Skip to content
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Spokesman Review)   Bacon 4:22   (spokesman.com) divider line
    More: Stupid, Judaism, Pig, pig meat, Pork, pig's symbolism, biblical prohibition, Columbia University Press, early Christian period  
•       •       •

708 clicks; posted to Food » on 04 Mar 2021 at 9:05 AM (6 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



11 Comments     (+0 »)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2021-03-04 9:45:28 AM  
But what about skrimps?
 
2021-03-04 9:58:43 AM  

NINEv2: But what about skrimps?


bacon-wrapped skrimps, with pigs-milk cheese.
 
2021-03-04 10:19:52 AM  

tintar: NINEv2: But what about skrimps?

bacon-wrapped skrimps, with pigs-milk cheese.


I'll uh, skip the pig's milk thanks buddy.

Now, skrimps on the grill with spicy Montreal? It is supposed to be 70 here on Saturday.  hmmm....
 
2021-03-04 12:40:59 PM  

NINEv2: tintar: NINEv2: But what about skrimps?

bacon-wrapped skrimps, with pigs-milk cheese.

I'll uh, skip the pig's milk thanks buddy.

Now, skrimps on the grill with spicy Montreal? It is supposed to be 70 here on Saturday.  hmmm....


Great - now I want shrimp - and the weather's been shiat so grilling is not happening.  Bleagh.

/the 40's temps would be livable
//the winds that have been picking up right around dinnertime not so much
///humbug
 
2021-03-04 1:36:15 PM  
Wow. That's a lot of bad theories about Jews and pork published in the New York Times in 1998. It probably drew a ton of angry letters.

I've come abut this theory that pigs were seen as evil because their large litters represented the fertile Mother Godess which patriarchal Judaism opposed.

https://global.oup.com/obso/focus/foc​u​s_on_why_does_the_bible_prohibit_eatin​g_pork/

The biblical text does not directly discuss this reproductive aspect of pigs, yet the multiparity (bearing in litters) of pigs comes into direct conflict with other aspects of biblical ritual involving animals. Aside from the fact that no clean land animal is multiparous, and that most unclean animals are multiparous or egg layers, pigs' manner of reproduction does not allow them to bear a single firstborn (in Hebrew, the pe?er re?em, "womb opener," or bekor, "firstborn"). Either one would need to witness the birth to see which was born first, or possibly the entire litter would be considered the firstborn. This may seem inconsequential, but in biblical thought, the firstborn male of domesticated animals is the most sacred animal, and must be offered to God. The firstborn of cows, sheep, and goats is either slaughtered or given to the sanctuary (Ex 13:12; Deut 15:19-20), or given to the Levites (Num 18:15-17). According to Deuteronomy, the only animal offerings one must make, aside from offerings at pilgrimage festivals, are one's firstborn male animals (Deut 15:19-21). Thus the firstborn male of all land animals raised for food must be offered to Yahweh. Why exactly this is the case is not clear, but it seems to express some sense that the deity owns the firstborn and that by giving the deity the firstborn there will be continued fertility.

The firstborn male animal is ritually significant on its own as well as in relation to firstborn male humans, who too are devoted to the deity. For example, Exodus ritually and ideologically equates firstborn sons with firstborn animals as well as with first fruits:

You will not delay to make offerings from the fullness of your harvest and from the outflow of your presses. The firstborn of your sons you shall give to me. You will do the same with your oxen and with your sheep: for seven days it will remain with its mother; on the eighth day you will give it to me (Ex 22:29-30 [Heb 28-29]).
 
2021-03-04 8:56:55 PM  

NINEv2: But what about skrimps?


I had bacon-wrapped scallops once and nearly had an orgasm. Good stuff like that is definitely banned.
 
2021-03-04 9:29:08 PM  
Don't eat pig, don't eat shrimp... that's your damn problem. I don't give a schitt if the issue is kosher or halal... that's your damn problem.
To me, religious dietary strictures are only surpassed by religion itself in stupidity.

If you want to limit your diet, try using logic: dietary, nutritional, moral concerns... not something someone long dead said an imaginary figure didn't like.

Like I said, the key word here is stupid.

By the way, can Joos eat crab and lobster? If so, what is the difference?
 
2021-03-05 9:46:40 AM  
TFA is possibly older than some of the Farkers reading it. Fact is we'll never know specifically WHY pork was forbidden. Just that it was. Therefore, I'll continue to believe that the folks in charge way back at the birth of civilization were motivated to ban pork because raising hogs was too resource-intensive for the stone age farmer and people who ate pork occasionally got trichinosis, while those who ate goat, sheep, and auroch, didn't.
 
2021-03-05 1:42:29 PM  

pheelix: Therefore, I'll continue to believe that the folks in charge way back at the birth of civilization were motivated to ban pork because raising hogs was too resource-intensive for the stone age farmer


nonsense. The neighbors of Jews had no problems raising and eating pigs. In many cultures it was common for a family to own just one pig to eat their garbage and sometimes even their shiat.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pig_toi​l​et
A pig toilet (sometimes called a "pig sty latrine") is a simple type of dry toilet consisting of an outhouse mounted over a pigsty, with a chute or hole connecting the two. The pigs consume the feces of the users of the toilet, as well as other food.

~100 AD:
Fark user imageView Full Size



pheelix: people who ate pork occasionally got trichinosis,


In those days there was no theory of infectious diseases particularly from eating a food that doesn't immediately make you sick. Out of all cultures are you saying that Jews were the only ones to notice a correlation between pork and possible later illness?
 
2021-03-05 1:57:20 PM  

Percise1: Don't eat pig, don't eat shrimp... that's your damn problem. I don't give a schitt if the issue is kosher or halal... that's your damn problem.
To me, religious dietary strictures are only surpassed by religion itself in stupidity.

If you want to limit your diet, try using logic: dietary, nutritional, moral concerns... not something someone long dead said an imaginary figure didn't like.

Like I said, the key word here is stupid.

By the way, can Joos eat crab and lobster? If so, what is the difference?


As far as I understand, they cannot because they are bottom feeders. Which isn't so bad if you live in a desert. But I understand the Rastas follow Jewish laws. It's gotta suck living in Jamaica and not being able to eat lobster.
 
2021-03-05 4:08:28 PM  

NINEv2: tintar: NINEv2: But what about skrimps?

bacon-wrapped skrimps, with pigs-milk cheese.

I'll uh, skip the pig's milk thanks buddy.

Now, skrimps on the grill with spicy Montreal? It is supposed to be 70 here on Saturday.  hmmm....


tbh my jerk-dumbass was only attempting to combine as many possible dietary violations in one shot (calf cooked in its mothers milk, or whatever) - although given a chance, I'd happily try pig-cheese!

meanwhile...

Fark user imageView Full Size


it's almost like https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De​licate​ssen_(1991_film) ha ha ha.
 
Displayed 11 of 11 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking





On Twitter



  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.