On a day many considered filled with shame, a bull died most cruelly after almost 20 minutes of torture, for the sake of culture.
In an article in an ANC newsletter of December 1995, Chief Mlaba is quoted thus:
“We must use our bare hands, It’s cruelty, we agree, but it’s our culture. We cannot change our culture.” and goes on to describe what happens during the ritual, saying that “For 40 minutes, dozens trampled the bellowing, groaning bull, wrenched its head around by the horns to try to break its neck, pulled its tongue out, stuffed sand in its mouth and even tried to tie its penis in a knot. Gleaming with sweat, they raised their arms in triumph and sang when the bull finally succumbed.”
It is, of course, easy to comment after the fact, but the judge merely suggested that the ceremony is video taped so that it could later be examined , in order to decide whether it was cruel or not,. This suggestion was refused by the respondents. Why did the judge not state that this would be done, which is indeed his right, and why would the respondents refuse? How could the clear and unambiguous words of Chief Mlaba be ignored?
To suggest that tired and boring refrain, that efforts to save the bull are racist, is to deflect attention from and deny the issue at hand, which is simply that cruelty in any form, for any reason, is unacceptable. Tradition, culture and 'we have always done it' is insufficient reason, especially in an age where we have leant so much about our fellow earthlings (we all feel joy, happiness, pain and suffering) to insist on delibertately inflicting an extremely painful and terrifying death upon anyone.
Beauty Without Cruelty condemns this vile ritual for the same reason we condemn the everyday wholesale slaughter of millions of sentient beings. We do not need to survive through the death of others.
As far as everyday slaughter goes, free range or not, the animals who end up on someone's plate suffer the same cruel end.
Beauty Without Cruelty did attempt to have the slaughter of the bull halted as far back as 1995 and this remains an issue that requires attention.
INTERNATIONAL ANIMAL RIGHTS DAY
At the V&A Waterfront in Cape Town a crowd gathered on Saturday 12th December to highlight animal abuse and expoloitation in all its forms. International Animal Rights Day and International Human Rights Day falls on the same date, and given that violence toward animals invariably leads to violence toward humans, this can be no co-incidence.
LANGUAGE
Language shapes how we think. Social justice movements, numerous researchers, studies and even politicians recognize this.
Think about this: we have a language that, for example, has nearly positive-only slang for promiscuous men and hundreds of negative and degrading slang for promiscuous women. This has a very real impact on how we all,, generally speaking, as part of society, thinks and consequenly behaves toward women.
We are all used to saying 'it' when it comes to discussing non-human animals.
We do this without thought and even for many who fight for the rights of animals, the occasional lapse into the use of the word 'it' prevails. Language determines our emotion toward another. In times of war , the enemy are given names in order to render them an entity, to objectify them, which makes it easier to destroy them.
We use negative terminology to describe other humans and do it often enough and we cannot help but feel anger, disgust, fear or dislike.
The common way of referring to animals as it rather than him or her objectifies them. Objects can be bought, sold, and owned nd this terminology is used in everyday conversation when talking about animals. indicating our assumption that animals are property.
Peter Singer (1990) describes the way that “The English language, like other languages, reflects the prejudices of its users”
The terms used for killing is different for humans and animals: Animals are slaughtered, humans are murdered. Try changing the two - You murdered my pet rabbit sounds weird. The villagers were slaughtered means that they were killed brutally, uncaringly, and immorally. Which is of course, what we do with animals on a day to day basis.
We too, use everyday terms like beef and pork to hide the fact that a living being has been slaughtered to feed us. We say beef 'products' and not 'pieces of cow flesh', hide and leather not 'skin'.
We need to consider the conscious use of language to ensure that we reflect what we mean and how we feel. Our companion dog (pet implies ownership) is he or she, not 'it.'
Our use of language defines us. How does yours define you, when it comes to animals?
THE HUMAN COST OF ANIMAL EXPERIMENTS
New research has concluded that the vaginal microbicide gel PRO 2000 does not prevent HIV infection in women, a recent study confirmed.
In animal testing, PRO 2000 had demonstrated a protective effect against HIV and other sexually transmitted infections, by preventing HIV cell entry.
However due to the failure of the gel with human use, the women in the study who did subesequently become HIV positive were provided counselling and ongoing psychosocial care. Saying that the outcome, 'while disappointing', did provide a platform for HIV education matters little to those who made every effort to remain HIV negative and have now contracted the disease.
When are scientists and governments going to accept that animal testing poses more harm than good to humans, while causing untold misery and suffering of millions of animals at the hands of scientists? The misuse of funding for these tests, the delay in finding cures and the deaths of people and animals continues.
QUOTE OF THE MONTH
"Animals give me more pleasure through the viewfinder of a camera than they ever did in the crosshairs of a gunsight. And after I've finished "shooting," my unharmed victims are still around for others to enjoy. I have developed a deep respect for animals. I consider them fellow living creatures with certain rights that should not be violated any more than those of humans " ~ Actor Jimmy Stewart
NEW FILM ON CAPE TOWN TV
Beauty Without Cruelty is delighted to be able to present essential viewing to many thousands of Cape Town viewers. The film, 'Bad Medicine', will be screened on Cape Town TV in the new year. This film confirms what we know - there is a real human cost to animal experimentation. Viewing times will be sent to our facebook members.
RECIPE
Only one recipe this time but this breadrecipe has to be the best ever! With all the options, no kneading or punching down and the aroma of fresh bread baking...it's all you need! Enjoy!
RAFFLE REMINDER
Please support our raffle and stand to win dinner, bed and breakfast at the fabulous Drakenstein Lion Park near Paarl plus other wonderful goodies!
Beauty Without Cruelty can only continue to fight animal exploitation, in all its forms, with your ongoing support.
Please consider placing a stop order on your account, from as little as R50 monthly.
The funding, without which no organisation can survive, goes toward educational materials and essential day to day running costs.
Standard Bank
Branch 025109
Savings Acc 077 491 645
FREE DOWNLOADS
The Beauty Without Cruelty August 2009 Approved List
We have strict criteria that includes the holding companies, subsidiaries and suppliers.
Humane Criteria
POINT TO PONDER
The idea that it is funny to see wild animals coerced into acting like clumsy humans, or thrilling to see powerful beasts reduced to cringing cowards by a whipcracking trainer is primitive and medieval. It stems from the old idea that we are superior to other species and have the right to hold dominion over them.
Dr Desmond Morris.
People either agree with the view that animals are not for our amusement or entertainment or completely don't get it. One hears the argument that certain animals are ‘show off’ or love the attention or love to act, or that kindness and positive re-inforcement is used and that the trainers love their animals.
That is not the point.
Given the choice, no animal would choose to live an unnatural life of captivity, regardless of the kindness of the treatment and no animal would choose a life that allows none of their natural behaviour. Certainly animals would not choose to be taken from their families to be obliged to amuse us.
Contact Us
BERYL SCOTT
chairperson@bwcsa.co.za
HEAD OFFICE
021 438 2282
MEDIA LIAISON / MARKETING
TONI BROCKHOVEN
toni@bwcsa.co.za
