By Lorelei Plotczyk | September 24, 2017 | Categories Animal Rescue Stories
Cowboy leading cows down a city street after hurricane Harvey.
A cowboy leads “rescued” animals down a city street after hurricane Harvey hits Texas.
As we all know, hurricanes Harvey, Irma, and Maria have brought devastation upon so many. As someone with family in Florida, including my Mom, I anxiously followed Irma’s path and was immensely relieved when she only lost a couple of shingles along with power for several days. Many others, as we know, were not so lucky.
Yet even during such nail-biting times and now the tremendous destruction left behind, I couldn’t help but notice that, somehow, a perfect storm had been created for glorifying animal exploitation and ridiculing veganism (of all things).
Although I really wish we didn’t have to talk about this right now, unfortunately, letting these distortions go unchallenged would be a…
View original post 2,175 more words
Exposing the Big Game 
The story on the cattle may be frustrating, but it is not surprising. People do not want to hear the full story when the end is depressing. Animal stories are supposed to be funny or at least uplifting. No graphics or violence. No depressing end, like the kind awaiting the cattle. No reminder of where their cheeseburger came from.
But I don’t know if the viewers actually thought that the cows were being herded into a sanctuary to live happily in their pasture until they slipped into bovine senescence. I doubt if they thought that far ahead.
I know better myself and realize that they are not fated to live long. However, I was happy that they were helped to a place where they would at least not drown. They were luckier, if you can use that term to describe animals destined to be doomed anyway, than the 750 cows of one rancher who did not escape the flood.
However, I share the frustration of the writer generally. I have seen more than one story on transport truck accidents with pigs. The vehicle is usually on its side, barriers placed around it so that passing cars cannot seen the injured or dead victims. Invariably, there are state troopers chasing the still ambulatory and terrified animals, all with lame-brained reporters joking in the background. There is no concern for the injured and dead, no notion of how scared those still stuck in the truck must be or how great their pain, no remembrance of where they were headed, and where the still living victims will still be sent.
At one time PETA wanted to put up roadside memorials to the victims of transport accidents. Their request was refused, and many people were outraged at the very idea that the deaths of pigs and chickens should be recognized.
You end sadly realizing that all the years of animal rights leaves most people clueless and lacking in empathy when it comes to farm animals.
It’s unfortunate that the vegan food was still on the shelf and that it was photographed. It’s probably making the Internet rounds of the vegan bashers. Actually, though, there is not all that much food left. A handful of vegans leaving town could account for most of it.
A bit of an aside, and some good news. The Guggenheim has decided to pull that awful exhibit. It sounded like one of Rene Descartes’ machines:
Great news!
Yes. The Guggenheim spokespeople have said ‘freedom of expression is paramount’. I’m sorry, but stopping animal abuse in all of its forms is paramount, IMO. There’s a Supreme Court case too, involving pornography, that says we can’t indulge all of our perversions in the name of freedom of expression.
http://www.politico.com/blogs/under-the-radar/2012/11/feds-bring-first-case-under-new-animal-crush-video-law-150700
Yes, I’m sorry to have interrupted the main topic of the thread, but I thought it might be ‘breaking news’.
Contrary to the reason for pulling this appalling exhibit is that it may have run afoul of laws and statutes, such as that Anti-
PervCrush Act of 2010 information that I posted. Dog-fighting is covered under that Act, and there may be separate dog fighting statutes illegal in NY and in the US.I’m sure the Guggenheim doesn’t want to go anywhere near that, and the old standby excuse is to blame vague threats from Animal Rights Activists to cover themselves.
If they want to explore globalization through art, by all means, use people in the exhibit! People can give informed consent, sign releases, take required breaks after so many hours per Labor laws, and get paid for being an artist’s muse.
Great news! I’ve been writing and signing petitions but didn’t have much hope. Every time we succeed in stopping something like this perversion of talent sends a great message that animal cruelty is not art and we don’t want it in our museums.
“The museum tried to quell the backlash last Thursday, releasing a statement acknowledging that the work was difficult to view but encouraging patrons to consider what the piece “may be saying about the social conditions of globalization and the complex nature of the world we share.””:
I’m truly aghast – you do not use a living thing, nor do you need it, to express these concepts in art! It is saying something really bad, but not the message the Guggenheim nor the artists have in mind! And again, it seems to be all about people. Probably their benefactors and patrons complained and threatened them, not the animal rights activists!!!