To have argued with a beggar (animal abuse content)

[MinnieMoose]

Was I being unreasonable to have an argument with a street beggar?

We were on holiday to Rhodes and visited Rhodes old town one evening with the children.

I had read a campaign in our hotel lobby from a local animal welfare charity, that was informing tourists not to give money to beggars with puppies. As they are taken from their mothers too early and are drugged to keep them quiet, all to gain sympathy for money.

They work as gangs and once the puppies have served their purpose they are killed, they are given no water and left with the beggar in the heat for long periods of time - not to mention the drugs they are given to keep them sleepy.

I was distressed to read this and we encountered a street beggar almost immediately on our evening out.

She was only a young girl (13 at a guess) and had a tiny black pup, asleep next to her.

I couldn't help but feel outraged, should I have turned my head and walked on?

I asked her where the pup's mother was, where was it's water/milk/food? How come the pup was fast asleep and couldn't be roused?

She looked at me blankly, so I informed the tourists around us not to give her any money and suddenly she understands english and begins swearing at me and giving me hand gestures of the "fuck off" variety.

Well then I saw red and an argument followed with lots of swearing and shouting, I am ashamed of myself but as an animal lover I couldn't contain myself.

We informed a policeman and she ran with the poor puppy under her arm.

My husband had taken the children away from the situation before it became heated, but was annoyed with me for causing a scene.

So was I being unreasonable?

Awful behavior

Minnie
I think it's admirable that you've come back to the thread and admitted you were wrong.

You've also done a good thing in highlighting the issue.

I would have bought the pup off her.

PlatinumStar I don't have DCs although I am sure if I did I would no doubt put them above anything else in saving them from a disaster. However I wonder whether although nearly everyone would do this, it may be as much to do with the fact that humans generally have/form closer bonds with other humans than with animals. Therefore I think most people rush to save the child because of that, not because they necessarily hold a deep philosophical conviction that human life is more important than animal life. There's a bit difference between 'I care more about the child' and 'I believe animal life is expensable'. Anyway, I digress...

My point wasn't really about who/what you'd save from drowning - in fact my point was the exact opposite really. I think that in most circumstances (ie NOT cases where you have to choose between saving a human or animal from certain death), and leaving aside the thorny issues of diet, animal testing etc (I don't think this thread really needs to go there!) viewpoints that say 'animal life is expendable' are cruel and arrogant and entirely subjective. (We can believe deeply in something while still seeing its an entirely subjective position).

Fundamentally, I don't see the POINT in saying 'animal life' is expendable unless it's in the context of a life-death dilemma or similar. Many situations, including this one, allow for showing equal or at least similar compassion for both, and I don't think in situations like that it's helpful, or indeed our place, to decide which is more important.

We are all living creatures on this planet. Utterly simplistically, I don't believe in any innate superiority or greater value of human life. But then you get to issues like eating meat, drug testing and of course, life and death choices, and like most people, in my actions I place humans first. Which I suppose makes me a total hypocrite, but where you end up after making various messy choices I think is very different from taking 'animal life is expendable' as a starting point. I think it's the word expendable I have such problems with.

Human life inevitably involves choices which we have to make, and our existence and actions tend to have much more impact on the world than other species, but that's chance. I don't think that gives us the right to assume an overall position that ANY other life is expendable. To me, the choices we make are a constant struggle and a tragedy (albeit what most of us agree is 'necessary'). Who are we to say 'it doesn't matter, they're not important.?

Does that make sense?

Afternoon everyone,

Thank you to everyone who reported this thread to us. We think it's wonderful to see that the OP has come back to the thread to apologies, and that you've been gracious in accepting her apology. It shows how great AIBU can be for debate and discussion.

We have deleted some personal attacks, and will continue to do so, once they are reported to us. It would be a shame for an interesting debate to descend into a bunfight, so let's keep it within the guidelines eh?

Glad you see that you were wrong but I can't help feeling awful for that poor child. First enslaved by a criminal gang for street begging (and how the fuck is nothing done about that throughout Europe, when we all know what's going on!!!!!! Outrageous), then abused on the street by ignorant tourists.

I love puppies and ideally those who abuse and torture animals should have the harshest sentences meted out to them but our first concern needs to be enslaved children and adults who are terrorised and owned by vicious gangs (and not just for begging, there's also a huge issue with sex slavery). I don't understand why there is no political will to sort this problem out, why the police ignore it, although maybe it's because the victims come from vulnerable communities and poor backgrounds. If the victims were local and being abducted/sold from the same backgrounds as politicians, police chiefs and journalists then maybe there would be a will to care.

Was the beggar girl Roma? There's a big issue across Europe of Roma children being bought or stolen from their parents and then controlled by highly organised criminal gangs who traffic them across Europe to work as beggars or pickpockets. This isn't a life any 13 year old chooses for themselves.

I saw a documentary a while ago about an Italian (iirc) police team trying to tackle this issue. They'd do sweeps and round up the children, but eventually either their parents would collect them (and send them back to the gangs) or they'd run away from children's homes and return to their gang masters as they knew no different. Then the gangs would just move them to another city or country.

Platinum I don't think I can add much to what woozlebear said above.

I don't have DC either but have no doubt if I did I'd place them above anything else in terms of a life or death situation.

It's the expendable idea I take issue with too. But I suppose I just can't get onboard with such a viewpoint because I get equally upset about animal abuse as all the other awful things that unfortunately happen in this world on a daily basis. I reckon we all have enough compassion in us not to have to resort to ranking things and deciding which is worse.

Woozlebear and wasapea - thanks for responses. Interesting debate b

Posted too soon. I just can't get on with the view point that animals and people are equally important, although I can appreciate the idea of "expendable" is uncomfortable.

My point was that not all people are immediately upset by the same things. There will always be people who bring animals home from their holidays, always be people who boycott places for child abuse records like Vietnam and be people who don't really think about it. The main thing is that those people don't just talk on the web but actually involve themselves in chance, whether animals or humans. I rescue 2 lobsters a month, I buy them and release, doesn't mean I don't care about humans. I also pay boarding fees for 2 children From Sri Lanka who were my cleaners kids in Dubai. We do what we can...or do nothing

Did I really make a personal attack

Theodora I agree that we do what we can and just because you rescue lobsters doesn't mean you don't care about children. However if you were confronted with a lobster and child being held in captivity, or at least in need of help at the same time, the idea that anyone would prioritise the lobster is just so alien to me as to be incomprehensible.

Gosh - didn't expect that reaction -sorry if I have upset anyone - I didn't make it clear what I meant ..but I am struggling to explain what I mean any better...
It was a moral thing - a bit like the 'who do you save from drowning scenario mentioned above' -and when does human cruelty become acceptable ...

It is nothing to do whether the child is in this country or not...

I read it and thought poor poor girl and poor animal and what a terrible world we live in...

Reading the posts made me think even more about animals and human cruelty ...(comments like animals being dispensable etc etc)...

Then I thought the puppy wasn't actually suffering as much as the girl ...and the girl had a lifetime suffering to 'look forward' to...
human survival instinct and where do you draw the line in order to survive/ avoid making your suffering worse...
(Thoughts about Congolese child soldier training, Jews who 'worked ' in the concentration camps etc etc)

Really don't want to go down this line - but the suicide thing is if that is your absolute last resort to escape/not do something you couldn't live with yourself for doing...(thinking forced marriages of younger than 13 yos who then set fire to themselves)

And 13 isn't that young - in this country the age of criminal responsibility can be as young as 10 ....

Someone said about victims of child abuse (actually have known a few...).
The helplessness - and no choice - I also know absolutely that is not necessarily true ...even at younger than 13...
Different western country and 30+yo ago now -
A boy who had been physically & mentally abused until at the age of 11-12 turned on their abuser (mother) - he stopped being abused (in fact mother became a little scared of him) - but he became an abuser -
Did things like forcing his younger brothers (7 & 9) to hurt each other - eg bite each other until they drew blood ...the younger ones were still being abused by the mother too....
The youngest brother ran away at the age of 11 - (which thankfully lead to them going into care) ... the middle brother (then 13) had stayed to protect the youngest - (the elder brother had stopped making them hurt each other as much - think he realised what he had done with his mother might happen to him as they got bigger)
These three really badly abused children had all made decisions/choices of a kind when younger or around 13...
I know the youngest really well - he still has the bite markers
He has (sort of) forgiven his mother but not forgotten.. (he can see that she had a terrible time too - married at 14, 4 dcs before she was 20, moved to a strange country with no family, abused by the alcoholic father etc) but he has not (and don't think ever will) forgiven his elder brother who 'chose' to turn into an abuser...

theodora that's a lovely thing to do. You're right, different things affect people in stronger ways than others.

Platinum it is an interesting debate. I have always been an animal lover and I find it extremely hard to hear stories about them being mistreated. But it definitely doesn't mean I can't care about other stuff.

My pets give me so much joy and love. But that's not to say I value them more highly than DH, for example (mostly).

Cross posted there. I also think Platinum that it's partly based on what you can do as an individual at a certain point in time.

Theodora can personally save a lobster there and then and do a good thing with little or no comeback. It's much harder to free a child from slavery, for example. Obviously we should all do our bit for the big issues but that's not to say we can't deal with the smaller ones at the same time.

Unlucky, when you're in a hole...

the idea that anyone would prioritise the lobster is just so alien to me as to be incomprehensible.

I'm not saying it wouldn't be a tad strange, but can I just turn the tables a minute Platinum and ask you to explain WHY it seems to obvious to you to prioritise the child?

I know it's what we'd all do, but I'm finding it really interesting thinking about how we arrive at those decisions/emotions. Is it that the child would tug your heart strings more, or that you think that it as an absolute 'truth' that the child is more 'valuable'?

I am actually appalled at the vile level of swearing going on here.
I am sure all those contributing to this thread are doing something for humanity? Are you giving to charity in your daily lives as much as you are swearing?
For what is worth:

1- there are people who have a desire to defend animals and others who do so for children or whatever. I believe all are noble and better than sitting on a couch yelling at strangers. Fair enough, I would not have yelled at the girl, but I would also not have saved the puppy. I would/have walked on. Which in my book makes me a worse person than those who do something. If WE were concentrating on doing what WE are good at/passionate about, rather than yelling at others, then maybe this would be a better world.

2- Let us not be silly. A lobster's and a child's life are not comparable. However, I do not believe that those who rant so much about children's lives are not buying clothes/shoes/whatever made by children, are not eating the cows that are fed with the grain cultivated in India where there are less fields of grains for the children because the rich Westerners have to be fed, and are not wasting food/water and so forth that will have to be paid for by the children of the world. A bit of perspective please.

100% I think a child is more valuable than a puppy.

I might walk past a beggar in the scenario described and think "aw, poor puppy" - but to ignore the plight of the child is incomprehensible to me.

Humans are more valuable than animals. It is fine to kill and eat animals, the vast majority of people in this country happily tuck into animal products even knowing there is a fair amount of suffering involved. Human lives are worth more.

I apologise for my personal attack, particularly now the OP has admitted she was wrong.

Unlucky83, I can't say what I think of you and your post because I don't want this deleted. But please...put your brain in gear and have a think. Did you really mean to suggest that a 13 year old child should kill herself to escape abuse? And that this possibility constitutes her having a choice?

YY to doing what you can at any given time.

It's also a good thing that we all have different isues that really get us more than others. In a way it would be unworkable to have anvery rigid accepted hierarchy of what's 'important' and what's not, and everyone rushing to help with the highest on that list. We need some people to help tackle child abuse, and we need other people to help tackle animal abuse. In fact we need more people to do both rather than judging people for which they focus on.

Some people further up this thread seem to be SO contemptuous of people who 'care more about animals than people', and I wonder what falls foul of this disapproval? Are animal charities bad for taking potential donations away from people-oriented charities?

But maja, that's only because humans have decided that's the case.

Personally I would question anyone who didn't help a suffering animal if they had an opportunity to do so (obviously within reason, without putting themselves or others in danger) because they didn't think an animal was 'worth' enough.

Unlucky I was brought up by horribly abusive parents and started self harming as I felt that the only choice I had was to commit suicide. It made me feel like I had some control over the situation. I now realise I had none