Ok, so humans are egoistic and therefore view animal abuse as less wrong then the abuse and murder of human beings. But what does this mean for society? You may be thinking that animals have been treated as lesser beings for a long time and nothing really devastating has happened. Well, if you are harboring this thought, recent psychological research might get you thinking. As mentioned by Dale Bartlett, “[a]nimal cruelty rarely occurs in a vacuum”, and violence to any creature should be a signal of violent tendencies towards human beings too.
Again highlighting the case of Rome, appreciation of animal violence as recreation and spectacle very easily slipped into the cold blooded massacre of early Christians. As history have shown, the satisfaction derived from watching violence inflicted on animals can also be conveniently also provided by watching the torture of human beings.
As researched by Arluke et al (1999), there is some kind of link between animal abuse in a household and the chances of abuse of women and children. Ascione (1998) found that "71% of battered women in a shelter who owned a pet reported that their assaultive male partners had threatened to harm or had actually harmed the family pet" (965). Acts like hunting stirs up worry about its effects on society because, as claimed by Joy Williams, “Hunters kill for play, for entertainment... They kill for the thrill of it, to make an animal ‘theirs.'... The animal becomes the property of the hunter by its death." In the same way, if a human being harbors this mentality, it is not hard to see how such thoughts and desires can lead him/her to inflict the same cruelty to other living creatures, including humans.
According to the social learning theory, "violence, like any other form of behavior, is learned from very early in childhood" (260). Although the link between animal abuse and abuse to humans have not been scientifically proven, research in the field of child psychology and sociology is already suggesting that society creates individuals, implying that violent tendencies can be bred, sustained and justified.
Are we going to sit back and allow our societies to be breeding grounds of violent tendencies? Are we going to say "it is not that bad" to commit gruesome animal torture and abuse, by refusing to explore deeper into our judicial laws?towards animal abuse? Are we going to continue justifying violence based only on a historically and socially constructed foundation of reasoning? Are we going to keep silent until a love one of ours is brutally murdered by a fined animal abuser? I think these are questions we all need to ask ourself, and stop waiting for the blatant link between violence to animals and humans to be proven. Do let me know whether you share my same sentiments about what is at stake here.
8 comments:
It is scary to think that people do not realize the seriousness of animal abuse. How can one think that destroying and killing an innocent animal is acceptable behavior. Especially since animal abuse and criminal behavior seem to be strongly correlated, I hope people begin to think about this issue more seriously. If stricter controls are not enforced, our society could potentially become a much scarier place.
Wow I had no idea about the connection between the abuse of humans and animals. I also wonder about the outside connection between hunting and animal abuse. I also wonder what the future will hold for society if we do not address this problem
I feel like you should elaborate a little on what your links describe in them. This will make your post easier to follow. I think that you have an interesting topic, but I have no outside knowledge on it. As a result, I felt a little lost as it what support you gave for your argument. Giving more spicific details about the links would fix this and further strengthen your argument.
While I understand the basis of our argument, some of your issues are confusing. I think you should elaborate more on the issues of which you provide links, rather than making your reader investigate the entire article. Provide more background information to make it easier for your reader to understand so that your audience will be able to perceive your point of view. Also, proofread for mistakes. There were some sentences that did not make much sense that could probably be solved if you read over it a couple more times.
I really like this topic and the link between animal abusers and abuse of other humans is really interesting though I guess it could be expected.
It might helpful if you started to simply write more about the topic so that the reader wouldn't have to read your works cited that you offer to understand your argument fully.
I believe that your topic is interesting, but to make it better you should work on transitioning between ideas. As well, I believe the second paragraph needs to be revised. Through your syntax I am unable to ascertain your ideas.
I feel like you could do more to state the relationship you are implying. My take was that you think people who have been convicted of animal abuse or who hunt pose more of a threat to society. "...these findings dispute the assumption that animal abuse inevitably leads to violence toward humans." This quote is from your first link and seems to counter your argument. If you supplied concrete facts, such as the number of people who first abused animals then moved on to people, your argument would be much stronger.
I think if you expanded on this topic it might influence the reader a little more. The link between animal abuse and abuse within the household is interesting and should be expanded. What are the impacts of this link? Also, I think the link between hunting and abuse needs to be examined further. There is a huge difference in the recreational sport of hunting and purposeful torture of animals, or humans. Hunting has been a part of human existence since the beginning of time, so why connect it now to the abuse of animals or people in the household?
Post a Comment