Should Bullfighting be Made Illegal in Spain?

 I wanted to create a clear plan of the content I am going to include for my main arguments of the dissertation, as these will make up the bulk of my essay and I need to have an organised argument since there is so much information that I could use. I am going to do the best i can to identify which of my blog posts will help me the most with each section also to ensure I have a range of reliable sources. I plan to write it as following: 1st argument: Cultural relevance Look into the process of the fight (The different thirds) and why the violence does not fit into modern society anymore. How tradition does not excuse violence. Use bullhorn injuries information.  Examine the origins of bullfighting and how it is from Roman times, so it can be percieved as outdated. (Specific origins) Look into its later associations with Franco and its associations with a homogenous culture, but also its masculine associations and how this phallocentric nature is extremely outdated. (Carrie B D...

 My dissertation will be 5,000 words explaining my debate of whether bullfighting should be banned in Spain or not. I plan to split it into three main sections to help me cover every topic I wish to speak about, and these will be based on:  The actual process of the fight and why I believe that the violence is unnecessary. The economic and social impacts of bullfighting; essentially whether the benefits outweigh the costs.  The amount of support it has, socially and politically.  I believe these all contribute to the argument that bullfighting should be banned in Spain, and they cover the topic areas I have researched in my blog.  The structure that I plan to use for my dissertation is as follows: Abstract - I will write this at the end since it is essentially a summary of my debate. Introduction - I will briefly outline my debate and my reasons for choosing this subject area. It won't delve into my full argument, but it will explain what I will write about in t...

I wanted to look more into the political aspect of bullfighting, and found an article by "The Guardian" from 2019.  I am going to select the most relevant information and assess which parts are of most use to me: "Bullfighting had already taken form by the beginning of the 19th century when the Napoleonic invasion gave rise to Spanish nationalism. During the 1830s bulls became a metaphor for nationalism during the civil war between the absolutist Carlists and the liberals. Bullfights, now newly signifying liberalism, expanded throughout  Spain ."  Thhe popularity "came to an end with the Franco regime under which bullfights came to be a metaphor for a supposed race, a homogenous nation and an identity that was misunderstood in Europe." "The political colonisation of a popular pursuit led to the gradual distancing of the public from bullfighting – as people also distanced themselves from Francoism and Spanish nationalism. The Catalan parliament passed ...

 Today I found an article that looks into Francis Wolff and his opinions on bullfighting. Wolff defends it, and this is seen in the Netflix film "A Philosopher in the Arena",  https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/219380874.pdf . However, this article is an academic refutation of his points, which I find interesting as it offers a viewpoint and secondary data that support my own opinions.  Firstly, the author challenges the way Wolff  "denies that in bullfighting, there is any torture." (Andrade, 2018). He argues that its an art so it cannot be torture: it is "not about the intristic suffering of an animal, in the same manner that fishing is about the thrill of catching a fish, not about the pain of the fish itself."  (Andrade, 2018). This would insinuate there is no difference between bullfighting and other competetive sports, but the logic is flawed because in bullfighting the violence is prolongued, enforced and it is in no way ethical. The author claims ...

 Positionality is important because it acknowledges that we all have bias, but it is good to challenge our viewpoints by looking into other peoples. I feel that the sources I have found have been challenging my own original positionality: Initially, I was extremely opposed to the sport of bullfighting and thought it was too violent and immoral. In my research, I have been aware of my positionality and have made sure to look into opposing viewpoints, for example the documantary I looked into by The National Geographic, which spoke of a matador who adores the sport and saw it as a completely fair competition. Also, I believed that bullfighting was a completely dying sport, when in actuality there are some places that still celebrate the sport and even governments who support it. Seeing these contrasting views to my own has widened my understanding and I have been able to recognise different contexts, attitudes and opinions that test my own view point. 

 I feel that my progress is going well. I have recently looked into bullfighting and tourism and successfully compared bullfighting to football, as well as found information from various animal rights groups. I think that I am fulfilling my original objective of improving my research skills as I have found it much easier to evaluate sources now. However, I think that my time management skills have developed differently to how I originally expected, as I didn't set a timescale (to avoid creating unrealistic goals). This has helped me in a sense as I have kept a diary of progress and can clearly see the research I have completed. I also feel that I have completed my other aims of studying a topic relevant for university and a topic involving other countries because this debate has already taught me so much about the cultural and political history of Spain.  The next steps are to look into a counter argument of bullfighting and perhaps find some more specific facts about the inco...