|
|
|
|
|
by eganist
2859 days ago
|
|
> Except we have zoos now and we treat animals very poorly, consider the billions upon billions of animals we slaughter every single year who’ve been forced to live in torturous conditions — zoos haven’t saved them. There's a false equivalence here. Zoos--and other tools like them which grant exposure--bring awareness to a challenge or a problem. Without them, awareness would be fleeting if not entirely absent from the western world as a direct consequence of the fact that far too many species housed in zoos just do not exist in the same regions of the world as developed economies right now. In other word, zoos beget awareness, which drive people like yourself to protect and care for the many forms of life with which we share this planet. I suspect there would be a much harder time convincing people in the developed world to pay e.g. Africa or the Pacific Islands a visit without an initial exposure to their simulated wilds in a well-maintained zoo. |
|
The fundamental problem is that humans view animals as tools, torture and murder for our benefit is normalised from birth and zoos are just an extension of that.
You can argue that zoos play a part in giving some humans some compassion towards some animals but what use is that when their next stop after the lion enclosure is the hotdog cart.
We shouldn’t need zoos. There’s lots of non-invasive ways to learn about animals, and if our shared fundamental belief was that we should do everything we can to show animals compassion and respect, then at no point would anyone need to say “unless these kids see a caged tiger they’re not going to consider the consequences of deforestation”.