Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 5
ouija ouija

What is the cure for almost constant anguish?

91 posts in this topic

No one has mentioned the animals involved in agricultural practices. The defintion of animal cruelty includes unnecessary pain, suffering or death. Since humans do not need to consume milk, eggs or animal flesh to survive, it is by defintion cruel.

So the question is, if you are concerned about animal welfare, why are you not a vegan?

I am.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am.

Hi Ouija, I wasn't writing specifically about you, but in general, to the UM readers.

There is an e-coli outbreakright now in an Alberta slaughterhouse that has resulted in a massive recall of beef in Canada and the U.S. In one article I read I was surprised that the author spoke truthfully about the cause.

"Many of the staff are recent immigrants or temporary foreign workers". These workers can't speak English, are told to work as fast as possible and are not likely to complain or blow any whistles.

There is plenty of scholarly literarure about the effects of working on a "kill floor". That's why no one wants to do this dirty work and is left to desperate immigrants. This was well documented in the 1906 novel The Jungle by Upton Sinclair about the Chicago slaughterhouses. It's always the most desperate who have to do this work.

I will leave you with a happy story. There are some ranchers who have had a change of heart and refuse to participate anymore.

Here's a video trailer about one such rancher.

http://www.peaceablekingdomfilm.org/

Here's another trailer http://www.witnessfilm.org/ about one man who felt compelled to do something and is making a difference.

It's people like these, and you, who give me hope.

edit: found the full video for The Witness

Edited by redhen
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I recently read an article on, of all places, the "Cracked" magazine web site about the reasons that humanity needs monsters. One of the reasons was that our brains respond to hatred and anger the same way they respond to cocaine: Our bodies release norepinephrine, a natural analgesic. So perhaps humans are drawn to stories about animal abusers because when we read them, we react with hatred and anger, thereby stimulating our brains to release norepinephrine to soothe us.

Just a thought.

I think another reason why we are drawn to horrific situations and behaviour is a primitive need to know about all dangers so that we can avoid them/run away from them/ prepare to fight them/rescue 'tribe' members from them. This was fine when we lived in very small extended family groups, but now, through the various forms of modern media we are being informed of so many horrors that our brains 'short-circuit', so to speak. I think the same primitive instinct kicks in when we drive past a car crash on the motorway. Reporters are always quick to accuse the public of 'rubber-necking'(even though that is essentially what they themselves are doing!), but I believe it is that instinct that insists we become aware of close dangers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Recently there have been several topics in UM that have particularly troubled me. They were about animal misuse and abuse. They immediately made me feel really down and they played on my mind. I am 60, and this abuse of animals(and humans too), seems neverending ..... it seems to have been around forever. The sheer number of miserable, pain-filled lives around the world, overwhelms me. It seems that even when some horror lessens or even stops altogether, a new one appears somewhere else. Sometimes it feels as if there will never be an end to the new horrors and tortures that humans can think up and then inflict upon the weak. It makes me feel as if I don't belong here and that the only time I will have relief is when I am dead.

So what I am asking for help with is this: how do I learn to cope, on a daily basis, with this excruciating anguish that, on occasion, makes me feel almost suicidal?

I get alerts of all kinds .I post them,photos an all,on my facebook.This distressed my friends,but I say to them ,we Nuff never forget how cruel humankind is ,and we must always stand up for animals .

I got one,this week,of a dog,so cute,stolen ,out of its owners yard in NJ,found 3 weeks later,in a dumpster .

Starved abused .Used as bait .

A tiny loving family dog .

I cannot even tell you ,the sounds that came out of me .

I posted It on my fb ,and wished death ,on the perpetrators children .I

And I got yelled at ,and I know thats beyond harsh ,but people who do this ,do not deserve happiness ,or kids.

Children of such people,are better off being reborn ,somewhere else.

Just my feeling on it .

Wishing karma on them ,helps me cope .

And it never makes me suicidal ,but maybe homicidal.

I hate people. I see this stuff,and know,most of the world today ,sucks .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is an e-coli outbreakright now in an Alberta slaughterhouse that has resulted in a massive recall of beef in Canada and the U.S. In one article I read I was surprised that the author spoke truthfully about the cause.

"Many of the staff are recent immigrants or temporary foreign workers". These workers can't speak English, are told to work as fast as possible and are not likely to complain or blow any whistles.

There is plenty of scholarly literarure about the effects of working on a "kill floor". That's why no one wants to do this dirty work and is left to desperate immigrants. This was well documented in the 1906 novel The Jungle by Upton Sinclair about the Chicago slaughterhouses. It's always the most desperate who have to do this work.

People who are immune to the suffering of animals and are only concerned with making the maximum amount of money out of them, those who own/run slaughterhouses are not going to be the kind of people who are bothered about food hygiene & safety laws.

Edited by ouija ouija

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I get alerts of all kinds .I post them,photos an all,on my facebook.This distressed my friends,but I say to them ,we Nuff never forget how cruel humankind is ,and we must always stand up for animals .

I got one,this week,of a dog,so cute,stolen ,out of its owners yard in NJ,found 3 weeks later,in a dumpster .

Starved abused .Used as bait .

A tiny loving family dog .

I cannot even tell you ,the sounds that came out of me .

I posted It on my fb ,and wished death ,on the perpetrators children .I

And I got yelled at ,and I know thats beyond harsh ,but people who do this ,do not deserve happiness ,or kids.

Children of such people,are better off being reborn ,somewhere else.

Just my feeling on it .

Wishing karma on them ,helps me cope .

And it never makes me suicidal ,but maybe homicidal.

I hate people. I see this stuff,and know,most of the world today ,sucks .

Keep up the good work. It seems there are plenty of people who agree with you ........ including me, of course.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I got one,this week,of a dog,so cute,stolen ,out of its owners yard in NJ,found 3 weeks later,in a dumpster .

Starved abused .Used as bait .sucks .

Let me guess, Camden? Camden NJ is notorious for the number of animal cruelty and neglect cases and where politicians just don't care. I could post some websites but the images there prevent me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let me guess, Camden? Camden NJ is notorious for the number of animal cruelty and neglect cases and where politicians just don't care. I could post some websites but the images there prevent me.

New Brunswick . I have it ,if you want to see it .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Even in nature animal cruelty is at an all time high, would it be as cruel and anguishing to you just focusing on the barbarity of animals themselves without the human factor that brings misery on an industrial scale? Life exists by consuming other lives and that is one of the cruelest facts of our existence but one that cannot be denied.

But come on get real!!!! How many strays are in your county alone? Do they not suffer? Does it require animal farms or bull fighting to allow your suffering meter to go up? Stray pets suffer too, starvation, cold, neglect, right there in your county and are you doing anything about that? This is not to say one cannot feel bad without going out to volunteer where there is a need to be filled, this is not even judging those who do not volunteer, it is about the gift of life itself we have been given.

Plants are also forms of life and they die everyday, even trees cut down to make way for another shopping strip. I hate that but life goes on and I will end up shopping there.

I am not saying one doesn't have a right to feel miserable at times but to remain there perpetually is in a way spitting on the gift of life and opportunities we each have. One can only be in protective mode or in growth mode but not in both modes at the same time. When in protective mode we cannot help ourselves or those around us so in essence it is also robbing those around us of all the things we could have done for them.

'Even in nature, animal cruelty is at an all time high' ...... I don't understand what you mean by this. (I am fine with wildlife eating other wildlife).

No, cruelty does not have to be large-scale and dramatic to affect me. I am lucky in that the county I live in has one of the lowest crime rates in the U.K. . The county is sparsely populated and therefore consists mainly of small rural communities. Animal cruelty is largely of the legal kind i.e. farming, fishing, although there is the occasional horse-mutilation reported(latest was less than a week ago). There are plenty of places for stray pets to go and plenty of people with the space to adopt them. Currently I am not physically able to help out at an animal shelter and I can't afford to rehome an animal.

I do not believe that life is a gift.

I wasn't going to mention plants/trees for fear of being laughed at!

Part of my problem at the moment is that my opportunities/possibilities are almost non-existent and I'm struggling to reinvent my life from scratch almost. I believe I am partially in growth mode and partially in protective mode at the moment.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Humans, and some other species, have been shown to have mirror neurons that are involved with empathy. Some argue that we are not hard wired for aggression and self interests. The economist and political adviser Jeremy Rifkin has written a thick book on this discovery and the consequences.

[media=]

[/media]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Speaking of empathy, around 800 normally peaceful and quiet Canadians stormed the gates of Marineland in Niagara Falls today, protesting longstanding allegations of animal abuse and neglect. There are no laws or regulatory agencies in Canada that are responsible for monitoring these aquatic zoos. The Canadian government thinks it's fine the way it is with the industry monitoring itself. What could go wrong?

http://marinelandanimaldefense.com/

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I 'm sorry to hear of anyone in an anguished state, but I must play devil's advocate a wee bit here. I have met many people who genuinely fretted over the perceived mistreatment of animals, and I agree wholeheartedly that it is a worthy cause to advocate animal rights. However, what has dismayed me, is an all too common coldness or indifference in these same people, to suffering inflicted on humans. This is really indicative of a misanthropic streak, where people who perceive they have been wronged by the world of people, can readily identify with animal victims of human wrong-doing, but human victims can't be similarly empathised with, because they are, after all, of the very species that perpetrates these injustices. A feat of mental gymnastics no doubt, but not a rare one by any means, in my experience.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I 'm sorry to hear of anyone in an anguished state, but I must play devil's advocate a wee bit here. I have met many people who genuinely fretted over the perceived mistreatment of animals, and I agree wholeheartedly that it is a worthy cause to advocate animal rights. However, what has dismayed me, is an all too common coldness or indifference in these same people, to suffering inflicted on humans. This is really indicative of a misanthropic streak, where people who perceive they have been wronged by the world of people, can readily identify with animal victims of human wrong-doing, but human victims can't be similarly empathised with, because they are, after all, of the very species that perpetrates these injustices. A feat of mental gymnastics no doubt, but not a rare one by any means, in my experience.

I think the 'fretting' over the mistreatment of animals arises out of the fact that they can't speak our language(they can't speak up for themselves) plus we can out-wit them most of the time and constrain them too. Obviously that applies to some humans too and I do feel equally bad for them. The bottom line is, humans are better equipped to get themselves out of bad situations than animals are(obviously I'm speaking very generally here, please don't cite examples where the opposite is true!).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Humans, and some other species, have been shown to have mirror neurons that are involved with empathy. Some argue that we are not hard wired for aggression and self interests. The economist and political adviser Jeremy Rifkin has written a thick book on this discovery and the consequences.

[media=]

[/media]

OMG!!!!!!! This video just blew me away! :w00t: Thank you, thank you, THANK YOU Redhen, for posting it. This explains everything.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think this might help you.

http://www.personalt.../awakening.html

Thank you ...... it did! (Will have to read it a few more times, though).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am lucky in that the county I live in has one of the lowest crime rates in the U.K. . The county is sparsely populated and therefore consists mainly of small rural communities. Animal cruelty is largely of the legal kind i.e. farming, fishing, although there is the occasional horse-mutilation reported(latest was less than a week ago).

I think you live in the same county as me, we've had horse mutilation here, I did a thread about it. We could be neighbours! :tu:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the 'fretting' over the mistreatment of animals arises out of the fact that they can't speak our language(they can't speak up for themselves) plus we can out-wit them most of the time and constrain them too. Obviously that applies to some humans too and I do feel equally bad for them. The bottom line is, humans are better equipped to get themselves out of bad situations than animals are(obviously I'm speaking very generally here, please don't cite examples where the opposite is true!).

I have heard this kind of rationalization before, the real bottom line is you have to perceive yourself as a deeply wronged, and especially isolated victim of human malice to "side" with animals that are persecuted, but not people. Or do you not consider yourself such a victim ? We can probably infer Hitler was such a person, cruelly indifferent to humans, but lovingly devoted to his German Shepherd dogs. I can even recall people half-excusing Hitler because he was an animal lover ! No surprise to hear they were animal liberationists. This is primarily a psychological phenomenon, and has more to do with the inner world of those so-afflicted, than external realities. I have never heard an animal cruelty fanatic express concern over the seeming cruelties of the natural world, which have never ceased for hundreds of millions of years, the difference being that humans are not directly responsible. I see animal cruelty campaigners as being as much anti-people as pro-animals in very many cases. Unless your heart extends as much to human "victims" as it does to animal ones, you are picking winners, in the same way "cute" fauna gets people motivated to protect, but "ugly" fauna can take their chances. Pandas are cuter than the average human, seemingly.

Edited by Habitat

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have heard this kind of rationalization before, the real bottom line is you have to perceive yourself as a deeply wronged, and especially isolated victim of human malice to "side" with animals that are persecuted, but not people.

I'm going to interject here, I've heard all these fallacies before. This first one is a false dichotomy, an exclusive either or that doesn't really exist. It is quite feasible to be concerned with animal welfare and human welfare at the same time. Exhibit A is William Wilberforce a leader in the fight against slavery and a founder of the RSPCA.

Or do you not consider yourself such a victim ? We can probably infer Hitler was such a person, cruelly indifferent to humans, but lovingly devoted to his German Shepherd dogs. I can even recall people half-excusing Hitler because he was an animal lover ! No surprise to hear they were animal liberationists.

This one is called poisoning the well. This fallacy attempts to discredit a claim based on irrelevant criteria. Rather than examining the claim, the arguer attacks the person's character, the origin of the idea, or something the idea or person is associated with, in this case Hitler's love of dogs and vegetarianism.

This is primarily a psychological phenomenon, and has more to do with the inner world of those so-afflicted, than external realities.

I'm assuming this is your own personal, uninformed opinion. If not, could you please cite your sources?

I have never heard an animal cruelty fanatic express concern over the seeming cruelties of the natural world, which have never ceased for hundreds of millions of years, the difference being that humans are not directly responsible.

First we have the use of loaded terms "fanatic". Next we have a straw man argument. No one made the claim that nature was cruel. Animal cruelty is a legal term, which can only be applied to humans since humans, according to the law authors are the only moral beings on the planet. Nature is not immoral, nature simply is.

This could also be categorized as a hasty generalization which consists of generalizing on the basis of an inadequate set of cases. Personally, I think the poster is deliberately leaving out evidence. Who is not aware of the compassion shown by "fanatics" to animal victims of hurricane Katrina?

I see animal cruelty campaigners as being as much anti-people as pro-animals in very many cases. Unless your heart extends as much to human "victims" as it does to animal ones, you are picking winners, in the same way "cute" fauna gets people motivated to protect, but "ugly" fauna can take their chances. Pandas are cuter than the average human, seemingly.

This is not a fallacy, this claim simply lacks any empirical evidence. It is the authors personal, uninformed opinion. Everyone is entitled to an opinion, but it should not be confused with evidence.

Edited by redhen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What he said ^ ^ ^ (And he said it a whole lot better than I could, too!)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm going to interject here, I've heard all these fallacies before. This first one is a false dichotomy, an exclusive either or that doesn't really exist. It is quite feasible to be concerned with animal welfare and human welfare at the same time. Exhibit A is William Wilberforce a leader in the fight against slavery and a founder of the RSPCA.

This one is called poisoning the well. This fallacy attempts to discredit a claim based on irrelevant criteria. Rather than examining the claim, the arguer attacks the person's character, the origin of the idea, or something the idea or person is associated with, in this case Hitler's love of dogs and vegetarianism.

I'm assuming this is your own personal, uninformed opinion. If not, could you please cite your sources?

First we have the use of loaded terms "fanatic". Next we have a straw man argument. No one made the claim that nature was cruel. Animal cruelty is a legal term, which can only be applied to humans since humans, according to the law authors are the only moral beings on the planet. Nature is not immoral, nature simply is.

This could also be categorized as a hasty generalization which consists of generalizing on the basis of an inadequate set of cases. Personally, I think the poster is deliberately leaving out evidence. Who is not aware of the compassion shown by "fanatics" to animal victims of hurricane Katrina?

This is not a fallacy, this claim simply lacks any empirical evidence. It is the authors personal, uninformed opinion. Everyone is entitled to an opinion, but it should not be confused with evidence.

Pull your head out of wherever it's stuck, Redhen, anyone who has failed to notice that particular breed of "animal lover" who simply could not give a rat's rear end about the fate of countless human victims of whatever cruel fate befalls them, has not been paying attention. It is so common I have seen it dozens of times. Instead of trying to impress with tales of false dichotomies and poisoned wells and whatever, how about you go to work and explain this phenomenon for me, unless you insist it is a fallacy and does not exist, in which case there is no point to this discussion. Seems to me you are a bit confused, I never claimed that a concern for animal welfare was incompatible with a similar concern for beleagured humans. You just couldn't resist the temptation to have yourself sound clever talking about Wilberforce. Let me leave you with an example of a now elderly chap I know who is forever taking in stray animals, and feeding every form of birdlife around his house. So far so good, but he made a rather callous quip when there was massive loss of life and homelessness in a natural disaster in Asia....." No problem, the way they breed over there they'll have made up the numbers in a few months". Enough said.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is something I always have trouble with...

(foremost details - I believe in protecting humans first... ie. deer in road cant go off shoulder its drop off, car coming, I hit the deer, not risk myself or another motorist)

I have trouble with people and animals born with disabilities, physical, mental, disfigurement, etc. And others are not.

I say this because I feel guilty alot because I feel like I have been blessed all my life. Good family, healthy kids, etc. Things always seem to work out for me and honestly it bother's me on frequent occasion, when I see someone less fortunate than me. I know life is not fair, but it's easy to say when everything is all good.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Instead of trying to impress with tales of false dichotomies and poisoned wells and whatever, how about you go to work and explain this phenomenon for me

This is called shifting the burden of proof. You made a claim that many people have a "misanthropic streak, where people who perceive they have been wronged by the world of people, can readily identify with animal victims of human wrong-doing, but human victims can't be similarly empathised with, because they are, after all, of the very species that perpetrates these injustices. A feat of mental gymnastics no doubt, but not a rare one by any means, in my experience."

You said that you "have met many people" that fit this description. You also mentioned dozens of such people. And from that you make the inference that most animal welfare advocates hate people? Anyways, we're just quibbling about numbers now.

Seems to me you are a bit confused, I never claimed that a concern for animal welfare was incompatible with a similar concern for beleagured humans.

Ok good, so you don't think it's 100%, but you think it's many, based on people you've met. You made the claim, If you want me to believe you, I would need some peer reviewed articles.

You just couldn't resist the temptation to have yourself sound clever talking about Wilberforce. Let me leave you with an example of a now elderly chap I know who is forever taking in stray animals, and feeding every form of birdlife around his house. So far so good, but he made a rather callous quip when there was massive loss of life and homelessness in a natural disaster in Asia....." No problem, the way they breed over there they'll have made up the numbers in a few months". Enough said.

I will grant you that some people who are concerned about animal welfare have a misanthropic streak, but I don't believe this group constitutes the majority of animal advocates.

I will also grant you that cute animals get more publicity than say lobsters. Yet every year Buddhists around the world release marine life, including lobsters, back into the oceans as a gesture of compassion. And yes, these people are concerned about human welfare too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No need for "peer reviews" this is not a science paper, refer again to post #63, I can't put it any clearer than that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

. And from that you make the inference that most animal welfare advocates hate people?

I did not infer that at all, but they are not a rarity, from my observations.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 5

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.