Sadism

In the article Animal Cruelty Law Tests Free Speech a decision must reached on whether internet videos depicting animal cruelty are protected under the First Amendment. In the videos you can hear a women’s voice “talking to the animals in a kind of dominatrix pattern” and the “cries and squeals of the animals, obviously in great pain” (692). With Congress and the Supreme Court on opposite ends of the case it is hard to understand what the fighting is all about. While the consideration of a person’s rights to commit these acts is being acknowledged, the rights of the animals are being overlooked. And for what, to give those watching defenseless animals being crushed them a perverse sense of happiness. The solution would appear be a lot clearer if humans were to think of animals as equals and not as lower beings. Humans, over time have grown to develop an “insuperable line… dividing beings that count from those that do not” (169). However, this decision was reached in a bias sense almost forgetting all together the theories of Charles Darwin. If Charles Darwin is right, we, humans and animals, are tied together by one ancestor. Why is it, then, that humans’ tend to believe that they are the better of the two? Is it based on ‘speciesism’ an “irrational prejudice that […] is the basis of our different treatment of animals and humans” (169). Several excuses are given for the mistreatment of animals by humans. Humans automatically assume that they hold power over animals but it is possible that people have “felt the need perpetually to reassert human dominance over, and separation from, the animal kingdom” (172) As the ‘dominant’ figure it is unacceptable to seem intimidated by the weaker ranks therefore any sign of threat might cause humans to act aggressively towards animals. This is why humans are rapid to put animals in cages and zoos or to strike them when they are worried that they might lose power. In laboratories where animals are treated at times like rag dolls “researchers insulate themselves from moral qualms by rejecting as ‘inappropriate’ the descriptive language more usually used for human behavior” (170). By avoiding the use of words usually used for humans, researches avoid feeling bad about the dreadful acts performed on small animals. Instead a number is assigned to the animals because it is “more dehumanizing than a name” (170). Completely separating the treatment of animals and humans prohibits any compassion or sympathy from taking place. Treating animals humanely or with any compassion would mean that humans would have to understand the suffering of animals on a personal level. However, the separation in place does not allow for these action or ideas to cross the minds of humans who cannot consider that animals suffer. This goes back to personally understanding what the animals feel in order to exhibit and emotional connection to the animal; however humans have “ little sympathy for distresses which they have never felt” (191). This appears to be true even between humans, as it tends to be hard to understand racial profiling if you yourself have not encountered it. An example is the continuous infliction of pain by participants in the Millgram Studies. Another example of not being able to empathize with others is the Stanford Prison Study, the students in charge became sadistic to the prisoners, “they adapted to their roles, stepping beyond the boundaries of what had been predicted” (202). This displays the “implications about the danger which lurks in the darker side of human nature” (203). Animals on the other hand tend to understand the suffering of those around them with domesticated animals effectively reflecting their owner’s emotions. Another example of animals understanding of others is in the study done with macaque monkeys. Unlike humans, upon realizing that the other was being harmed, the monkeys reacted freely choosing not to allow for further injury to take place. The ideas presented in the readings are interesting because while humans have two different perspectives on how to react when a creature of another species is being harmed, animals automatically choose to react in the most positive way risking themselves before harming others.