on petophilia and planned marine prison

On petophilia and the planned marine prison

Petophilia

On November 20, I used the word "petophilia", giving only a brief

description of the word's meaning. I think it will be worth explaining

in some detail this phenomenon, since Malta appears not to be immune

to it.

I found some relevant information on this phenomenon on the Backlander

website. Although I do not agree completely with all that is said in

the article (and neither do I necessarily agree with any or all of the

other articles on the website), most of this article about petophilia

is indeed very true.

The article, for instance, tells us that "millions of pet owners are

co-opting helpless creatures into parodies of family and community

life. These relationships are destructive to the animals involved, and

they erode social, political and economic well-being".

Of course, to spare any misunderstandings and misinterpretation, I

will immediately state that I make a distinction between rescuing

non-human animals for their own sake, and rescuing or buying non-human

animals just for the sake of companionship. The former is to be

encouraged, while the latter goes against the right of non-human

animals not to be used as human property.

The Backlander article on petophilia goes on to say that "an obvious

harm flowing from sorting species into pettable or not pettable is

that, when individual creatures are devalued (deemed not pettable),

the loss of parent species tends to be regarded as inconsequential.

The following propositions seem self-evident:

Pet ownership is discretionary. No one is forced by biological or

psychological imperatives to enter into these arrangements.

The pleasures of pet ownership are one-sided. It does not matter

whether Fluffy or Jake appear to enjoy their circumstances.

The only certainty is that they have been house broken.

Pets never need to apologize for what they get up to. This is because

they cannot be said to have chosen their circumstance. Their options

are restricted to capitulation, fawning, performing, and begging to

secure morsels and attention. These are the prostitutions petophiles

seem to delight in.

Human beings have not been content to housebreak naturally occurring

animals. Selective breeding has spawned sub-species requiring constant

surveillance, food, manicuring and defense. Dogs 'downsized' their

once relatively large wolf brains as part of the bargain struck with

early human beings. Large brains are metabolically expensive and could

be dispensed with when scavenging, servility and barking at strangers

became coping skills sufficient for dog days.

Pet owners believe that their willingness to provide this nurturing is

evidence of stellar moral character.

Petophiles point out that pets have a much better life than farm

animals. It is true that farmers, especially corporate farmers, have

manipulated species they find interesting into grotesque caricatures.

Chickens and turkeys convert food into flesh so rapidly that their

skeletons often cannot support them. Decades ago, 'nouveaux chicks'

lost the ability to brood naturally. They must now be reproduced under

thermostatically controlled incubators.

Genetically modified organisms are the 'next big thing' in the

pantheon of human imperialism vis-�-vis what we are pleased to think

of as lesser creatures.

Even so, the lives endured farmed animals are usually mercifully

brief, compared to the interminable harms suffered by pets.

(If pets were phased out - not by killing them, but by breeding no

more) people would find themselves with more time and energy on their

hands. These resources could accomplish a great deal. Without pets to

lord it over, we would be less prone to arrogance and false claims of

empathy and responsibility. Without pets, we might very well resurrect

something of family and community life" (I would add that we would

even have more time to dedicate ourselves to other pressing issues,

like the use and killing of millions of other non-human animals for

"food", "clothing", vivisection and "entertainment").

Dr Charles Danten, a veterinarian, also writing on petophilia, tells

us: "There is a persistent belief that pets are well treated in our

society, that in fact they're often better treated than children.

Owning an animal is often taken to be proof of love, respect and

compassion. But the reality is considerably darker, and until we look

into it, it's hardly possible to bring about a meaningful change...

While the larger issues remain unaddressed, neutering at the consumer

level has very little impact on the over-all numbers of stray and

unwanted pets. In fact, it encourages consumerism by giving the

consumer a false impression that the problem is being taken care of.

This perception is largely responsible for the present unprecedented

popularity of pets. America and rich Western societies have truly gone

pet-crazy. As long as the pet industry survives, there will be

incurable population issues...

In other words, neutering and adoption are like treating a fever

instead of the infection; we are focusing on what is only a symptom of

a society's quiet disease. Meanwhile, things just keep on getting

worse. This point of view is mostly ignored by veterinarians and

humane societies who study the overpopulation problem with the help of

grants from the pharmaceutical and feed companies. I'll let you come

to your own conclusions about why this is so...

As long as we adopt a pet from death row and get him neutered, we feel

clear of conscience. We feel it's up to humane societies to do the

rest. We indulge ourselves in fantasies about the human-pet bond,

confident that we've done our part to improve the fate of animals. We

feel like a part of the solution. But it's a con. Our society not only

condones, but encourages our relationship with pets which is nothing

but a subtle form of slavery. Shelters and humane organizations play a

shamefully important role in this masquerade...

We nurture tight bonds with our animals, which makes them extremely

dependent and infantile. Yet many of us do not hesitate to leave a pet

alone all day, often locked up in a cage.

Depression, neurosis, phobias, chronic seperation anxiety, and stress

are the lot of animals kept as pets. Usually these problems are caused

by endless boredom, confinement, poor diet and lack of exercise.

Animals have innate characteristics that are not compatible with the

lifestyle we impose on them for our own pleasure and comfort. For

instance, dogs follow their instincts to fit into a certain position

in a pack. Dominance comes naturally to some dogs, which is good in a

dog pack, but usually undesirable in dog-human relationships. Most

people have little understanding of the laws that govern dog behavior,

and when conflicts arise, it is always the dog that loses in the end.

This is but one example of the incompatibility of animals and people

that causes life to be stressful for pets.

Although we all acknowledge what pets do for us, we seldom think about

what we are actually doing to them. When you start looking below the

surface, when you finally see the big picture, you come to realize

that over-all, pets are not so fortunate, indeed no more fortunate

than the other animals that we use for food, clothing and to test

beauty products, or those that we hunt for pleasure. This link is more

difficult to make because the exploitation of pets operates perversely

under the covert of good intentions. Precisely because of this, it is

much more cruel by its hypocrisy and sophistication than the more

obvious forms".

But that's enough to give a general idea on Dr Danten's arguments

against the pet industry, that is fuelled by petophilia. If you would

like to read the whole text, you will find it at

http://www.angryvet.org/en/03_articles/Slavesofouraffection.htm

"We should, of course, care for all those domestic animals that are

presently alive, but we should not continue to bring more animals into

existence so that we may own them as pets" - Gary L. Francione

Mepa approves application for marine prisons in Qawra

The Malta Independent of today reports that The Malta Environment and

Planning Authority (Mepa) board yesterday approved the full

development application for the construction of a marine "aquarium"

(prison) close to the Qawra promenade.

The marine prison includes several facilities for humans who love to

see falsely imprisoned non-human inmates. The facilities, according to

The Malta Independent, include a cafeteria, a museum, a diving

institute, an amphitheatre and underground parking.

At present, the site is a derelict stretch of land on the foreshore of

Qawra and will also convert the existing parking area into a promenade

with ample open spaces.

According to the plan, the marine prison will be divided in a number

of sections. These include a "paludarium" in which Mediterranean

species will be imprisoned, a reef tank for the imprisonment of

tropical species and a section for fixed display tanks.

During yesterday's public hearing, the board also approved the

application for the construction of a new substation at Manoel Island,

underground services at the Malta Freeport and deferred the hearing

for outline application for the construction of "pig fattening" units

for pigs destined to be murdered.