Hens' periods??

[ReginaL]

I've come across more than a few vegans who refer to eggs as hens' periods. This bothers me because:

1. A period is equivalent to menstruation.
2. Hens are birds and do not form a placenta; this is a function of mammals.
3. Only a few mammal species menstruate; therefore, even most mammals do not have periods.
4. An egg is an ovum and not the shed lining of a uterus (a period usually includes an unfertilized egg, but menstruation specifically refers to the shedding of the uterine lining).
5. Isn't it enough to use the facts available in regard to egg production to discourage egg eating without resorting to an unscientific gross-out factor?

I realize this may seem overly pedantic and some may view it as semantically insignificant, but precise terminology has value when presenting an argument. I'm kind of an ass when it comes to stuff like that. Playing fast and loose with terms reduces overall credibility and, in this instance, comes across to me as kind of childish. "EWWW, gross! You're eating its period!!!!!!"

Disclaimer: It isn't a HUGE deal. It's a peeve and I thought it might make for an interesting discussion, primarily in regard to whether referring to "hens' periods" makes vegans look like hacks who don't understand basic science. Vegans shouldn't have to resort to such tactics to deliver an effective message. As Joe Friday used to say, "Just the facts, ma'am."

Thoughts?

[miniboes]

For some people, it's effective. Often people have trouble realizing what the food on their plate actually is. The connections between udder and milk, menstruation and egg, beef and dead cow, etc. often help. It's not a strong argument, of course. There are many things people eat on a daily basis that are kind of gross when you think about it too much.

The terrors of egg production is indeed a far better argument. People react very well when they ask "But how about eggs, they aren't that bad right?" and I simply point out that sadly egg production may very well be the worst. It often sparks curiosity, upon which you can explain that farm chicken often can't stand, their beaks are cut off, etc. Those things are not just disgusting, but deeply unethical.

[brimstoneSalad]

Saying they are chicken periods is like saying feathers are chicken hair. I see it more like an analogy than a claim of precise biological equivalence.

In evolution, there are many cases like that.
Does an octopus have eyes? Because there's no evolutionary relationship between ours and theirs, yet it has the same kind of function.

Here are somethoughts on the issue from a nurse with PETA: http://www.peta2.com/blog/are_eggs_chicken_periods_a_nurse_gives_the_lowdown/

1. A period is equivalent to menstruation.

Informally.

2. Hens are birds and do not form a placenta; this is a function of mammals.

Along those lines, a yolk is basically serving the purpose of a chick's placenta.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yolk

4. An egg is an ovum and not the shed lining of a uterus (a period usually includes an unfertilized egg, but menstruation specifically refers to the shedding of the uterine lining).

Doesn't it kind of refer to the whole process? At least informally.

5. Isn't it enough to use the facts available in regard to egg production to discourage egg eating without resorting to an unscientific gross-out factor?

Sure. But I think the informal usage is defensible.

I realize this may seem overly pedantic and some may view it as semantically insignificant, but precise terminology has value when presenting an argument. I'm kind of an ass when it comes to stuff like that. Playing fast and loose with terms reduces overall credibility and, in this instance, comes across to me as kind of childish. "EWWW, gross! You're eating its period!!!!!!"

It's not really a scientific argument, though. The gross out argument doesn't usually represent itself as intellectual, regardless of accuracy. I see it as just a silly little thing that draws a crude analogy. And sometimes that's OK, at least informally. I'm not bothered by it. Although I might be bothered if I saw it being represented as a pivotal argument somewhere, not because of inacuracy, but because this kind of argument isn't very effective.