[wednesday, july 29, 2009] two of my friends felt michael vick, the NFL football player, is getting too bad of a rap for his crimes of running a dog fighting ring and being responsible for the deaths of several dogs. in 2007 vick faced felony charges for his actions, was convicted and served less than two years in prison. recently he was released and is now free to rejoin the NFL. the viewpoint my two friends held was that, while crimes against animals are not to be condoned and should be punishable by law, they are nowhere near the severity of human-to-human crimes and should not be prioritized so highly. one friend in particular was upset that so much negative attention was given to vick when there are, in his words, "far more serious crimes being committed on humans," that we should attend to. their comments were in reaction to my facebook status line [posted 7.28.09], which harshly condemned vick for his actions. the following is my response to their comments:
for anyone to make the assumption there are worse crimes in the world than bashing another living creature's head into a wall, merely because it is not a human being, is speaking from a position of nothing more than ubiquitous speciesism; something which never ceases to amaze me. it is an arrogant supposition to repetitively place one's own kind in the center of all suffering.
regarding michael vick "not getting a break," he is already out of prison and free to sign with any NFL team who will take him, which is more than many convicted murderers get, despite him being precisely that, a convicted murderer.
in terms of comparing my status line to the sort of draconian measures taken against those in guantanamo bay - i am generally a pacifist by nature. however, if vick were to enact that sort of violence on a dog right in front of me, i would use whatever means necessary and available to stop him, no less than were he bashing a child into a wall in front of me.
as for my anger being the result of mere misplaced media nudging - hardly. i'm a serious animal rights advocate, have been for years, and strive to hoist human apprehension into accepting animals in equal standing with people. as for the rest of america, R., instead of its anger being unjust and misplaced, i ask you to consider that it is the slow and creaking revelation of a society (both media and the public) who is beginning to identify with animals as having a soulful, thinking, and feeling consciousness. it is *crucial* that this happen in appreciable numbers and inclusive of the media so it will offset the devastating impact that meat and fur consumption, not to mention systemic environmental collapse, continue to have on the world's animal populations.
and the funny thing is, R., in polls, the majority of people *do* feel vick has sufficiently paid for his crimes and want to see no more legal or professional action taken against him. so, it's not exactly like his public image has irreversibly plummeted to the depths unending social ostracization that you assert it has.
if my attitude toward him sounds harsh and unforgiving it is because the power to determine life and death on nearly every living organism on this planet lies within our hands and continues to do so at an exponential rate. our ego-maniacal race kills upwards of 50 BILLION animals a year for food consumption ALONE. this figure does not reflect the multitudes of wildlife species we are decimating by the minute in our mad dash to exploit every pocket of the globe as if it were ours alone. this figure also does not reflect how many millions, if not billions, of animals are taken out gratuitously each year for their fur, tusks or other products. the emotional severity of my status line is in accordance with the dire need to reflect the level of savagery that occurs unthinkingly among our race against other creatures. why would i act beholden to some violent, self-serving millionaire football player who is the living embodiment of values i abhor? why would i curb my emotions or mince my words? i'll stand on the rooftop and scream bloody murder if i have to, if that's what it takes to wake people up. because bloody murder is exactly what he committed.
H. put it quite astutely when he said, "this man's entire life has been founded on violence." football is a violent sport, running a dog fighting ring is a violent action. the likelihood of any genuine rehabilitation having occurred in vick from our current system is small. considering the pathological nature of his violence, the likelihood of his sincere contrition is also equally small. we'll watch whatever repentant pageantry he puts on, most people will be convinced he's a "changed man," and he'll continue to exercise some level of deep seated hostility under the radar if he can help it. it may not be with dog fighting or animal abuse, but that type of violence as evidenced by his actions, does not easily go away. i.e. O.J. simpson. and yes, i do think it's a viable comparison.
this is not to say that having a perpetrator of animal violence doing community service in the name of animal welfare groups is a wasted effort. i actually think it's a great idea - but in this particular case, it services and honors the animals whom he's offended more than it will motivate any deep conscientious change within him. in other cases, i think it would prove more effective at actually initiating a change in consciousness, depending on the person and the case.
© 2009 Copyright by Paola Lopez
for anyone to make the assumption there are worse crimes in the world than bashing another living creature's head into a wall, merely because it is not a human being, is speaking from a position of nothing more than ubiquitous speciesism; something which never ceases to amaze me. it is an arrogant supposition to repetitively place one's own kind in the center of all suffering.
regarding michael vick "not getting a break," he is already out of prison and free to sign with any NFL team who will take him, which is more than many convicted murderers get, despite him being precisely that, a convicted murderer.
in terms of comparing my status line to the sort of draconian measures taken against those in guantanamo bay - i am generally a pacifist by nature. however, if vick were to enact that sort of violence on a dog right in front of me, i would use whatever means necessary and available to stop him, no less than were he bashing a child into a wall in front of me.
as for my anger being the result of mere misplaced media nudging - hardly. i'm a serious animal rights advocate, have been for years, and strive to hoist human apprehension into accepting animals in equal standing with people. as for the rest of america, R., instead of its anger being unjust and misplaced, i ask you to consider that it is the slow and creaking revelation of a society (both media and the public) who is beginning to identify with animals as having a soulful, thinking, and feeling consciousness. it is *crucial* that this happen in appreciable numbers and inclusive of the media so it will offset the devastating impact that meat and fur consumption, not to mention systemic environmental collapse, continue to have on the world's animal populations.
and the funny thing is, R., in polls, the majority of people *do* feel vick has sufficiently paid for his crimes and want to see no more legal or professional action taken against him. so, it's not exactly like his public image has irreversibly plummeted to the depths unending social ostracization that you assert it has.
if my attitude toward him sounds harsh and unforgiving it is because the power to determine life and death on nearly every living organism on this planet lies within our hands and continues to do so at an exponential rate. our ego-maniacal race kills upwards of 50 BILLION animals a year for food consumption ALONE. this figure does not reflect the multitudes of wildlife species we are decimating by the minute in our mad dash to exploit every pocket of the globe as if it were ours alone. this figure also does not reflect how many millions, if not billions, of animals are taken out gratuitously each year for their fur, tusks or other products. the emotional severity of my status line is in accordance with the dire need to reflect the level of savagery that occurs unthinkingly among our race against other creatures. why would i act beholden to some violent, self-serving millionaire football player who is the living embodiment of values i abhor? why would i curb my emotions or mince my words? i'll stand on the rooftop and scream bloody murder if i have to, if that's what it takes to wake people up. because bloody murder is exactly what he committed.
H. put it quite astutely when he said, "this man's entire life has been founded on violence." football is a violent sport, running a dog fighting ring is a violent action. the likelihood of any genuine rehabilitation having occurred in vick from our current system is small. considering the pathological nature of his violence, the likelihood of his sincere contrition is also equally small. we'll watch whatever repentant pageantry he puts on, most people will be convinced he's a "changed man," and he'll continue to exercise some level of deep seated hostility under the radar if he can help it. it may not be with dog fighting or animal abuse, but that type of violence as evidenced by his actions, does not easily go away. i.e. O.J. simpson. and yes, i do think it's a viable comparison.
this is not to say that having a perpetrator of animal violence doing community service in the name of animal welfare groups is a wasted effort. i actually think it's a great idea - but in this particular case, it services and honors the animals whom he's offended more than it will motivate any deep conscientious change within him. in other cases, i think it would prove more effective at actually initiating a change in consciousness, depending on the person and the case.
© 2009 Copyright by Paola Lopez
No comments:
Post a Comment