Outrage Not Created Equal
I’m sure none of you reading this blog have escaped the Michael Vick media blitzkrieg surrounding his recent indictment on dog fighting charges. The story has been all over the news outlets and has been explored from many angles: Vick’s legal prognosis, the appropriate reaction for the Atlanta Falcons and Commissioner Roger Goodell, and even some racial implications for the city of Atlanta. When I first heard of the indictments, I had a different reaction; why am I so outraged?
It seems that the Vick case has released a special sort of outrage especially when compared with other criminal investigations. Adam “Pacman” Jones and his surrounding legal problems didn’t nearly receive the same amount of coverage as Vick. Even though I was young, I don’t remember the Ray Lewis murder case getting near the level of coverage that Vick has received.
Why is it that NFL players who have been connected with paralyzing a man or even killing another can’t garner the same hype as a player who has allegedly brutalized dogs? When thinking about it, several different things came to mind. Maybe we as a public see dogs and animals as being wholly more innocent than we humans. We see our own faults and readily see the failings of our race, making the loss of human life more tolerable. Maybe the bombardment of negative news has desensitized us. Maybe, like many propose, video game, movie and TV violence has left us quite numb to the prospect of loss of human life. The difference in outrage is probably a combination of some of the things mentioned above and many other things left unmentioned.
I’m not trying to say that I wasn’t outraged by the dog fighting indictments or that people should be less outraged relative to the many other cruelties we hear about. On the contrary, being a pet owner, I was tremendously outraged by the allegations and want swift and severe punishment for Michael Vick if the allegations are true. What I lament is that I cannot become more outraged when I hear about murder and other crimes against humanity. When I watch the evening news talk about a local murder, I want to have some empathy for the family and pay it more than passing glance and thought. Perhaps if we valued human life as much as we value the lives of pets, we would see less crime and evil acts. I hope that we can learn from the Vick case, that we can understand why we’re so outraged and try to become a people who respect all life, animal or human.
Great use of links and a great second post, Drew.
Quoting your first article, John Goodwin of the Humane Society said the “methods of execution — they’re unnecessary and just sick.” I think someone softened up his words, because I’m sure he feels there is no necessary execution in all it’s forms and finds it all “just sick”. I find the use of his semantics to be an attempt to bring readers to his side, people should be reporting this as a legal case, not a judgment of humaneness. I doubt anyone will say animal fighting is a good thing. This does not apply to your article, it just caught me wrong.
All of your arguments are valid to the explanation of why people seem more offended, and I would just like to add some viewpoints.
Firstly, I think there are more “animalphiles” (PETA) and not so many people-lovers (Barney the Dinosaur). I also think that because dogs were being used, more people are offended. If this were chicken fights instead, I think he would be slapped on the wrists and life would go on.
It is true that we are partially desensitized to human violence. I would just like to state that the general “solution” to remove all TV, movie, and game violence is an extremely poor solution, which gets referenced every time violence is. I am not saying that people should not have feelings (everybody loves robots, however), but people need to realize that tragedy is something that humans are subjected to, and the better you can handle it (desensitization, ignorance, etc), the easier it is to keep moving. It is a crazy debate, and I will end it at that.
Perhaps ESPN is running low on news and this is the “sports” thing to write to bring an audience. Hopefully this coverage doesn’t continue to overflow and halt real news that belongs to the Falcons or the NFL. (/end rant)
I am opposed to the whole concept of animal rights. I, as a citizen of this country, should have as much right to chop up my sofa into tiny bits as I have to chop up my dog into tiny bits (if I had a dog, which I don’t). They are both my property — I own them and it’s my business (and only my business) what I choose do with them. (That’s not to say that I must be totally crazy to chop up a perfectly good sofa… but that’s another story).
It has become very fashionable these days to invent all sorts of rights. Women’s rights, civil rights, gay rights, and yes, even animal rights. But one must ask — Where do these rights come from? And against what responsibilities will these rights be balanced?
This country was founded on the principle that all rights are retained by individuals except for those powers specifically delegated to the government. Any “extra” rights that the government chooses to recognize for one special interest group is freedom (and power) that must be subtracted from everyone else. This is not a zero-sum game — there is only so much freedom out there. Therefore, rights bestowed upon our canine friends are rights subtracted from me (and other homo sapiens). The government has no business transferring power from me to other members of the animal kingdom — no matter how cute and cuddly they might be. Furthermore, rights in our society normally come with responsibilities. For example, the right to operate a motor vehicle come with responsibilities to obey traffic signals. Would anyone care to inform me exactly what responsibilities our canine friends assume in exchange for their animal rights?
Drew, I think this is a good post in which I have been giving a lot of thought. And although you all may say it is mostly being covered on ESPN, it is also covered a lot on Fox news which my family and I watch every night.
For me, I think the reason I am more appalled at violence between animals and from human beings to animals is the fact that dogs are defenseless. It is the same feeling I get when you see babies being abused by parents or such. Adults can fight with words and can do things which upsets others. We can fight with each other using fists or whatever. If you know me, you know I do not like violence at all. It is all the worse whenever it is against a defenseless animal or baby. What could they have done to deserve it? I am not saying adults deserve to die. I am just saying dogs do not cheat on you. Babies do not threaten you.
A person can be angry with another. It is understandable. We have all felt these feelings of hate, anger, or jealousy. However if someone sets dogs against each other just for entertainment purposes, I think it shows their character to be one of low morals. I think that is why people can feel more passionately for animals or babies. They are defenseless.
On a moral level, I think the whole thing is wrong. I think it is wrong to see the destruction of human beings or animals and get enjoyment out of it. I am looking at puppies right now and if anyone touched my dog I would want to physically hurt them and I am not a violent person. It is the same feeling I think I would get if anyone ever tried to hurt my future children. Although I think that feeling will be a million times stronger.
I just do not like Michael Vick right now. He does not seem to be a very moral person and if he enjoys seeing defenseless animals fighting, he can’t be a good person.
Well after the first two replies/ the awesome post, I just wanted to put my two cents in.
Although the emphasized point of the post/replies was about rights of animals and whether or not they should have. As far as “Is this hype too much just for a dog fight?” I think he could have stolen a candy bar and they would have made a big deal about it. Its Mike Vick. He was the number one pick in 2001. He revolutionized the quarterback position with a totally different style of game(running as opposed to passing). Yada-yada other football statistics. He’s a good quarterback.
Maybe not just stealing a candy bar but I think it is a big deal because he is in the limelight, not the because he has been indicted, he is now the center of attention. He has been for a while. People/dogs/other life get killed all the time. It is inevitable. There are murders everyday. I am not saying its a good thing but it happens. Bad stuff is going to happen unless we create a utopia, which couldn’t work and even if it could I would not want it to. The Media has to talk about something, and as far as the sports world goes I am tired of hearing about Bonds and his freaking steroids.
[...] comments have been great, but I would like to respond particularly to Mr. Trevino’s. When I read Mr. Trevino’s comment, I was taken aback. He presented a well thought out argument against animal rights and I spent a [...]