Talk:Ikizukuri

Do you beleive that the preperation of Ikizukuri is objectionable? Why or why not? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by WatershedG (talk • contribs) 19:08, 2 December 2005.

Most Japanese people call this ikezukuri, not ikizukuri. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 125.232.150.238 (talk • contribs) 16:34, 30 May 2007.

Ah, yes, ikezukuri (活け造り) is grammatically correct Japanese. I've had ikezukuri, once. A company superior treated me to it, and it wasn't something I would have paid for out of my pocket. A regular piece of sashimi is served on top of half of a fish that's still twitching. Actually, the only evidence of life from the fish is that it's twitching, and I don't know if that's really life or just muscle reflex at that point. As a gourmand, you might want to believe the fish is still alive, but I'm sure it's just reflex. As a frugal commoner, I found the presentation wasteful. You only get to eat half of the fish that you pay in full for.

As for ikezukuri-ikizukuri, consider how the mushroom shiitake is often spelled shiitaki or shitaki. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.121.120.67 (talk) 04:46, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Pain

Germany allegedly denies that fish feel pain, whilst ye olde Wikipedia says: “[T]he ability to experience pain or irritation is observable in most multicellular organisms.” Who is right?—Wikipeditor

Well if an animal has a central nervous system, I would say they probably noticed they've been taken out of water, can't breath comfortably, and are missing half of their body. But more to the point of this practice, it's unnecessary to eat meat, and even more unnecessary to go out of your way to make the animal suffer if you do happen to eat meat. I just can't figure out the kind of attitude behind this practice. But hey, I guess man has dominion over all the earth and whatever's on it, so we can do whatever we want with no guilt, right? - Corby 01:59, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your answer. I don't eat any animal products already; I am just wondering about the degree of certainty concerning fish feeling or not feeling pain. Not too many years ago, I read a small notice in a newspaper explaining how human babies' ability to feel pain was finally proven, and how earlier scientists had denied such ability and conducted experiments that involved poking babies with pointy sticks or some such. If we only know so much about our own species, it would seem we can only guess about fish and others.—Wikipeditor

My personal view is that it's less cruel to step on a bug than to kill a dog. With fish though, and other animals who are very limited physically in their ability to express any feelings they may be having, I think it's better to be on the safe side and not risk it. A fish doesn't have many facial muscles, no expressions, they aren't vocal, all they can do at most is struggle about, which is what they do when they are out of water or being cut. A cat can scream as if to say "hey, that fucking hurt!" if you accidentally step on their tails, but a fish sure can't say anything. Next thing you know these scientists will be poking people who are paralyzed to determine if they can feel pain. It seems pretty obvious that brains and nerves = pain. Sensing pain and injury is one of the first things an animal would need to evolve the ability to do in order to survive in the real world. - Corby 10:32, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

I think if you eat meat at all then ikizukuri shouldn't bother you. Equivalently, if ikizukuri does bother you, you should be a vegetarian. Cruelty to animals doesn't cease to exist simply because it's hidden from you and their meat is served to you in a nice sanitary way. —Keenan Pepper 13:13, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

That's idiotic. There's a big difference between how fast a cow is generally killed in a slaughterhouse and how fast a fish is killed with ikizukuri. Fish are often thrown in fucking hot frying pans and cooked while they are alive, and then picked apart by some heartless dipshit while they're still 'gasping for air'. Pulseczar 21:59, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

True, and I have been a vegetarian for 10 years. I would like to think that if people actually saw the slaughtered animal alive and in pain, then they would have to realize and come to terms with what meat is (as opposed to being something thats sold in packages at Safeway). However, the fact that Ikisukuri exists makes me think that some people really just don't give a shit. - Corby 11:40, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

That's absurd. Up until very recently, the slaughter of animals was much more visible to the population than it is today, and people still ate meat. Even today, the sizable proportion of people who do have contact with the meat industry still eat meat. And no, meat is not animals "in pain". Today, animals are slaughtered pretty quickly. Humans need this kind of nutrition to live. It can be provided other ways, but only with significant difficulty (both practical and emotional), extra expense (I'm all for killing a few animals to feed a few poor people), and increased risk of malnutrition (as you are no doubt vividly aware in your meal planning). We evolved as predators, and we are today quite likely the most merciful predators on Earth, even accounting for poor conditions on many farms and also the few people who indulge in sadistic crap like this. Be vegetarian if you want, but to imply that we're the ones who haven't "come to terms with what meat is" is both insulting and naïve. Incidentally, I would like to think that if vegetarians actually saw a food animal being slaughtered and then saw an animal suffering a natural death (I'm resisting the urge to post YouTube links for both), they would have to come to terms with what nature is (as opposed to being some nausea-inducing romanticized pastiche of children's stories), but posts like the above make me think it's all about feeling superior to others, and about the animals they really don't give a shit. 24.174.30.146 (talk) 05:55, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

Like me — I love meat. =P —Keenan Pepper 22:59, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

Same here. Its an animal. You're above the food chain. A lion wouldnt hesitate to think twice about ripping your guts out. I think feeling pity for something that was meant to die in order to feed you is ridiculous. If anything, you should be against "factory farming" where unnecessary procedures are done to improve the "quality" of the product. I actually find it funny that westerners find it horifying to see what its like when an animal is slaughtered for its meat. Its because you buy it in ultra clean supermarkets, frozen and packaged like it grew from some tree. --Gigaguyser 17:34, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

"Meant to die in order to feed you"? I had a feeling that religion's idiocy had a role in the rationalization of a lot of people that practice ikizukuri. Only a religion would say that some animal is inferior to another and 'meant' to be eaten by other animals, as if there's some designer of the world that said "fish shall be eaten by ‘x’". Secondly, animals aren't generally put through anywhere near the amount of 'apparent' suffering, when they are slaughtered in Western societies, as the apparent suffering that fish are put through with ikizukuri. Pulseczar 22:08, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Humans have a unique quality other animals don't, rational thought. I think a human is much more capable of reasoning that pain it receives must be similar to the pain it can cause others. I mean, there are only a handful of animals in the world that can recognize themselves in a mirror. There is no doubt that the world is a brutal place, where animals are merely links in a food chain, but I think humans have the power (and therefore the obligation) to show respect. There is nothing wrong with utilizing resources, but to abuse and exploit them seems below human compassion to me. It's all about the golden rule. Personally, I'd want a quick death rather than to agonize during someones feast, therefore I'd ideally treat an animal the same way. Just as a ruler has an obligation to best serve his people, a human has the obligation to best serve the world and its inhabitants. But as with any ruler, its easy to get caught up thinking about me, me, me. LostCause 04:14, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

I agree. 24.174.30.146 (talk) 05:58, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

its reasonable to say that if i cant tell a fish is feeling pain then that pain is irrelevant to me. plus that when recreation ally fishing i would usually cut the the brain-stem of the fish and leave it (with a beating heart) to bleed out on the beach. likewise when manually slaughtering a cow, the usual method is just to slit its throat so it bleeds out. When hunting, some shots may be less than lethal, and supposing the wounded animal slips down into gorge, it may lay for quite some time conscious of its injuries, until the hunter finds it or it bleeds to death. when hunting pests, its quite a normal practice to leave the animals in this kind of state anyway, just because of the sheer volumes that need to be culled(eg for forest conservation efforts). i dont see how this practice of "Ikizukuri" is anymore inhumane than these methods. this is the real world, actual humans are dying of various "inhumane" causes, perhaps these things should be solved before we agonize over or not it is "humane" to swat that mosquito. this article feels like a kind of xenophobia that has been greenwashed into apparently logical ethical concerns, when all cultures of the world have there own equivalent to these practices, except for maybe fuax-hippie Starbucks culture.

The German Wikipedia article Odori ebi says “As shrimps are not vertebrates, the preparation of odori ebi does not constitute cruelty to animals under German law. (Da Garnelen keine Wirbeltiere sind, erfüllt die Zubereitung von odori ebi nach deutschem Recht nicht den Straftatbestand der Tierquälerei.)”, again without giving sources. Wikipeditor 00:50, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

I can't understand the “ethical” stance taken by some vegetarians (and some especially pathetic meat eaters.) I mean, you're worried about animals feeling pain? You complain about people “labeling” animals as lower on the food chain? Worried about prolonging the death of animals instead of finishing them off? Squeamish when a creature experiences quite obvious pain just so that it can be brought to market as produce?

This is hypocrisy at its finest, as you people don't seem to exhibit this sort of concern for even lower forms of life like plants and microbes. What about the unborn baby corn embryos being gnashed to death between your teeth? The infant brussel sprouts you boil alive? The still living tomato that SCREAMS as you sink your fangs into it? The yeast kept inebriated and starved until a few short hours of struggling life before they're slowly ROASTED TO DEATH!? The bonzai tree you MANGLE and STUNT for your own twisted pleasure? Oh, cruelty, savageness, yawn…

People like you are so pathetic. I bear no malice toward the fish, but the fish just so happens to be full of delicious meat. Since it, like all nonhuman life on earth, lacks deep thought, one more fish getting hurt or killed by me makes no meaningful difference to fishdom. Eating a fish, oyster, or carrot alive is no more cruel than waiting a few minutes for the nutrients and flavors to dull. Oh, wait, it IS cruel… To me, since the fish isn't as tasty then.

Seriously folks, grow up a little. 72.235.10.209 (talk) 10:31, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

I have to say, this is one of the dumbest comments I've ever read on Wikipedia. I'm not even sure where to begin responding to your apparent claim that drawing moral distinctions is hypocrisy. I'll restrict myself to giving you some advice on that count: don't try this in court. "Oh, so hitting a rock with a sledgehammer is fine but hitting someone's head with a sledgehammer isn't?! Hypocrisy!" probably won't go over too well. Also, don't try it with any significant other you might have: "Oh, you seem to like it when I have sex with you but when I have sex with other people that's some kind of problem?! Hypocrisy!" Don't try it, well, anywhere. Because it's moronic. Most vegetarians-for-ethical-reasons claim some reasons to draw a distinction between vegetables/microbes and animals (e.g. lack of brain, central nervous system, or any of the other biological features which appear to be connected to consciousness). If you'd like to dispute some of those reasons, please do. Who knows, you might actually come up with an actual argument rather than the non-sensical babbling you've contributed so far. I should warn you though, it might require you to actually think. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.10.139.41 (talk) 19:13, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, that's pretty absurd. The ethical stance isn't that it's wrong to eat a living thing; no mammal and in fact no animal, can live without consuming matter from living things. Killing a thinking, feeling thing is different though. It's wrong to kill people right? But insects don't really have the same sorts of CNS's, and alot of ocean dwellers like shrimp are even less so, and oysters are even lower than that. That's why some people who are otherwise vegetarians are alright eating some sea food. I like to think of pets I've had - they clearly have/had thoughts, feelings, things they want, things they don't like. You wouldn't kill and eat your pet, so why is it ok to kill and eat a creature of similar ability and stature? It's not much more than mere coincidence that dogs are pet but pigs (which have a more developed CNS) are farm animals, and I know people who are offended by the eating of horses in other cultures but have no problem with an equally intelligent cow. That's legitimate hipocrisy.

But the biggest inconsistency is when people who eat meat wouldn't kill or butcher their own animal. If you're ok with it morally, you shouldn't need a proxy to feel ok about it - a butcher no more alleviates your responsibility for the animal's death than a knife alleviates a stabber. So if you could look at that animal and kill it and take the body apart in the way it was killed so you could have it on your plate, then you really are morally neutral on the issue of eating it, and some people would call you morally bad but you wouldn't be inconsistent. And if that's not the case you should really do some thinking about that, maybe with your pet beside you.

Some religious texts that said killing sea creatures have bad karma:

A buddhist dreamt about eaten fishes, shrimps and crabs every night. 法師現身說法: 殺生業力的現世報, 魚蝦蟹夜夜現相追討命債

Shakya people killed by Kosala all have karma with a fish. Shakyamuni Buddha hit the fish's head and had headache 3 days.神行於血光國

A man met a buddhist monk suffered sickness pain once killed a fish cruelly. 現代因果實錄 Xcwvgxb nryu (talk) 07:18, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

sannakji

There was a recent suggestion that sannakji merge with this article. Because ikizukuri is a process and sannakji is a specific octupus dish prepared using this method, I think that they should remain separate. -Merkurix 04:04, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

I made that suggestion because I didn't know about that difference (i.e. process vs. dish), except sannakji seemed to have something to do with octopuses. Are there specific names for any other dishes prepared by ikizukuri-ing animals? I suggest we keep the templates up for a while to see whether anybody has anything more to say on this, and then remove them. Wikipeditor 21:14, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

I think I would prefer them to be separate as well. --Kjoonlee 12:39, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Proposal of creation of new article

Wikipedia does not seem to have an article about being eaten alive, or eating alive. It'd have relevance to these Oriental dishes and to subjects like cannibalism. I'd want to find some references before article creation, though.--h i s ^{s p a c e} _{r e s e a r c h} 07:47, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Raw food diet already exists, covering everything from onions to oysters. Remember that vegetarians are also barberous murderers, but of flora instead of fauna. 72.235.10.209 (talk) 10:31, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Yin Yang Fish

I think Yin Yang Fish is a similar dish in China where a chef fries a fish without killing it, then serves it with the head still moving. It is quite similar to the preparation of Ikizukuri. I am wondering if they are the same. Chris! _ct 02:57, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

No. It's a Sichuan Fried fish dish. A cooker reintroduced it in Taiwan was critized by public and fined, he stopped that.陰陽魚太殘忍 業者罰一到五萬陰陽活魚絕跡？！太血腥又不衛生石門店家拒不料理Xcwvgxb nryu (talk) 07:26, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject Food and drink Tagging

This article talk page was automatically added with {{WikiProject Food and drink}} banner as it falls under Category:Food or one of its subcategories. If you find this addition an error, Kindly undo the changes and update the inappropriate categories if needed. The bot was instructed to tagg these articles upon consenus from WikiProject Food and drink. You can find the related request for tagging here . If you have concerns , please inform on the project talk page -- TinucherianBot (talk) 12:31, 3 July 2008 (UTC)