To be a "speciesist"?

     Imagine that the meat you eat this afternoon is made from the animals killed like the picture above. The video Earthlings was like the picture above. For today's dinner, I went to a restaurant to eat Galbi, but as soon as I saw the meat, the slaughterhouse in the video came out to my mind. Human beings were exploiting the animals cruely as tools of earning money, and the methods to treat the animals were just considered by profit calculation. Even though the video was very shocking, the movie was somewhat one-sided, and there were some interesting things to think about.

Welcome to the SLAUGHTERHOUSE

People did not had any opportunities to know what is
going inside the slaughterhouse. However, the video
suggest that stupidity comes from lack of willingness
for knowledge.

   

      The first reason why I think this movie is one-sided is the shock people get from this video. Just like the picture on the left, cows are hung up and bleeding, but they are still conscious. Their horns are cut without anesthesia. Many animals including pigs suffered from electric shocks. The animals are also raised in cramped, closed cages. Thus, they suffer lots of stress so they even kill same species. In the video, Nobel Prize winner Isaac Singer said in his novel that "As often has Herman had witnessed the slaughter of animals and fish, he always had the same thought: in their behavior toward creatures, all men were Nazis, like the picture below. 

"In their behavior toward creatures, all men were Nazis."

    The behavior treating animals as entertainment tools were also astounding. Rodeo was an aggregate of animal abuse. A belt called a flank strap is secured around the animal's body over the genital area. The strap is tightened when the bull should go into the stadium so that the animal goes completely insane due to the pain.

It is quite obvious that people will get shocked if they see this movie. However, the movie should reveal more fundamental reasons of this phenomenon and rely on rational decision rather than just appealing emotionally. The movie shows the environment of animals for a long time but does not mention about the problem of human consumption.

     The second focus is rightness of the reason for animal killing. The movie just suggests that animal killing is a bad thing. However, Supply for animals follow due to the demand existing somewhere. The demand is definitely people's desire. As the demand for meat increases, the number of animals that should be raised increases. However, the space and the capital of owner to raise them are limited. Because many ranches are low return businesses with tight margins, the veterinary services delivered must be as cost effective as possible for those producers whose cattle provide a major portion of their family income. Therefore, animals are hard to be treated with mercy. It is hard to say eating meat is bad because animals are dead. Killing with mercy does not make sense because killing is a merciless act itself. If we change ourselves to vegetarian to prevent animal killing and environment pollution due to it, demand for plants will increase, and whether the number of plants rise or decrease, there is change in the environment. The definition of life becomes controversial because animals and plants are both "living". Thus, the demand for animals is not an improper thing and it does not have any alternatives. It is a inevitable thing due to the increase of human population and total wealth of the world. Thus, killing animals is a inevitable phenomenon, which should not be criticized.

     The point that should be criticized is neither the increasing demand nor the attitude towards the animals. It is consumerism. The third part about clothes ends with a conversation in the fur-coat shop. "How much is it?" "$49,500." Just one cloth costs as much as double of GNI of Korea. In other words, the profit of producing animal-based products are great. The problem is the demand of leather clothes are increasing. Leather clothes are considered as luxuries, and by consuming these items individuals satisfy. In the modern capitalism society, consuming is encouraged as the motor of economy. It is important to judge whether this consumerism is right. Are those products really essential to life? Same as the entertainment industry. Are animals really needed for entertainment? Are there no alternatives? How about not consuming entertainment services or fur-made products? Does not using them damage your daily life in a severe way? The movie should have pointed out for this rather than just asserting equality.

The demand for animals for food is a inevitable thing.
However, does the satisfaction of the women above
worth as much as the lives of animals?

     The last focus is speciesism. I wonder if this is a proper word to use. Not only humans but every "earthlings" eat other "earthlings" who is at the lower level in the energy pyramid. Desire for eating them is a natural thing. It is also difficult to mention that the slaughter should be more merciful. Euthanasia, which is a merciful method, is injecting chemicals in food that should be put on our dinner table. As mentioned before, killing itself is a unethical act. Therefore, raising animals and hunting wild animals has no difference. Speciesism is defined as a prejudice or attitude of bias in favor of the interests of members of one's own species and against those of members of other species. By the definition, every species except the lowest level in the energy pyramid is a speciesist. Also, the movie mentions animal experiments does not lead to advance of medical researches. To follow this idea, only human experiments can lead to medical advance, which is more controversial ethically. Because of the ethical issue, researches has been done with animals who have similar body order such as mice and these researched are turned out to be successful. Antibiotics, insulin, vaccines for polio and cervical cancer, organ transplantation, HIV treatments, heart-bypass surgery were all developed and tested using animals.

Speciesism??

     The shocking image is now accepted as one of the reality reports. Earthlings is a good movie that informed me about the hidden actuality, but it was somewhat one-sided. According to the three previous points, this movie should have been better if it contained the contrasting ideas.

External links: http://www.animalfreedom.org/english/information/meat.html
http://www.vetmed.wsu.edu/courses-jmgay/poebeefindustry.htm
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/science-news/3353960/Should-we-experiment-on-animals-Yes.html

Word count: 989