Commentary: Where is the outrage when humans are abused?

[Prrkitty]

http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/09/12/mar...ef=mpstoryview

Quote: When federal prosecutors in Virginia released details of the dogfighting charges against Atlanta Falcons quarterback Michael Vick, all hell broke loose.

Folks were protesting, calling for him to be immediately kicked out of the league, and demanding long jail sentences for Vick and his co-defendants.

Many lawyers went on television and admitted that had Vick beat a girlfriend, shot or even murdered someone, he wouldn't have been slammed as hard as he was for the vicious acts committed against dogs.

I suppose those lawyers are right.

Just look at the case of Megan Williams. The 20-year-old West Virginia woman, Megan Williams, was kidnapped by six sadistic individuals and held in a mobile home.

They raped her, forced her to eat rat and dog feces, made her drink from a toilet, stabbed her multiple times, and called the black woman a "nigger" every time they beat her.

Thank God she lived, and may be released from the hospital in a few days.
------

This article is too true. Our (humans) outrage seems to be very disproportionate. There was a very huge visible outrage in the Vick incident. But the outrage for (as the example) the 20 year old black West Virginia woman isn't so visible.

Could it be that humanity is becoming "used to" these sort of atrocities against humanity? Could it be that we hear about it so much that we've almost become immune to it's affects?

I think it's a shame (and that's putting it mildly) when the media puts more emphasis on Britney's act (or mis-act) on MTV ... then the atrocities that happened against the West Virginia woman.

It seems the media places too much importance on the "screw ups" of actors/actresses and not enough importance on every day issues (for lack of a better way to put it).

And honestly I'm not sure how to have this fact ... fixed.

[Aegix Drakan]

That's because people don't WANT to hear about what happens to other humans. Partly because most people don't even give a damn about their own neighbors. Although I find animal abuse horrible, I think that the focus SHOULD be on human abuse. People tend to get away with so much, that it's digusting. Oftentimes, I hear about child molesters/serial rapist who are repeat offenders, who get jail sentences that are far from enough, and then, they get let out into society in children filled areas, and we don't even bother to keep tabs on them. It just goes to show that humanity generally couldn't care less about itself. -_-

*for background, I am a pacifist. I would never attack another human except under the direst of circumstances*

But maybe the problem isn't just the media. Maybe the problem is you. The reader. The viewer. Maybe you've decided that you care more about discussing a celebrity than nobodies like Megan Williams, Channon Christian or Christopher Newsom.

This statement contains 100% pure ownage, right there.

[Rainman]

Humans seems to be treating pets like they are human babies or children now which makes sense because most were bred for such a purpose. Many dog and cat breeds have been bred so child-like characteristics are emphasized even when they are adults. As a result there are a lot of people who get the same instinctual reaction that they should get for babies when they hear of animal abuse.

So unfortunately a lot of people seem to like animals way more than humans.

[erm2003]

I am sure it is the celebrity status that makes a difference though.

Vick is well known by many Americans.
Vick makes millions of dollars each year.
Vick is/was a role model for children.

When something goes wrong with someone with those qualifications, then the media will jump all over that because more people will be interested in the news stories and BUY THEIR PAPERS/MAGAZINES.

So is it really fair to blame the reader? Maybe it's the people who sell the news...

[phattonez]

I like to blame people like this.

http://images.southparkstudios.com/m...808_img_13.jpg

Yeah, the media chooses what we get mad about.

[vegeta1215]

I don't read the news, let alone watch much TV, but of course even I've heard about Michael Vick and the dogs. Sure, it's cruel, but those murder stories in that article are horrendous. It's all the media - they choose what we see, and of course "we" are already so interested in the lives of celebrities that anything they can drag out to get ratings or whatever, they will. It also doesn't help that various forms of media such as movies and video games etc have desensitized us to a lot of things.

[Skulkraken]

I'm not really so sure there's been much desensitizing at all going on. Personally, I don't think humanity was ever really that sensitive about violence against other humans to begin with. Examples would be the gladiators in ancient Rome, the 'rule of thumb', the 'Cops and Robbers' game lots of little kids have played in the past, etc...

[mikeron]

When was the last time a dog carjacked you or stole your identity? For the most part, I think of animals as innocent and more or less defenseless. Humans, on the other hand, are usually better equipped for dealing with people. Granted, violence against people is wrong, but animal abuse usually goes unpunished, which compounds people's feelings on the issue.

[phattonez]

When was the last time that a pit-bull attacked someone? Oh yeah, that happens seemingly all the time. Really, I don't see any other reason besides the media influence.

[Glenn the Great]

See, isn't this exactly what I was trying to tell you guys back in the last dogfighting thread? About society getting to where we care about animals more than humans?

All I can say is that this mentality, whether media transmitted or otherwise, has not touched me. In my mind, animals are food, like they have been since ancient times.