I do my best to not judge for one side or the other. But hypocrisy is what it is. I've seen this film and they do exactly what they criticize Seaworld for doing. Glossing over or omitting facts that are relevant to the discussion, forcing human characteristics on animals in order to force empathy or emotional responses, failing to recognize the benefits from alternative viewpoints.
How much good has been done by Seaworld during their existance? It's immeasurable; the film itself interviews marine biologists that entered the field due to a Seaworld experience. They donate money to reasearch, foundations, education, etc. Do they make money? Well it would be stupid to think they aren't there to make money, they are a *business*. The "Neuroscientist" they interviewed for the film just sounded like a whack-a-doodle from word one for me. Their emotional center of their brain is many times larger than a humans? How the hell would she know what that portion of their brain is used for in Orcas? An elephant's brain weighs almost 4 times as much as a human's but do they have Netflix?
The Seaworld animals benefit from critical discussions over the husbandry practices in use, training methods, etc. Someone has to advocate for animals or God only knows what conditions they'd be in.
My point to the makers of Blackfish: Don't be as bad as you say Seaworld is and try honesty instead of trying to out-lie the competition.
__________________
I have to go out and buy more snails for my hermit crabs.
|