This Story Breaks My Heart

[Diwundrin]

Dreamers, the lot of you. I despair of ever getting those rose coloured glasses away from you. :getit:hwell:

If your idea of a perfect life is packstacking humans in appartment blocks like battery hens and piping 'Soylent Green' in to feed them to accommodate a 'natural' planet to be enjoyed by wildlife that no one is ever going to see then fine. Enjoy yourselves.
Cage humans in order to free animals...mmmm sounds like a plan.

Human population will continue to grow exponentially and 'enough' to go round now won't be enough in a very short time. Don't be such a wusss, make the decision, which should be culled first? Putting it off with 'enough to go round' pap is a cop out, look ahead. The future can't be planned with only next week in mind.

Ramble:

Spoiler

Phil there may be plenty of land here, but only camels and lizards can live on it.
That spare land in the States, is any of it yours??
Or do you expect other people to give theirs away to salve your conscience? To walk off their properties and join the dole queue while assuring their families that it's for the good of the cute little furry mammals and that when it comes down to it, they are more important to the do gooders than mere humans.?
That's how these things usually go. Do gooders have righteously grand ideas that they expect others to bankroll.

Those virtuous 'enlightened' attitudes are commendable on paper but not everyone shares them and that is an important point that many overlook.
I laugh to hear "why don't people just stop fighting and live in peace?" As if they ever did! May as well ask why don't crocodiles run day care centres?

Why didn't communism work? Because it isn't in our 'nature'. To fight and protect territory is all that holds civilization together. It is as intrinsic to our natures as breathing is. We may kid ourselves that we rise above it when times are gentle but it is always the default option that kicks in when the pressure is on. And the pressure is building.

Don't think you're off the hook by stating principles and parading higher notions and emotions. If it really upsets you then spend some time figuring out a VIABLE ... LONG TERM solution. Banners and bleating and 'freeing' caged animals to be shot by police is not an answer. It's infantile.
Smarter brains than ours are working on it and the brick wall answer to most planetary problems is curtailing human population.

Now that's a real bummer. Who's gonna be charged with doing that? Who would you vote for to decide on which race/nation/culture/colour/body type/religion should have a breeding moratorium clamped on it first? How do you make them do it? Tell them it's for the good of endangered species? They'll see themselves as the endangered species! Maybe the ensuing war with cull a few?

Next time you get upset over a furry mammal pick out someone it should replace. Too hard? Sure is. Good luck with that decision.

Oh and before you nominate me, there's a waiting list.

Just what do you 'better life' dreamer people expect? Not what you want, we know that, you want Utopia, but what do you really expect?

Do you think human nature will change? .. or even that God will look after the problem so we don't have to think too deeply or logically about it? Just have faith and it'll all go away when 'daddy' fixes it? Of course Von Daniken's pyramid construction crew might drop by again and sort us out from orbit but not too many hold out much hope of that. Nup, it's down to the good lord for most I'm afraid.
But do you expect that to happen or just hope it will? Is it an excuse to not face the harder realities perhaps? Just wonderin'.

It's fine to point out the failings of greed and general rottenness afflicting us but where is your solution for that? It doesn't go away by having itself pointed at and named. How are you going to fix it? In detail.

The world isn't Disneyland, it's the jungle and there are soooo many more complex problems that each do gooder 'improvement' engenders that it all ends in a fustercluck and nothing good comes of anything we do. Setting up reserves just made it easier for poachers to find their prey. Reserves also set boundaries on wild animals, so other than area is that so different to a zoo?

It genuinely interests me to know the thinking behind the 'Pollyanna' syndrome. I don't really give a toss what you think just why you see things differently. I think I'm really trying to find out how I tick because I always seem to be out of time with general consensus. I love animals, prefer them to humans, but it's about more than that and a real solution for them to continue existing seems to me to require more than emotional protestations.
:dunno:

Do you want to be grabbed out of your house, shoved into a nursing home, be hooked up with meds and machines to artificially extend your life and have people paying to come in and poke sticks at you? All in the name of - what? The advancement of Man's knowledge? The protection of your species? Will there be a little sign over your bed that reads "This is for her own good - we know best"?

Then one day when you've just finished a box of choccies, someone on staff decides that they have too many Diwundrin genes and gee, here comes the guys down the hall with the bolt gun ... I'll bet you'll wish that you were back in your "natural habitat" right about that time.

I am on the verge of being grabbed and shoved into the 'waiting room' for the nursing home, thanks for the reminder.

As to living in my 'natural habitat', what the hell is that? Naked and swinging from trees? What human anywhere lives in it's 'natural habitat?' Do you? Must get damned cold there.

I wouldn't last 2 days in my 'natural habitat.' Not too many would which is why we're so overpopulated.
My genes aren't sullying the DNA pool but I do tend to suck in my share of oxygen. Sorry bout that.
Oh and pulling the tubes any damned time they like is okay with me, I've given written permission for exactly that.

In case you were wondering, I'm for 'culling' humans, but you probably suspected that already.:grin:

Well that was a workout.

 

[SifuPhil]

Well that was a workout.

Aye! I've not seen such a blow since the Great Hurricanoe of 1897! Lost a good lot of lads that day, we did ...

Unfortunately, m'Lady, me tired eyes are beginnin' ta stick ta their lids, and the foul-smellin' beasties are gettin' right comfy on me lap, so I be beggin' yer indulgence ta answer yer entreaties upon th' morrow.

Fair winds an' followin' seas ta ya, lass!

 

[Diwundrin]

And full sails and clear stars to you sleepyhead.

I might get some work done now.

 

[Rainee]

Great answers from Phil and also Di.. and Jilly I know how you must be upset but I also agree to Phils post no other way I could put it any better... I am mixed feelings about this , the part I don`t like is that it was done in front of children that upsets me as they don`t need to witness any cruelty so young in their life.. and also that the zoo would rather do this than take the offer given to them from outside to save the giraffe`s life .. that part is what I don`t like..but everyone has a different opinion.. guess I am no different to some .. maybe to others.. [h=2][/h]

 

[rkunsaw]

I think you are all overreacting. Selling the animal would not change the fact that there are too many animals of the same family in the gene pool. They would then have to follow everywhere that animal went to make sure his genes didn't come back into the gene pool of member zoos.

It seems to me this zoo is a member of a group of zoos that are doing the right thing to preserve the animals future.

Children who grow up on farms or have parents who own a butcher shop, etc. know about animals being slaughtered and many times help in the process. It doesn't hurt them to know where their meat comes from.

Phil, I agree with you more often than not, but this time is one of those times I don't. It's ridiculous to suggest turning wild animals loose wherever there is undeveloped land. Turning a non native species loose can devastate native species. Without natural food for the animals to eat and without natural predators to keep populations under control.

Pythons in Florida, rabbits and mice in Australia just to give a couple of examples.

I know you all mean well, but a lot of damage can be done by people with good intentions.

 

[Justme]

Culling the animal in front of a crowd seems a really weird thing to do!

 

[SifuPhil]

Dreamers, the lot of you. I despair of ever getting those rose coloured glasses away from you.

There have to be dreamers in the world, as well as doers, in order to keep balance. I'd never want to live in a world that consisted entirely of scientists, accountants and washer repairmen.

If your idea of a perfect life is packstacking humans in appartment blocks like battery hens and piping 'Soylent Green' in to feed them to accommodate a 'natural' planet to be enjoyed by wildlife that no one is ever going to see then fine. Enjoy yourselves.
Cage humans in order to free animals...mmmm sounds like a plan.

That wasn't my plan - not at all.

Your hyperbole is showing.

Human population will continue to grow exponentially and 'enough' to go round now won't be enough in a very short time. Don't be such a wusss, make the decision, which should be culled first? Putting it off with 'enough to go round' pap is a cop out, look ahead. The future can't be planned with only next week in mind.

That "OMG the world is being overpopulated" thing is highly overrated. Like animals, if left to our own devices without outside interference we'll do a bang-up job of keeping the population manageable.

This isn't Hunger Games.

Ramble:

Phil there may be plenty of land here, but only camels and lizards can live on it.

Well, at least the camels and lizards are safe for the time being ...

That spare land in the States, is any of it yours??

I personally don't "own" any land. I believe here in the States the Federal government owns the lion's share of undeveloped land, in the form of National parks, etc.

Or do you expect other people to give theirs away to salve your conscience? To walk off their properties and join the dole queue while assuring their families that it's for the good of the cute little furry mammals and that when it comes down to it, they are more important to the do gooders than mere humans.?

That's how these things usually go. Do gooders have righteously grand ideas that they expect others to bankroll.

I have no expectations - that's something I learned a long time ago - so no, I'm not relying upon people giving up what they really don't own. As I mentioned in my previous post, there is an abundance of undeveloped land that could be used for wildlife management (such an ugly term, but it conveys the thought).

Those virtuous 'enlightened' attitudes are commendable on paper but not everyone shares them and that is an important point that many overlook.

I know you don't take a shine to enlightened people - I just hope the Dalai Lama never knocks on your door.

I laugh to hear "why don't people just stop fighting and live in peace?" As if they ever did! May as well ask why don't crocodiles run day care centres?

There have been scattered periods of peace throughout history, proving that Man is indeed capable of it - he just always finds a reason to end that peace.

Why didn't communism work? Because it isn't in our 'nature'. To fight and protect territory is all that holds civilization together. It is as intrinsic to our natures as breathing is. We may kid ourselves that we rise above it when times are gentle but it is always the default option that kicks in when the pressure is on. And the pressure is building.

Communism failed because it was a perfect theory made imperfect by human beings. Our "nature" is self-determined - we could make ANY system work if we wanted it badly enough.

How is the pressure building? This sounds like Chicken Little and his conspiracy theory that the ionosphere is caving in. There has always been pressure in life - I don't think that we're necessarily under any more now than we ever had been in the past - less, if anything.

Don't think you're off the hook by stating principles and parading higher notions and emotions. If it really upsets you then spend some time figuring out a VIABLE ... LONG TERM solution. Banners and bleating and 'freeing' caged animals to be shot by police is not an answer. It's infantile.
Smarter brains than ours are working on it and the brick wall answer to most planetary problems is curtailing human population.

I divorced myself from the world and its problems a while back. My role now is merely as an observer and commentator.



I'm not upset - I don't get upset.

Now that's a real bummer. Who's gonna be charged with doing that? Who would you vote for to decide on which race/nation/culture/colour/body type/religion should have a breeding moratorium clamped on it first? How do you make them do it? Tell them it's for the good of endangered species? They'll see themselves as the endangered species! Maybe the ensuing war with cull a few?

Yet that is exactly what we're doing with the animals. Double-standard, anyone?

I have no desire to dictate which race, creed etc. should be regulated - Man is doing that quite well already without my help.

Next time you get upset over a furry mammal pick out someone it should replace. Too hard? Sure is. Good luck with that decision.

Oh and before you nominate me, there's a waiting list.

I would choose a honey badger to replace you - I think it would be an equitable trade.

Wherever did I mention replacing humans with animals? I said they could co-exist.

Just what do you 'better life' dreamer people expect? Not what you want, we know that, you want Utopia, but what do you really expect?

Again, I have no expectations nor do I desire Utopia - I think it would actually be pretty boring.

Do you think human nature will change? .. or even that God will look after the problem so we don't have to think too deeply or logically about it? Just have faith and it'll all go away when 'daddy' fixes it? Of course Von Daniken's pyramid construction crew might drop by again and sort us out from orbit but not too many hold out much hope of that. Nup, it's down to the good lord for most I'm afraid.
But do you expect that to happen or just hope it will? Is it an excuse to not face the harder realities perhaps? Just wonderin'.

If you're expecting insightful answers from me then you may die wonderin'.

I don't think that human nature is capable of changing - we are what we are. I don't believe in God, so that's not a solution, nor do I watch for the lights in the sky to "save" me.

I don't NEED saving. I'm perfect just the way I am. I have a small "footprint" - I don't take more than my fair share from the Earth, and I endeavor to return it several times over when I do.

The rest of the world, however, could use a bit of help.

I am a Taoist, and one of a Taoist's primary goals is to pierce the veil of illusion that Humans have created to surround themselves. I see nothing BUT realities, hence my position on the useless slaughter of animals.

It's fine to point out the failings of greed and general rottenness afflicting us but where is your solution for that? It doesn't go away by having itself pointed at and named. How are you going to fix it? In detail.

I've not been appointed to be the Problem Solver General. You folks got yourselves into this mess - you find a way out.

The world isn't Disneyland, it's the jungle and there are soooo many more complex problems that each do gooder 'improvement' engenders that it all ends in a fustercluck and nothing good comes of anything we do. Setting up reserves just made it easier for poachers to find their prey. Reserves also set boundaries on wild animals, so other than area is that so different to a zoo?

I'm not talking about reserves - I'm talking about basic humanity, about not killing animals for frivolous purposes. I'm talking about a new paradigm for the interaction between species.

It genuinely interests me to know the thinking behind the 'Pollyanna' syndrome. I don't really give a toss what you think just why you see things differently. I think I'm really trying to find out how I tick because I always seem to be out of time with general consensus. I love animals, prefer them to humans, but it's about more than that and a real solution for them to continue existing seems to me to require more than emotional protestations.

I'm afraid I can't speak to Pollyannaism since I don't participate in it.

I am on the verge of being grabbed and shoved into the 'waiting room' for the nursing home, thanks for the reminder.

As to living in my 'natural habitat', what the hell is that? Naked and swinging from trees? What human anywhere lives in it's 'natural habitat?' Do you? Must get damned cold there.

I wouldn't last 2 days in my 'natural habitat.' Not too many would which is why we're so overpopulated.
My genes aren't sullying the DNA pool but I do tend to suck in my share of oxygen. Sorry bout that.
Oh and pulling the tubes any damned time they like is okay with me, I've given written permission for exactly that.

When I spoke of your "natural habitat" I meant your own home or apartment - I certainly didn't envision you swinging through the jungle on vines, dressed only in a koala loincloth.

... although that mental picture DID cross my mind.

In case you were wondering, I'm for 'culling' humans, but you probably suspected that already.

... and that's just one of the reasons we get along so well!

Well that was a workout.

That's why I'm thinking of taking up a Vow of Silence.

 

[SifuPhil]

I think you are all overreacting. Selling the animal would not change the fact that there are too many animals of the same family in the gene pool. They would then have to follow everywhere that animal went to make sure his genes didn't come back into the gene pool of member zoos.

I don't believe that Man is smart enough to know how much is TOO much. What they're indulging in is genocide.

It seems to me this zoo is a member of a group of zoos that are doing the right thing to preserve the animals future.

So should we replace all the "ZOO" signs with "ABATTOIR"?

"Mommy, Mommy, please, can we go to the Abattoir today? We want to see the giraffes slaughtered!"

Children who grow up on farms or have parents who own a butcher shop, etc. know about animals being slaughtered and many times help in the process. It doesn't hurt them to know where their meat comes from.

The problem with that is that this is supposedly a zoo - a place to learn about animals' natural lives, not to witness their executions. And I doubt the children in attendance had giraffeburgers for lunch.

Phil, I agree with you more often than not, but this time is one of those times I don't. It's ridiculous to suggest turning wild animals loose wherever there is undeveloped land. Turning a non native species loose can devastate native species. Without natural food for the animals to eat and without natural predators to keep populations under control.

That's not what I was suggesting.

Pythons in Florida, rabbits and mice in Australia just to give a couple of examples.

I know you all mean well, but a lot of damage can be done by people with good intentions.

You mean like the good intentions of Man deciding which species lives or dies? He's been doing that for eons, you know.

 

[nan]

That was disgusting killing and carving up that poor giraffe the way they did, and especially with children watching,but then the parent's must be just as bad to let them stand there and watch.
I think they should cull humans, especially the cruel people of this earth ,although I do think the big pharmas and chemical companies are trying their best to kill all humans off.

 

[Diwundrin]

Do we have a failure to communicate here? Is there a correlation between differing viewpoints related to the 'City/Country' kid upbringing?
Do some live just a 'little closer to the earth'? Is it easier to disconnect from the hard realities when eggs grow in cartons and meat is conjured in clingwrap?
Another subject perhaps.

No one sane condones cruelty, but this wasn't cruel. Puzzling, but not cruel. It was a questionable decision to make a public spectacle of what may have better been done quietly. But listening to those involved it was presented as an educational demonstration and I can accept that even if not the reasoning behind the 'zoo animals not for sale' under any circumstances rule.

So putting aside the cruelty aspect the outrage can only be over the public butchery. Well, 2 ways of seeing that too. Personally I think the earlier kids get their eyes opened to as many experiences of different aspects of life the better.
If they were horrified by seeing what death looks like and where meat comes from then good, at least they'll know that 'game over' is for real out there! That Wiley Coyote doesn't get up after the rock flattens him. That life doesn't have a 'restart' button and that there are trade offs and consequences for everything, right down to what we eat.

I think perhaps the parents were trying to impart that to the kids, maybe not, maybe they were just as naive and thought it was entertainment or something, but most must have had good reason to let them watch. I had another look at the crowd and there didn't seem to be any shock/horror reactions in the footage I saw.

Would the media have given air time to this had the animal been a Hyena? or a Wart Hog? Or a Snake? Honestly now, how many would have signed a petition to save it then? How many here would have given a toss about something less 'Bambi'-like?


Is all life sacred? Are all species equally valued? Really? Those who bleat about a giraffe have no compunction in whacking the head off a snake with a spade and setting mouse traps so what is that 'animal rights' things and outrage really all about? Does it only apply to cuties?
(You don't have to admit it, just think about it.

Hey Phil, about that 'Honey Badger' trade, excellent choice, nobody loves 'em but nobody messes with 'em either.

I'll answer the rest when I have more time... :iwillbeback:

 

[Ina]

Di, I too grew up having to "get" the lessons of putting down an animal as humanely as possible. Sometimes it meant the difference of the family's survival. I wore flour sack dresses too, and I thought they were the fashion. :cart:

 

[Diwundrin]

i was a city kid with rural relatives so got both sides of the coin. First lesson in life I remember was watching one of the chooks I'd catch and cuddle running around the yard headless because Nana forgot to bind it's legs. Then I got to help her pluck the thing and chicken dinners were never quite the same again.

 

[SifuPhil]

But Di, where do you draw the line re: exposing children to "the real world"? At what age do you start doing that?

Isn't part of our problem with kids killing other kids the result of early indoctrination into the cold, hard facts of life? Maybe if they DID watch more Wiley Coyote they would have more time to enjoy being children, instead of becoming murderous midgets.

And it isn't just cartoons and homicide, either - the lack of manners they exhibit - where does THAT come from? Isn't it from emulating the grown-ups around them, grown-ups that represent the "real world"?

In cartoons, everyone works for their keep. In real life, the kids see Mommy (and daddy, if he's around) cheating the system. Which is a better role model?

 

[Happyflowerlady]

We have animals slaughtered every day for people (as well as other animals) to eat. Those lions that ate the giraffe probably ate some kind of meat every day. So, to me it is not that they fed the giraffe to the lion, it was the way the whole thing was done.
As was previously said, this was a zoo, a place where people come to watch LIVE animals, living in a small rendition of what would be their natural habitat. It is a place to enjoy those animals living there, maybe even to try and communicate with them.
It is NOT a place where animals are slaughtered for food, and people come to observe the killing.

I can't imagine why the parents would even bring their children there to watch such a spectacle, just for the entertainment value of it. This is a whole lot different than Di's experience of watching a chicken being slaughtered to make a family dinner.
That was something that children see, and learn that it is done for the purpose of eating the animal; not just because someone decided that creature was expendable, and killed it.

The giraffe could easily have been gelded, we do that all the time with dogs, cats, horses, and cattle; just to mention a few. If he was not wanted for breeding, he still could have gone to the other zoo, lived a long and comfortable life there, with other giraffes.
To my way of thinking, this was a totally unnecessary taking of an innocent life; and portrayed like some ancient Roman spectacle would have been announced and carried out.

 

[Diwundrin]

It wasn't a 'Roman spectacle' HFL, it was presented as part of an education in the work done, and the whys of it, by zoos worldwide. That point was easily lost by the media. It was open to those interested, not just to passing traffic.

Can't see that confining kids to watching cartoons makes them better citizens Phil. I loved cartoons, still do, funny ones, but had no problem in categorising them as different and separate from real life. Many kids these days seem to think the whole world is a cartoon. Or a video game with a restart button. Knowing about reality doesn't prevent them being children, it just educates them into all sides of what growing up is about. It gives them perspective. It's 'natural'.

Do we forget that the last few generations are the only ones, ever, to be so disconnected from their food source and from the 'earth' itself? How protected from reality do think our ancestors were as kids? Aren't we the ones so anxious about 'getting back to nature?" or is that just smoke and mirrors to kid ourselves with too? Which version of 'nature' are we trying to get back to? The real one or Disney's?

Seeing something slaughtered won't turn them into serial killers, unless they would be anyway. Blinding kids to the harsh realities won't make the realities go away. it will just make it harder for them to cope with the shock when they are turned out into the jungle.

A cousin was violently ill when she got the news that her favourite crumbed cutlets came from those cute little lambikins. Really, she was outright traumatized! ... and she was about 12 years old! Not much education to carry in that head. We honestly thought she'd been joking when she announced that she wouldn't eat filthy chicken eggs, hers came from the supermarket. She wasn't! Doh
.
But she did know exactly what 'must be seen in' Label was trendy that week. Her 'literature' was fan mags and soap operas.

Was that a more suitable protective education? She's been abandoned, divorced, raised and raising 3 brats as clueless as herself (one already a jailbird).She's battling to keep a car running now and moving in with 'Mum' to save on the rent and all the labels are Target. But she's still doughy in the head and kissing the wrong frogs hoping for one to turn into Prince Charming. Maybe she should have visited the Country cuzzes ???

 

[SifuPhil]

It wasn't a 'Roman spectacle' HFL, it was presented as part of an education in the work done, and the whys of it, by zoos worldwide. That point was easily lost by the media. It was open to those interested, not just to passing traffic.

I'll bet they applauded and chowed down on some jaguar's earlobes and wolf-nipple chips while the deed was done. (Bonus points for naming the reference ).

Their "why" was highly suspect. I'd be interested in hearing what a few OTHER zoo organizations have to say about it.

Can't see that confining kids to watching cartoons makes them better citizens Phil. I loved cartoons, still do, funny ones, but had no problem in categorising them as different and separate from real life. Many kids these days seem to think the whole world is a cartoon. Or a video game with a restart button. Knowing about reality doesn't prevent them being children, it just educates them into all sides of what growing up is about. It gives them perspective. It's 'natural'.

I don't know, you must be more intelligent than me. I thought Capt. Kangaroo was a real captain until I was 5. I wanted to work at the Acme factory until I was 7.

I'm STILL looking for Duncan McCloud.

I'm not arguing about educating them in the real world - just at what age. The kids in that video were, in my opinion, a little too young to be exposed to something as brutal as a killing and a dissection. Hell, I didn't dissect anything until I was 12, and THAT was in my basement lab, without any urging by adults.

Do we forget that the last few generations are the only ones, ever, to be so disconnected from their food source and from the 'earth' itself? How protected from reality do think our ancestors were as kids? Aren't we the ones so anxious about 'getting back to nature?" or is that just smoke and mirrors to kid ourselves with too? Which version of 'nature' are we trying to get back to? The real one or Disney's?

I think that one's economic class has always determined, at least up until now, how exposed we were to the workings of the food chain. The rich never saw the killing and butchering - they only saw the finished product, hot and steaming on a silver platter.

The poor, on the other hand, were quite used to catching rats and gnawing on them.

There IS only one version of Nature - Disney was a shill.

Seeing something slaughtered won't turn them into serial killers, unless they would be anyway. Blinding kids to the harsh realities won't make the realities go away. it will just make it harder for them to cope with the shock when they are turned out into the jungle.

It will inure them to violence the same way people claim that playing Grand Theft Auto does. I don't buy the idea that a child is pre-destined to be vicious - it's nurture, not nature, that most often brings them to the brink. Yes, they may have a few wires short of a circuit, but the really explosive manifestations of that condition don't appear until triggered by something they see or experience.

And again, I'm not saying keep the kids in a bubble - simply teach them at the appropriate times.

A cousin was violently ill when she got the news that her favourite crumbed cutlets came from those cute little lambikins. Really, she was outright traumatized! ... and she was about 12 years old! Not much education to carry in that head. We honestly thought she'd been joking when she announced that she wouldn't eat filthy chicken eggs, hers came from the supermarket. She wasn't! Doh
.
But she did know exactly what 'must be seen in' Label was trendy that week. Her 'literature' was fan mags and soap operas.

Perhaps she was referring to the mandated laws concerning cleaning of eggs before marketing ...

Was that a more suitable protective education? She's been abandoned, divorced, raised and raising 3 brats as clueless as herself (one already a jailbird).She's battling to keep a car running now and moving in with 'Mum' to save on the rent and all the labels are Target. But she's still doughy in the head and kissing the wrong frogs hoping for one to turn into Prince Charming. Maybe she should have visited the Country cuzzes ???

There are casualties in every war - that doesn't mean they define that war.

 

[Happyflowerlady]

Di, I agree with you that keeping kids "in the dark" about the realities of this world is not the right thing to do, either. Understanding that milk doesn't come from gallon jugs, and meat from nice little plastic and styrofoam packs, is a good thing, and it is one that most generations before this one learned as a child.
I remember watching the chickens flop around with their heads cut off, too, and my dad and grandpa bringing home a deer for us to eat, in hunting season. We went fishing on weekends, and I learned how to kill a fish swiftly, rather than watching it slowly suffocate.
It was all about the realities of life, and there was meaning to it.

The story about the lady who complained about hunters killing animals, when they could "just get their meat at the supermarket, where no animal is harmed", is about the way many of the young people (who grow up in a city) understand these things.
So, while I do understand the reasoning of teaching our young people where food comes from, I do not think that taking kids to a zoo to see how animals live, and then watching a giraffe being butchered, is teaching them this information in a very meaningful or humane way.

It is more like saying that when something is no longer useful or wanted, you can destroy it.
NOT the same message at all.....

 

[Diwundrin]

It is more like saying that when something is no longer useful or wanted, you can destroy it.
NOT the same message at all..

But isn't that the message they get already without really understanding the deeper meaning of what it entails?
Don't they discard last weeks cell phone when a newer one comes on the market? Throw out more food than we eat. Change our furnishings with the fashions. Trade in cars for new models? Dump pets when they become a bother? 'Kill' enemies in gloriously gory video games with not a twinge of mercy or compunction because they don't matter, it's just a game?

Doesn't a smidgeon of understanding how zoos work improve their appreciation of seeing the animals in it as the only chance most will ever have of seeing one for real at all? Wouldn't it give them just a tad more insight into the actual animal as a living thing to be respected as such, and not merely as an entertaining exhibit?


I never raised kids but was one once, I think, and grew up with many and they were somehow more 'grounded' than some, not all, kids are today.
They knew that responsibility and consequences resulted from their actions. Of course we still did stupid things, we just weren't so surprised when things went titsup and we 'paid' for it.

Unlike a bullying little b* who bashed all and sundry at a day centre in Cessnock, and then went blue in the face when one hit him back, kids back then knew that hitting hurt. It turned out that darling little bully had never felt a hand on him in his entire life and had no idea that he was inflicting pain on others. Didn't know what it was! Life was a cartoon to him and hitting was 'funny'. The pain of getting a punch put him into shock. Too protected?

How kind to animals do you think that little kid would be? He wouldn't think about their feelings either would he? He wasn't taught any better. Nothing was 'real' to him. I hope they didn't have any pets.

But we're getting into semantics. I know how you feel about it and it's up to parents to decide I guess. It was okay for me to see chooks axed and watch a steer butchered but i wasn't allowed go to funerals until I was 17! The logic of that one escapes me. Hell, I knew they were dead!
Maybe they thought I'd play up in Church or something?

 

[Jillaroo]

Here is another article about this

http://www.dailylife.com.au/news-an...ET000&promote_channel=edmail&mbnr=MTI3MTU5NjY

 

[Jillaroo]

We now have another Zoo about to do the same thing, breaks my heart

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...kill-healthy-giraffe-unsuitable-breeding.html

 

[SifuPhil]

I'm with PETA on this one - no need for this to be happening.

 

[Keesha]

A Zoo has killed a Giraffe and cut it up in front of children and fed to the lions, they say to save inbreeding:soangry:


http://www.news.com.au/travel/trave...t-copenhagen-zoo/story-e6frfq80-1226822164205


:what:

This is incredible sad.
Mankind can be totally pathetic at times and this is one of them.