>>21480771>You mischaracterized the original post by taking cuts that cook differently and just lumping them together as "just beef it's only beef".Yes ma'am, I said that, but no ma'am, that's not a mischaracterisation. Unless, of course, you're arguing that beef brisket is actually venison. Beef brisket is beef. Texas barbecue is beef, beef, beef, beef, beef and beef as well as beef. Maybe a pork sausage here or there. But by and large, it's beef.
>>21480784Exactly.
>>21480791>his main point was that they needed to be cooked differentlyNo ma'am. My main and only point is beef brisket, beef plate, beef shank and beef chuck are all beef. They are the same meat.
Let's put it this way: will Pajeet eat beef burnt ends but not beef brisket? No? What about Mohammed. Will he eat pork belly but not pork loin? Also no? Why is that, despite me describing four entirely different cuts, two of beef and two of pork? Don't answer that. You'll get it wrong. The answer is because beef is beef, pork is pork and the cuts and cooking methods don't transmute either into something else. QE fucking D.
>>21480819That's nice but literally nothing in your post is remotely relevant. The argument was "is beef not beef?" Any answer other than "beef is beef" is the wrong answer, fullstop. Your feelings and opinions towards and on America, Americans, American food, Texas barbecue, Mother Theresa, the moon landing, Tuesdays With Morrie, capitalism, Cabbage Patch dolls, the rain in Spain (and whether or not it falls mainly on the plain) and Lufthansa are entirely immaterial to this discussion.