How on earth can you say that? And to answer your question, I think it IS cruel. You're forcing an animal to do something it doesn't want to do and no animal has to be "for" something. What are YOU for? Just because one practice is less cruel than another, it doesn't mean it's right.

The OP's friend refused to go because the place used an ox to pull a cart. So they didn't even bother to find anything out, just tarred it with the "it's abuse" brush because it is being used to do something they don't "think" is should be doing.

The reason I compared an ox to a human is because some people wish to affix humans emotions and thoughts onto animal species at the same level that we would feel emotions and thoughts. This is why I pointed out that that ox is more liable to be better looked after than a poor person.

The OP didn't want to go there because an ox pulls a cart. Ergo the same person should apply this logic to hotels/ shops/ places they shop because that chain/ store may pay their staff wages that they cannot live on. I suspect they don't.

You are right that we have no idea whether the ox "loves/ hates" pulling a cart, but again we are stamping the assumption that they love/ hate things like we do.

We don't really know I have cats so most of the time I have no idea what they are thinking but I don't try and label them, like I don't try and label what other people are thinking

Sorry, but that just doesn't make sense.

The burden is the load the animal is carrying. A beast of burden is an animal that carries something (a burden). Whether the animal is discomfited by the load is a completely different thing.

Have you confused the definition with something else?

because it implies what the animal is doing as a "burden" to that animal. Again, fixing an emotion to a word that nowadays for farm animals that are well looked after, doesn't really fit anymore.

They are effing animals we are talking about here, not people. Why do you think we have domesticated animals? To do a job. That job may be as meat, wool, leather, burden or even a pet. If we couldn't use domesticated animals for the purpose they were intended we would not keep them at all.

I agree, the ops fiends should not of made an assumption (if that's what she did. Maybe she does know the facts) but is rather people question things than put up responses like 'they're effing animals' which make my blood boil

It's not an assumption, its first hand experience over the past 9 years....

Is it forcing or just training ? If we didn't train our dogs we couldn't live with them in our homes, same with cats and horses are trained to be riden. What you are saying means no one would have a pet or animal in their life.

How do you know it doesn't want to do it? You don't.

What is crueler, an animal pulling a cart for a few hours a day (which it has been trained to do) and then most probably roaming around in a field for the rest of the time when it isn't needed or a human working 12plus hours a day in a job they hate, (which they have been trained to do) in cramped environments and then dying before they can retire and enjoy some time roaming around in their "field"? (like those poor workers in the factory in India where their building collapsed)

From the pictures the animals look in very good health. Would you worry so much for the farmer who looks after the animal and most prob works longer hours than the ox?

I'm against animal cruelty in ANY form but, from the looks of it the animals are not being treated badly, just doing their job (as everyone and some animals need to do).

If they weren't needed to pull the cart or perform other farming duties then the species wouldn't be around.

Or perhaps people would prefer animals like the ox to be replaced by polluting tractors and other machinery? Which cost more to build, run and purchase and more harmful to the planet in the long run? Then how would the farmer survive if they have to replace their ox with expensive machinery? They wouldn't. They would have to raise prices of their products to survive which then goes to the consumer who will then complain about rocketing prices. Or the farm will have to close, the other animals would have to be slaughtered needlessly and the family homeless.

I would prefer a well looked after ox myself.

I accept that you think its cruel, but I don't accept that most people would agree with you.

Only 5% of the population are vegetarians, so if 95% of the population are prepared to eat Ox tail soup, I doubt very much if they would object to seeing one (complete with its tail) pulling a cart over a relatively short distance.

Not me. I don't think there are any signs that the animals are badly treated, so I will be off shortly to see it all get underway, before heading up to the Caves to join in the party.

I dont think its a case ogf veggies vs carnivores here - personally I value welfare over everything else. A fit and healthy working animal that is well looked after and provided with excellent welfare is preferable to me than a pacing big cat in a zoo (amur leopard in edinburugh for example), but its a case by case basis.

a totally different set of morals need to be applied to bull fighting, grand national type races, baiting of animals, etc - not saying any are wrong, but they all need individual review - a million £ winning race horse will be treated a damn sight better than a £100k horse thats losing races

Sowwy! My bad...

Hope you had a brilliant time and enjoyed the party!

Thanks, it was a great day out enjoyed by everyone who went.

Couldn't agree more, as a vegetarian I have no problems with working animals as long as they are treated well.