
Some people condemn the (factory) farming of animals but support the hunting of wild animals for human consumption. The logic seems to be that, because this is a more 'natural' process it is therefore ethically neutral. This is flawed on a number of counts, not least of which is the fact that, if the concern is for animal suffering it should be remembered that animals in the wild usually live much more stressful lives that those in domesticated captivity. The apparent respect that is being shown by valuing the 'natural' life of the wild is a romanticization of a nature that humans have spent 100000 years trying to civilise themselves out of. The call of the wild is not a call that any animal, given a choice, would want to respond to, and the affection for this call by humans (usually male humans) is evolutionary tourism. I'm reminded of the lines from Pulp's "Common People": Are you sure you want to live like common people, you want to see whatever common people see, you want to sleep with common people, you want to sleep with common people, like me." But she didn't understand, she just smiled and held my hand. Rent a flat above a shop, cut your hair and get a job. Smoke some fags and play some pool, pretend you never went to school. But still you'll never get it right, cos when you're laid in bed at night, watching roaches climb the wall, if you call your Dad he could stop it all. Article in SciAm: www.scientificamerican.com
animal
cruelty
happiness
stress
factory
farming
wild
nature
conferencereport