Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

See all MNHQ comments on this thread

Animals vs humans round 2

1002 replies

livingzuid · 02/11/2013 20:00

I was enjoying our previous debate started by Fifi. Not sure if we were done!

AIBU to think if faced with choosing a pet over a human (even if a stranger), you should choose the human?

The idea was brought up in another thread and put in life or death situation. Building on fire contains your pet and a stranger. You could only save one, who would it be?

I had a dog, Ralph, I cried my heart out when he died 3 years ago. The only dog I wasn't scared of! But I can't imagine leaving a person to die instead, no matter how my heart would break.

OP posts:
ToysRLuv · 04/11/2013 21:27

Maryz: I, personally, wouldn't say there are "evil" acts either, just ones that are incomprehensible, and morally and legally wrong - caused by biology/psychology. "Evil" for me sort of resonates with sin and religion and a sort of esoteric plain of being. But I understand that for many other it doesn't quite mean what it means to me.

merrygo · 04/11/2013 21:29

Altruism in animals describes a range of behaviours performed by animals that may be to their own disadvantage but which benefit others.[1] Other definitions place emphasis on the genetic consequences of altruism, e.g. altruism is "Instinctive behavior that is detrimental to the individual but favors the survival or spread of that individual's genes, as by benefiting its relatives."[2] or the biological fitness of the animals, e.g. "Altruism refers to behavior by an individual that increases the fitness of another individual while decreasing the fitness of the actor.[3] Altruism appears most obviously in kin relationships but may also be evident amongst wider social groups.

Altruism in animals is not identical to the everyday concept of altruism in humans. In humans, an action would only be called "altruistic" if it was done with the conscious intention of helping another. But in the animal behaviour sense there is no such requirement. Indeed, some of the most interesting examples of altruism in animals are found among species that are presumably not capable of conscious thought, e.g. insects. For the animal biologist, it is the consequences of an action for reproductive fitness that determine whether the action counts as altruistic, not the intentions, if any, with which the action is performed.[4]

In the science of ethology (the study of behavior), and more generally in the study of social evolution, on occasion, some animals do behave in ways that reduce their individual fitness but increase the fitness of other individuals in the population; this is a functional definition of altruism.[5] Research in evolutionary theory has been applied to social behaviour, including altruism. Cases of animals helping individuals to whom they are closely related can be explained by kin selection, and are not considered true altruism. Beyond the physical exertions that in some species mothers and in some species fathers undertake to protect their young, extreme examples of sacrifice may occur. One example is matriphagy (the consumption of the mother by her offspring) in the spider Stegodyphus; another example is a male spider allowing a female fertilized by him to eat him. Hamilton's rule describes the benefit of such altruism in terms of Wright's coefficient of relationship to the beneficiary and the benefit granted to the beneficiary minus the cost to the sacrificer. Should this sum be greater than zero a fitness gain will result from the sacrifice.

When apparent altruism is not between kin, it may be based on reciprocity. A monkey will present its back to another monkey, who will pick out parasites; after a time the roles will be reversed. Such reciprocity will pay off, in evolutionary terms, as long as the costs of helping are less than the benefits of being helped and as long as animals will not gain in the long run by "cheating" – that is to say, by receiving favours without returning them. This is elaborated on in evolutionary game theory and specifically the prisoner's dilemma as social theory.
Implications in evolutionary theory[edit]

Olive baboons grooming
The existence of altruism in nature is at first sight puzzling. The theory of natural selection proposed by Charles Darwin leads us to expect animals to behave in ways that increase their own chances of survival and reproduction, not those of others. But by behaving altruistically, an animal reduces its own fitness, so should be at a selective disadvantage. Researchers on alleged altruistic behaviours among animals have been ideologically opposed to the social Darwinist concept of the "survival of the fittest", under the name of "survival of the nicest" — the latter being globally compatible, however, with the theory of evolution by natural selection. Insistence on such cooperative behaviours between animals was first exposed by the Russian zoologist and anarchist Peter Kropotkin in his 1902 book, Mutual Aid: A Factor of Evolution.

The idea that group selection might explain the evolution of altruism was first broached by Darwin himself in The Descent of Man, and Selection in Relation to Sex, (1871). The concept of group selection has a chequered and controversial history in evolutionary biology but the uncritical ‘good of the species’ tradition came to an abrupt halt in the 1960s, due largely to the work of George C. Williams and John Maynard Smith. In the 1960s and 1970s the rival theory of kin selection emerged, due originally to W. D. Hamilton.[6] Kin selection is an instance of inclusive fitness, which combines the number of offspring produced with the number an individual can produce by supporting others, such as siblings. This theory showed how altruistic behaviour could evolve without the need for group-level selection, and quickly gained prominence among biologists interested in the evolution of social behaviour.[4]

Recent developments in game theory have provided some explanations for apparent altruism, as have traditional evolutionary analyses. Among the proposed mechanisms are:
Behavioural manipulation (for example, by certain parasites that can alter the behavior of the host)
Bounded rationality (for example, Herbert A. Simon)
Kin selection including eusociality (see also "The Selfish Gene")
Memes (by influencing behavior to favor their own spread; see religion as a meme)
Reciprocal altruism, mutual aid
Sexual selection, in particular, the Handicap principle
Reciprocity
Indirect reciprocity (for example, reputation)
Strong reciprocity[7]
Pseudo-reciprocity

The study of altruism was the initial impetus behind George R. Price's development of the Price equation which is a mathematical equation used to study genetic evolution.
Social behavior and altruism share many similarities to the interactions between the many parts (cells, genes) of an organism, but are distinguished by the ability of each individual to reproduce indefinitely without an absolute requirement for its neighbors.
Altruist theories in evolutionary biology were contested by Amotz Zahavi, the inventor of the signalling theory and its correlative, the handicap principle, based mainly on his observations of the Arabian Babbler, a bird commonly known for its surprising (alleged) altruistic behaviours.

Researchers in Switzerland have developed an algorithm based on Hamilton's rule of kin selection. The algorithm shows how altruism in a swarm of entities can, over time, evolve and result in more effective swarm behaviour.[8][9]

Maryz · 04/11/2013 21:29

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

pianodoodle · 04/11/2013 21:30

I haven't seen any name calling to be honest.

That would be easy to spot.

People (and me I'm sure) have certainly said they would consider the act of doing x/y/z evil, or that they would consider anyone who who committed the act of leaving a child to die to be possibly evil or not sane.

That isn't the same thing as calling someone names, or making mental health "slurs"

Saying you think a certain behaviour (like leaving a child to die over a pet) is not normal is not a "slur" about mental health.

No one has mocked mental health problems.

ToysRLuv · 04/11/2013 21:31

merrygo: I'm sorry, but can I have that in a nutshell? I'm too lazy to read all that.

merrygo · 04/11/2013 21:33

Humans aren’t the only ones who adopt babies of other species (like kittens and puppies). Animals do it too.

Non-human animals aren’t usually credited with emotions like generosity or empathy, but those are the simplest explanations for the decisions of cats, pigs, tigers, and many others to adopt babies who not only were not theirs genetically, but were a different species entirely.

One example is a cat who adopted a baby squirrel into her litter of kittens. The cat, Emmy, adopted, suckled, and raised the squirrel, Rocky, as her own. Rocky blended right in with his siblings, even learning to purr when stroked.

In Rotherham, England, Bubbles the baby bunny lost her mother when she was just a week old. But Snaggle Puss the cat came to the rescue, adopting Bubbles into her litter of kittens.

Read more: Odd Animal Pairs - Cute Mothering Animals at WomansDay.com - Woman's Day

The Humane Society in Meriden, Connecticut, found itself in a bad situation when it saved Charlie Daniels, a 6-day-old motherless Rottweiler. But Satin the cat came to the rescue when she took Charlie Daniels into her litter of kittens.

Read more: Odd Animal Pairs - Cute Mothering Animals at WomansDay.com - Woman's Day

Ever seen a small sheep looking after a 440-pound elephant? Well that’s exactly what Skaap did at the Hoedspruit Endangered Species Center in South Africa. Jabulani the elephant was abandoned by his mother as a baby and taken to the animal park. At first, the frightened elephant would charge anything that came near him—until he met Skaap. The two have become inseparable ever since.

Read more: Odd Animal Pairs - Cute Mothering Animals at WomansDay.com - Woman's Day

At the Sriracha Tiger Zoo outside of Bangkok, Thailand, 6-year-old Bengal tigress Saimai has been raising piglets since she was 2 years old. Saimai was actually nursed by a pig until she was 4 months old, so the situation probably doesn’t seem very unusual to her. The piglets even wear little tiger-print coats—not to fit in, but to keep warm in their cold room.

Read more: Odd Animal Pairs - Cute Mothering Animals at WomansDay.com - Woman's Day

On the flip side, at the Xiangjiang Safari Park in Guangzhou City, China, a sow adopted three tiger cubs who were abandoned by their mother. The sow, recently a new mother, was brought in to help feed the cubs after they rejected bottles.

Read more: Odd Animal Pairs - Cute Mothering Animals at WomansDay.com - Woman's Day

www.smashinglists.com/10-feral-human-children-raised-by-animals/

merrygo · 04/11/2013 21:35

And the last post is an example of animals saving there own how...?

merrygo · 04/11/2013 21:35

their! pfft!!

Spikeytree · 04/11/2013 21:36

I've never mentioned Jimmy Saville.

I would feel for the person suffering a loss. However, I wouldn't sacrifice my animals (not just cats) for them. I say this as someone who has suffered loss in their life. I don't judge humans to be above animals.

Many of the slurs have been deleted. Mental illness is not something that should be used to insult someone.

merrygo · 04/11/2013 21:37

Toys, no. Read it or don't. It's there for those truely wishing to educate & have an informed debate rather than just emotive 'can't believe' & semantic 'I said the ACT is...'

ToysRLuv · 04/11/2013 21:51

Ahem, even scientists, like me, like their summaries! Nothing dodgy about that, as I'm sure you do understand. If I judge the summary worthy, I will read the whole research. I have more important thing to do than possibly read lots of emotive, isolated and anecdotal cases of animals "being like humans". Is that what you'd like to say/prove?

Do you believe in evolution/the food chain, merrygo? As humans, we are developed enough to worry about animal welfare and philosophise about the morality of these things while e.g. cats will still happily kill birds for fun, not for food (while it is normal behaviour for birds).

I am a veggie and have a deep respect for nature, but we are not all equal and never will be. Not the worm and the bird, not not the dog and the human. Roaches will outlive us all.

All creatures, tiny and large, are important and deliberate destruction, maltreatment and killing of animals is morally wrong, but humans should still come first - if it comes down to it.

pianodoodle · 04/11/2013 21:53

think the so-called animal savers have shown very little sympathy on this thread.

I tend to agree. When you think that a lot of posters would indeed be imagining the scenario where one of the pet savers has left their child to die, I'd have expected those posters to come up with a lot more callous responses than they did.

The outrage over curlew suggesting a parent would seek vengeance for example. No empathy for the fact that she would be acting on the news that her child had died in order to save a pet, but more "how could you do that to my dog?"

It's strange and certainly does lack empathy.

There have also been a lot who have thrown out bad things that have happened in their lives etc... even when not in context or not relevant to the point they were making, which I found quite strange as well.

Sometimes I couldn't quite work out why certain pieces of personal information had been volunteered IYSWIM.

Spikeytree · 04/11/2013 21:55

And with that, I'm off the thread.

MaidOfStars · 04/11/2013 21:56

Merry, some of those anecdotes are lovely, some are a little unconvincing. Animals staying with sick owners doesn't really count as 'life saving', for me anyway. When I read about a dog that tracked down a missing woman who was close to death, I don't think the dog saved her life, I think about the medical team - the human medical team - who worked tirelessly for a week to bring her back to health.

2tiredtoScare · 04/11/2013 22:04

None of my comments have been deleted and I have not once referred to mental illness either.

ToysRLuv · 04/11/2013 22:07

I know it is human nature to antropomorphise, but I think the right thing to do is to try and respect animals for what they are, and for their own special features (e.g. the dog's incredibly good sense of smell that can help it to find badgers, rabbits and humans).

2tiredtoScare · 04/11/2013 22:10

Patronising much merry

curlew · 04/11/2013 22:16

"You only need to look at both threads to find numerous cases of those of us who would save an animal being labelled 'twisted', 'evil' or of course on the other thread absolutely dreadful slurs using mental illness as an insult."

No, there were no slurs. It is not using mental illness as an insult to say that certain behaviours indicate a unbalanced mental condition. And I stand by thinking that saving an animal rather than a human is such a behaviour.

Spider7 · 04/11/2013 22:17

As humans, we are developed enough to worry about animal welfare and philosophise about the morality of these things while e.g. cats will still happily kill birds for fun, not for food (while it is normal behaviour for birds).

U.S. Dog-Fighting Rings Stealing Pets for "Bait"
Maryann Mott
for National Geographic News
February 18, 2004
For years the Pima County Sheriff's Department found the chewed-up bodies of dead dogs in the Arizona desert. But it wasn't until four years ago that the truth behind the killings emerged: Stolen family pets were being used in bloody training exercises by dog fighting rings.

The problem is not confined to Arizona. Animal-welfare groups and law-enforcement officers say pets throughout the country are frequently nabbed for "bait"—animals used to test another dog's fighting instinct. The "bait" is mauled or killed.

Like all good detectives, Mike Duffey of the Pima County Sheriff's Department pieced together the clues. Four years ago he was assigned to investigate animal crimes full-time.

Duffey knew the dead dogs found in the county's rural areas weren't strays, because the pads of their feet and their nails had not been worn down from a life on the streets. So Duffey checked the lost-and-stolen-animal reports kept by the local humane society.

"We found that a lot of the dogs found in these desert dumping areas were in fact, at one time, [reported] stolen," said Duffey, co-chair of the Animal Cruelty Taskforce of Southern Arizona, an organization made up of law-enforcement, criminal-justice, and animal-protection professionals. "So we began looking for a connection."

That connection was made when the veteran detective found a copy of the American Patriot. The journal, he said, was filled with pictures of fighting pit bulls kept in the very same areas where officers were finding the remains of mauled dogs.

Duffey says a large number of animals are reported lost in Pima County. Within the last six months, 3,396 animals have been reported missing. Of that amount, Duffey estimates 50 percent may have been stolen.

"Animal control has enough people out on patrol, so if [an animal] was truly a stray, they'd encounter it," Duffey said. "But they never turn up as strays; they just turn up as missing. Then somewhere down the line, we find one in the desert that matches the description of four or five that were reported stolen."

In January the sheriff's department began to tally local pets stolen by dog-fighting operations. Officers match the descriptions of animals found dumped in the desert to those reported missing.

National statistics on how many pets are taken each year and used as bait by dog-fighting rings are not available.

"I think every state has a problem with it, whether they know it or not," said Patricia Wagner, head of the National Illegal Animal Fighting Task Force for the Humane Society of the United States.

Wagner said news reports about stolen pets in the U.S. have appeared in California, Colorado, Florida, Illinois, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, and Texas, among other states.

18 October 2012 Last updated at 12:13 Share this pageEmailPrint
ShareFacebookTwitter
Human trafficking to UK 'rising'

And of course humans using other humans for fun & gain....

BBC's Tom Symonds: "Police have been stepping up the fight against the global trade in people"
Continue reading the main story
Related Stories

Trafficked young 'missing in UK'
UK men in 'modern slavery' abroad
2,600 UK prostitutes 'trafficked'
The number of people being trafficked into the UK is rising, latest government estimates suggest.

Last year the authorities learned of 946 victims, compared with 710 in 2010, the inter-departmental ministerial group on human trafficking said.

Trafficking gangs in China, Vietnam, Nigeria and eastern Europe now pose the biggest threat to the UK , it said.

The government said better co-ordination between its departments and with authorities abroad was key.

But anti-slavery groups warned government "failures" had led to "significant steps back" in the fight.

Illegal organ removals
Continue reading the main story
At the scene

Tom Symonds
Home Affairs correspondent
In Ilford, East London, the police moved in at 05:15 BST, smashing through the door of an end of terrace house, but without result. It was empty.

The Met says it carries out two such raids every week, on average.

Two miles away in a second house, they found a Lithuanian family living in one room. A stack of mail showed that a large number of people have stayed there before.

They questioned the Lithuanians who said they were being paid below minimum wage to work in a recycling depot and building firm.

The room costs £140 a week. There was a CCTV camera watching the door of the house.

Are they victims of people trafficking? It's not clear, and often those involved haven't asked themselves the same question.

But police say those who try to run are often subject to violence.

There is currently no official figure for the number of victims trafficked into the country each year.

However, the report said 712 adult victims and 234 child victims were reported last year to the National Referral Mechanism, the official body that identifies and looks after those caught up in trafficking.

Of the victims referred in 2010, 524 were adults and 186 were children.

It is thought the increase could be explained by improvements in identifying victims, although campaigners say the figures of those being trafficked could be far higher as many victims choose not to come forward for fear of being deported.

The report suggested an increase in the number of children being forced into crime, including street begging.

The Child Exploitation and Online Protection Centre estimates there are about 300 child trafficking victims in the UK every year.

The report also detailed two cases of people trafficked for illegal organ removals, but they were detected and stopped before the operations were carried out.

One involved the planned sale of a victim's kidneys.

'Better life'
Det Insp Kevin Hyland, of London's Metropolitan Police - which sees the UK's highest rates of trafficking - said some victims travelled to the UK in lorries or containers but the majority arrived lawfully, often accompanied by their traffickers.

"The vast majority of them think they're coming to a better life in the UK," he said.

Mr Hyland said it was often "almost impossible" for border guards to spot victims because they often did not even know they were being trafficked.

Many victims are promised jobs in the hotel or leisure industry, or as interpreters, but when they arrive they are "groomed or threatened" and used for sexual exploitation, forced labour or both, he said.

In London, police deal with more than 100 cases of trafficking a year. Some will involve more than 400 victims but the majority involve about 10 to 15 people.

The report revealed the largest number of referrals of potential victims of trafficking were Nigerian nationals. From within Europe, Romanian nationals were the biggest group referred.

There are an estimated 92 organised crime groups in the UK with known involvement in human trafficking, it said.

And 142 defendants were charged with offences related to human trafficking in 2011/12.

'Vile trade'
Continue reading the main story
Organ trafficking

Philippa Roxby
Health reporter, BBC News
The two potential victims of organ trafficking in the UK in 2011 are the first people identified as being forced into giving up their internal organs for transplant.

But it's still a small problem, with organ trafficking making up only 1% of all potential victims of trafficking last year, according to the Serious Organised Crime Association.

Cases of illegal organ trading are rare in the UK because of safeguards in place.

The Human Tissue Authority sees 1,200 cases a year of living organ donation - 95% involve kidneys and 5% liver lobes.

These cases include people making altruistic organ donations and those coming from abroad to donate organs to family members.

The HTA interviews all potential donors to make sure they are consenting freely and to ensure there is no reward or payment.

The process can take up to six months with the donor required to sign a form stating no coercion was involved.

Only when the HTA is satisfied would the operation be allowed to go ahead.

Advice is being drafted for NHS staff to help them identify potential cases of organ trafficking.

The report concluded intelligence sharing with international police forces was already "proving effective".

Immigration minister Mark Harper said the results demonstrated UK professionals were getting better at "spotting" the crime due to "cross-government" cooperation.

"We're doing a better job of cracking down people involved in the vile trade," he told BBC Radio 5 Live.

But the number of those prosecuted was "not enough," he said.

"One of the things we do is to prosecute people for the most serious offences we can, and sometimes that's not a trafficking offence."

Mr Harper also said agencies needed to "make sure victims who are trafficked are treated as victims and not as offenders, which has happened in the past".

Dr Aidan McQuade, director of Anti-Slavery International, said Mr Harper "must face up to the fact" that the problem was worsening "because of fundamental policy failures".

Sophie Hayes said no one helped her. Not even her wealthy clients, which included judges and senior police officers.
He said the government viewed the problem "through the lens of immigration" and had allowed rights for migrant workers to slip from "best practice".

"It would be helpful if the government appointed a national commissioner on trafficking to make sure policy on this issue was unimpeded by politics."

The report revealed thousands of "front-line" workers, including border staff, police and healthcare workers, have been trained to better identify, support and protect victims over the past two years.

Some airlines, including Virgin Atlantic and Thomas Cook, are also training cabin crew to identify those who engaged in trafficking and their potential victims.

And a 24-hour confidential line has been set up for crew to report concerns to border officials before a plane lands in the UK.

Spider7 · 04/11/2013 22:19

Clearly cats are not alone in hurting others for fun.....

pianodoodle · 04/11/2013 22:25

You posted a whole essay to point out that some people are bad? Why?

ToysRLuv · 04/11/2013 22:25

Spider: Violent, destructive, malevolent, extremely selfish acts by humans are condemned as morally and legally wrong by the majority of fellow humans. We are still animals, so plenty of humans are damaged by their biology and/or experiences and consequently do things that are incomprehensible and wrong. Doesn't mean that we are not very advanced as a species.

merrygo · 04/11/2013 22:26

All I'm trying to do is provide concrete examples of the other point of view.

Of course ignore animals raising humans & other species.

If the dog had not found the human, the medical team would not be saving anyone. But ignore that by all means.

better tell all those who received Pride of Britain awards for rescuing/saving people to give them back because it was in fact the medical teams who really saved them.

merrygo · 04/11/2013 22:28

Spider beat me to that one....... the quote at the top of her (his?) post clearly shows why that was posted. There are some horrid videos out there. Glad those weren't linked!

ToysRLuv · 04/11/2013 22:28

BTW, I think it is a bit lazy (and possibly sometimes indicative of lack of proper understanding) if you are not able to condense a huge amount of text into a shorter, summarised post, suitable to a chat forum. It's not Nature, FFS Wink

Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.

This thread is not accepting new messages.