this post was submitted on 02 Sep 2025
1008 points (98.8% liked)
People Twitter
8093 readers
1897 users here now
People tweeting stuff. We allow tweets from anyone.
RULES:
- Mark NSFW content.
- No doxxing people.
- Must be a pic of the tweet or similar. No direct links to the tweet.
- No bullying or international politcs
- Be excellent to each other.
- Provide an archived link to the tweet (or similar) being shown if it's a major figure or a politician.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I literally believe an innocent, defenseless, sentient creature was systematicallty and needlessly tortured and murdered to make this and that my tax dollars paid to subsidize it. If this isn't triggering to me, I can't even imagine how fucking stupid this looks to Muslims who think God forbids it. Like should someone fire back a video of themselves disregarding the Sabbath and expect Christians to care?
And isn't pork haram predominantly because it was considered by people like Muhammad to be impure? So this sounds more like someone sending them a video of scraping gum off the underside of a desk and chewing it. You sure owned them.
It was probably considered impure because pigs have a big parasite issue before industrialization and improper cooking often led to people getting sick or dying.
A lot of religious "rules" can typically be boiled down to trying to keep people alive by making sure they avoid potential dangerous things, increasing their hygiene, or just making life easier and reducing hardships.
It's almost like people in charge realized that it would be easier to get people to do things if it meant going to heaven and avoiding hell instead of jail or something.
The stated reason is because pigs are considered unclean because they'll live in conditions we consider dirty, and will eat things we consider unclean.
It can be very tempting to look at ways that modern beliefs and practices overlap with historical ones and find ways that make them "make sense" from a modern perspective. This can make it harder to understand what people actually believed, or see the framework they were using, pushing the "oddness" somewhere else, like a bubble under a piece of plastic.
For parasites, we think of pork as carriers of parasites in the modern world because our supply chain has eliminated them from other commonly eaten meats.
This lines up with 2/3 of abrahamic religions having a prohibition against pork: they must have gotten the right answer for the wrong reason.
Except in the times those religions were developed pigs weren't greater vectors than other animals.
There were also other contemporaneous cultures that didn't have that prohibition despite very similar circumstances. If it were a food safety issue we would expect to see other cultures have the same prohibition. Similar problems have similar solutions after all.
https://archaeology.org/issues/march-april-2025/letters-from/on-the-origin-of-the-pork-taboo/
Our supply chain has also eliminated them from pork at this point. As far as I know, most trichinosis in the US, at least, is wild game (bear and boar) and home-reared hogs not subject to the controls on commercial hogs.
Also, I liked that article. It seems like the long story short is that the proto-jews and proto-muslims were pastoralists who wouldn't have raised pigs themselves, and when they butted into neighboring peoples who did raise pigs, that difference became a cultural identifier, and its importance was magnified to the point of becoming an actual prohibition.
Yup. And bobcat, of all things. Last I checked that was the last US confirmed case. (It makes sense since bobcat obviously can get trichinosis, but eating bobcat seems like such an unlikely thing to do)
I didn't get persnickety on the details there because common understanding hasn't caught up with the reality of the food safety situation. It'll take a while before people really accept that you can cook pork medium rare and be just fine, and longer still for tastes to adapt, since the guidelines only officially changed in 2011 and medium rare pork still feels underdone to a lot of people.