Animal Rights and the Influence of Mass Media on the American Society - Coursework Example

Client’s 12 November Animal rights is a very debatable issue and human beings have started treating animals without any respect, this has been the problem for many years but the situation is becoming worse and much needs to be done about this issue. The power of media is beyond imagination, we start believing in what we see and television channels these days are shows round the clock. Many a time what they show becomes very debatable, animal rights, has been a very debatable topic and several leading channels have openly voiced their opinion on this topic. The growing cruelty against animals has been shown on leading networks time and again, several disturbing pictures have also been published in some of the leading newspapers, this paper will shed light upon animal rights and the influence of mass media on the American society will also be analyzed. “Every piece of fur is the result of horrific cruelty. Animals trapped for their fur can suffer for hours or days in body-gripping traps, chewing through their own feet in a desperate attempt to escape. More than four million wild animals are trapped and killed each year in the United States by commercial and recreational trappers alone. “(The Cruelty of Fur Trim) The way human beings treat animals is certainly beyond the pale, animals are ruthlessly killed to please the taste buds of certain human beings who consume them on a regular basis, the slaughter that takes place is very painful for the helpless animals, the pain inflicted upon them is very hard to see but very little has been done to counter it. There are organizations fighting for animal rights but those organizations are not as active as they should be. This paper will throw light upon the views of Catharine A. Mackinnon and Elizabeth Anderson on how animals are being treated; both their views will be juxtaposed to bring out the real essence of their respective arguments. “Each year, in China, millions of dogs and cats are cruelly killed by bludgeoning, hanging and slow strangulation with wire nooses and their fur turned into trim and trinkets. Chinese fur is often deliberately mislabeled so that it will be bought by unsuspecting customers around the globe.” (China’s Gold Medal for Cruelty). Catharine A. Mackinnon has a very feminist view on the exploitation of animals, she compares the state of animals to the state of women, she thinks that women and animals are both exploited and have more similarities than one. She claims that animals are treated like women and women like animals, this again goes to show the sheer exploitation of both women and animals. She goes on to say that women are as badly treated as animals, she is aghast when she makes this comparison and she is right in many ways, women are still being exploited in some areas of the world and so are animals. “People dominate animals, men dominate women.” (Animal Rights, P277) The author sheds light upon how women and animals are being dominated in our society. She throws light upon the inequality that prevails in our society. The author brings out an excellent ideology; the suppression of both women and animals is because they are considered inferior, women are exploited because they are considered biologically weaker, animals are exploited because they are considered much inferior to the human race, the exploitation is purely based on the ideology of inferior and superior, a superior being starts believing that it is his right to suppress the inferior, the same has been highlighted by the author. The author is labeled to be a feminist because she talks about the male ideology and brings out the similarities in animals and women. “Qualities considered human and higher are denied to animals as qualities considered masculine and higher are denied to women.” (Animal Rights, P278) The lesser humanity of women is conceded by men and they call women animal names like chick, bunny, bitch and so on, this again points to the inferior nature of women in the society, animals are lower than humans is also a presumption which with several human beings live with. The author also talks about the ridiculous ways in which both women and animals are exploited, rats are put in the vagina of women and it is thought that the rat would suffer much more than the women, the author tries to say that the status of women is lower than the status of animals. Misery and exploitation are common amongst women and animals, men find new ways to exploit and dominate both. The author talks about the laws that have been made to protect animals, films showing the crushing of animals have been banned by the government of the US but she says that there are no such laws in place to protect women who are also being exploited sexually by men. She concludes her argument by saying that women are better off without laws. Elizabeth Anderson has a different take on the same matter, her analysis cannot be called a feminist view, and she does not juxtapose animals with women, the author bases her argument on intrinsic value of animals. The author talks about the animal rights, she says that chimpanzees are believed to have the mental ability of a mentally retarded child, chimpanzees are being used for several experiments, and can mentally retarded children be used for the same experiments? The author is directly comparing animals with human beings; the point is why we are not using mentally retarded children for experiments who have the same mental makeup as a chimpanzee has? This goes to show double standards in the society, animals are treated much differently than human beings. The author talks about the animal rights, animal welfare and environmental ethics in her argument, she finds that there are several conflicts occurring when the above three perspectives are taken into account, she also finds herself in a quandary trying to satisfy all the three perspectives. The above example of mentally retarded children and chimpanzees is a classic example that has been given by the author. “How to proceed? We begin by asking how the moral status of animals has been understood by thinkers who deny that animals have rights. Then we test the mettle of their ideas by seeing how well they stand up under the heat of fair criticism.” (Empty Cages) Mentally retarded children or demented adults are not killed for food or for any other thing, the author asks for consistency of rights; these people are not locked up in a cage, the author argues that there should not be double standards, animals should be treated equally. The argument is very logical and concise; the author has tried to juxtapose the way human beings are treated with the way animals are treated, the author also talks about the moral rights and asks us to defend the helpless animals on moral grounds if not for anything else. “The author gives an example of an Alzheimer patient, if a patient is half naked and is fed in a bowl, if she eats like an animal and if her relative comes to see her, they would say that she is being treated like a dog.” (Animal Rights, 282) This again highlights the status of animals, the author goes on to say that if a dog is fed with a spoon, it would be without a doubt absurd. We have a right to protect children from predators and in the very same way we have to protect animals against predators who kill them on a daily basis. The author also claims that wild animals have fewer rights than domesticated animals and animals used in laboratories. The author then goes on to talk about rights which come with reciprocal relationship, the animal skeptics talk about the inability of animals to be reciprocal, the author rebuts this claim and gives two great examples. She talks about horse riding and how horses respond to human beings, the other example is of dogs, they respond when they see a human being who seems familiar and they also respond in a different way when the human being seems unfamiliar, this clearly proves that animals have the capacity to be reciprocal and hence deserve to have rights, the author proves the animal skeptics wrong by giving these two immaculate examples. The author gives another example of rats, she says that they rats are incapable of living in the wild, which is why they make their homes in our houses, they are exterminated because they cause inconvenience to us, this again goes to show that they have a right to life but are not given their right. The author concludes by saying that animals have many rights and we have a lot of work to do in acknowledging their rights, following those comes at a later stage but it is essential to acknowledge the rights in the first place. Conclusion The two authors have made different arguments but all roads lead to Rome, the conclusion that they have tried to impose is that we must stop exploiting animals; the authors have used their own vocabulary and their own arguments to prove the same. The arguments are different but point to the same cause, Catharine pointed towards the plight of animals and women in the society, Elizabeth juxtaposed animals with human beings on several occasions in her essay. The feminist view of Catharine points towards the urgent need to put an end to the exploitation of women and animals, similarly Elizabeth’s argument is also centered on putting an end to the pain inflicted upon animals. References Animal Rights Current Debates and New Directions, Oxford University Press, 2004 Empty “China’s gold medal for cruelty.” In Animal Rights Articles. n.p., Web. Retrieved from: “In the Cages.” The Case for Animal Rights. n.p., Web. Retrieved from: “The Cruelty of Fur Trim.” In Fur Trim Kills More Animals. n.p., Web. Retrieved from: Read More