about sentient but severely mentally handicapped, we can kill them too? Why is walking your standard?
Again, I’m 100% pro-choice. Including late term abortion.
I’m only a few comments deep, but are some of you guys really equating basic human rights and equality with force-feeding animals for food? So gays are just a bunch of geese to you? Are you fucking nuts? With friends like you, who needs enemies?
@114
Congratulations! You’re up to speed.
I guess I could just say “sentient,” but then some blagoff would probably reply with the “well aren’t plants sentient, too?” and then I’d have to go through all the reasons why plants aren’t sentient, which would get into a big thing about whether or not we can actually know if a plant is sentient or not, etc. which would distract from the original point, which is that killing a non-sentient and sentient being isn’t really the same thing.
@111:
NARN supporters could spend their Friday evenings working at a soup kitchen or tutoring disadvantaged youths, no? Seems like your line of reasoning involves either assuming that there’s nothing NARNers could do about the more important issues, or assuming that each activist has infinite resources. Both assumptions are false.
@115, the point was ridiculous enough that I had to say something.
Reading the arguments of the pro-ban people is as convincing as a PETA ad. I think the protesters are naive and wasting their time. The consumption of beef is so much worse by such a great magnitude, not just for the poor animals but for the environment, but this is what people choose to speak out against? I just cannot fathom the thought process.
About 120 comments about birds and abortion and not a single Nazi reference?
you know that this is not going to be solved by people talking at each other over a series of tubes.
People can protest at Lark and people can protest at Planned Parenthood. Both are legal in the United States. As long as no one disrupts the employees or clients, it should be allowed, and is guaranteed by the US Constitution – you know, that thing that lets us all say what we want, believe what we want and assemble where we want (and be the bestest country around).
When life begins is a fun thing to discuss, and no one will agree on it (even among like-minded people), so this is flame war silly exercise. YOU ALL KNOW IT. Raise your Powerglove if you’ve switched sides more than twice during the last two days based on people’s rational anonymous arguments.
Having said that, it is entertaining to hit refresh over and over and over again. By all means, carry on. I can’t stop reading. The Stranger LOVES the ad loads, I reckon.
119, it seems to be new new editorial policy around here: site hits and ad loads at any cost.
Lizzie- foie gras is too expensive to become as common as you fear, and will always be. You may have just discovered its existence, but that doesn’t mean it’s trendier now than it was before. (It may be that we have better restaurants than we used to, but I’m not a native so I can’t say for sure.) And the fact that you don’t care about something until it appears in your metaphorical backyard makes you look parochial and foolish. If you don’t see it, it doesn’t exist?
Abby, I’ve known about foie gras as long as I can remember. Everyone interested in preventing animal abuse knows that foie gras is the worst of the worst — as said in my previous link, even the earliest known mention of foie gras was from a Jewish scholar in the 11th century commenting on its cruelty. The point is that nobody should care about banning or protesting something locally until it becomes a problem here. I mean, they have technology for hovercars now, should we start protesting hovercar safety right now or wait and see until it becomes a problem? I don’t get what your point is.
Lizzie, did you know that your “friend” is being reduced tomorrow? I love a good reduction with berry confit. Nice, reduction…
Thank you Lizzie, I appreciate your thoughtful responses on here.
I ♥ Lizzie.
Morse Hellhole is a racist, disgusting blog.
Just saying.
I’m also so glad I moved out of Rogers Park…
Man, the Stranger is all-in on the full-bore idiot asshole mode on this issue. Given the source, not surprising the approach taken; it is somewhat surprising, however, that half the staff feels compelled to make dismissing and insulting posts regarding a few people standing in front of a restaurant for an hour a week.
Still wondering how much Lark and other FG-serving restaurants spend in advertising with the Stranger… If NARN and other animal rights groups were for some reason to consistently invest in ads with the Stranger, then something tells me the sophisticated, worldly, post-whatever know-it-alls for the Slog might consider a take on this issue that actually addressed, you know, the issue.
Those radical fringe freak wackos over at The Humane Society of the United States have free postcards you can order from them, that you can send to restaurants serving foie gras urging the manager to stop serving it.
Order them here: http://www.hsus.org/forms/foie_gras_card…
Personally, I oppose the forced tube-feeding of embryos in order to kill them for their fatty livers.
I want to again suggest that people who support freedom of dietary choice call the Lark Restaurant and encourage them to keep foie gras on the menu.
The anti food choice side wants to make it seem there is a ground swell of support for their position. When I called Lark they told me they were getting calls from both sides. Just a quick phone call can help undermine NARN’s efforts. I will be eating there on Friday and bringing them four new customers.
You anti foie gras people do realise that geese and duck livers fatten naturally, right? And that force feeding is only used to enable the process 12 months a year instead of just before winter? You do also realise that ducks and geese routinely swallow whole fish, far larger than a gavage tube? There is no doubt SOME fois gras companies treat their animals poorly, and they should be forced to treat the animals well or be shut down. But saying ALL foie gras production is cruel is just plain wrong. Did you know there are fois gras producers that only use naturally fattened livers harvested during autumm? Should this be banned also?
While I do not agree with the premise of this article that we should ignore animal rights because there are other issues, I would sooner see NARN focus its attentions onraising conditions for the billions of battery chickens worldwide than worrying about the hundreds of thousands of ducks and geese in the foie gras industry.
Comparing foie gras to homosexual rights, womens rights or abortion is just absurd, and offensive. All these issues are so alien to foie gras it is entirely irrelevent and quite absurd.
It should be noted that most European countries HAVE NOT banned foie gras. The force feeding of animals for non medical purposes has been banned in countries ‘where it is not current practise’. These countries still allow the importation and sale of foie gras. It is worth noting that while the number of fois gras producing countries has halves, the amount of foie gras being produced has increased, likely due to demand for a higher quality product which countries with a longer heritage of producing it are more capable of fulfilling.
Australia has banned the domestic production of foie gras, and interestingly enough all that has happened is producers have gone underground, using word of mouth and whatnot to continue to sell the product. God knows how these animals are being treated, far better would have been to allow production but regulate animals conditions.
As to the history, the Jews learnt the art of foie gras from the Egyptians, not the other way around. It has been a documented delicacy for four and a half thousand years, and it will not be ending any time soon regardless of what animal rights protesters might claim.
Thank you, AussieFarmBoy. I think some of the animal rights people will actually listen when facts and reason are presented to them. For far too many of them however they believe that twisting of facts and outright lies are justified because they think there cause is so important that the ends justifies the means. This is why so many of them will say with a straight face that animal research has never advanced medicine or science in any way.
In reality animal research has hepled save millions of lives including their own and the lives of other animals.
Thank you, Ron.
A slight correction, according to the Council of Europe 1999:
“1. Countries allowing foie gras production shall encourage research on its welfare aspects and on alternative methods which do not include gavage. 2. Until new scientific evidence on alternative methods and their welfare aspects is available, the production of foie gras shall be carried out only where it is current practice and then only in accordance with standards laid down in domestic law. (…)”
This can not be considered a ban as it only prevents countries with no previous foie gras industry from producing the product. Those that claim ‘Europe has banned foie gras’ are misrepresenting the truth in a rather significant way.
I am all in favour of countries investigating how to improve the standards for animals in the foie gras industry, I am not in favour of a ban. My personal experience with gavage was with gavage performed by hand, in a yard. This was humane, I am not in favour of industrial mechanised gavage in battery like conditions anymore than I approve of the treatment of regular battery chickens.
Note that the livers of migratory birds do not degenerate when fattened, whether naturally or enlarged. In Europe migratory breeds are used. In America the Moulard duck, which is non-migratory, is used and may exhibit some degeneration in the liver. Generally speaking the animal is killed before any pain or suffering results.
The foie gras industry is not all evil, nor is it all good. More regulation could result in better treatment for the animals. But properly done gavage is not cruel, nor are the livers diseased. An outright ban will never happen, and will simply drive production under ground resulting in worse conditions for the animals. Also large and relatively wealthy animal rights organisations attacking a small artisan industry and the restaurants it serves is not in itself a moral action, especially given that their claims regarding the cruelty inherent in foie gras are at best wild exaggerations and at worst outright lies.
I have to say I am particularly offended by the class based attacks levelled against foie gras. I am from a farming family, I am young, the first member of my family to attend university (via scholarship) I am by no means wealthy or elitist. My mother is a union delegate and my father works at a school, yet we all appreciate the gastronomic qualities of foie gras and its cultural heritage. We do not belong to some kind of rich elite, indifferent to the (alleged) suffering of animals. Now, while I am not going to make unsupported claims or generalisations, I do wonder how many of the anti-foie gras protesters have actually had much to do with animals and animal agriculture.