Zoosmatter

Home » animal abuse » Look into their eyes – Elephant Psychics?

Look into their eyes – Elephant Psychics?

Can you tell the difference?

Can you tell the difference?

One of the favourite battle cries of the anti zoo army “look into their eyes!”

Look into their eyes and you will see….what?

Above is a series of photos of elephant eyes, taken from pics of wild, captive zoo, circus and sanctuary elephants.

Can you tell who is who just by looking into their eyes? Assuming that by doing so you can tell which animal is happy and which animal is sad?

It is amusing when I hear people chant this little ditty. How many times do you look at your cat or your dog and project your own human perception of emotion onto them? Yes we can sometimes tell when our pets are feeling happy, sad or scared; but by merely by gazing into their eyes? Sometimes my cat, while lying with his head down in a relaxed cat pose looks sad. But he isn’t sad, his body posture and the tilt of his head give him a sort of adorable appearance that inspires an emotional reaction from me. I start to think human thoughts, is he hungry? is he sick? did something happen? Or is it perhaps that he is just a cat, lazing about with thoughts I will never actually be able to fully know or understand…maybe he is just content thinking his cat thoughts. It is outlined a little more in detail in this interesting blog post http://melissaasmith.hubpages.com/hub/sad-zoo-animals and I tend to agree with the writer.

As humans we tend to relate everything we experience back to our own emotional experiences and this includes how we perceive others as well as animals. To me it is a bit narcissistic bordering on speciest to gage the emotions of living creatures against  our own human emotions as if ours were the standard by which all life on earth should be compared to. They say they are the voice for the voiceless. To me this is kind of like an aggressive and unsolicited offer to interpret for a deaf person when you don’t know the first thing about sign language. Yes  it is rooted in compassion and caring to want to be a voice for animals but when human advantage and motive begin to take centre stage that voice becomes your own, not one for animals. And the human species is rarely a purely selfless creature no matter how kind or good you might think you are. Ego is ever present, be it the ego which pats yourself on the back for doing what it considers to be an act of kindness to the ego that wants to compete, to win, perhaps to win a campaign for a cause. Personal motivation can be  sly and covert even an unconscious parasitic crippler of good deeds. If one is not aware enough to recognize that they do not have super magic Dr. Doolittle powers of animal telepathy what are the odds that they are self aware enough to assess the influence their personal ego might have over their actions and words?

Perhaps there are many voices for the voiceless. Who decides whose voice is the right one? Surely being the loudest does not simply make you right.

“As empty vessels make the loudest sound, so they that have the

least wit are the greatest blabbers.”

Plato

Advertisements

3 Comments

  1. Animal Welfare Advocate says:

    Well said! Please tell us which elephants’ eyes were photographed and posted above: wild, sanctuary, zoo?

  2. UCC mom says:

    Some scientists who have studied elephants in the wild state that elephants at the Toronto Zoo look bad, Contrast that to the bull at Oakland Zoo who looks good.It’s not about looking solely at the eyes.

    Do you believe in freedom of speech and free exchange of ideas, or do you plan to censor this comment?

    • zoosmatter says:

      Those wild elephant experts do not study captive elephants nor have they ever seen the toronto zoo elephants physcially in person, they do not look bad. By conyrast they are in far better physcial conditon than Paws elephants which are grossly obese. Moss and poole are paid advocates for animal rights groups. They say what they need to say accordong to agendas. For example they never mention the value of family groups of all ages which is how elephants live in the wild. They dont mention this very important factor for happy elephants in the wild when they lobby for anti zoo groups. They only mention living in groups. But in the wild older elephants do not break off from their families to go live in small herds of old elephants do they? They cannot lobby this as an important factor which is evidenced in their own body of work as elephant behaviourist not veterinarians because sanctuaries cannot provide multi generational family groups can they? Also if you are referring to Dr. mel Richardson he is another paid advocate for animal rights groups, he says what they want him to say. He makes occular assessments according to agendas and has never seen the elephants in person. Even when he was here in Toronto to depute on behalf of paws claiming to be their vet he didnt visit the elephants. He is a disgruntled ex zoo vet who when asked at a Toronto council meeting how many elephants had died at PAWS in last 4 years, this was in 2012 he had no idea. He was supposed to have been their vet but had no idea how many elephants had died under his watch. The answer btw is 6. As for freedom of speech animal rights groups have enough platforms to voice their opinions. This is a venue to post the documented facts which were accessed via freedom of information requests from the USDA California State Health and and California Fish and wildlife. We outline the story as it played out which was not evidenced in mainstream media. yes we will censor as needed. Why? Because it is time for another voice to be heard on this issue without it being clouded by animal rights dogma which puts the cause and campaign before the animal’s true welfare. No matter hoe many facts have been put out there people dont care, they will stand by their cause amd ignore the truth which challenges it. There is an alternative location for these elephants but because people dont want them to be a part of the zoo industry they would rather risk thier lives in transport and to disease. So dont take this the wrong way but we dont give a damn about what paws experts say anyone who claims to care about animals would not risk these animal’s lives like this plain amd simple.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: