Odd Moments in the Animal Kingdom

@Robert Gentel,

Robert Gentel wrote:

The video description said:

"The zoo keeper are trying to help the bear to find animal instinct and wild nature."

Seemed pretty cruel, but that bear is amazingly expressive and cute.

It made me ill to watch.

If someone is wishing to help a bear cub "find animal instinct and wild nature"

a. You would imitate nature for mammals and do it by remaining very close to the cub, to act as a reassuring and protective presesnce to regulate the bears's fear and allow it to explore at its own rate without being clearly and seriously traumatised and, in its view, abandoned.

b. Maybe try other bears? I don't think bears have a lot to learn about THEIR änimal instincts" from totally alien species and ones which they would never come across in their wild state.

I thought the thing depicted quite serious cruelty to the cub and enormoous ignorance on the part of the zoo, or the handler.

1 Reply

@rosborne979,

rosborne979 wrote:

Robert Gentel wrote:
Poor bear is terrified!

What the hell's the matter with those people?

Stupid ignorance.

0 Replies

@nimh,

Lovely!

0 Replies

http://img194.imageshack.us/img194/8730/other24229tphq.jpg

0 Replies

@dlowan,

dlowan wrote:

I thought the thing depicted quite serious cruelty to the cub and enormoous ignorance on the part of the zoo, or the handler.

I think it was wrong-headed but I honestly think that bear is like that in any setting, and I think that is what they were trying to help him with. I don't think they can be faulted for the bear being afraid of his own shadow even if the way they try to help the bear doesn't make a lot of sense.

Flooding in psychology isn't very far removed from what they were trying to do, I think the outrage on the internet (from people who eat hundreds of animals especially, which has to be worse than scaring one) about the video is a bit overblown.

1 Reply

@Robert Gentel,

Flooding is a technique which is applied to consenting adults, many of whom don't cope with it, and there are other preferred options.

I see no evidence the cub was "äfraid of his own shadow" in any but strange and frightening situations.

Eating animals has some merit as an argument, or at least appears to, against ''overblown' outrage about cruelty to this bear....however, that animals are eaten (this cub might well have been eaten by male bears, which often prey on cubs, or starved, etc, in the wild) has no bearing on unnecessary cruelty to THIS cub, responsibility for which has been taken by humans.

Nor is eating animals an excuse for totally unnecessary cruelty to them before they are killed.

There certainly IS cruelty to animals that are to be eaten, but steps are slowly being taken to lessen this, and there is no excuse for that, either.

By the way, even if 'flooding 'was intended, it was not achieved, as the bear was removed while it was still terrified.

This would act to INCREASE its fear level.

2 Replies

@dlowan,

I guess what I find so distressing is that information about animal psychology and how to manage them is so bloody easy to access, and there is an explosion of information for zoo people about how to make life for their animals as good as possible.

I just don't see an excuse for such such bad judgment on the part of people who have taken on responsibility for these creatures...especially in such a rich and educated country as Japan (where I assume the thing was filmed???)

I understand that, in a world full of suffering and cruelty this is not such a big deal....but it's just so UNNECESSARY.

1 Reply

@dlowan,

I noticed in the video there was alot of laughter. What they did to that cub was mean and I don't find any humor in it at all.

0 Replies

@dlowan,

I felt bad for the bear, but I eat meat and I buy things that aren't "necessary". I know that my lifestyle contributes to far more suffering to animals than this woman caused, I am not ignorant of the consequences so I have a hard time saying that the woman in the video was exceptionally cruel.

Misguided or ignorant perhaps, and seeing distress will trigger a protective instinct in all but the most callous of people, but if the bear is always scared and they thought it would help I just don't see it as exceptionally cruel.

Quote:

I see no evidence the cub was "äfraid of his own shadow" in any but strange and frightening situations.

The zoologist said something (I don't understand Korean) about how they were doing that to help the bear overcome fear.

Quote:

Eating animals has some merit as an argument, or at least appears to, against ''overblown' outrage about cruelty to this bear....however, that animals are eaten (this cub might well have been eaten by male bears, which often prey on cubs, or starved, etc, in the wild) has no bearing on unnecessary cruelty to THIS cub, responsibility for which has been taken by humans.

My point was that I don't think what happened to THIS cub was that cruel to begin with. He was very expressive about it and that naturally elicits more sympathy but I don't think what they did was particularly cruel so much as just not working very well.

Quote:

Nor is eating animals an excuse for totally unnecessary cruelty to them before they are killed.

Don't get me wrong, I'm all for less cruelty to animals but nearly all the outrage seems to be directed at tiny cases that are emotionally compelling. If the bear was terrified but stoic it wouldn't have caused much outrage.

Quote:

There certainly IS cruelty to animals that are to be eaten, but steps are slowly being taken to lessen this, and there is no excuse for that, either.

I'm all for that, but the whole killing and eating them part has always struck me as a bigger issue to their well being than their treatment before doing so.

Quote:

By the way, even if 'flooding 'was intended, it was not achieved, as the bear was removed while it was still terrified.

Flooding wasn't quite right, because they don't seem to have been trying to give the bear a positive memory with a specific fear so much as just trying to see if they could make the bear braver by socializing it with other animals.

It was a stupid idea to begin with, and may not have been an attempt to help the bear at all (I have my own doubts about that). But that they said they were doing something of the sort, combined with how neurotic the bear seemed leads me to believe he had issues before this took place.

If the bear really is afraid of his own shadow (and he quite literally freaked out when the monkey's shadow moved) and already behaved this way about everything that moved then this isn't cruel, just misguided.

If it worked they would have helped him avoid future suffering, and it's one of those things where you look like a genius if it works and an ass if it doesn't.

1 Reply

@Robert Gentel,

Oh, I understand you and agree with a lot of your arguments....I just disagree that the method could ever have any merit or success, and that anyone who knows anything about young mammals would know that.

I think, too, that it being put up on Youtube as a FUNNY video was the thing that I found exacerbated my reaction.

I know there's a long history of humans finding cruelty to animals (and other humans) amusing...and most people finding that video funny would do so simply from ignorance about how distressed the bear is...and the keeper intended no cruelty...but I am still disurbed by posting something like that on Youtube for people to laugh at.

1 Reply

@dlowan,

dlowan wrote:

I think, too, that it being put up on Youtube as a FUNNY video was the thing that I found exacerbated my reaction.

Humor is in the eye of the beholder I guess. I thought parts (like one of his late reactions and when he hopped) were absolutely hilarious even though I felt bad for the bear.

Quote:

I know there's a long history of humans finding cruelty to animals (and other humans) amusing...and most people finding that video funny would do so simply from ignorance about how distressed the bear is...and the keeper intended no cruelty...but I am still disurbed by posting something like that on Youtube for people to laugh at.

Humans find various negative things amusing, I think it has little to do with animal cruelty and find this kind of video no different than traditional slapstick (guy falling down, getting hit in the nuts) in that regard.

1 Reply

I find that video disturbing. Yes, humor is in the eye of the beholder. That I agree with. What I don't agree with is comparing a person falling down, tripping whatever and getting up with no injuries even comparable to traumatizing a baby cub. Their method was not working yet they continued to put that cub in a situation that scared it and laughed about it. That is just cruel.

0 Replies

@Robert Gentel,

Yeah....I find the human videos horrible, too...if the person is hurt at all. Can't stand 'em.

You know, when I worked intensely with Chinese restaurant people for three years, I found what seemed to be a real cultural difference re reactions to people being REALLY hurt.

At least, this seemed to be true for the mainly Southern Chinese who comprised the chefs and kitchen hands.

A lot of horrible accidents can occur in restaurant kitchens.....and I saw one poor man cut his finger off, some very serious burns, and a lot of very nasty cuts that needed hospital treatment.

ALL the kitchen staff would roar with laughter at such times (and it didn't seem at all like the anxious laughter we can have at such times.)

The badly hurt person would appear more embarrassed than anything, and would try to kind of laugh along in a very humiliated way, while also often screaming in pain and such....and they would not seem at all angry or distressed by the laughter.

Often, the hilarity would seem to delay any first aid response for long enough for it to be one of the European staff who came in after the incident to be the one who acted.....you know, like cutting off arterial bleeds, immersing burn in cold water, calling ambulance etc. I don't mean that the Chinese staff WOULDN'T react and help...they would...but the laughter seemed so prolonged and kind of disabling (you know how hard it is to do anything when you are convulsed by laughter) that it seemed to take longer.

This would be stuff so serious that I don't think it would evoke laughter in any other culture that I am very familiar with....but it certainly resembled the laughter you refer to re people being hit in the nuts etc.

I am not sure how common this is? The pratfall etc stuff seems to be universal....but I don't happen to have seen this with any other group of folk re really obviously serious injury. Except maybe some of the Soprano family?

Acually, it seemed to be a male thing...I never saw any of the female Chinese staff respond that way. Or maybe it was a cultural thing just for that restaurant?

3 Replies

@dlowan,

dlowan wrote:

Acually, it seemed to be a male thing...I never saw any of the female Chinese staff respond that way. Or maybe it was a cultural thing just for that restaurant?

Dunno, but almost all of the cultural things you have told me about your Chinese restaurant experience seemed atypical or exaggerated.

1 Reply

@Robert Gentel,

I will take that with all the seriousness and respect it deserves from someone who wasn't there.

1 Reply

@dlowan,

I didn't mean that you exaggerated it, but that the things you've ascribed to cultural differences seem to me to have more to do with an atypical experience with some rather weird folk. There may be cultural elements that are amplified (that's a better word) by it having been some rather shady folk.

1 Reply

@dlowan,

Minor anecdotal evidence, but I remember having a conversation with E.G. about something similar when we were in Hawaii. A family (and I'm embarrassed to say I don't remember exactly what nationality -- I'm thinking Chinese but they may have been Japanese) was walking along when the little boy of the family tripped and fell on the sidewalk. He scraped his knee, which bled, and he started bawling. The family laughed. E.G. and I watched and waited for that to be over and for them to comfort the boy -- nope. They kept laughing. He'd get more distressed, they'd laugh more. All of them. (Seemed to be a mother, father, older sibling, and a grandparent or two.)

We figured intervening would be gauche but we couldn't quite believe what we were seeing. They eventually moved on, sad little boy (ambulatory but distressed) trailing along behind.

We theorized that it might have something to do with social training re: showing emotions in public? Really had/have no idea, just was a startling thing to see.

1 Reply

@dlowan,

dlowan wrote:

Yeah....I find the human videos horrible, too...if the person is hurt at all. Can't stand 'em.

I'm gonna guess your Meyer's Briggs type is NF. INFJ if I had to guess all four....

0 Replies

@sozobe,

sozobe wrote:

Minor anecdotal evidence, but I remember having a conversation with E.G. about something similar when we were in Hawaii. A family (and I'm embarrassed to say I don't remember exactly what nationality -- I'm thinking Chinese but they may have been Japanese) was walking along when the little boy of the family tripped and fell on the sidewalk. He scraped his knee, which bled, and he started bawling. The family laughed. E.G. and I watched and waited for that to be over and for them to comfort the boy -- nope. They kept laughing. He'd get more distressed, they'd laugh more. All of them. (Seemed to be a mother, father, older sibling, and a grandparent or two.)

It was Japanese, you told this story on Abuzz and I told you that they often laugh to cover their embarrassment at the unwanted attention the crying brought. I think it's different from what dlowan is describing because in that case they don't really seem to have anything to be embarrassed about.

1 Reply

@Robert Gentel,

Wow, good memory!

That makes sense. That could be related to the social lesson thing too -- a lesson to the kid about how crying brought his family unwanted attention (so don't do it).

0 Replies

Odd Moments in the Animal Kingdom

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know