The Jungle Book 2

The story within How Fear Came about the relationship between animals and humans is by far my favorite thing presented in this course. Throughout this course we’ve seen that “the old order of things was changing” (897) and authors found ways to use this as an explanation of why the world is so, in this book we see changes that remained. It ties in so many of the events and ideas that affect the world today. It’s interesting to look at the effects that humans and animals have had on each other and still how a connection exists after everything. With all the crazy climate changes going on today and the situation presented in the story, the connection becomes even more visible because “we suffer together” (892).



It true that things like climate changes have an effect on everyone on this planet and it also becomes the one time when humans and animals acknowledge that they both must act and “no one could escape” (888). Within the story, we also witness the ignorance expressed by humans about threatening situations. Mowgli states “What is that to me” (889) setting himself apart from the others because of that difference that has been previously presented to him. However, with his ignorance he learns the story of the separation between different animals that became the separation between animal and man. It’s almost impossible to think that all animals once roamed the earth together but with many of the jungle laws presented, it makes it a reasonable idea. How wonderful it must have been to see several amazingly beautiful creatures together.




However, all good things must end, in this case the blame is placed on the Tiger who made the animals suspicious of each other and of the dangers they might bring. The change all took place with the want of meat “the smell of blood made us foolish” (893). From there death and fear seemed to run ramped in the jungle and the introduction of mankind only made things worse as he became the thing most feared by animals. Man however, is not solely responsible, the tiger made him dreadfully dangerous “Thou has taught Man to kill, and he is not a slow learner” (895). The separation was created by both animals and beast as well as between different animals and that still survives today. What would the world have been like if the Tiger would have never killed the buck and the encounter between man and tiger would not have produce fear. Would it be the case that the reality that we all suffer together stand out and be a priority concern when things go wrong. “Earth, people, and food were all one “(898).

The Jungle Book

Having only ever thought of The Jungle Book as a Disney movie, I was interested in seeing the differences between the film and the book. However, I’ve never seen the movie so that won’t really help for this discussion board. The book did however get me interested in the movie; I’d like to see how this book was portrayed to kids. I always see Disney movies as being deceptive to children, they mess up the true story and only focus on princesses finding their princes and living happily ever after as if that’s all there is to life. I’m sure that they took the book and made it happier for children when the book is really much more. I, myself, don’t really understand the message of the book. At first I thought it dealt with the connection and similarities between humans and animals but it slowly became about the differences and the separation between the two. Throughout the book, we see the internal battle that Mowgli faces as he tries to be a part of the wolf but knowing that he is different, he is man and using this to his advantage when he’s in harm’s way. This concept I feel would be too hard for children to grasp but it is truly one of the things that made the chapter amazing for me, it shows the battle that all humans should face when thinking of harming animals. I thought the description of little Mowgli reflected what men think of themselves, the ‘man- cub’ “looks up and is not afraid” (866). As humans, we think we rule over all animals because we don’t fear them we have ways of making them fear us as Mowgli find out when using the ‘Red Flower’ (fire) to save his life. The description of the wolf pack as ‘free people’ gave them a different light, they weren’t just animals, and they lived by the jungle law and held council meetings that seem so democratic. Baloo and Bagheeras connection with Mowgli is fascinating even being called abrother. “in all but blood” (873) showing again the relationship between man and animal. I had no idea that within the jungle book different stories existed, I always thought that it would all revolve around the life of Mowgli in the jungle but I was wrong. The chapter entitled The White Seal is completely different. The brave little white seal named Kotick is an interesting character.He never is settled with what is infront of him and always wants to know more. The whole story is a great example of this and it starts with humans choosing which seals to take to the ‘killing- pens’ where they would be turned into sealskin jackets. “Hundreds and hundreds of thousands of seals watched them being driven, but they went on playing just the same” (881). The response of all the seals made me think of the similarities between this and the holocaust. It’s been said several times that many would just sit back and act ignorant to the fact that their neighbors were being taken to concentration camps, so did the seals in the story. Even when told what was going on the seals didn’t care stating that it wasn’t their concern and that he shouldn’t have followed them.Kotick is the only one that acted knowing that the location that they lived in was not safe he explored for several seasons for a different, safer area. After finding it he is still made fun of and not trusted and it is only through violence that his advice is accepted. I think it’s really sad but true that all animals only react immediately when they are faced with violence.

Peaceable Kingdom

The two presented in the course have been completely opposite of one another in what they show and how they display the information. While having been terrified when viewing Earthlings, I was expecting a similar reaction to Peaceable Kingdom. However, there can be no comparison made between the two they are extremely different. While Earthlings was gruesome and made me feel horrible about how I help in the pain obtained by animals, Peaceable Kingdom showed the nicer side of the fight for animal’s rights. There has always been a relationship between humans and animals but somewhere along the way the concern for one another disappeared. It was crazy to see this farmer not really think of profit but only of the animal’s well being, that is not common in today’s world especially in a country such as America. For him to sit in front of a camera and show emotions when talking about his encounter with dead animals hanging from trees and his connection with his cow made me wonder why and how factory farms exists. In Earthlings, the concern for animals by humans was never shown, it was always just a want to hurt them and end their lives. I don’t understand how these movies are so different when covering the same topic. It makes me wonder about the reality of the situation and which is the side to believe. I mean while I know that cruel things do happen to animals how often they occur is Earthlings only taking a bit of footage and manipulating the audience to think that this is always the case. These movies of course play into the course and our thoughts on the fight for animals rights. I believe that these films were a good balance to the semester’s text giving two different sides of the story. Having seen several PETA videos on the side and having been extremely effected by Earthlings I would never think something as calming as Peaceable Kingdom would also have an effect of me, it would give me hope that things could and have started to change slowly. It also shows that the fight for animals doesn’t solely rely on pictures of cruelty but it also depends on the sentiments of humans towards animals and whether they choose to support the problem or find a solution.

Black Beauty 3

After having read Black Beauty, I clearly see a connection between slavery and horses. In the earlier chapters of this section we are introduced to the world of horse fairs, in hearing the description of the day’s events I can’t help but think of the slave auctions that took place in colonial America. Like the inspection of horses, slaves were also thoroughly inspected. After being bought horses like slaves were to “be used up; that is what they are doing, whipping and working with never one thought of what I suffer; they paid for me, and must get it out of me” (pg 170 ch 40). It amazes me that this can encompass the treatment of slaves and horses. Slaves were truly treated like animals and they were considered only objects to white people. Some of the statements made a few chapters later by a war horse also help show the similarities between the journeys to a land of cruelty. For a military horse his experience in times of war almost sounds like a firsthand account description from slaves about their thoughts on America, “the country we had come to was very different from our own and that we had many hardships to endure besides the fighting” (pg 140 ch 34). So much around both slaves and horses changed because the conditions that surrounded them were forced upon them by those that now held control over them. As Black Beauty talks about all the pains of being a cab horse he again emphasizes the similarities in little ways.



He and other characters in the book make several different comments about the conditions of animals. In one comment Beauty talks about his commitment to his work “I did my best, as I always had done, in spite of cruelty and injustice” (pg 203 ch 47). In another, the sentiments shared about not being able to have control of yourself and having someone else ruling over you “for ‘tis a poor thing not to be one’s own master” (pg 185 ch 44). Another comment made which is never really related to slaves but I think makes sense. “To be punished and abused when I was doing my very best was so hard, it took the heart out of me” (pg 198 ch 46). It is rarely talked about but it is most likely true that slaves did all they possibly could with the conditions they were given. It has been said that slaves were really proud of their work but we never stop to think that they were never recognized for the good they did and only abused upon a mess up. We are also shown the perspective of owners. “I say ‘tis a mockery to tell a man that he must not overwork his horse, for when a beast is downright tired there’s nothing but the whip that will keep his legs agoing- you can’t help yourself- you must put your wife and children before the horse, the masters must look to that, we can’t” (pg 167 ch 39). I know this sounds wrong because its justifying the ill treatment of animals but it make sense, if you’re working for a living and depending on the assistance of another you will go to whatever limit to get the task accomplished even if it means inflicting pain.

Black Beauty 2

At the end of the last section, the separation of what seemed to be a happy little family was certain but to Black Beauty it was no longer about the location or his treatment but about those that surrounded him. The separation however was eased by having Ginger around. After being injured Black Beauty was put to rest and thought that “though I enjoyed the liberty and the sweet grass, yet I had been so long used to society that I felt very lonely” (pg 108, ch 27). Having been use to others for so long it was awkward to be alone, the loneliness soon ended when Ginger who had been injured as well joined him. “Here we are- ruined in the prime of our youth and strength- you by a drunkard, and I by a fool; It is very hard” (pg 109, ch 27).



After this accident, the family was finally fully separated. Black Beauty again went to a new home where he didn’t feel badly treated but yet again alone, “although in many ways I was well treated, I had no friend” (pg 93, ch 23). Throughout the book I notice more the similarities between humans and animals and though people might not believe these similarities exist it becomes obvious once Black Beauty is separated from his friends. The emotions that most humans would encounter upon isolation and separation appear to be felt by Beauty as well. A lot of the writing within the book actually reflect a strong resemblance between humans and horses. For example, at one point in the book they discuss the display of uneasiness, “it is just as unnatural for horses as for men to foam at the mouth; it is a sure sign of some discomfort, and should be attended to” (pg 93, ch 23). In another section, again like in the first third of the book they compare horses to boys, “spoiling a horse and letting him get into bad habits was just as cruel as spoiling a child, and both had to suffer for it afterwards” (pg 112, ch 28). Much of this chapter is also spent talking about the lack of opportunity for the horse to state what they feel is the relationship between human and animals. “What were horses made for, if not to drag people up- hill” (pg 115, ch 29).



While humans see the horses as a form of transportation, they never really consider them having any limits and it really upsets the horses that their health is never really taken into consideration. Black Beauty lets it be known that “I could not complain, nor make known my wants” (pg 123, ch 30). I feel that the communication barrier is clear to both humans and animals and it makes it uncomfortable to realize that nothing can be done and it almost disempowers both parties but since humans are concerned only about themselves it effects them less.

Black Beauty 1

Through the eyes of Black Beauty we are given different sides of the relationship between horse and men. From his mother’s perspectives it is up to the horse to decide how the relationship between the two will work out. “She told me the better I behaved, the better I should be treated, and that it was wisest always to do my best to please my master” (pg 13, ch 3). This interpretation of the relationship gives power to the horse who decides his own path but it also doesn’t account for the humans treatment of the animal and the effects that they might have on the horses behavior. “…there are a great many kinds of men; there are good, thoughtful men like our master, bad, cruel men, who never ought to have a horse or dog to call their own” (pg 13, ch 3). This perspective is given by Beauty’s mom, Ginger, Merrylegs, and Sir Oliver. While Black Beauty thinks nothing nut the best of his original master saying that “he spoke as kindly to us as he did to his little children” (pg 4, ch1) he also sees their ignorant side when he sees their hunt of a hare. His mom’s interpretation of the situation puts into perspective the ignorance of man and disregard of everything. “I never yet could make out why men are so fond of this sport; they often hurt themselves, often spoil good horses, and tear up the fields, and all for a hare or fox, or a stag, that they could get more easily some other way; but we are only horses and don’t know” (8, Ch 2) She can’t put the pieces together to get a clear picture of what men are and why they do some things and blames her differences for the confusion. Upon arriving at his new home he again was treated kindly and had his care taker talk to him a “great deal; of course I did not understand all he said, but I learned more and more to know what he meant, and what he wanted me to do” (pg 20, ch 4). He seems to be blessed in being treated fairly well but is able to see the harm that humans can do through the stories of his new friends.



Ginger shares the story of her upbringing. She states that “the first experience I had of men’s kindness; it was all force; they did not give me a chance to know what they wanted” (pg 25, ch 7). From her earliest encounters she’s learned to see men as her enemies and has carried this into her actions when interacting with men. She also shares that men realize that if a horse does wrong it is only the fault of the care taker’s, as an old owner of hers said “ ‘a bad-tempered man will never make a good-tempered horse’” (pg 27, ch 7). Sir Oliver also shares his past experiences to show that not all humans are good, in his case his tail was cut off as a fashion statement. This caused Sir Oliver to be unable to swat the flies on his legs and sides.



He also shares that the same thing happens to puppies that get their tails and ears cut as part of a fashion style to make them appear nicer. He asks why don’t do that to their own kids? “What right have they to torment and disfigure God’s creatures?” (pg 39 ch 10) Merrylegs talks about the gender differences in humanity stating that boys like horses need to be broken in and taught right from wrong. This reflects the similarities and almost a battle over power of who should be training and be trained. Throughout I feel that all the characters realize the importance of balance within the relationship in order for be one that continues to work for both parties involved for the most part.

Animal Research Center

The beginning of animal experimentation stems from a belief that all earthlings are alike. The differences however became apparent when Belgian doctor Andreas Vesalius challenged and disproved anatomical discoveries previously made by Roman physician Galen who worked on animals and perceived his finding applicable to humans as well.



Figure 1: Roman physician and philosopher Galen

French philosopher Rene Descartes then used Vesalius findings to support the idea that animals were “unthinking unfeeling machines.” This allowed for the continuation of animal experimentation without remorse of harming a creature similar to humans. However, French philosopher François- Marie Arouet de Voltaire disputed Descartes point by stating that vivisection actually “uncovered organs of feelings in animals” proving that they weren’t machines. Two different sides on the topic of animal experimentation quickly developed. British philosopher Jeremy Bentham complicated the matter even more by posing a different question. “The question is not, Can they reason? Nor, Can they talk? But, Can they suffer?”
Throughout the course, we’ve been challenged to not only stand outside ourselves and see how our reactions have affected other earthlings but to try and place ourselves in the position of those animals that are so often mistreated in order for the human race to achieve a medical or scientific advance of some sort. But are the experiments performed considered essential for the betterment of mankind, is the use of animals even really necessary? These questions constantly crossed my mind throughout the course especially when considering that we, as humans, try to separate ourselves from animals, why is it then that we try to find out about ourselves through the use of creatures that are different from us. Animal research is an established practice done all over the world that many believe is beneficial to advancements however it is also a horrible experience for the animals partaking in the procedures.
During the nineteenth century, a new found awareness of animal welfare led to organized efforts in the fight against animal cruelty around the world. In December 1875, Frances Power Cobbe, founded the Society for the Protection of Animals Liable to Vivisection (later, the Victorian Street Society), the first organization to campaign against animal experiments.



Figure 2: Founder of several animal rights organizations, Frances Power Cobbe

Over the years that followed, various animals’ rights groups would continue to form and try to outlaw cruelty practices, these groups would help pass several pieces of legislation including the Pure Food and Drug Act that passed in 1906, after a series of injuries, sicknesses, and deaths. The extensive use of animals in human products caused several side effects. Doctors lobbied for a crack down on drugs and personal products sold that contained any by- product from animals. It wasn’t until after the death of nearly 100 people that enough pressure was put on Congress to strengthen the original PFDA. In 1938, the Pure Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act passed stating that animal testing would be a requirement for all products. As time progressed the testing requirements were “gradually amended to include different species and to last for longer time periods.”
In the 1960s the movement resurged when Pepper, a Dalmatian, disappeared from a family’s backyard. The discovery was made shortly after that she had been sold to a hospital that conducted an experiment on her and euthanized her. People wanted new legislation that protected animals and would be monitored by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) were brought forth. Congress passed the Laboratory Animal Welfare Act of 1966 making it necessary for animal dealers to be licensed and laboratories regulatory. In 1970 the act was renamed the Animal Welfare Act (AWA) and covered all warm- blooded animals, a year later rats, mice, and birds were excluded. In 1985, the act was amended again to require that researchers minimize the animal’s pain whenever possible through the use of anesthesia, pain killers, and humane euthanasia. In 1990, the act was extended to farm animals.





Figure 3: A book cover on Ryder's speciesism idea

Around the same time Richard Ryder, coined the term speciesism referring to a “widely held belief that the human species is inherently superior to other species and so has rights or privileges that are denied to other sentient animals […] can also be used to describe the oppressive behaviour, cruelty, prejudice and discrimination that are associated with such a belief.” Ryder, after years of inflicting pain on animals through research, began to work against the evils done to animals by humans. Like many others before and after him, he used his sympathetic imagination to understand the animal’s experience. We too must use our sympathetic imagination. We must reflect on the fact that we are alike; we are harming a part of ourselves by inflicting pain on animals for research purposes. We are taking part in passive cruelty- “the observation of a cruel act in which the observer neither participates nor intervenes.” We must take action to protect all earthlings.
While a good deal of work has already been done regarding the treatment of animals there is still so much left to do. We realistically cannot get rid of all animal cruelty at once; smaller steps must first be taken. The implementation and enforcement of laws has already begun with the help of older generations; now, we must ask ourselves what will we do. The small group of dedicated young men and women in class can have a major impact on the treatment of animals right here on campus by getting students informed about the research lab apart of UT and the things we can do to get rid of it.



Figure 4: Map for location the ARC

Built in the summer of 1977, the Animal Resource Center was originally a 50,000 square foot facility capable of housing 10-15,000 laboratory animals per year. Claiming to be "Seeking progress for all species through research" and located on 2701 Speedway, the “centralized facility permits the most efficient and up-to-date environmental control for sanitation and animal health monitoring. It also has access to a diagnostic laboratory, two complete animal surgery suites, several darkrooms, controlled environment rooms, and a necropsy room.” Users of the center include faculty and students from several departments on campus. Since its construction, a 20,000 square foot extension was added. Fifteen part and full-time animal attendants and technicians, an administrative associate, a facilities manager, compliance and training manager, and the director whose specialty is lab animal medicine assist researchers in their tasks.





Figure 5: Experimenter giving animals drugs

The activities performed in the center are pre-approved by the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee whose mission is to “oversee the provisions for the care and well-being of animals used for research and educational purposes at The University of Texas at Austin. The IACUC is also committed to serving the public by ensuring conformance to all legal and ethical standards regarding the use of animals in research.” While not much is made public about the projects conducted and several rules and guidelines are in place for researchers to follow, dreadful things still take place daily. Information on previous and ongoing projects is hard to find, the secrecy the surrounds the center makes me wonder why so much privacy is necessary, even getting into the location seems difficult. The facility is not open to everyone, to get into the center you must first fill and print out the ARC record, have it signed by your PI (Principle Investigator), obtain a proximity card from the ID center located in the FAC ID, and take printed form and ID to ARC front office to get card activated. “ALL visitors must register at the front desk of the ARC prior to entering the animal care areas.” It is almost impossible to go into the center and comfortably walk around much less inquire about anything within the center.
A limited amount of information regarding the ARC is posted online and few even know that the location exists on campus. These two factors lead me to believe that UT officials are aware of the uproar that would occur if students knew. To get the ARC, and the atrocities that go on inside of the building, removed from campus we must first inform individuals about the situation. School officials have intentionally or unintentionally kept the center out of sight and mind for students, even for those who pass it every day after all there is no sign with its name brightly displayed as is with other buildings on campus. The next step would be to approach organizations geared towards protecting animal’s rights, they would be a great core group to start spreading the word about trying to remove the ARC from campus. With these organizations we would start a petition that we can later take to school officials. The plan of action from there would be to host a rally in the West Mall and further distribute information. This would help reach all the people not involved in animal rights organizations and encourage more people to sign a petition. We would also recruit people who have been inside the ARC either as observers or as assistants in projects to testify about their experiences.



Figure 6: Along with several other students we would talk to people in the Main and West Malls about the ARC

Being that it is already April, there is not enough time to continue all the way through our plan we will need to wait for the upcoming semester and in the mean time focus on keeping students motivated about getting rid of the ARC. It would give the core group time to research and find out as much information as possible about the center and the steps necessary to get it removed from campus. Holding social gatherings during the summer break would allow us to keep people interested in our plans for the semester while keeping them up to date on what we are learning. At the beginning of the fall semester, we will make sure that all the information needed is obtained and again hold a rally in the West Mall. We would also push for The Daily Texan to write an article on the ARC. They would be able to do research and develop an expose story that would make anyone who picks the paper up aware of our intentions. Also, they would also have access to school officials that could be interrogated about the projects that take place in the ARC. It can be assumed that school officials would be reluctant to talk about the matter, this would then cause more support within the community and help enable a stronger voice against the ARC.





Figure 7: We must always think of the reprocussions of our actions

A protest rally, outside of the center would be the next step. It would show the complete disapproval and encourage those who work there to be a bit embarrassed. In mid October, we would talk to SG officials to see if anything could be done about presenting a piece of legislation to the campus which would call for the removal of the ARC which could then be taken to President Powers.



Figure 8: The UT tower should be a sign of power not of cruelty

Considered one of the top schools of the nations, UT is thought of as an example to many. To help lead the fight against animal cruelty would encourage other campuses to do the same and cause students to become informed about the laboratories and experiments that take place on their campus. Just looking out for animals can make a big change “In everything you do, try to educate others, stop cruel behaviors, and bring about a revolution in human consciousness.” We must stop being selfish and consider those that are harmed daily for no other reason than to answer a question. They are not at fault for the lack of answers and should be treated with more respect. With a few simple changes in ourselves, afterwards our community, and later the world all earthlings can live a peaceful life never worrying of any harm coming their way as many animals who live in fear about being abducted do today. “Animals, as part of God’s creation, have rights which must be respected. It behoves us always to be sensitive to their needs and to the reality of their pain."

WORD COUNT WITH QUOTES: 1,980
WORD COUNT WITHOUT QUOTES: 1,709

Bibliography

“Animal Facility Access Policy .” UTARC. http://www.utexas.edu/research/arc/facilities/access.pdf (accessed March 29, 2010).

Bentham, Jeremy. “The Principles of Morals and Legislation, 1789, Chapter VII, Section 1 .” In E379NF Animal Humanities VOlume 2 . N.p.: n.p., n.d.

“General Information .” UTARC . http://www.utexas.edu/research/arc/facilities/facility.htm (accessed March 29, 2010).

“IACUC Mission Statement.” Office of Research Support . http://www.utexas.edu/research/rsc/iacuc/about.html (accessed March 29, 2010).

Linzey, Andrew. Why Animal Suffering Matters: Philosophy, Theology, and Practical Ethics. New York: Oxford University Press, 2009.

Merz-Perez, Linda, and Kathleen M. Heide. Animal Cruelty: Pathway to Violence against People . Walnut Creek : Altamira Press , 2004.

“The PETA Practical Guide to Animal Rights .” In E379NF Animal Humanities Volume 1. N.p.: n.p., n.d.

“Research Animals- History .” Libraby Index . http://www.libraryindex.com/pages/2180/Research-Animals-HISTORY.html (accessed March 29, 2010).

“Speciesism .” Richard Ryder . http://www.richardryder.co.uk/speciesism.html (accessed March 29, 2010).

Figure 1: http://www.sciencemuseum.org.uk/hommedia.ashx?id=10957&size=Small

Figure 2: http://www.navs.org.uk/media/uploads/normal_pages/abyy2t_francespowercobbe.jpg

Figure 3: http://pense-bete.org/references/imgs/couv-Joan_Dunayer-Speciesism.jpg

Figure 4: http://www.utexas.edu/maps/main/buildings/arc.html

Figure 5: http://www.osaka-med.ac.jp/Global/information_about_omc/laboratory_animal_center.jpg

Figure 6: http://txtell.lib.utexas.edu/stories/media/m0002-3.jpg

Figure 7: http://www.shac.net/news/2009/February/images/28b.jpg

Figure 8: http://collegeprowler.com/images/standard/1595/the-tower-at-ut.jpeg