My question is: What are some situations in which a
human would not benefit from a relationship with a companion animal?
I think there are many such situations. Firstly, a human could simply be allergic to a particular species of animal, and so would be harmed or at least inconvenienced by a relationship with a companion of that species. Someone could also have had a traumatic experience with a type of animal, and so could have PTSD-like symptoms when exposed to animals of that type. Someone could also simply dislike some of the personality traits typically found within one species of animal, and so would be unlikely to find a fulfilling relationship with a member of that species.
This last point brings up an issue, however, that I have been thinking about. It is clear enough that different humans have radically different personalities. It is further clear that many non-human animals are quite capable of having individual personalities - one cat may be almost nothing like another. Thus, why is it that people consistently stereotype species? 'Cats are aloof.' 'Dogs are loyal.' It may be true that most cats, at least when compared to other types of animal, are aloof; yet this is hardly true of all cats. I lived for several years with a cat who would routinely crawl up my chest as I read a book and shove her nose into my eyes until I scratched her behind the ears. She would also lie around near people, and if no one had associated with her for a while, she would walk about meowing mournfully until someone picked her up or played with her. It is no more true that all dogs are loyal. Most dogs are probably loyal, but some are actually quite aloof, or will wander off and not return - while I have not personally known any dogs who did this, I have known people who have lost dogs in just this way.
So, with all these individual personalities, non-humans are not much easier to generalise about accurately than humans. Is it some sort of 'ism' which causes us to stereotype them like this?
Sunday, April 14, 2013
Mirrors
In response to Perri's post 'Difference Between Zoos and Aquariums' (4/7/2013):
I completely agree that water-dwelling animals are far less appealing to the majority of humans than land animals, and elicit less empathy and sympathy. This is, indeed, very unfortunate, considering the intelligence and often social nature of many water-dwelling animals, particularly cetaceans and octopi. I think that it is the seemingly alien nature of these creatures which causes the mental and emotional distance that many humans seem to feel towards them. Furthermore, I think that this distinction applies between different species of land animal as well.
Dogs and cats appeal to many people; even if a human does not like dogs or cats in general, they may concede that these animals have at least some moral value, or are sentient and somewhat intelligent. This frequently extends to wild cats as well, and wild canines. To a lesser extent, it applies to many other species of mammal.
Yet birds do not receive such a sympathetic attitude at all. In fact, the way in which many people view birds is quite comparable to the way in which they view most sea life - as primarily decorative, without much intelligence or ability to feel emotions. Quite apart from the fact that not all sea life fits this description (although, to be fair, many of the small fish people commonly keep as pets/companions are unintelligent), many birds are actually far more intelligent than the average cat or canine. Some estimates suggest that certain species of parrot have roughly the same mental capacity as six-year-old human children. Birds can also form lasting, deeply emotional bonds with other birds and with non-bird animals as well, including humans - when a parrot says 'I love you,' the bird may actually mean it! Yet humans continue to purchase colourful parrots on a whim, keep them in undersized cages, and provide them with no social interaction whatsoever. I think that this is likely because parrots, like sea-dwelling animals, are less similar to humans than are mammals. Reptiles, amphibians, and insects also fall victim to this alienation, although it may be more commonly justified in their cases.
Overall, I think that this attitude can be traced back to the same essential source as racism can - these creatures, human or not, do not look like me - therefore, they cannot be like me in any important sense. And I think that it is nearly as unjustified in both cases.
I completely agree that water-dwelling animals are far less appealing to the majority of humans than land animals, and elicit less empathy and sympathy. This is, indeed, very unfortunate, considering the intelligence and often social nature of many water-dwelling animals, particularly cetaceans and octopi. I think that it is the seemingly alien nature of these creatures which causes the mental and emotional distance that many humans seem to feel towards them. Furthermore, I think that this distinction applies between different species of land animal as well.
Dogs and cats appeal to many people; even if a human does not like dogs or cats in general, they may concede that these animals have at least some moral value, or are sentient and somewhat intelligent. This frequently extends to wild cats as well, and wild canines. To a lesser extent, it applies to many other species of mammal.
Yet birds do not receive such a sympathetic attitude at all. In fact, the way in which many people view birds is quite comparable to the way in which they view most sea life - as primarily decorative, without much intelligence or ability to feel emotions. Quite apart from the fact that not all sea life fits this description (although, to be fair, many of the small fish people commonly keep as pets/companions are unintelligent), many birds are actually far more intelligent than the average cat or canine. Some estimates suggest that certain species of parrot have roughly the same mental capacity as six-year-old human children. Birds can also form lasting, deeply emotional bonds with other birds and with non-bird animals as well, including humans - when a parrot says 'I love you,' the bird may actually mean it! Yet humans continue to purchase colourful parrots on a whim, keep them in undersized cages, and provide them with no social interaction whatsoever. I think that this is likely because parrots, like sea-dwelling animals, are less similar to humans than are mammals. Reptiles, amphibians, and insects also fall victim to this alienation, although it may be more commonly justified in their cases.
Overall, I think that this attitude can be traced back to the same essential source as racism can - these creatures, human or not, do not look like me - therefore, they cannot be like me in any important sense. And I think that it is nearly as unjustified in both cases.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)