this post was submitted on 04 Jun 2026

128 points (97.1% liked)

World News

56755 readers

1988 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed.
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF OCTOBER 19 2025
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world

Recommendations

How to spot Misinformation and Propaganda

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link

founded 3 years ago

MODERATORS

NewsAutoMod@lemmy.world

Tenthrow@lemmy.world

little_cow@lemmy.world

lemmyAtom@lemmy.world

jordanlund@lemmy.world

128

Hundreds of whales slaughtered in Faroe Islands as annual cull turns sea blood red (www.the-independent.com)

submitted 3 weeks ago by throws_lemy@lemmy.nz to c/world@lemmy.world

43 comments fedilink hide all child comments

top 43 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] furzegulo@lemmy.dbzer0.com 47 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Arm the whales

[–] Agent641@lemmy.world 7 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Hear me out: Stab vests, like the constables have, but for whales.

[–] kamenlady@lemmy.world 3 points 3 weeks ago

Constable Odo didn't have a Stab Vest.

[–] CalmChaos72@lemmy.world 27 points 3 weeks ago

I hate to feel like this… but we are doomed.

[–] unitedwithme@lemmy.today 25 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Jesus... OK so I get this has gone on for a long time. However, I feel with advances in tech and tools, 700 is probably way more than that used to get years ago before this better tools. Maybe they should stop when a limit is reached? 100 years ago there's no way it would've been as many.

[–] Miller@lemmy.world 9 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

I think the answer lies in how sustainable is the population after modern culls, how humanely is it done and is all the meat eaten by locals.

[+] TheTechnician27@lemmy.world -6 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (3 children)

how humanely is it done

You can't "humanely" murder a living, sentient being with emotions and the capacity to feel fear and pain who doesn't want to die. (Along with their family in the case of the Grind.)

and is all the meat eaten by locals.

You know, I've never seen "but your honor, I ate the entire body" used as a mitigating factor at a murder trial, but you do you, boo.

[–] qaeta@lemmy.ca 18 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (1 children)

In this context "humanely" refers to killing them with as little suffering as possible, generally meaning to do so as quickly and painlessly as possible so the animal does not need to live in pain any longer than necessary before dying.

It does seem strange to me to do this with whales, but I also eat meat, so I'm in no real place to judge.

[+] TheTechnician27@lemmy.world -11 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (2 children)

any longer than necessary

"Any longer than necessary" is literally any suffering in this context because it's wholly superfluous. Even on that note, if I walked outside today and were killed by a skilled marksman, I probably wouldn't feel a single thing; that's still not "humane" because it still didn't need to happen.

but I also eat meat, so I’m in no real place to judge.

No, I really think you are and that meat eaters resign themselves too quickly to this attitude to resolve the cognitive dissonance and avoid feeling hypocritical. I'm vegan and haven't used animal products for years, but I didn't drop everything one day. I thought "huh, you know, killing cows and pigs for no real reason seems kind of fucked up." This extended to chickens and then extended to fish as I increasingly realized I was using the same excuses. I look back and realize how hypocritical I was being at each stage, but it still made me work toward change.

Never putting yourself in a place to judge is putting yourself in a place where you're perpetually stuck.

[–] qaeta@lemmy.ca 5 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (1 children)

No, I really think you are and that meat eaters resign themselves too quickly to this attitude to resolve the cognitive dissonance and avoid feeling hypocritical.

Oh no, I recognize the hypocrisy, I just enjoy eating meat and I don't care enough to stop. I would be willing to switch to plant based alternatives that offer similar eating experiences at comparable pricing, but we aren't there yet, although I do like the beyond ground beef, it's just too expensive for me on a personal level.

Basically, I'll stop when there are viable alternatives in taste, texture and price. Don't really care about the moral arguments tbh. I've accepted that in this aspect of life I am a bad person.

[–] foggenbooty@lemmy.world 1 points 3 weeks ago

Wow. I mean, props to you for being honest about it. You... kinda suck. Hope you snap out of it some day and realize you can be a better person.

[–] BrickEater@lemmy.world 0 points 3 weeks ago

MEEeAt EaATeRsSsS

[–] imahappyguy@lemmy.world 4 points 3 weeks ago

Damn,I wish someone would humanely murder me.

[–] Miller@lemmy.world -4 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

So you are entirely unaware that a large part of organic evolution on this planet has proceeded by species predation. Or are you aware of it but are simply sliding the definition of words to a disgusting degree to make woke points. Let us be clear what you are saying, animal husbandry for meat production is in your mind correctly defined as murder. So a man murdering a child is equivalent in your view to a man eating a steak, you are so willing to make your self righteous claims that you would allow the severity of child murder to be diminished.

[–] TheTechnician27@lemmy.world -4 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (1 children)

So you are entirely unaware that a large part of organic evolution on this planet has proceeded by species predation.

A large part of organic evolution on this planet has proceeded by rape. Why do I care when considering human ethics? This appeal to nature is always flimsily brought out, and it's always obviously fallacious.

Or are you aware of it but are simply sliding the definition of words to a disgusting degree to make woke points.

Oops, you dropped the w-word; I'm sorry nobody here can take you seriously anymore, although the rest of your comment is just strawmanning garbage not worth addressing in the first place.

Edit: I guess Lemmy doesn't find it even a little strange that they're siding with an ideology that power over others justifies cruelty and that opposition to that is "woke".

[–] Miller@lemmy.world -1 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

But you cannot answer it can you.

[–] TheTechnician27@lemmy.world -1 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (1 children)

What are you even talking about? The fact that you're calling it "woke" tells me that there's no productive conversation to be had with you. You're saying in obvious bad-faith that calling the intentional killing of a living, sentient being for pleasure "murder" is equating killing e.g. a cow with killing a human child, but that's obviously ridiculous; there are degrees of severity to morally wrong actions.

You do this all the time; everyone does this all the time. If I see somebody kick a harmless dog, I'd call that "abuse"; you wouldn't come up and start lecturing me about how "woke" I'm being because I'm diminishing human victims of abuse who are brutally beaten, starved, etc. by their family members.

[–] Miller@lemmy.world 1 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

I phrased my reply that way precisely because you are using emotive human terms incorrectly to illicit a response but you cannot see it. Animals mating without human formalised consent is not rape and culling or predating wild animals or humanely slaughtering livestock is not murder, at least not in the sense you are trying to force. They are human terms and not applicable, also why did it take you so long to tell us you are vegan and have much higher developed sensibilities than the rest of us.

[–] TheTechnician27@lemmy.world -2 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (2 children)

also why did it take you so long to tell us you are vegan

"How do you know someone's vegan? It'll come up organically and we'll still berate them for saying it anyway because the whole 'they'll tell you' thing was always a bad-faith thought-terminating cliché."

I don't think I really care to be lectured about how to use language from someone who unironically throws around the word "woke".

Edit: By the way, just curious about applying "emotive human terms" and where the boundaries are: why did dairy farmers and animal researchers call artificial insemination chutes "rape racks"? Where was their compunction then? Is it only problematic when terms like "rape" aren't used for "humorous" alliteration?

[–] Miller@lemmy.world 0 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

They were wrong, like you are.

[–] TheTechnician27@lemmy.world -1 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

No, it sounds to me like they just got embarrassed and stopped being honest about it.

[–] Miller@lemmy.world -3 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

But your hearing and comprehension are demonstrably poor, probably because you are malnourished.

[–] TheTechnician27@lemmy.world -1 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (2 children)

probably because you are malnourished.

So you're just trying to pivot to nutrition as a smokescreen because you know you look bad. You can always tell someone hasn't touched nutritional literature in the last 20 years when they throw out rhetoric like this.

I'm sorry that I'm not malnourished; I'm just over here enjoying my ~25% lowered risk of ischemic heart disease.

[–] Miller@lemmy.world -3 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

That's what I thought.

[–] Miller@lemmy.world -5 points 3 weeks ago

I doubt I am called upon to pivot quite as much as you are, you being such a big noise in the girl guides.

[–] Miller@lemmy.world -1 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Still managed to work it in though didn't you, how many people that interact with you know you are vegan? Up around the 100 percent mark I would guess. Is that why you are vegan, to supplement your impoverished personality in the same way your unnatural diet needs to be supplemented. Be more powerful if your conviction was known only to you and you didn't use it for girl guide badges.

[–] Miller@lemmy.world -2 points 3 weeks ago

Not answering this one Susan? Busy telling the Amazon driver you are vegan?

[–] mierdabird@lemmy.dbzer0.com 17 points 3 weeks ago

It's interesting to me that nowhere in the article and really nowhere in the comments does anyone raise the question of why do the Faroe Islanders do these hunts in the first place?

Obviously people living close to the sea have always gotten large portions of their diet from seafood, so are they actually preserving and eating all of the whale/dolphin meat they are harvesting?

If so then it doesn't seem to me like a question of should the hunt be banned, unless we also want to discuss banning all other forms of hunting and animal husbandry.
It seems instead that we should be asking if they are doing it less humanely than other forms of hunting or animal husbandry, and if so what can be done to reduce the whales' suffering?

[–] TheTechnician27@lemmy.world 15 points 3 weeks ago

https://www.stopthegrindnow.org/

[–] RedIce25@lemmy.world 3 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

But Faroe islands are not part of Britain?

[–] TheTechnician27@lemmy.world 6 points 3 weeks ago

This is (I assume) what The Independent is referencing in the subheader. "Push to ban the hunts" would mean putting pressure on the Faroe Islands to ban it.

[–] corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca 2 points 3 weeks ago

Compare Head-Smashed-In Buffalo Jump.

[–] bedwyr@piefed.ca 1 points 3 weeks ago

Wow, there are a lot of pieces of fucking shit on this thread.

[+] terrific@lemmy.dbzer0.com -8 points 3 weeks ago (3 children)

It's the same story every year. And it's a bunch of pearl clutching second grade journalism, if you ask me.

These are animals that have lived free, beautiful lives in their natural habitats. Then they are killed and eaten, with no deliberate cruelty involved. Circle of life.

If we want to reduce animal cruelty, look towards the massive scale of factory farming, not at the 700 animals that are hunted by a small indigenous community.

[–] Agent641@lemmy.world 20 points 3 weeks ago

look towards the massive scale of factory farming, not at the 700 animals that are hunted by a small indigenous community.

We are allowed to do both at the same time.

[–] TheTechnician27@lemmy.world 14 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (3 children)

If we want to reduce animal cruelty, look towards the massive scale of factory farming

How about not rounding up hundreds of highly intelligent beings and their families to murder them for no reason. And don't give me your whataboutist bullshit about "muh factory farms"; I don't use those either. 9 times out of 10, the people I see citing factory farms in cases like this deliberately use factory farms all the time and simply want an excuse for inaction. Shit like this needs to end too and can trivially end.

These are animals that have lived free, beautiful lives in their natural habitats.

So are you, so come here. We'll just chase you into an alley, put a hook through your nose, and cut your spine; no deliberate cruelty involved (besides the deliberate, brutal, totally superfluous murder).

[–] terrific@lemmy.dbzer0.com -1 points 3 weeks ago

Wow that is one extremely aggressive response to what I thought was a relatively sensible comment. I'm sorry if I upset you.

It's not whatsboutism, it's a question of scale. Attention is a finite resource, and I think you should place it where it matters most.

There is a post-colonial dimension to Grindadráp that is rarely mentioned by the media. And that matters more to me personally than the lives of the whales.

[–] Lumisal@lemmy.world 1 points 3 weeks ago

1: the Brits there aren't exactly indigenous

2: ranching is sustainable for the species, since we're also breeding / protecting them for food. Mass hunting isn't the same as we're not protecting or ensuring the reproduction of the whale population.