|
|
THE
CAT
A
few years ago, the Home Box Office network aired a program entitled
“To Love or Kill: Man vs. Animals.” It told a fascinating
and, at the same time, a disturbing story about how different cultures
treat the same animals differently. One especially chilling segment
took viewers out to dinner in a small Chinese village. You know
how, in some American restaurants, patrons get to choose from among
live lobsters or live fish?
And
how, after they make their selection, the animal is killed, and
the chef cooks a meal of their choice? At this Chinese restaurant,
things are the same except the menu is different. At this restaurant,
patrons get to select from among live cats and dogs.
The
video takes its time. First we see the hungry patrons inspect the
cats and dogs, jammed cheek by jowl into wooden cages; next we see
them talk it over; then we see them make their selection; finally
we see the cook, using long metal tongs, yank a white fluffy cat
from her cage and hurry into the kitchen. What follows does not
make for pleasant reading, so feel free to skip the next paragraph.
While
the cat claws and screeches, the cook hits her several times with
an iron bar. Clawing and screeching more now, she is abruptly submerged
in a tub of scalding water for about ten seconds. Once removed,
and while still alive, the cook skins her, from head to tail, in
one swift pull. He then throws the traumatized animal into a large
stone vat where (as the camera zooms in) we watch her gulp slowly,
with increasing difficulty, her eyes glazed, until — her last
breath taken — she drowns. The whole episode, from selection
to final breath, takes several minutes. When the meal is served,
the diners eat heartily, offering thanks and praise to the cook.
I
have never been more stunned in my life. I was literally speechless.
Like most Americans, I already knew that some people in China, Korea,
and other countries eat cat and eat dog. The video didn’t
teach me any new fact about dietary customs. What was new for me,
what pushed me back in my chair, was seeing how this is done, seeing
the process. Watching the awful shock and suffering of the cat was
devastating. I felt a mix of disbelief and anger welling-up in my
chest. I wanted to scream, “Stop it! What are you doing? Stop
it!”
But
what made matters worse, at least for me, was how the people behaved.
For them, everything was just so ordinary, just so ho-hum, just
so matter-of-fact. The diners said, “We’ll have this
cat for our dinner” the way we say, “We’ll have
this roll with our coffee.” And the cook? The cook could not
have cared less about the cat’s ordeal. The poor animal might
just as well have been a block of wood as far as he was concerned.
I have never seen people behave so nonchalantly, so comfortably,
so indifferently in the face of an animal’s suffering and
death. I don’t think many Americans could watch this episode
and not ask themselves, as I asked myself, “What is this world
coming to?”
VARIATIONS
In the years since I first saw “To Love or Kill,” I
have imagined different variations of the episode I have just described.
First variation: Everything is the same as in the original video
except the dogs and cats are housed in large cages rather than jammed
together. I ask myself, “Would making their cages larger make
a difference in my thinking? Would I say, ‘Well, since the
cat lived in a larger cage, I no longer object to what happened
to her?” My answer is always the same. I would still object
to what happened to her.
Second
variation: In addition to living in a larger cage, the cook handles
the cat gently and ends her life by giving her a shot of sodium
pentobarbital, from which, to all appearances, she dies peacefully.
Aside from these changes, everything else in the video remains the
same. I ask myself the same kinds of question. “Would these
changes make a difference in my thinking? Would I say, ‘Well,
since the cat lived in a larger cage, was treated gently, and died
peacefully, I no longer object to what happened to her?” My
answer is always the same. I would still object to what happened
to her.
Does
this mean that I think these imaginary variations are just as bad
as the original? No. Larger cages are better than smaller cages.
Gentle treatment is better than violent treatment. Nevertheless,
when that fluffy white cat is killed and skinned for dinner, even
if she had lived in a larger cage and was killed without undue suffering,
I would still want to shout (or at least plead), “Stop it!
What are you doing? Stop it!” I cannot help thinking that
the vast majority of people throughout the world, including many
Chinese and Koreans, would agree with me.
ANIMAL
RIGHTS ADVOCATES
For reasons I explain in Part I, people like me, people who believe
in animal rights, feel the same way about eagles and elephants,
pigs and porpoises as most people feel about cats and dogs. Don’t
get me wrong. Animal Rights Advocates (ARAs) don’t want pigs
sleeping in our beds or elephants riding in our cars. We don’t
want to make “pets” of these animals. What we want is
something simpler: we just want people to stop doing terrible things
to them.
Why
do ARAs think this way? What explains our beliefs and values? There
is no one-size-fits-all answer. ARAs take different paths to reach
the same destination. It is important for people who are not ARAs
to know something about those of us who are; it increases the chance
of polite discussion. Which is why I will be saying something about
my journey, along with the journeys of others.
My
path has this odd twist to it. Part of the reason I became an ARA
is because I studied philosophy. My teachers taught me to prize
clear, rigorous, logical, fair thinking when I found it in others,
and challenged me (my, how they challenged me!) to bring my own
thinking up to these lofty standards. In quiet homage to them, this
is what I have tried to do in my philosophical writing for the past
thirty years and more.
I
know there is a stereotype of ARAs out there that pictures all of
us as emotionally unbalanced bunny-huggers who wouldn’t recognize
a logical argument if one fell on us. I will address the origin
of this and other ARA-myths in Chapter One. Here it is enough to
express my hope that reading about my journey will go some way towards
taking the air out of this particular stereotype. There is a rigorous,
logical philosophy that supports what ARAs believe, one that treats
fairly those with whom we disagree. In Part II, I do my best to
explain this philosophy, as clearly and as simply as I can.
continued
on next page
Top
of Page • Close
Window
|
|
|