Thread replies: 5
Thread images: 1
Thread images: 1
File: 1958791196_1583e8fa42_z.jpg (107KB, 499x500px) Image search:
[Google]
107KB, 499x500px
>Cock throwing, also known as cock-shying or throwing at cocks, was a blood sport widely practised in England until the late 18th century. A rooster was tied to a post, and people took turns throwing coksteles (special weighted sticks) at the bird until it died.
>In 1835, the Parliament of the United Kingdom implemented an Act called the Cruelty to Animals Act 1835, which prohibited the baiting of some animals such as the bull, bear, and other large animals. However, rat baiting was not enforced and ratting competitions came to the forefront as a gambling sport. At one time, in London, there were at least 70 rat pits.[1]
>Billy's career was crowned on 22 April 1823, when a world record was set with a hundred rats killed in five-and-a-half minutes. This record stood until 1862 when it was claimed by another ratter named "Jacko". Billy continued in the rat pit until old age reportedly with only one eye and two teeth remaining.
>In twentieth century America, despite the expansion of laws to outlaw dog fighting, dog fighting continued to flourish underground.[3] Aiding in the expansion of dog fighting were the police and firemen, who saw dog fighting as a form of entertainment amongst their ranks.[3] In fact, the Police Gazzette served as a "go to" source for information about where one could attend a fight.[3]
>On July 8, 2009, the ASPCA also participated in one of the largest federal dog fighting raids in U.S. History. Most of the dogs rescued were pit bulls (over 400 of them). This raid took place in eight states and had 26 arrests, of which 2 defendants are required to spend at least 10 years in prison.[10]
/his/, why are blood sports like dogfighting so common throughout history? I also recall seeing something about a bloodsport where nobles would gather together and throw animals into the air with family, which was seen as a family-friendly form of entertainment. Why does it seem like almost no ancient civilizations cared about animal welfare?
>>
>>1542706
>Handling rats in 1823 London
EEEEEEEEEEWWWW
>>
>why did no civilization except for countries west of the iron curtain in the last 50 years humanize animals and put them on a pedestal
I dunno lol
>>
Same reason most third worlders don't care about animal welfare very much. When you have real problems, you don't give a fuck about shit like that.
Some day people will be asking why 21st century barbarians thought it was okay to murder cows for their meat and skin.
>>
>>1542745
>Some day people will be asking why 21st century barbarians thought it was okay to murder cows for their meat and skin.
That seems to rely on a model of history which becomes inherently more 'progressive', which has always struck me as kind of... arrogant, I guess? I mean, the Sumerians had a goddess of Social Justice. Admitedly they were savage and draconian as fuck, but they were obviously thinking about shit like charity if they have a whole goddess devoted to it.
>>1542728
Eh, seems like more since the 1800s. Also, fun fact, American child abuse laws first came about because someone successfully argued that a child who was being abused was an animal, and thus the state could intervene. In America at least, we had laws against animal abuse before we had laws against child abuse. Kind of seems like this goes against your argument that this is about humanization.
Thread posts: 5
Thread images: 1
Thread images: 1