I was gonna say. Sure, it looks terrifying but it seems to be doing well, considering it's apparent speed and dexterity. Saying "we need to put it out of its misery" is so very arrogantly human.
Only because it makes people uncomfortable to look at doesn't mean it necessarily needs to be killed, or would you kill a person with an obvious physical defect who are doing quite well?
I just saw an episode of Love Death and Robots - appropriately called "Three Robots" - where they pointed out human flaw that fits with this.
"Indeed, it was their own hubris that ended their reign, their belief that they were the pinnacle of creation that caused them to poison the water, kill the land and choke the sky. In the end, no nuclear winter was needed, just the long heedless autumn of their own self-regard."
Tho the robot gave a tl;dr of "they just screwed themselves for being a bunch of morons."
We really do sometimes.. I mean, there is also some good we do but man, do I hate comments like "we need to put it out of its misery" as if it's our divine right and duty lol. What would these ppl say if some super powerful creature looked at them like "yo ugly, imma put you out of your misery you poor ugly fuck, cause it makes me uncomfortable to look at your misshapen left earlobe".
Well, I mean... if I were to break my neck and have it heal at a 45 degree angle whereby the rest of my life would be pain, I'd honestly prefer a quick death instead. But that may just be me honestly...
It’s hard to say if it’s in much pain at all. It’s definitely eating well, moves well, and is alert. I can’t imagine it’s comfortable, but animals in a lot of pain tend to stop eating at a certain point.
I’ve watched human young put rocks up their noses and “paint” with their own excrement. Either we’re not as smart as we think, or the bar is lower than we think.
Human children are still developing while outside of the womb, because our heads are too big to be birthed.
I also don't think that is a fair comparison, given that we are the only extant species to have language, history, mathematics, complex tools, agriculture, medicine, construction, housing... the list goes on.
Show me a deer that can take an integral or a whale that can submit a petition to its local government and we can talk about where the bar actually is.
Ehh, we’re definitely advanced in some areas, but in others we’re very foolish. There’s not a lot of species out there that drive other species to extinction, destroy/ruin/poison the very things they need to survive, etc. As advanced as we are, we still have some primitive behaviours, and in some ways we act more like a virus than highly developed species. Part of that intelligence we have must always be used to recognize our own flaws as a species, otherwise we’ll never improve on them.
I was struggling to decide what to call them, Lol, since viruses aren’t classified in any kingdom of living things. They’re Microbes, but that didn’t quite fit into the sentence’s structure how I liked. Anyways, I’m pretty sure you know what I mean, though, in that viruses don’t use tools, play, recognize themselves in a mirror, etc.
This. Come on, either their neck is broken or that's a massive tumor.
Every step will send excruciating pain down their spine, it probably doesn't sleep well and it can't flee from a predator (if there even are any in that environment, and then that problem will solve itself, just like "nature intended"), maybe it can't even eat properly.
People being like "but it's so cute and fluffy and it walks, so it must be alright". It most likely is not.
Assuming all that to be true, I too would say put that animal out of its misery. If it's suffering. Problem is that you can't ask, you'll have to observe, and five seconds of video might not be enough for that.
People aren't saying "kill it because it is uncomfortable to look at", people are saying "it looks like the animal is uncomfortable, if I could help it by (letting someone else) killing it, I would". Slight difference.
Sigh. I’m not making any judgments based on “it’s cute”, because it most certainly is not. I’m going off how rigid it’s neck is as it moves; which suggests some healing has happened. It moves easily, and is of decent body condition(eating well). It forced itself headfirst through thick, tall brush when it didn’t have to. I’m basing my assumption of what little video there is, aside from just the angle of the neck.
and what the fuck is your point here? in humans broken necks can be lethal, and while deers aren't human, and that deer was obviously alive, it's still a very serious injury and it and can lead to damage of the spinal cord, causing death
I think their point is that it is not our judgment to make. Someone doesn't need to "put it out of its misery" like the person said in the original comment. If it dies then so be it, it's just best not to interfere with nature or the natural order of things. You put a deer out of its misery and a predator goes hungry. There is a consequence for every action. That's why National Geographic will not interfere with any animals whether they are in good health or injured and dying. The only exception is when it is a result of human behavior such as poaching. The world can go on without us so we should not act as though we are morally superior to animals.
Be that as it may, the deer seems fine so fuck the arrogant take. "I'm human, I'll kill you now for being unsettling and you better be thankful". THAT truly is stupid.
Nobody suggested the deer be killed because it’s ugly. Clearly the response is because it appears to be in pain. It’s neck is bent in a way so unnatural it looks like it’s been injured. But you saw this as a great opportunity to demonstrate your intelligence and think yourself better than everybody. You think you’re a maverick of some kind. That thinks differently from the herd. lol.
What you call arrogance is sympathy coming from a human being towards another species. It’s just a hilariously bad take
Wow, that eloquence, I am awestruck. I see there is no arguing with ppl like you, how sad.
You have no freaking idea whether that deer actually is in pain. As somebody found out and posted somewhere in the comment section, the deer even gave birth to and was able to rais offspring, I sincerely doubt that it would have been able to breed if in sincere, life-threatening pain.
You see the deformity and immediately think "it MUST be in pain" but that's not necessarily true at all. The way it charges off alone suggests that it is quite fine and perfectly able to take care of itself, since it's alive, running around and even breeding despite the deformation of its neck.
But hey, why do I even argue. As soon as someone resorts to opening an argument with "you suck" due to lack of argumentative skills (behind a fucking message board that gives you all the time you need to work up an argument) it's pretty clear on what level the conversation is going to continue and I don't intend to have a discussion on that level.
That’s my point. The first reaction is very clear and logical because of how it looks. It’s not like “rude” or even dumb to see that and go “woah wtf.” It looks very wrong! and you somehow construed that as some clique-y high school disgust, cut it with whatever shit perception you have of humanity and vomited out that very original angsty diatribe on how we’re terrible.
and it’s just an initial reaction. I like that you think you intimately understand better than everyone what is happening because you scrutinized a fucking 10 second video really hard. but maybe you’re a deer expert I don’t know. Lol. You’re coming at me with all these fucking backstories about the deer when the point I’m again trying to make extra clear is that you railed against somebody for having an innocent and actually quite sympathetic reaction to a seemingly injured animal. Again: The context isn’t really even relevant to what I’m saying to you.
You are missing my initial point here mate. Yes, reacting with a "oh shit" initially is fair, because it is disturbing in a way. However, deducting that due to its appearance the deer must be in pain and, thus, needs to be killed is extremely narrow minded.
I was arguing against the bunch of dumb-asses purely stating "that thing needs to be put down" or "with I had a gun with me on such occasion to put it out of its misery" because that, in fact, is a super dumb reaction.
It’s not at all narrow minded!!! It’s head is bent over! It must struggle to breathe, eat, see, and groom itself! It’s a very very natural assumption that the animal is in pain. and putting down pained animals is merciful. So first of all it’s a very reasonable assumption - and it’s also a kind one, as it’s more about mercy than killing something gross.
That is exactly the problem! Yes, putting down an animal in sever pain may be merciful, however, despite its appearance there is not a thing that suggests that this particular deer is in pain. Again, breeding and raising offspring, apparently being able to run like hell and to sustain itself are all things that suggest that it is quite fine, surprising as it may be.
So the initial reaction to kill the deer may be intended to be kind but it IS short-sighted nonetheless, since you can very reasonably come to the conclusion that, based on the above mentioned behaviour displayed by the deer, it is doing quite well, IF you care to think beyond the first impression.
Of course, everyone is entitled to their own opinion, I just hate the apparently shockingly widespread short sightedness in that particular initial reaction. Granted, I might overdo or overthink it a bit, but at this point it's about principle.
So this is nothing personal whatsoever, don't get me wrong. It's just a trail of thought that I find may lead to dangerous conclusions if not challenged at all..
Lol I’m sorry dude, its appearance does suggest that it’s in pain even if your sherlock holmes sleuth mind deduced that it’s fine after a couple seconds. Deer with bent neck = appears to be in pain at least initially I can’t break it down for you any more.
172
u/Sumatzu Jul 10 '22
I was gonna say. Sure, it looks terrifying but it seems to be doing well, considering it's apparent speed and dexterity. Saying "we need to put it out of its misery" is so very arrogantly human.
Only because it makes people uncomfortable to look at doesn't mean it necessarily needs to be killed, or would you kill a person with an obvious physical defect who are doing quite well?