This site is not maintained. Click here for the new website of Richard Dawkins.

← British Airways takes beef off the menu to avoid offending Hindus

British Airways takes beef off the menu to avoid offending Hindus - Comments

Negasta's Avatar Comment 1 by Negasta

Yet another reason that I never want to go to or live in Britain.

The go out of their way to fellate religion at every possible opportunity.

PS. Yay in 1st comment!

Sat, 10 May 2008 09:31:00 UTC | #168923

82abhilash's Avatar Comment 2 by 82abhilash

I suspect the real reason is is the price rise in beef from £2,500 a tonne to more than £4,000 a tonne. The religiosity is just a convenient excuse.

Sat, 10 May 2008 09:38:00 UTC | #168926

shellemush's Avatar Comment 3 by shellemush

Never mind about "offending" the British beef producers.

Sat, 10 May 2008 09:46:00 UTC | #168930

mordacious1's Avatar Comment 4 by mordacious1

Last time I flew BOA I sat next to a cow, and she didn't seem offended that I was eating beef. Are they going to ban drinking alcohol to keep from offending our muslim friends, or have they already done that? I haven't flown them for 20 years.

Sat, 10 May 2008 09:54:00 UTC | #168932

Jimbesity's Avatar Comment 5 by Jimbesity

This is ridiculous. If your doctrine says 'Don't do X', that does not give you a right to make everyone around you conform to not doing X. They're your damned restrictions, keep it so they only restrict you. I can't bring myself to believe that the world around is us becoming so pussyfooted and politically correct that we have to abide by the dietary choices of third world countries. I never had a problem with Hinduism before beside the usual "they're deluded" issue I have with nearly every faith anyway, but this has gone too far.

Whenever you religious folks are done blowing things up, destroying free speech, and demanding special rights while you do it: Can the rest of us -- in the words of Marcus Brigstocke -- HAVE OUR PLANET BACK?

Sat, 10 May 2008 09:58:00 UTC | #168933

FightingFalcon's Avatar Comment 6 by FightingFalcon

What about offending beef eaters??!!

When I fly BA back to the States next month I'm gonna demand beef on religious grounds. Surely the FSM mandates the consumption of beef!!!

On a serious note...I can understand this move for flights going to/from India. Why ruin the fun for the rest of us going to America?

edit: O yea, if BA stops its free alcohol policy, I will never fly them again. Putting up with the headache known as Heathrow is only worth it if I can drink for free on the flight home.

Sat, 10 May 2008 10:03:00 UTC | #168936

Nova's Avatar Comment 7 by Nova

This isn't about offense at all, we read about Muslims so much that some of us and this newspaper have jumped to the conclusion this is about offense, its not. Hindus generally don't get offended or force their viewpoints on others, as this shows:

The Hindu Council UK said:

That said, Hindus are tolerant of the beliefs of others and do not expect everyone to stop eating a food because they do not eat it.

This is simply a business decision because Hindus choose personally not to eat beef. That is perfectly fine on both the Hindus' and BA's part - because a large amount of customers would never buy it, beef was less profitable than other options.

This newspaper is right-wing and is just plain lying when they say that it was to avoid offending Hindus who never expressed offense - it just wants to get its political views across which are not anti-religion but 'traditional values'.

I dislike being the defender of religion - ultimately the metaphysical claims of Hinduism are irrational dogma and like all religions humanity would be better off without them. I defend it because like Buddhism, Hinduism is responsible for almost no trouble to society and our real enemies at the moment are the really damaging religions of Christianity in the States and Islam in Britain.

Sat, 10 May 2008 10:08:00 UTC | #168939

FightingFalcon's Avatar Comment 8 by FightingFalcon



This is simply a business decision because Hindus choose personally not to eat beef. That is perfectly fine on both the Hindus' and BA's part - because a large amount of customers would never buy it, beef was less profitable than other options.


Right....but India only represents a minority of BA's customers. Like I said earlier, why remove it on ALL flights. I can definitely understand why they would remove it on flights to/from India but not all.


"Our beef is also much in demand overseas. It is predominately grass fed and highly praised for its flavour."

I'm kind of surprised to hear that. I've lived here for a year and never once have I touched the beef. Call me crazy but mad cow/hoof-and-mouth outbreaks here have kinda driven me away from British beef...

Sat, 10 May 2008 10:12:00 UTC | #168941

Nova's Avatar Comment 9 by Nova

FightingFalcon typed:

Right....but India only represents a minority of BA's customers. Like I said earlier, why remove it on ALL flights. I can definitely understand why they would remove it on flights to/from India but not all.
It is economically inefficient to have lots of different menus for different flights. It is much cheaper to stick to a set few foodstuffs to buy and get delivered.
I'm kind of surprised to hear that. I've lived here for a year and never once have I touched the beef. Call me crazy but mad cow/hoof-and-mouth outbreaks here have kinda driven me away from British beef...
This did scare many away from British beef and like autism from the MMR vaccine it is completely illogical and unscientifically based because there is no human form of mod cow or foot and mouth disease nor is there even close to being a human form so please stop worrying.

Sat, 10 May 2008 10:15:00 UTC | #168942

FightingFalcon's Avatar Comment 10 by FightingFalcon


It is economically inefficient to have lots of different menus for different flights. It is much cheaper to stick to a set few foodstuffs to buy and get delivered.


Yes, I suppose that's true. I've never heard of this newspaper so I suppose that it could simply be bias.


This did scare many away from British beef and like autism in the MMR vaccine it is completely illogical and unscientifically based because there is no human form of mod cow or foot and mouth disease nor is there even close to being a human form so please stop worrying.


I'll take your word for it, mate! Looks like I'm getting minced meat pie at the pub tonight :D

Sat, 10 May 2008 10:23:00 UTC | #168944

Nova's Avatar Comment 11 by Nova

FightingFalcon typed:

I'll take your word for it, mate! Looks like I'm getting minced meat pie at the pub tonight :D
Heh heh :D

Sat, 10 May 2008 10:29:00 UTC | #168946

PJG's Avatar Comment 12 by PJG


82abhilash says:

I suspect the real reason is is the price rise in beef from £2,500 a tonne to more than £4,000 a tonne. The religiosity is just a convenient excuse.


I think you are right. I hope you are right!

Sat, 10 May 2008 10:39:00 UTC | #168948

saraswati's Avatar Comment 13 by saraswati

Ugh. My objection to this is that now all passengers will choose the chicken, leaving only the fish option for those at the back of the plane. Always happens to me.

Anyway, don't most airlines already offer all sorts of options, including "Hindu vegetarian", on special request? And many airlines already offer an Indian vegetarian meal as one of the two major options on all flights to and from India.

If they're really taking beef off all planes it doesn't make sense do to that for fear of offending Hindus... I don't think Hindus make up a significant proportion of flights that don't originate or end in India.

The article didn't explicitly specify, are they also going to stop serving pork on all planes?

Rather than fear of offending, it seems to be more about pleasing as many people as possible, which isn't necessarily a bad thing. I just hope they don't end up serving only vegan food.

Sat, 10 May 2008 10:45:00 UTC | #168950

faouloki's Avatar Comment 14 by faouloki

Nova - I defend it because like Buddhism, Hinduism is responsible for almost no trouble to society and our real enemies at the moment are the really damaging religions of Christianity in the States and Islam in Britain.


Absolutely untrue. I would suggest reading some Hitchens for some good examples. Buddhism, and particularly Hinduism can be just as damaging, you just don't hear about them so much because both the US and the UK are Christian-dominated societies currently obsessed with Islam.

Sat, 10 May 2008 10:53:00 UTC | #168951

Border Collie's Avatar Comment 15 by Border Collie

I can't even comment on this silly BS any longer. Hey, thank goodness for the Brits ... every time I get utterly sick of the "mamby-pamby, PC, I'm offended, call a waaaaaambulance" crap here in the US, I can always look east and know that the Brits are way ahead of us in the arse kissing game ...

Sat, 10 May 2008 10:54:00 UTC | #168952

epeeist's Avatar Comment 16 by epeeist

Comment #178055 by Nova


This newspaper is right-wing and is just plain lying when they say that it was to avoid offending Hindus
Look at the bottom of the page - the Evening Standard is part of the Mail group. A paper so thoroughly nasty that irate_atheist won't even take a copy for his cat to crap on.

A paper whose principle method of selling itself was to give its readers a daily hate.

Sat, 10 May 2008 10:56:00 UTC | #168953

Wosret's Avatar Comment 17 by Wosret

And I was all ready to be pissed off when I saw the headline. I get offended everytime I go to the grocery strore... and see disgusting hunks of flesh everywhere. No one seems to care about offending me. That is what I was going to say.

This is obviously not about offending people, but clearly exactly for the reasons offered. It would be foolish to have a main dish of beef on a flight to india which is sure to have a large number of Hindus, no one will buy it. Getting a dish that is far more likely to be popular with Hindus, as well as other people is the best economic and pragmatic course of action.

This news paper seems to be purposely attempting to stir shit.

Sat, 10 May 2008 11:09:00 UTC | #168955

Elles's Avatar Comment 18 by Elles

...

There isn't a vegetarian option?

Right then, I'm going to go find some lunch. I'm thinking roast beef sandwich...

Sat, 10 May 2008 11:30:00 UTC | #168958

alexmzk's Avatar Comment 19 by alexmzk

English Beef and Lamb Executive

i like the idea that such an organisation exists.
to be fair though, there's no point in them selling a dish that a large number of their customers are simply not ever going to buy or eat under any circumstances.

Sat, 10 May 2008 11:42:00 UTC | #168960

mordacious1's Avatar Comment 20 by mordacious1

So, the next time I go on a hunger strike to protest the excesses of religion, and board BA I can insist that the rest of the passengers get nothing to eat either?

Sat, 10 May 2008 11:44:00 UTC | #168961

Szkeptik's Avatar Comment 21 by Szkeptik

"That said, Hindus are tolerant of the beliefs of others and do not expect everyone to stop eating a food because they do not eat it."

How kind of them...

Sat, 10 May 2008 11:48:00 UTC | #168962

Partisan's Avatar Comment 22 by Partisan

This doesn't bother me at all - some people are vegetarian, and people's reasons for being vegetarian seem alien to me. Some people don't eat beef, and their reasons also strike me as bizzare, BUT if they form a majority of the airline's passengers then it makes perfect sense to change the menu to their tastes.

Also, as it turns out, I prefer chicken and fish pie to beef (and I'm British), so big woop =]

Sat, 10 May 2008 12:03:00 UTC | #168966

PaulJ's Avatar Comment 23 by PaulJ

I'm kind of surprised to hear that. I've lived here for a year and never once have I touched the beef. Call me crazy but mad cow/hoof-and-mouth outbreaks here have kinda driven me away from British beef...
This did scare many away from British beef and like autism from the MMR vaccine it is completely illogical and unscientifically based because there is no human form of mod cow or foot and mouth disease nor is there even close to being a human form so please stop worrying.
The human form of BSE (mad cow disease) is new variant Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease

Sat, 10 May 2008 12:16:00 UTC | #168970

WilliamP's Avatar Comment 24 by WilliamP

As an atheist I am offended whenever a company panders to religion like this.

Sat, 10 May 2008 12:23:00 UTC | #168973

Enlightenme..'s Avatar Comment 25 by Enlightenme..

Chicken tikka is the national dish now anyway, we are no longer rosbeufs.

Gettin' back to watching East is East on C4

Sat, 10 May 2008 12:30:00 UTC | #168978

Broicher's Avatar Comment 26 by Broicher

This is absolutely ridiculous. Imagine vegans would hav a religion! Or - don't know the word in English - those people who eat only raw food! COME ON!

Even when you fly ElAl (the Israeli Airline) you can chose between kosher and non-kosher!

Sat, 10 May 2008 12:32:00 UTC | #168980

Dinah's Avatar Comment 27 by Dinah

This strikes me as being a bit of a storm in a stew pot. I mostly find the food on planes so disgusting I'm unable to work out what kind of meat is lurking in those foil trays (it could be horse for all I know) and I end up just eating the roll and cheese and leaving the rest. I suspect this decision is far more to do with economics and profit margins than religious dietary requirements.

Sat, 10 May 2008 13:15:00 UTC | #168994

nalfeshnee's Avatar Comment 28 by nalfeshnee

""Hindus have a great deal of respect for British culture and are well integrated into the British way of life, so it's good to see evidence of how they are literally flying the British flag by choosing British Airways."

paraphrase as:

"Hindus have bugger all respect for British culture and are so far from being integrated into the British way of life that they can actually take offence merely because one of the food options on plane flights doesn't agree with their pet delusions. In this, we are literally pissing on the British flag by threatening to boycott British Airways until they bend the knee before us."

Or words to that effect.

Sat, 10 May 2008 13:40:00 UTC | #169007

redkris's Avatar Comment 29 by redkris

Holy cow! I expect this decision is motivated by worry of offending, although Hindu's themselves have probably had little to do with the decision; the decision will most likely have been made by a non-Hindu who has taken it upon him/herself to act as defender of their cultural difference by depriving everyone else of an eating option.

Sat, 10 May 2008 14:09:00 UTC | #169020

Chris C's Avatar Comment 30 by Chris C

They did a good thing for a bad reason.

Sat, 10 May 2008 14:12:00 UTC | #169021