Orangutans as Prostitutes

[Cultural Speciesism Around the Globe.]

The issue of using orangutans as prostitutes seems to be creating a stir at the moment, not least among animal advocates.

Have we not seen enough of what we do, of what we are capable of, of how we'll use other animals for all sorts of reasons, to stop being so freaked out?

Indeed, given the depth of cultural speciesism in our societies, should we not rather expect this sort of thing?

http://www.thepetitionsite.com/841/068/757/stop-using-orangutans-as...

[sharon tupper]

sadly it doesn’t shock me that this abuse occurs – humans have proven themselves imaginative and adept at torture and abuse - but that doesn’t mean to say i shouldn’t be outraged… as a womon, i abhor the rape of any female, and one of the most frightening things to me is that now some are attempting to have inter-species rape normalized by naming it “a lifestyle choice”… rape is rape, and we should all be outraged – otherwise we’re in danger of this becoming an even more widespread, perhaps even acceptable, atrocity…

[Kerry Baker]

Perhaps I haven't been watching other forums but his issue is from what I've seen relatively recent.  I am making an assumption that the animals used in these brothels are almost exclusively female, which is about sexism among other things.  Sex in many respects remains a taboo subject, mostly confined to the scandal pages. 

The notions we have of cruelty are subjective and although wishing to stamp out all cruelty we tend to place these things on a scale.  How we categorise these things is largely one of ability to empathise, in turn based on experience.  In Australia there is still a great deal of discrimination towards women, you only have to look at the military and sporting field for attitudes towards females.  I suspect that there is still some sort of view that women secretly enjoy rape, because the sex act itself is pleasurable and pain is in intercourse is something that many men would have problems trying to comprehend.  

This is one form of animal torture that I suspect might have to be fought on a feminist platform.

[sharon tupper]

i think you may be right kerry... rape is used as a weapon, to control, to brutalize - rape is not about sex, never has been... rape is about power over the powerless, and womyn in this patriarchal society have grown up with that threat, that fear, so empathy with females of all species is heightened... the brutality of rape is something womyn really understand...

Kerry Baker said:

Perhaps I haven't been watching other forums but his issue is from what I've seen relatively recent.  I am making an assumption that the animals used in these brothels are almost exclusively female, which is about sexism among other things.  Sex in many respects remains a taboo subject, mostly confined to the scandal pages. 

The notions we have of cruelty are subjective and although wishing to stamp out all cruelty we tend to place these things on a scale.  How we categorise these things is largely one of ability to empathise, in turn based on experience.  In Australia there is still a great deal of discrimination towards women, you only have to look at the military and sporting field for attitudes towards females.  I suspect that there is still some sort of view that women secretly enjoy rape, because the sex act itself is pleasurable and pain is in intercourse is something that many men would have problems trying to comprehend.  

This is one form of animal torture that I suspect might have to be fought on a feminist platform.

[Billy L]

That's interesting about that reality show.

Do you have any insight in regard to the main influence of these attitudes? What I mean is that it is plain as day that killing is not in any way humane or beneficial to anyone (putting aside the other environmental and health claims). I'm guessing for the majority of people, it would be the absence of certain key information, and carefully selected, widely promoted and reinforced ideas of what is acceptable, but maybe pointing a finger at one source is a bit simplistic. It makes me wonder what, as Jordan Wyatt might say, "muhmillions" of dollars in public awareness campaigning might accomplish, as compared let's say, to the equally effective but smaller scale efforts of tabling and leafleting. I suppose you might see the situation as needing to build numbers of ethical vegans before proceeding with such an undertaking.

Roger Yates said:

They did try to repeat Stanford as a "reality TV" sort of thing in recent years. It did not work the second time. The "cons" just laughed at the "screws" trying to be heavy.

I think the suggestion that most people do not object to violence towards other animals is rather complex. For example, with most people subscribing to the tenets of animal welfarism, they buy into the myth that non-cruel use can be a reality. So, they also do not agree with being violent to other animals - they just think (rather insanely we vegans may think) that eating them and being non-violent to them are consistent ideas!

Billy Lovci said:

Are most of us vegans because we are shocked by what we learn about how animals are treated, and oppose it? I wonder if that's the number 1 reason. I also wonder if there is any way to understand, as Carolyn mentions, how humans get to the point that they become involved in this type of thing. We have some clues with the Stanford Prison Experiment, but on a gut level, I don't know if vegans can in any way relate enough to the majority, to see the world as the majority sees it. Most of us have omnivorous backgrounds, but all of us object to violence against animals; most people don't. To take it a step further, my theory is that overpowering another being, either by psychological, physical, or fatal means is some kind of easily repeatable, temporary release from social oppression of one sort or another.