MoogleViper Posted December 5, 2011 Posted December 5, 2011 Definitely won't take it as having a go, your comments were the exact conversation I was looking for. I see where you're coming from and I think it's safe to say a lot of people would think the same. Had it been a mouse or similar rodent. It would be disturbing but with less outrage. I think the situation and context of the video is the most disturbing part. I mean had this been a wild snake eating a stray cat in say India. Then it would be upsetting but natural to some extent. However because of the domestic nature of kittens and the fact someone has clearly set this up for a video is beyond cruel. Yeah had it been done in the wild it would have been much different. In that instance it would be an animal eating another animal. But that's not the case in the video (or at least not the reason why people are outraged). It's the fact that somebody set it up as some sort of twisted video. I don't think anyone is angry with the snake itself. What if it had been a Moogle? You sick bastard.
Ellmeister Posted December 5, 2011 Posted December 5, 2011 Interesting how people are more predisposed to feeling empathy towards a kitten than, let's say, a rat. Perhaps it's because we're more likely to anthropomorphise a kitten's features than we are a rat's, but either way, the reaction is a little disproportionate and is a little resonant with how shallow our feelings can be. An animal ate another for sustenance. Big fucking whoop. P.S Although I do agree that when it is within your agency to either kill the animal beforehand so it doesn't feel more pain than it has to, it is inhumane not to. And really this seems like it was done for some sort of cruel torture fetish than anything else. Where do you even get your basis for the idea about anthropomorphising being relevant in this case? Also, I think a lot of these posts (mine included) are more concerned about the manner the kitten was killed rather than the fact it was eaten by a snake. The person stopped the Kitten getting away and the enjoyed gain from the person filming I believe is what most people are truly disgusted about.
Murr Posted December 5, 2011 Posted December 5, 2011 How would people feel if in the video it was a mouse being eaten by a snake not a kitten? (Not that I in anyway condone the video or the concept behind filming snakes eating live prey) I think the difference in this is that you actually buy mice for snakes specifically to eat, and the majority of the time the mice are already dead & sold frozen. Same for people who own lizards, they can buy live insects from any petstore for their lizard to eat. I'd never expect anyone to respond to an advert in the paper for kittens, for the sole purpose of bringing one home to feed to their snake. As you mentioned if it were a documentary on BBC in some country where cats / dogs aren't really seen as house animals and left a-stray while it woulsd still be terrible to watch, I guess you can see it as an act of nature. Distracting a domestic kitten, so that it can be attacked unexpectadely is just fucking disgusting. I'm a cat person if you hadn't realized.
Jimbob Posted December 5, 2011 Posted December 5, 2011 If this kitten had "wandered" into the snake territory by itself, would we be talking about it like we are now?. We'd feel sorry for the kitten a little, but as it would have wandered in to the space by itself, then thats nature for you.
The Peeps Posted December 5, 2011 Posted December 5, 2011 I'm in the same line of thinking as Murr. Rodents are natural prey to snakes and people buy live rodents to feed snakes. It's accepted as being natural or whatever. Kittens are not natural prey to snakes and they're domesticated animals. You don't get cats (not pet-type cats) in the wild so it's removed from nature. It's just sick. It's just mindless, pointless cruelty and the person behind the video should be locked up. This is much worse than sticking a cat in a bin.
The Bard Posted December 5, 2011 Posted December 5, 2011 Where do you even get your basis for the idea about anthropomorphising being relevant in this case? Also, I think a lot of these posts (mine included) are more concerned about the manner the kitten was killed rather than the fact it was eaten by a snake. The person stopped the Kitten getting away and the enjoyed gain from the person filming I believe is what most people are truly disgusted about. I get it from the way people behave around "cute" kittens, and also having to endure the fucking lolcat meme for about 5 years. That solid enough of a basis for you?
Ellmeister Posted December 5, 2011 Posted December 5, 2011 No, I don't think people looking for human characteristics in cats because we find them cute has much relevance in seeing someone feed a kitten to a snake.
Grazza Posted December 5, 2011 Posted December 5, 2011 Cruelty is the worst human trait of all. I can accept bad things happen, but being cruel for pleasure is totally disgusting. I actually find it hard to accept I'm the same species as the type of scumbag who'd do this. And no, I don't agree with feeding snakes live rodents either (reptiles should be banned as pets, frankly, for all sorts of reasons), but it is worse that it's a cat. Cats and dogs wouldn't even exist in their current form unless humans had domesticated them. We've brought them into our lives, and a few scumbags like this betray their trust. Let's just hope one day the snake turns on him and kills him. Then ask him if he still likes suffering so much.
Diageo Posted December 5, 2011 Posted December 5, 2011 Why should reptiles be banned as pets? And if you beat him, doesn't that mean you are getting pleasure from hurting another person? You'd be just as bad as him then.
Grazza Posted December 5, 2011 Posted December 5, 2011 Why should reptiles be banned as pets? They're not native animals (most of them), it's not fair to keep them in cages, they get fed a lot of live animals (like this). I'm not saying people who keep reptiles are assholes, it's just that, on balance, I don't agree with keeping them as pets. And if you beat him, doesn't that mean you are getting pleasure from hurting another person? You'd be just as bad as him then. No, that would be out of anger, not cruelty. People like this need to be punished much more than they are.
Diageo Posted December 5, 2011 Posted December 5, 2011 Anger or not you're still getting something from it.
Grazza Posted December 5, 2011 Posted December 5, 2011 It would be justice though, not actual pleasure. Anger is a natural trait, cruelty is not.
MoogleViper Posted December 5, 2011 Posted December 5, 2011 And if you beat him, doesn't that mean you are getting pleasure from hurting another person? You'd be just as bad as him then. Anger or not you're still getting something from it. So you agree with punishment/justice then? As for them being banned, I think the majority of pets should be banned. It amazes me how we view keeping a prisoner in a cell for their life as severe punishment, yet we do the exact same thing to the pets that we "love". It's pure cruelty. You can't say that you love your bird/rabbit/snake/hamster etc. when you imprison it for the entirety of it's life. We all thought Fritzl was a monster for keeping his daughter locked in the basement. Take a look at your pets and tell me how that's any different.
Diageo Posted December 5, 2011 Posted December 5, 2011 So you agree with punishment/justice then? Depends on the punishment.
Grazza Posted December 5, 2011 Posted December 5, 2011 As for them being banned, I think the majority of pets should be banned. It amazes me how we view keeping a prisoner in a cell for their life as severe punishment, yet we do the exact same thing to the pets that we "love". It's pure cruelty. You can't say that you love your bird/rabbit/snake/hamster etc. when you imprison it for the entirety of it's life. That's what I was thinking earlier. If it doesn't come back to you of its own accord, it's not a proper pet. It's just keeping an animal. I don't want to go too far, because obviously keeping a rabbit or budgie is completely different from the thread subject matter, but I do agree with the sentiment.
Ellmeister Posted December 5, 2011 Posted December 5, 2011 So you agree with punishment/justice then? As for them being banned, I think the majority of pets should be banned. It amazes me how we view keeping a prisoner in a cell for their life as severe punishment, yet we do the exact same thing to the pets that we "love". It's pure cruelty. You can't say that you love your bird/rabbit/snake/hamster etc. when you imprison it for the entirety of it's life. We all thought Fritzl was a monster for keeping his daughter locked in the basement. Take a look at your pets and tell me how that's any different. I can't tell if you're joking or actually serious about comparing Fritzl's treatment to that of a pet.
Diageo Posted December 5, 2011 Posted December 5, 2011 It would be justice though, not actual pleasure. Anger is a natural trait, cruelty is not. It would be pleasure from doing what you think is justice. You would be causing someone to suffer physically, that's cruelty.
The Bard Posted December 5, 2011 Posted December 5, 2011 No, I don't think people looking for human characteristics in cats because we find them cute has much relevance in seeing someone feed a kitten to a snake. I think it has plenty of relevance. The way you see people fawn over kittens is overwhelmingly similar to the way they respond to the simplicity of a baby's expressions. Kittens have simply hijacked a mechanism that evolved to aid in an instinctive will to protect our offspring. We do the same for a bunch of baby animals, because we imagine them to possess characteristics that we typically associate with human children; innocence, helplessness, curiosity etc. Curiously, this tendancy seems to be largely reserved for mammals. Would you really feel the same visceral emotion if, say, a baby snake was being eaten, or a toad? I'm inclined to think probably not.
Ramar Posted December 5, 2011 Posted December 5, 2011 We all thought Fritzl was a monster for keeping his daughter locked in the basement. Take a look at your pets and tell me how that's any different. How dare you, I never touched that Hamster I swear!
Murr Posted December 5, 2011 Posted December 5, 2011 Would you really feel the same visceral emotion if, say, a baby snake was being eaten, or a toad? I'm inclined to think probably not. Baby frogs are pretty cute :p
EddieColeslaw Posted December 5, 2011 Posted December 5, 2011 So you agree with punishment/justice then? As for them being banned, I think the majority of pets should be banned. It amazes me how we view keeping a prisoner in a cell for their life as severe punishment, yet we do the exact same thing to the pets that we "love". It's pure cruelty. You can't say that you love your bird/rabbit/snake/hamster etc. when you imprison it for the entirety of it's life. We all thought Fritzl was a monster for keeping his daughter locked in the basement. Take a look at your pets and tell me how that's any different. But domestication = the animals have actually become accustomed to being pets, i.e. owned by humans. Whoever locks their pet in the basement is definitely in the wrong, but most pet owners I know take them out for walks and exercise, groom them, and feed them well... I mean, you're right to bring this up, especially since not all pets seem to be suited to domestication (agree with someone's post about not having reptiles as pets), but I think you're thinking a little too extremely.
Jonnas Posted December 5, 2011 Posted December 5, 2011 Well, it started as a clear display of sadism, filming a snake eating a loved animal that is normally not given to snakes and then post it all for the sake of some twisted call for attention... ...But comparing keeping pets to consistently raping your own daughter in a basement also works, I suppose... Of course, this comparison is ludicrous on a number of levels, but let's focus on why keeping pets isn't generally seen as monstrous. Like it was already said, taking care of a pet also involves playing with it, grooming it, keeping it healthy, etc. Locking animals in cages and little else can easily be considered animal cruelty. And then there are animals that can't, shouldn't be domesticated, but they are. Normally, a good case can be made against their owners, but certain cases keep slipping through the cracks (like Iguanas). I would assume animal rights groups are making progress on such cases, but I don't know for certain.
Beast Posted December 5, 2011 Author Posted December 5, 2011 If this kitten had "wandered" into the snake territory by itself, would we be talking about it like we are now?. We'd feel sorry for the kitten a little, but as it would have wandered in to the space by itself, then thats nature for you. Yeah we would if it was filmed in the same location because it's clearly a house-cat being set up to be dinner for a snake, which is still cruel. By the way, I'm not a cat person but I'm just really disgusted in the fact that this person is trusted with an animal that needs caring and he goes and kills it in a horrible fashion. What's worse is that this creep who did this is APPARENTLY linked to the other kitten abuse videos where last Christmas, he vaccuum-bagged two kittens and now the drowning one. It's just sick!
jayseven Posted December 5, 2011 Posted December 5, 2011 Bard defintely raises one of the points of interest; affinity to the prey. There's a definite heirarchy of preferred distaste. I think tortoises are pretty much the only reptiles I can humanise to a degree (no idea why), and within the mammalian kingdom there's certainly those more antropomorph-able (or whatever the phrase is) than others. Finding one kind of animal more cute than another has a reasoning behind it. Doesn't mean that it should affect our moral judgement of these situations... but it does! Another point of interest is the human involvement. yes, animals eat animals in the wild, but the idea that the situation arose purely because some douche conducted it into existence -- and even worse, that this person appears to do so for the sake of pleasure is something that brings us as the supposedly superior species to feel shame at abusing our superiority -- something that changes to anger when directed to others who tarnish the human name - anger as a response to reinforce difference between us and them, to put ground between their behaviour and our own. Also, another interesting point here, though not really as involved, is the whole "should we keep pets?" thing. With cats and dogs and many other mammals it's clear that the animal's quality of life is fantastic. With snakes and reptiles and lizards and fish and birds it's trickier to recognise how exactly domestication is improving their lives - but then again, perhaps that's placing human characteristics on animal behaviour and assuming things. An interesting point in general but more of a tangent. [/thread summarising or something]
Iun Posted December 5, 2011 Posted December 5, 2011 (edited) How did I get roped into this? And where do I sign? Here... Here... And ... Here. You get 15p per episode, less tax. Actually, it looks like you're going to end up owing the production company money. Better get a second job. And a third one, if you expect to pay off what you owe AND eat dinner every night, you filthy debtor. Edited December 5, 2011 by Iun
Recommended Posts