Animals vs. Children

[OperaDiva]

If a puppy or kitten is separated from it's mommy and cries, everyone feels so bad for it, and it's a horribly sad thing. When they have to be fed formula by a dropper, it is portrayed as a huge struggle to keep them alive on something other than their mother's milk.

Some human babies are put to sleep in a room alone, without their mother beside them, and it "helps them be independent". Some human babies are given formula for convenience, or because feeding them from the breast is "weird".

If you did these things to a newborn puppy or kitten, you are a horrible, inhumane person. If you do them to a newborn human, totally normal, no one bats an eye.

Is anyone else completely confused by this lack of consistency?

[mntnmom]

Horribly confused. We don't circumcise pets and livestock either, so at least we're twisted in a consistent way.

[rubidoux]

I was thinking about something sort of along these lines yesterday. It's only very tangentially related, similar in how we think about these things.

Clearly the reason that babies want to be held almost constantly and want to sleep in close physical proximity to their caregivers is that it was evolutionarily selected for, but most of our society works so hard to "train" them out of it. If they'd just think about it for a second and realize that babies are hard wired to be that way and there is no good reason to change them, and in fact, it is a better healthier way for them to be, wouldn't they have to give up on all that training crap?

And yes, I agree, it is completely backwards.

[writteninkursive]

I know. It's really upsetting to think about. I've often had the thought when I see a neighbor's dog why we have so much propaganda surrounding human circumcision and how "necessary" it is, but how many dogs do you know of that have had massive, life-threatening infections from not being circumcised? I suppose once they realize they can make money off circumcising animals, they'll push that too. Just like vaccines. Sigh.

I treat my babies like they need me. And I think it's sad when any infant creature is crying for it's mom! We need to learn to respect the children of our society.

[JL83]

Originally Posted by mntnmom

Horribly confused. We don't circumcise pets and livestock either, so at least we're twisted in a consistent way.

No, we simply remove both their testicles or their uterus. And in many cases, like with country animals, people do the neuter themselves without any anesthesia or pain relief.

[Bluegoat]

Originally Posted by JL83

No, we simply remove both their testicles or their uterus. And in many cases, like with country animals, people do the neuter themselves without any anesthesia or pain relief.

My first job was at a farm where one of the owners had started out in farming as a person who would go ti a farm and castrate all the young steer. It was, I gather, a bit of an odd way to spend one's days.

[Litcrit]

DH and I talked about it while I was pg with our first and that's how we decided we'd be AP (not that we knew that's what it's called).

Kittens and puppies sleep with their mother and suck when they need to. If they squeal, their mother immediately responds, sniffs them, licks them, checks on them, comforts them. She doesn't reason 'well, they're not hungry, so they don't need me'. Why should human cubs have such a harsher treatment? It didn't make sense.

[aurora_skys]

Ive thought about this often. Watching my cat take care of her kittens while I was pregnant was a part of what helped me understand how a parent should be (she was devoted and nursed them to 10 weeks, most kittens would have been snatched from her by 6 weeks!!). She never let them cry...

A friend of mine posted today on facebook about her 6 week old son "had already developed a fake cry to get her attention." and everyone else was commenting back like the baby is being manipulative! I wanted to just post "except it isnt fake " but couldnt bring myself to... Our culture is so sad when it comes to how we treat our precious babies...

[moondiapers]

I must have had some mean mama cats, because beyond the first few weeks, there wasn't anything gentle about them.

[AutumnW]

I find that if you use this view in debate with the parents using these techniques that they state that they are not animals. All of the anthropologists (i'm an anthropology student) that I know who study human evolution and interactions are big on breastfeeding and keeping babies close because they know that we are in fact animals.

[noobmom]

Originally Posted by moondiapers

I must have had some mean mama cats, because beyond the first few weeks, there wasn't anything gentle about them.

Yes, but cats are adults (sexually mature) within a year, if not sooner. If you say that a humans are minimally sexually mature at 12 yo, that's 12 times as long. Multiple a few weeks (a month), by 12 and you get a year. So, using the cat as a example we should be gentle at least a year!

[Tigerchild]

Originally Posted by mntnmom

Horribly confused. We don't circumcise pets and livestock either, so at least we're twisted in a consistent way.

No, we don't circumcize livestock, but we remove their testicles without anesthetic. We crop ears and dock tails, and often pull out teeth and nails, and cut off beaks. We pull out or destroy flight feathers so that animals born to fly never will. We also encourage rampant inbreeding that virtually ensures disease and disorders (often painful and lethal and dehabilitating). We also breed animals so that they can't walk or have joints burst from deformed bodies so that we can more cheap meat. We rip newborns away from their mothers so that we can take their milk for ourselves, and keep the babies alive just until they have enough meat to harvest. We make most livestock live in their own filth, in such overcrowded conditions that they often attack or trample each other to death.

Um...sorry, but honestly, comparing CIO to how we treat livestock and thinking CIO is worse--I realize that probably this is anethema to MDC but...really. Wow. I think I'd rather be a human than a livestock animal in most commercial setups, sorry.

[butterfly_mommy]

My sister and I have often commented on how humans are the only mammals that force their young to sleep away from them at a young age.

[choli]

Originally Posted by mntnmom

Horribly confused. We don't circumcise pets and livestock either, so at least we're twisted in a consistent way.

We don't castrate children either, or remove their fingertips, or dock their tails, or slaughter them for food.

Well, I guess I'm coming down on the side of children are treated better than animals in this world.

[Storm Bride]

Originally Posted by Tigerchild

No, we don't circumcize livestock, but we remove their testicles without anesthetic. We crop ears and dock tails, and often pull out teeth and nails, and cut off beaks. We pull out or destroy flight feathers so that animals born to fly never will. We also encourage rampant inbreeding that virtually ensures disease and disorders (often painful and lethal and dehabilitating). We also breed animals so that they can't walk or have joints burst from deformed bodies so that we can more cheap meat. We rip newborns away from their mothers so that we can take their milk for ourselves, and keep the babies alive just until they have enough meat to harvest. We make most livestock live in their own filth, in such overcrowded conditions that they often attack or trample each other to death.

Um...sorry, but honestly, comparing CIO to how we treat livestock and thinking CIO is worse--I realize that probably this is anethema to MDC but...really. Wow. I think I'd rather be a human than a livestock animal in most commercial setups, sorry.

I totally agree. But, there's one fundamental difference between CIO/circumcision and all these things. Not one of the things we do to animals is done with the claim that it's in the best interests of the animal. We, as a society, do those things, because they suit our purposes. Maybe if we were that honest about CIO and circ, I'd feel better. But, we're not. We merrily go along chopping off pieces of infant's penises, and forcing them to cry themselves to sleep, alone and scared, and can't even be honest enough to admit we're doing it for our benefit (eg. a "pretty penis" :Puke ), not for theirs. I'm not excusing the way factory farms work, though. They're sick.

[Storm Bride]

Originally Posted by choli

Well, I guess I'm coming down on the side of children are treated better than animals in this world.

In this part of the world, anyway. Children are treated abominably in some places.

[Litcrit]

Originally Posted by choli

Well, I guess I'm coming down on the side of children are treated better than animals in this world.

Yes, by us. We can certainly be more cruel to other species.

But animal cubs are often treated much better by their mothers than human cubs.

[Lilly Milly]

It might help to differentiate between a comparison between how animals treat their own young and how humans treat their own young, versus a comparison of how humans treat animals and how humans treat their children. Big difference. KWIM? I think the OP was making the first comparison.

That being said, I would make the case that humans are animals, but that we are also a VERY unique animal. We are the only animal that does a lot of things, like we are bipedal, we are agrarian, etc. It is oversimplification to think we are an animal/mammal so we should do what other animals/mammals do. BUT I do think there are lessons to learn from what other mammals do, particularly in regards to breastfeeding since that is the intrisic quality of being mammalian.

From an ecological POV, we are a VERY successful species, albeit we have some ethical problems IMO. The main reason I've read that we are so successful is that we are so adaptable. So, though it is preferrable to not CIO, to BF, etc. the fact that humans survive and can even thrive with or without these behaviors is part of what makes us a unique species.

This gives us the leeway (that other animals do not have) to DECIDE how to raise our young and prepare them for the world, and therefore argue over the best way to do so, which all of us would probably agree is to not CIO, BF, etc.

Anyway, say we were in an environment that you wouldn't survive if you were an independent, go against the grain person who had the self-esteem to speak their mind. Imagine Orwells 1984. Then it would actually be preferrable to CIO, etc and to have learned from birth to not "make a fuss".

Humans would still survive in this example and a change in how they "prepare" their young for the world would be a part of why.

We humans are an intriguing animal indeed.

[Tigerchild]

Originally Posted by Storm Bride

Not one of the things we do to animals is done with the claim that it's in the best interests of the animal.

I'm sorry, but that's simply not true. Birds are debeaked so that collectively they won't cannibalize each other. Pigs tails are docked so that other pigs will not chew them off and thus introduce blood loss and infection. Cats who scratch furniture are often declawed so they can stay in the home.

Of course, we can see through these excuses just as one can see through circumcision excuses. But people DO claim that they're in the best interests of the animal.

Let's not romanticize and anthropomorphize animal mothers either. Animal mothers *regularly* reject and kill their babies. They stand by and allow new male mates to kill and eat their babies/young ones. Many kinds of animals provide NO nuturing for their young at all.

Looked at in this context, I think that while it's always tragic, it's not suprising when human mothers do essentially the same thing. It happens.

In the animal world, offspring are NOT given primacy. Often time it's mates. Or the mother's own survival.

[Lilly Milly]

Originally Posted by Tigerchild

Let's not romanticize and anthropomorphize animal mothers either. Animal mothers *regularly* reject and kill their babies. They stand by and allow new male mates to kill and eat their babies/young ones. Many kinds of animals provide NO nuturing for their young at all.

Looked at in this context, I think that while it's always tragic, it's not suprising when human mothers do essentially the same thing. It happens.

In the animal world, offspring are NOT given primacy. Often time it's mates. Or the mother's own survival.

I agree with this. Often humans are compared to primates specifically. And we are much more likely to abandon/reject our babies than any primate. FWIW.