- Dragon Ball Z Forum
- →
- The Lounge
- →
- Deep Discussion
- →
- Where is the line between "Animal lover" and "Negative Nancy?
| We hope you enjoy your visit to this forum. If you are reading this then it means you are currently browsing the forum as a guest, we don’t limit any of the content posted from guests however if you join, you will have the ability to join the discussions! We are always happy to see new faces at this forum and we would like to hear your opinion, so why not register now? It doesn’t take long and you can get posting right away. Click here to Register! If you are having difficulties validating your account please email us at admin@dbzf.co.uk If you're already a member please log in to your account: |
| Where is the line between "Animal lover" and "Negative Nancy? | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Sep 26 2017, 09:49 AM (513 Views) | |
| + Steve | Sep 26 2017, 09:49 AM Post #1 |
Greetings. I will be your waifu this season.
|
First, watch: There's a few ways in which videos like that are taken, mostly people find it funny, cute animals doing funny things. But then there's people who get outraged over it, saying it's not natural and that animals aren't here for our entertainment or to be held captive, largely on the grounds of the natural angle. Would you say they're universally right or just being negative? Because honestly, while I feel sorry for things like polar bears and orca's that absolutely do not get the right environment in captivity, some critters get on just fine and I fail to see how these otters here would be having a better time out in the wild, being hunted by predators, catching diseases, having to survive harsh weather, having to struggle to find food. The "It's not natural" argument never sits well with me as a baseline to the whole thing...houses aren't natural, cars aren't natural, medical care isn't natural, a constant supply of fresh food isn't natural. Most of these people wouldn't give up any of these things because it wouldn't be convenient for them. Is it plain and simple "wrong" to keep animals in captivity...or does it depend? |
 Definitely not a succubus, fear not | |
 |
 
|
|
|
Sep 26 2017, 01:27 PM Post #2 |
|
It definitely isn't a black or white issue. Because of our existence alone, nothing can be "natural" anymore. We're destroying animals' habitats left and right, cutting down trees, contributing to the ice caps melting, over-developing the entire planet, poisoning the water, etc. To put it simply, we're disgusting creatures, and we need to take responsibility for what we've done to our planet and its other inhabitants. We can help by donating to rescue facilities and captivity centers that treat their animals well, providing them with the correct habitats and food sources, because we all know that the government isn't going to stop what it's doing. We're going to continue to over-develop the planet, even if it means destroying most animal species other than ourselves. It's human nature to be selfish and disgusting. We'll end up killing ourselves, too, because of this hubris. So your example statement of "it's not natural and that animals aren't here for our entertainment or to be held captive" is 100% correct. Animals are not here for our entertainment, and to assume so is an incredibly selfish, disgusting mentality. But that's obvious. So where does the negativity come into play? If you're criticizing a person for owning an exotic animal purely for their own selfish desires and entertainment, then it is wholly justified. No one should own an exotic animal purely for the sake of owning one. If you're criticizing a video that stems from an actual facility where the animals are protected and well taken care of, that's just being negative for the sake of being negative, but most exotic animal videos I see being criticized on Facebook and the like are of the former example. |
|
|
|
| Darker | Sep 26 2017, 01:41 PM Post #3 |
The Lord of the Dark
|
It's gotten to a point that there's no way to argue against this as we're too used to this sort of thing. Thankfully we aren't complete savages anymore and some of our more brutal ways of entertainment with animals such as dog fighting or bull fighting are slowly being erradicated. I don't personally have a problem with animals doing what those otters are doing as long as the animals don't appear to be forced to do anything against their will or are suffering. As long as they're having fun in their own way, I'm happy, as we should all be because that's how we should keep things, in harmony, instead of how our ignorant ancestors would've done things. Of course it's good for certain animals to stay in captivity (endangered ones, for example). It's only when they bring wild ones and then try to release them back, it simply doesn't work unless you're only keeping the animals for a few months seeking a way to study or help them out in some way. You can't keep an animal in a zoo for a long time then toss it back out, it'll likely don't know how to survive in the wild, and same goes for some specimens born in captivity. Those have to stay within those walls. I believe animals that are in dangerous habitats with little food left like polar bears or killer whales are slowly adapting to better ones (Churchill, right?). Most animals are certainly better at adapting than we are. |
 Piccolo: Just how many people have you sacrificed?! Cell: Sacrifice? Hmph, rubbish! On the contrary, it is an honor to become a fraction of my power. | |
|
|
| + Steve | Sep 26 2017, 10:17 PM Post #4 |
|
Greetings. I will be your waifu this season.
|
Ya in regards to that I think it's always okay to keep injured/sick animals in captivity if they were young at the time. It's pretty cruel to keep them in safety and good health then launch them out in the wild when they have no experience surviving. If zoos and such were only injured animals that got looked after I'd have no problems with that, though lets face it there would be corrupt f***s in that industry that would go shoot Zebra's and be like "Oh we're helping it now come see...for the price of an admission ticket..."
I disagree there provided the person is looking after the animal well and it's not forced in to an environment it shouldn't be in. Like buying a Husky if you live in a ludicrously hot country, that's torture. I don't see a real difference between "exotic" and other animals, other than their care requirements but provided you have money they're easily met. To me it's more like the difference between a regular pet and a disabled one, don't take on a dog with diabetes or whatever if you can't afford to buy it's meds. I do agree if it's like "Look at me I'm rich and I have a tiger, I have a huge penis by the way, totally unrelated" which is maybe what you meant anyway. I'd say those are more "extreme" than exotic though. A lion or a komodo dragon isn't a fun and sensible pet, especially not if you're not aiming to form a bond with it and it's just a status symbol. I just never get the idea that being in the wild is always better for them. It just isn't, almost every animal lives longer in captivity aside from large ones that don't get adequate space. |
|
Definitely not a succubus, fear not | |
|
|
|
| + Pyrus | Sep 26 2017, 10:39 PM Post #5 |
|
Animals live longer in captivity because there's a helluva lot less stress being put on them. Disease and sickness is minimized, climate is normally more consistent, natural predators are gone, food/water is consistent. Under the right individual, a captive animal is in much more luxury than one in the wild, even if their habitat is drastically smaller. I don't think anybody should go out and buy an alligator or a tiger just because it's cooler than a hamster, but I don't see anything wrong with the norm – dogs, cats, small reptiles, birds, little fur balls, etc. Things that can feasibly coexist with us in our households, not something that basically needs a whole floor to itself to live semi-comfortably. I'd love to get an alligator, and it's perfectly legal for me, but it wouldn't be good for anybody involved. I'd need to renovate my entire basement to fit a gator environment, and the cost of food alone would kill me. But it'd be awesome as s*** to say I have a pet alligator, and take it for walks on the beach. |
|
Spoiler: click to toggle
| |
|
|
|
| + Saiyan Paladin | Sep 27 2017, 03:19 AM Post #6 |
 
|
Or, you know, the alligator would kill you.  People who try to own animals that can ragdoll you make me scratch my head.
I completely agree with this. Don't own animals if you're not going to take care of them properly. I don't really see it as being any different than having a child. Edited by Saiyan Paladin, Sep 27 2017, 03:20 AM.
|
|
|
|
| Darker | Sep 27 2017, 05:39 AM Post #7 |
|
The Lord of the Dark
|
I mean... Think of the many dog owners that have dogs that could easily tear their owners apart. Not the same of course as dogs have pretty much adapted to us, but there are certain large wild animals that have been domesticated before. It's not impossible to have them as pets, but it is indeed to hard to keep them well fed like Pyrus mentioned, unless you're quite rich or something.. |
|
Piccolo: Just how many people have you sacrificed?! Cell: Sacrifice? Hmph, rubbish! On the contrary, it is an honor to become a fraction of my power. | |
|
|
|
| NinjaSushiCreative | Sep 27 2017, 02:45 PM Post #8 |
|
I think alot of the negativity you're referring to comes with videos such as elephants painting using their trunks, or slow lloris' looking cute when they're being tickled. On the surface both those things look innocent and it's nothing more than pure fun and cuteness. The actual matter of it is that the elephants are only able to paint because it was taught in a cruel manner and a slow lloris only raises it's arms and looks cute because it sees tickling as an attack and is activating venom glands. The videos get shared, become viral and the behaviour gets perpetrated by more people. The issue that people have, and the reason you see a lot of negativity to those videos is that the people sharing them aren't aware of the dangers the act is causing on the animal. Think of a circus, nowadays to make an elephant stand on small boxes or do ridiculous trick is seen as almost barbaric, and society as a whole is aware of the cruelty that circus' put animals through in the past. I personally don't have issues with animals doing tricks or things that they're naturally capable of doing (like when I make my dog shake hands, or sit for a treat) but alot of the negativity is just people trying to raise the awareness of the fact that yes it is cute and funny but sometimes it's also incredibly damaging to the animal. On the other side of that, I definitely think some people can take it too far trying to defend animal rights. Captivity can be good for certain animals. |
 Find more of my tags at Sushi Portfolio | |
|
|
|
| + Pyrus | Sep 27 2017, 03:09 PM Post #9 |
|
It's not even lIke the animal is being held against its will. It's more like a second home with better living conditions. |
|
Spoiler: click to toggle
| |
|
|
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
 ZetaBoards gives you all the tools to create a successful discussion community. Learn More · Register Now |
|
| « Previous Topic · Deep Discussion · Next Topic » |
| Track Topic · E-mail Topic |
 4:53 PM Jul 13
|
Theme Designed by McKee91
Powered by ZetaBoards Premium · Privacy Policy