On Thu, 12 Mar 2009 11:24:34 -1000, dsi1 wrote:
> T wrote:
>> In article >,
>> says...
>>> notbob wrote:
>>>> On 2009-03-08, sf > wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> of butt in a huge vat of water....
>>>>> pork is tender, he drains it well....
>>>> Well, there goes most of the pork flavor.
>>> My auntie, told me to boil pork and then drain the water. Her reason,
>>> she said, was because pork is a "dirty" meat. I don't do this myself but
>>> it's likely that the rational for doing this goes far back to when men
>>> first started eating pork. My guess is that the Jews considered pork a
>>> dirty meat too - except that draining the cooking liquid could not
>>> redeem it.
>>>> nb
>>>>
>>
>> Part of the problem in biblical days was that they didn't necessarily
>> cook the meat thoroughly. This meant a whole host of little parasites
>> were along for the ride.
>
> I guess most of the restrictions of classes of food were based on the
> observation that some food tended to make folks sick or dead. Our pork
> is a lot safer these days. OTOH, folks in the old days had the advantage
> of not living that long.
>
frankly, i think there are more practical reasons for the ban on pork by
muslims and jews:
Deceased anthropologist Marvin Harris instead proposed that the regulation
results from mundane socio-economic concerns. Pigs are not biologically
suited to living in the arid climate of the Middle East, requiring far more
water to keep cool than animals native to the region. Although wild pigs
forage in the forests, there are no such environments for them in the
region that was Canaan, and consequently they must instead be fed grain;
however, the grain which pigs eat is also that eaten by people, and so the
pigs would compete with humans for survival during years of bad harvest. As
such, raising pigs could have been seen as wasteful and decadent; Harris
cites examples of similar ecological reasons for religious practices,
including prohibitions against pork, in other religions of the world.
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_kosher_animals>
....i mean, when you think about it, the middle east just is not a good
place to raise pigs. it's like god were to ban the raising of shrimp in
utah or something.
he also addressed why the cow is sacred in india:
In Cows, Pigs, Wars, and Witches: The Riddles of Culture, Harris begins
with an explanation for why the hungry peasants of India do not kill and
eat the ´sacred¡ cows which roam the country at will. Does this make sense?
Cows are kept alive for the simple reason that killing them is economic
abortion. Cows are revered because they provide milk. Their dung can be
burned like peat to heat homes and cooking pots. Dung can be mixed with
other ingredients and spread like cement across the ground for flooring
material. The cows are far less costly than unaffordable tractors for
cultivating fields. Finally, cows that freely walk the streets eat most
anything, saving the cost of paying street cleaners.
<http://blogcritics.org/archives/2007/04/15/230542.php>
i highly recommend the book reviewed above, available he
<http://www.amazon.com/Cows-Pigs-Wars-Witches-Riddles/dp/0679724680>
...which also addresses cargo cults and the phenomenon of the *potlatch*,
the savage male (some of you liberal arts types may remember the 'fierce
people,' the yanomamo) and the burning of witches, among other topics, in a
very sensible and entertaining way.
another good book by harris is concerned more directly with food (including
pigs and cows):
The Sacred Cow and the Abominable Pig: Riddles of Food and Culture
<http://www.amazon.com/Sacred-Cow-Abominable-Pig-Touchstone/dp/0671633082/ref=sr_1_14?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1236965769&sr=1-14>
both books are convincing argued and fun to read.
your pal,
blake