Friday, August 17, 2012

A R Follies Continued

I would rather write about things I enjoy, but I can't let Retrieverman do all the work... and no, a pig's relations with humans are not the same as a dog's, regardless of the pig's formidable intelligence.

You keep hearing that such people as the HSUS and their allies have become less fanatical, have evolved, have dropped their opposition to domesticated animals and breeding. Oh yeah, right. Then why are Animal Rights- ists putting out such new essays as this one, subtitled "The Inherent Problems of Domestication", and posted on July 31 of this year? An excerpt:

"Domestic animals are neither a real or full part of our world or of the nonhuman world. They exist forever in a netherworld of vulnerability, dependent on us for everything and at risk of harm from an environment that they do not really understand...We may make them happy in one sense, but the relationship can never be “natural” or “normal.” They do not belong stuck in our world irrespective of how well we treat them.

"We cannot justify such an institution... it is clear that humans have no business continuing to bring these creatures into a world in which they simply do not fit.

"As long as you think it is acceptable to kill and eat animals, the more abstract argument about domesticating animals to use as “pets” is not likely to resonate. I understand that... [but] Domestication is morally wrong..."

Don't bury your head in the sand! At least Gary Francione, above seems like a gentle man. But Dr Gail Goodman, saluki hand extraordinaire, just sent me a report on a much uglier phenomenon.

"Animal-rights advocates launched a vicious social media attack on U.S. Olympic trap shooter Corey Cogdell, just days before the 24-year-old Alaska native’s effort to best her 2008 bronze medal performance in Women’s International Trap. Her Facebook page and Twitter accounts were inundated with comments calling the beautiful young athlete a bitch, psychopath and murderer, and suggesting that she should shoot herself, be used as a target, or be physically assaulted. Some of the commenters went so far as to directly threaten physical violence on Corey, while others stuck to name-calling and expressing their hope that she would fail in her Olympic efforts.

"... anti-hunting extremists began lobbying the International Olympic Committee to have Cogdell – and any other athlete who engages in the lawful, and long-honored tradition of hunting – banned from Olympic competition. While the idea of banning hunters from the Olympics may seem a bit far-fetched, there is a strong anti-gun and anti-hunting sentiment among the elites who run the IOC. Consider the outrageous reaction when a couple of members of the Australian swim team posted a picture of themselves holding guns in a California gun shop. The two were threatened with expulsion from the team, but, after contrite apologies, they were allowed to compete. They were, however, required to leave London as soon as their events were over rather than staying for the conclusion of the games. "

"You may not be interested in war, but war is interested in you."- Leon Trotsky (and no, I don't know the source).


Heather Houlahan said...

Unless you know something I don't, I'm not sure how you are linking Francione with HSUS. Or are all "them" just one amorphous blob? That's intellectually lazy, factually incorrect, and tactically foolish.

Francione appears to sit up nights sweating about the moral impurity of Wayne Pacelle. Which amuses the shit out of me, but I'm easy that way.

And ima go eat an egg now.

Steve Bodio said...

I might change "they" to Animal Rights advocates but fail to see why associating such philosophers as Francione and advocates like Pacelle is misleading. Would you say they disagree?

"Moral impurity"? Maybe-- Mr Francione is awfully conflicted and hand- wringing. He reminds me of an AR screed I reviewed* in which the author decided it was morally dangerous to STUDY animals because it exposed the observer to dilemmas like whether to intervene to stop predation of one animal on another-- or not. Poor baby-- the only practical solution to such excruciating, permanent, internal conflicts may be suicide.

As long as they don't want to take the rest of us along...

*For Gray's in 1990: Animal Consciousness by D & M Radner-- talk about a bait- and switch title! The authors stated that if the coyote is after one prairie dog leave it alone; if two, intervene.

Looking this up led me to why I do lump these people and oppose them to the bitter end. Here is a quote, and I could give a dozen:

"If, in a prevention situation, we had to choose between saving the last two individuals of an endangered species or saving another individual [unendangered blah blah blah many subordinate clauses] the Rights view requires that we save that individual"