Edited: never mind, Miller addressed the abortion hijack while I was posting.
Are you really that fucking stupid? The last time I checked, movies are fake. Those “violent, torturous scenes” aren’t real. Ever heard of something called “special effects?” No one is actually being tortured, dumbass.
This was an actual person, deliberately getting a kick out of harming animals. It’s not just the “cuteness factor”, either. It’s the fact that people enjoy torturing helpless creatures. That’s a sociopathic trait.
Yes, the fact that the puppies ARE cute plays into it, I’m not going to deny that. However, people who go out and start torturing animals are seriously fucked up. Ask any psychologist.
I grew up in a rural area, and have been party to the drowning of unwanted puppies/kittens. When that had to be done, well, it had to be done, so we got a bag and got it done. We werent happy about it, these are living creatures after all, but we did it.
The linked video is different in my eyes. Somebody carrying out the necessary task of culling a litter would have lifted the bucket and put all of the puppies in the river in one go (assuming the lack of a bag with a rock in it). Anybody with a trace of emphathy would have been at best stoic about a harsh task.
Most creatures are hardwired to protect newborns (yeah yeah hyperbole). Most kids go gooey at newborn puppies/kittens/bunnies/anything. To my mind, there is something lacking about a very young girl picking up newborn puppies and lobbing them merrily into a river for shits and giggles.
Some posters indicated that this might be different because it was in Croatia or whatever, but I disagree, because even in eastern bloc countries, children are children. This girl is missing something basic, and it is her that I find disturbing, not the death of some puppies.
The parental attitude towards dogs and cats that many people in developed countries have acquired in the last 50 years is the product of a modern, sanitized society where people aren’t exposed to the realities of life and death. There are countless historical references to drowning unwanted kittens and puppies; it’s an economic way to kill and dispose of them. In places where there are fewer services to assist with random-bred animals or just where there are a lot of animals that aren’t fixed, this shit happens all the time. Even in places where there is a shelter system, often people prefer to kill the babies when they are tiny rather than go through the expense (often steep) of raising them until they are weaned so they can try to home them with people they know, or drop them off at the shelter - where they have a good chance of ending their lives by being gassed to death or killed by lethal injection (often by T-61 which is a rather painful, scary way to go).
I see absolutely nothing morally wrong with drowning unwanted infant animals (although I would never do so myself). As for this particular video; that girl was doing a job. Most likely one given her by her parents. She did it quickly and efficiently, with no evidence of pleasure.
I’ve mentioned before that I grew up in a farming community. Drowning unwanted litters of kittens and puppies happened in South Dakota in the 1990s, as well as many other things that involved cute, furry animals being hurt and killed in various ways. I’ve seen baby sheep have their testicles bloodily removed without painkillers; that was a bit harsh. Drowning isn’t a bad way to die, no matter your species or how cute you are.
Huh. Well, the farm kids I grew up with killed things all the time (deer/pheasant/chicken/geese/ducks/pigs/lambs/kittens/rats/mice etc), sometimes with their bare hands, and all of them appeared to be well-adjusted normal individuals (and those I am still facebook friends with still appear to be non-sociopathic). I would say that plenty of them actively enjoyed killing things (especially when hunting), and most didn’t appear to have any strong emotion at all about killing.
bucketybuck, maybe she didn’t just lower the bucket into the water to drown them together because she didn’t want to see them struggle and cry right in front of her.
Who says lower the bucket? Lift bucket, tip bucket, job done.
You mention words like methodical, efficient. Getting a friend to video you throwing the puppies one by one is not efficient. Lift the bucket, step to the river bank, tip the bucket. That girl wasnt blase about killing some puppies, she was making a game of it. Who makes a game out of killing newborns?
And I am not sure hunting equates, because who hunts newborns?
Of course children who are instructed to kill newborn puppies on a regular basis could treat it as a game. The kids who where in charge of raising and caring for the chickens that supplied the eggs and broilers for our co-op used to play a game that involved stomping baby rats (just as cute as puppies) to death - I found this gross and scary as a kid, but they were perfectly nice, polite, caring children (who strangled/broke hundreds of chicken necks every year to feed us all). I disagree that there is any inherent empathy for animals or baby animals in humans.
I kill mice. Rather than step on them, drown them in a bucket, or twist their necks (all more direct, blase methods than mine) I prefer to put them in a paper lunch bag and smack them against the wall to kill with impact. Simply because I am a bit squeamish and I don’t want to feel them die with my hands, or watch them expire right in front of my eyes. ‘Mouse-in-a-bag’ isn’t really a game to me, but it’s surely not necessary. And I don’t feel guilty or sad about the mouse.
Pfft. I’m married, I don’t have a choice. Maybe I should save all my sperm in a big bucket or something and then take it to a river and videotape myself tossing cupfuls of my jizz into the water, killing all the helpless little tadpoles.
Of all the poster’s here, you have the most serious reading comprehension problem. I was responding to Claude’s specific concern about the display of the incident rather than the incident itself for the enjoyment of others. Did you watch the video? Why ?
Did you notice how gently she handled those pups?
She wasn’t torturing the pups. She was simply terminating them. And whether she actually enjoyed the experience is debatable. The “whee” is disturbing but that may be like laughing in the face of a trajedy. She may have had nothing to do with the video taping either. In fact, I’d expect the reason she was wearing a glove was to distance herself from the intimacy of direct contact making her job more uncomfortable.
I’ve decided that this is my wild ass stab in the dark.
The girl is used to dealing with animals and death, probably a farm girl. The video taper is probably a bit more internet savvy than her and realized that a lot of us in webland would be shocked, shocked at what she was doing.
The girl is the one being exploited. It is par for the course for her, but she doesn’t realize the kid with the video is going to paint her as a psychotic animal abuser. Now that the btards are on her, I’m actually feeling sorry for her.
I’m often accused of turning every debate into a legal one. In a concurrent thread, defending this tendency, I said:
And this statement reminds me of why I do this.
I could say, “Animals don’t have an inherent right to life because it’s silly to say they do!”
But of course the response is, “Who says it’s silly?”
I’m sure you can generate any number of equally unpersuasive claims and rejoinders. Without any agreement between sides on the source, nature, and quality of “rights,” it seems well-nigh impossible to make a definitive statement on whether animals do, or do not, have an inherent right to life.
But – if we define “right,” as something for which society is prepared to provide a remedy at law for the deprivation of, then, by George, then we can easily settle the issue. Someone may claim there’s right to life for animals, and my response can be, “OK. CLaim it. Pick it off the tree where you believe it grows. Because if the claimed ‘right,’ is not one that society is prepared to recognize with a remedy at law, then it doesn’t exist.”
I tend to agree with you. Donning asbestos: when I was a child, my cousins and I use to enjoy what we called headless chicken fights. Basically, it involved at least two people who had the task of killing a chicken (to be eaten) to get together kill the chickens simultaneously and throw them into a large tub thus limiting how far their bodies could go. It was considered the fun part of chicken killing.
Pray tell, why not?