A while back, I had a thought about PETA's attitude towards pets: They want to take the average pet out of a life of comfort and safety, so that they can roam free in the wild, where they have to struggle just to survive, scraping for every tiny bit of food, engage in combat over territory, and face illness without the aid of a vet...But they don't ask the same of humans. I guess it's irony (or at the very least, hypocisy) that they speak so badly of humanity, yet think humans are granted special privileges to live in a society where we can take food, health, and safety for granted. They seem to think it's horrible that we would allow animals to experience the benefits of our society, only requesting a little bit of companionship and an amusing trick or two in exchange.
Of course, it's more likely that they're just too high on the Disneyfication of wilderness to realize how good pets have it. To them, the wilderness is probably just a pretty picture, like camping out in a particularly well landscaped backyard, only larger. Life in the wilderness is no modern camping trip. Animals don't have the amenities or the intellect humans do. They have far fewer means of making their life in the wild more comfortable.
14 comments:
I don't think you have a correct understanding of PETA's position on pets, which they spell out here:
http://www.peta.org/campaigns/ar-petaonpets.asp
Hmm, let's make that a link...
PETA's official position on pets
From the link:
Contrary to myth, PETA does not want to confiscate animals who are well cared for and "set them free."
And what, may I ask, is PETA's official position on the activities of the Animal Liberation Front?
From the link:
We at PETA very much love the animal companions who share our homes, but we believe that it would have been in the animals' best interests if the institution of "pet keeping"—i.e., breeding animals to be kept and regarded as "pets"—never existed.
In other words:
"I love my pet cat, but I wish he never existed."
Wow. Insincere much?
From that point on it's nothing but an overwrought screed about the horrors of pet ownership and how even the "best case" scenario isn't good enough.
So, they say they don't want to "set animals free" but that it's still a terrible condition for pets to be in.
BD was still pretty much dead on. And, it is a fair question, do they condemn the actions of the "animal liberation front" or no?
Their actions are dishonest all around. My little sister used to look up to them until she eventually discovered that a lot of their "animal cruelty" videos were staged by them, meaning they themselves were being cruel to animals. From there I pointed her to the Humane Society. If you want to support animal rights, that's the place to go. PETA does far more harm than good, and on top of that, they are ignorant of so very much about the nature they claim to love so much, and further are flat out annoying.
Actually they remind me of a certain "compassionate racist" that's been stalking us around here for some time.
The Animal Liberation Front's not interested in "liberating" pets, either. They link to no-kill shelters and free spay and neuter programs on their front page. (The no-kill thing puts them at odds with PETA, BTW.)
Well that's not exactly comforting when they specifically say they want to liberate pets.
It's one of those "we don't but we do" things. Look at PETA there. In one sentence they claim they LOVE their wittle animal buddies, but the next paragraph tells us their real feelings, that they feel like they are taking care of "ruined" animals that could never return to nature and need us to keep them around because we're the ones that screwed them up. It's the same basic idea, that being a pet is a worse state of affairs, that never having been a pet is better for them.
The liberation front also thinks this. I've seen enough interviews with their members on, well heck Animal Planet, to realize that. A small blurb on their website doesn't change that.
It's true that PETA condones euthanasia. They're really quite good at it. Even better than most animal shelters.
Weird reading, heres my view;
The international pastime of domesticating animals has created an overpopulation crisis; as a result, millions of unwanted animals are destroyed every year as "surplus." This selfish desire to possess animals and receive love from them causes immeasurable suffering
They do not define "suffering", which is odd. They claim these animals are terminated, which is can in no way be defined as "suffering", as they die.
No info on this? Or do they give none?
which results from manipulating their breeding, selling or giving them away casually, and depriving them of the opportunity to engage in their natural behavior
This is one of the strangest points I must come back to later (as they mention it over and over again).
Ehm, around 90% of these animals exist because of Human Domestication. They, be it a a dog, cat or Broccoli, would not exist if we did not make them through Artificial Domestication.
The "Natural Behvaiour" that these PETA people speak of does not exist. Strange that they do not know this.
Their lives are restricted to human homes where they must obey commands and can only eat, drink, and even urinate when humans allow them to.
Wow, extremely trained animals, I do not know where they got this information from, I never met anyone that could tell their cat when to pee....
And yes, poor creatures having access to unlimited food, you know, instead of being in the Wild where the food grows on trees and they just need to pick it....
Because domesticated animals retain many of their basic instincts and drives but are not able to survive on their own in the wild, dogs, cats, or birds, whose strongest desire is to be free, must be confined to a house, yard, or cage for their own safety.
How do they know what dogs, cats and birds "strongest desire" is? Can they communicate with these animals? Why do they not share this knowledge and science with the rest of the world? This is amazing technology that would make the life of other animals terrific as they could tell alot of important things.
Do they speak English?
This is a "best case" scenario. The truth is that millions of dogs spend their lives outside on heavy chains in all weather extremes
Yeah, in comparison to living in "the Wild" where they got Aircondition and a warm bed to sleep in....
or they are kept locked up in tiny chain-link pens from which they can only watch the world go by.
You keep your pets in chain-link pens? Sounds like a research study not a home.
Millions more are confined to filthy wire cages in puppy mills—forced to churn out litter after litter until they wear out
Never heard of these, also sounds illegal and against the Animal Abuse laws. No doubt some places like these exist, just like child labour and forced prostitution, which are all illegal as well, so I do not know the point being made?
at which time they are killed or dumped at the local animal shelter.
My ignorance, know nothing about these things.
Even in "good" homes, cats must relieve themselves in dirty litterboxes and often have their digits removed by "declawing,"
Dirty litterboxes in comparison to "the Wild", clean and nice dirt....
and dogs often have to drink water that has sat around for days
It is disgusting, is it not?
Instead they could be "in the Wild" drinking water from the stream that has been there for, say, 45 million years.. And here they have to drink water that has sat around for DAYS.. Juck!
are hurried along on their walks, and are yelled at to get off the furniture or be quiet.
Excersise is bad in PETA world?
And a screaming human, with its rather low voice is harming the animal when screaming? What about all other animals making noices, say, during night, high or low?
I left out other things, like the comments on dogs "betam with baseball bats by bored kids"... Yeah, does bored kids are not the problem, its the fact that the Animal EXIST....
Well, technically speaking, river and stream water isn't standing, so it's relatively fresh in that sense. No chance of mosquitoes, or anything. For those, you need lakes. On the other hand, it hasn't gone through any kind of filtration, so it could easily be full of yummy stuff like giardia.
Well, technically speaking, river and stream water isn't standing, so it's relatively fresh in that sense. No chance of mosquitoes, or anything. For those, you need lakes. On the other hand, it hasn't gone through any kind of filtration, so it could easily be full of yummy stuff like giardia.
True, and I do prefer fresh water (filthered through mountrains) rather then tap. but this is more of an esthetical choice I assume.
I guess we could play with the idea (if giving them alot of rope to play with) of giardia or other parasites in the "bucket water", but this would entail poor living condition which would be the cause of a bad "master" (Wouldn't change water, bad hygiene etc). And I doubt you find anyone promoting animal abuse or that people that are not suited to keep a animal at home being "good" and this ignores the fact of our little parasites "in the wild", of which they are more likely to run into.
It seems that according to PETA, we are all evil, however we treat our dogs, cats or birds. So I doubt this is any issue for them.
While I agree with you in general about PETA, I'm not entirely sure I agree with your specific line of reasoning here. Would you rather be a well-cared-for prisoner, or free, with all of freedom's inherent risks and problems?
Structurally, it's very similar to the argument that all those slaves in the antebellum South should be grateful for their enslavement, because they at least had reliable food and shelter.
Dunc, I do not think PETA is making th at kind of reasoning.
Lets forget for a second that they are mentally disturbed violent assholes making the world a less safe to live, They seem to say that Animals, that is, None Human Animals, have the right to live however they want without us interferring.
I think most of this is ignorance. I mean, the average PETA fanatic seem to think that the local Siamese Cat is a "natural" animal and a Doberman should be allowed to run around in the "free" just like he did.... Once.....
Gallus Domesticus I tell you, the DOMESTICATED CHICKEN..... They think they should be set FREE!!!
I think wanting to "release " an animal after 4000 years of domestication says alot about the policies.
Ignorance must be the key here.
Post a Comment