Okay, fine, call all the cattle cows. Just don’t try to milk the male “cows.” :dubious:
I sure hope you don’t eat the fuzzy cow-stuff with ketchup! I usually throw it out once fuzzy stuff starts growing on it.
I agree completely. I was just complaining about the apparent confusion between a position on a particular issue and a general political stance. I’d be better off taking it to GD or maybe the Pit.
OK, Walloon, what do you call a single specimen of Bos taurus, of unspecifed gender, if it isn’t a “cow”?

OK, Walloon, what do you call a single specimen of Bos taurus, of unspecifed gender, if it isn’t a “cow”?
Howdy, neighbor. Around here (beef cattle territory), that would be a “beef” (plural “beeves”). I know that word was used a lot more 100 years ago than it is now, but people in the cattle industry here still use it regularly.

I suspect that this will backfire on the leftist crowd. Decreased demand means lower price in the same supply, which means that leather will be cheaper… yay, Mercedes!
Jeeze-Louise… I know that the written word requires smilies sometimes, but if this wasn’t obviously funny (in the ironic sense), then okay – send me to live near a tannery for a couple of months…
Howdy, neighbor. Around here (beef cattle territory), that would be a “beef” (plural “beeves”). I know that word was used a lot more 100 years ago than it is now, but people in the cattle industry here still use it regularly.
So…“Kine” has no currency as a nongenderspecific term for generic bovines?
heh…Generic Bovines. You know. The all white ones with the word “Kine” branded into their flanks?
There are two possibilities:
1/ all Mercedes’ seat leather is made from cattle that are killed for meat and other products anyway. If so, Mercedes’ change will make no difference whatsoever.
2/ some cattle are raised and killed specifically to provide leather for Mercedes cars. If so, existing herds used for that purpose will be killed and their leather sold elsewhere, and those cattle will not be replaced (ie less cattle will be bred). In this case fewer cattle will be killed, but only because they will not be born in the first place. Is PETA’s position that it is better not to be born at all than bred and killed for leather?
According to my Webster’s Third unabridged, “kine” is an obsolete plural, Inigo Montoya. In fact, I can’t remember the last time I heard that word outside of a church. Chronos was looking for a singular.
If Mercedes sold as many cars as, say, Ford or GM, it could make a difference.
I’m starting to see leather interiors being offered in more cars from all manufacturers. Of course, I’m sure the quality of leather in a Kia would not be the same as that in an MB.
The reason I don’t think that PETA’s antics in this case will save many poor little mooly cows is this:
Daimler spokeswoman Ursula Mertzig-Stein said that far from wanting leather-free cars, “our customers … are more likely to want even more leather at the premium end. But we’ll make cars without leather on demand.”
Let’s face it folks, most people who buy a high-priced luxury car are doing it to show off how wealthy they are. So how would they feel if a neighbor sidles up to the new $180,000 CL65 AMG, glances in, and says, “Couldn’t afford the leather, huh?”

There are two possibilities:
1/ all Mercedes’ seat leather is made from cattle that are killed for meat and other products anyway. If so, Mercedes’ change will make no difference whatsoever.
2/ some cattle are raised and killed specifically to provide leather for Mercedes cars. If so, existing herds used for that purpose will be killed and their leather sold elsewhere, and those cattle will not be replaced (ie less cattle will be bred). In this case fewer cattle will be killed, but only because they will not be born in the first place. Is PETA’s position that it is better not to be born at all than bred and killed for leather?
You forget the possibility outlined in option #9: that cattle farmers look at the total profit of their operation when deciding whether to expand; that a drop in demand for leather will result in a drop in price for leather; than a drop in price for leather will result in a drop in total profit for cattle farmers; and that cattle farmers are therefore less likely to expand their operations.
And yes, I’m almost certain it’s PETA’s position that no ethical violation has occurred in choosing not to breed an animal, whereas an ethical violation has occurred when choosing to kill an animal for a non-necessary purpose. In other words, it is better for a cow not to be born at all than bred and killed for leather.
Daniel