Dozens Of Camels Disqualified From Saudi Beauty Pageant

So, apparently, camels have beauty pageants. Who knew? And it's just as corrupt as horse racing is here, with the reigning Kentucky Derby horse recently dying and allegedly been doping(as if the horse had a choice). This is just too silly, and there's millions at stake for a pretty camel so they have to resort to botox. How can a camel even be, or become, pretty? I'd be afraid to be the judge in this contest for fear of getting spit on or worse. Camels can be difficult.

www.washingtonexaminer.com...

Saudi Arabian officials reportedly banned 40 contestants from this year's camel beauty pageant over the use of Botox injections and other acts of "tampering and deception."

The move comes as part of a crackdown on the use of Botox , face-lifts, and other beauty alterations in the event, which is part of the King Abdulaziz Camel Festival that began last week. Thousands of camels participate in the festival's activities, which include the pageant, a petting zoo, and camel racing. Breeders can win up to $66 million in prize money in the beauty contest.

a reply to: TheSpanishArcher

Beat you to it, now don't get the hump hahaha.
www.abovetopsecret.com...

It's good enough to have at LEAST threads though.

a reply to: TheSpanishArcher

A camel can be pretty the same way a dog can in a dog show or any animal going up in a show where the judge is looking at lines and conformation. How many dog breeds have we spoiled through selecting for aesthetics rather than actual function? You can actually look at some breeds of dog or horse and tell if you're looking at a "show" individual or a "working" or "sport" individual because the breeding has diverged types that much.

Why should camels be different?

a reply to: LABTECH767

Your thread was much funnier.

a reply to: ketsuko

I had the same sentiments reading about this but went for the funny in the thread. Didn't work.

I strongly dislike the breeding of dogs for certain traits. Even after breeding there's the cutting of tails and ears on boxers, for one example, which is sadistic and only for aesthetics. So that we think they are pretty.

a reply to: TheSpanishArcher

Oh, don't get me entirely wrong. The idea of cheating by botoxing your camel is hilarious, but then again, my cousin's daughter was heavily invested in a heated discussion on the merits of tail extensions for show horses at the family reunion this summer.

a reply to: TheSpanishArcher

A very good point and it is actually very cruel to breed animals for certain traits but we have done it since animals were first domesticated.

That said there are all manner of illness that pedigree (inbred) dog's can and do get, flat faced dog's are very prone to several serious problems, small dog's and floppy eared dog's also are prone to health problem's.

I won't mention domesticated farm animals though we have been and remain very cruel to them but sometimes those traits are not good for us either, take cattle such as man breed's European cattle whose fat is white and actually quite bad for you but if you compare them to the much more close to the wild African and Asian domesticated cattle breeds whose fat is actually more yellow and far more full of nutritional value it shows that all that breeding for size actually backfired a lot.

That said I doubt I could stomach going full vegetarian yet as there are no real meat alternatives that give the same nutritional value or taste as good, still we will have to wait and see if cultured meat takes off though even that needs regular fresh cell samples to culture, still you don't have to kill or breed as many cattle to do that so if it pans out more woodland and land for food crops.

a reply to: LABTECH767

I wouldn't say it's entirely bad to breed for traits up to a point. It depends on the traits and purpose. Was it wrong for a shepherd to notice that natural tendency of this or that dog to group his sheep together and look for the offspring who could do likewise? Was it wrong for the hunter to notice the dogs who could scent prey or alert to its presence?

Those traits were dead useful and helped men do the things they needed to do in order to survive in times when it was far more important to them to be able to do so.

There are horse breeds who are adapted to being incredibly hardy partially as a function of selective breeding on top of having to survive in harsher environments. Was it wrong for their human partners to bred the most hardy?

a reply to: ketsuko

Actually that too is a good point, some selective breeding is a natural outcome of us tailoring what was after all mankind's greatest tools there domesticated animals.

What I was getting at is the inbreeding excessively to exaggerate specific traits such as shorter legs or longer body's or flatter faces not so much out of need but out of what people think is fashionable and with no care for the animals suffering that it causes them.

Many pedigree breeds of dog are prone to congenital disorders, arthritis and weaker immune systems as well as infections caused to dogs with extremely long droopy ears (especially shorter breeds) which can be caused by parasites using this as a means to infect there ears etc.

But there are situations were dogs bred as tools such as hunting dog's were adapted to the job they were meant to do and in that case it is excusable since it was a necessity for there owners.