To think that the response to animal killings is disproportionate to everything else going on in the world right now?

[littlemisseatsherfeelings]

Straight off I feel obliged to lay a disclaimer down to say I agree that the killing of the gorilla was really very sad and a complete waste of already endangered life. I thought the same when the killing of Cecil the lion got a hyper response as well. I think animal lovers could think I was being heartless if I didn't acknowledge this, and it really is sad.

That said - I NEVER see this kind of reaction about some truly horrific things going on EVERY day around the world. To humans. Our own kind. Day after day after day people are losing their lives. It is brutal. The refugee crisis, the conflicts in Africa, South America, just so much bloody war. Yet so few seem willing to talk about it.

You don't see the same numbers on petitions (430,000 for the gorilla when I checked a short while ago), you don't see as many long impassioned status rants on Facebook. It's just very awkward to start a conversation about the devastation to humankind right now, whether it is online, in the pub or wherever. But an animal gets killed and ALL HELL breaks loose. Celebrities shouting about their horror. The main news headlines full of it.

I get it to an extent. It's escapism. No one wants to face the reality of babies being burned in a war they didn't choose to be born into. Torture in prisons, FGM. The list goes on. It's depressing.

After sharing some stories about the war in the Middle East last year, and my distress at what I was seeing, the response on Facebook was very very quiet. I got a few comments that it made people uncomfortable. So I stopped doing it. But I read about the goings on in our world every day, my heart aches for what I am seeing and yet I feel like I have no one to talk to about this stuff. Like there's a stigma for wanting to enter into a discussion about it.

So back to my question, is it just me who thinks the reaction to animal stories is always disproportionate? Why can't we feel passion for other humans the way we do to one single animal we have never met or engaged with?

I often wonder just how much is done to alleviate human suffering by those who complain that people care more about animals than humans.

What did I say?

A different Mavis Mavis

Oh I was wondering what I'd said!

Oh yes, Iris I forgot about them. I have a minor but entirely ridiculous chimp phobia and mostly try to ignore the fact they exist

I do suspect that in a hundred years time, zoos - especially ones which house intelligent animals like gorillas - will be viewed with the same repulsion as institutions like old style prisons and workhouses and baby farms are now.

I think the chilling cruelty on the dogs' home was horrific and I'm not afraid to say so. It upsets me to think of anyone, animal or human, dying in terror, pain, alone and helpless.

The gorilla is different of course, but I really don't think what you believe makes you superior. What you do, does. Anyone who believes in minimising pain and suffering and exercising kindness is fine in my book.

Leigh - I'm a human, I like to think I'm not rude, greedy or nasty. And I certainly haven't killed anyone. If I happened to fall in to the enclosure you wouldn't have sympathy?

I just find it so weird.

Okay so the parents took their eyes off the ball. That was a mistake. That gorilla, deliberately or otherwise could easily and probably would have killed that little boy.

So - he, a four year old, deserved to die because his parents made a mistake?

Righto

I was appalled by the gorilla killing, but understand that with social media these things get way out of control, and become about extremes of opinion rather than the actual facts of what happened.

The issue with the image of the dead child on the beach - not the first or last - was that this led to a similar mass upsurge of emotion to which merkel responded ridiculously and now we have a massive problem and tragedy of more deaths as more are encourage d to risk their own and their family's lives - exploited by people smugglers and an increasing polarity of views on those perceived to be other, which in the uk is being exploited by the brexit folk. And trump.

And so it goes on. Law of unintended consequences which could all land us in the deepest of deep shit.

Its the innocence and sheer impotence of animals, they do our bidding, whether its food, entertainment etc. I do think people are going over the top about the gorilla though.
I dont think its a choice between humans and animals, you can care about both but I think the majority of people dont really care much about either.

I think that the part of what makes this so emotive is that Harambe (the Gorilla) was in captivity - at the hands of humans. He was shot because he was behaving as a Gorilla behaves. He wasn't behaving 'badly'; he hadn't 'gone mad'; he was just being a Gorilla, doing what Gorillas do.

Harambe was shot because a boy invaded his territory. That boy was only 4 years old and isn't responsible for his actions, but he is the responsibility of his parents. Whether they could have stopped him getting into the enclosure, we may never know - I've had many a close call with my DD1 who has SN and needed a harness until she was 6 and still needs very close attention at 10. But the fact remains that because they last control of their child that day, a Gorilla was killed.

YANBU, op. I've barely been on Facebook the past few days because otherwise I'd have had to have hidden dozens of friends who until now I thought were reasonable. Including a couple of teachers ffs!

Bonkers.

Leigh - Sorry I have no sympathy for people, only animals and children who can't protect or stand up for themselves.

Trouble is this situation came down directly to one versus the other of the very two you have sympathy with. Animal v child. What would you have done? What ever your personal semantics, that's the crux of it.

I would have tranquilised the gorilla not shot it! It's a zoo, I'm pretty sure they have tranquiliser gun of some sort.

I have to say that I always empathize with the helpless. So whether it's a little boy who fell into a cage and suddenly found himself face to face with a 400lb agitated young male gorilla and his panicking mother, a gorilla facing down an armed poacher in the forest, a boatload of refugees choosing between death at see or death in their homes, or young girls kidnapped and sold into slavery. I will always feel bad for those that are at the shorter end of the stick.

I am sorry for Harambe, but in that situation, I think the right choice was made. Just as if in a reverse situation it was a human shot trying to kill a gorilla.

I can't read about refugee's drowning anymore though, I always cry. And I've never been a share on facebook person. But I do donate to charities and just sent a pile of clothes and goods with the Red Crescent to Syria, and help with local animal rescues in the UAE. So.

*sea not see.

Hey where were you all when I started this exact same thread about Cecil the lion and got absolutely flamed to hell and back?

I agree with you OP.

I just wonder whether if all these people in anguish over the gorilla being shot or other "humans being nasty to animals" situations are vegans.

I bloody hope so or they are being rather hypocritical.

Tranquiliser shots take time to work and scare, hurt and agitate the animal while taking time to work which would have put the child at even more risk.

I'm not vegan Bakeoff but I don't eat meat only fish. However, I live where fish are caught by local fisherman so no big nets and I buy them fresh off the pier! I eat eggs from my friends own chickens and they are definitely not caged hens and there are only five of them in a big garden. I also sponsor an orangutan, a panda, a tiger and I give to the Donkey Samctuary and a cats home. I sponsor a child in Malawi and I help people locally with leftover food and various classes and some money. I have also done various campaigns on change and recently looked into trying to foster an orphan from being kept in cots and never leaving their cot in Romania. What do you do Bakeoff and the others who seem to despise animal lovers and ridicule us?

Oh yes and I worked with my mother to get fireworks banned where she lives as they are terrifying to animals. We got so much support that we managed to succeed and only laser displays are allowed on New Year's Eve and you get fined for using fireworks.

I expect the zoo people did have a tranquiliser gun to hand leigh. I also expect that as expert zoo professionals they knew better than you why a gun was a better choice.

I'm pretty sure they have tranquiliser gun of some sort.

Of course they do. But do you really think the trained, experienced gorilla handlers weighed up all the available options and thought 'nah, let's just kill it'.

Tranquilizers take time to work. A gorilla shot with a tranquilizer dart is not going to yawn politely then quietly take itself off for a nice snooze in the corner.

Genuine question: what leads you to believe that you are privy to viable solutions that the professional handlers were not able to devise? What do you believe to be the reasons why they decided against tranquilization?

Firstly as an ex manager with years of experience. One of the first things we set up was an entire risk assessment document with every single risk that could occur and an action plan of incase that happened. Regular training and meetings with tests to ensure all staff would know exactly what to do if something occurs. Why is it that it took them ten minutes to decide on a plan. In that ten minutes of fussing around the child could have been killed. There should have been a plan as to what if someone does go into an enclosure, what if an animal escapes. This is the same zoo that allowed two polar bears escape. A dead child would have guaranteed a massive court case with the parents who will sue the shit out of the zoo thus killing the business. Bad press etc. I would say that was what drive them to make that decision. They will use their "expertise" to manipulate their decisions but the real reason would have been the bad press and the lawsuit they would have to endure and the loss of their careers. I'm sorry but that's how I feel.

It was a horrible decision. If a child is in danger - and I'm sure the zoo staff would have assessed the situation and decided accordingly - then they have to act. The animal could not be tranquilized, He doesn't with or bribed with a banana.

These are wild animals - whether they should be in a zoo is another thread - but wild and not kept in a way that they are trained performers. They will act on instinct. A bored male gorilla will find a nice squeaky toy that makes the audience squeal and do what, ignore it? He doesn't care if it is human. He won't hesitate. The jersey gorilla did for some reason decide to guard and protect the child, but this one looked like a cat playing with a mouse.

Far worse things happen to animals in labs. The useless behaviour experiments carried out on monkeys were horrific pointless (yes, an orphan monkey will cuddle a toy mummy monkey with a sharp spike in it to death). I read these when studying psychology and haven't looked to see if they are still doing such studies.