Vegan Long Island Message Board › appreciating animal intelligence: dog-coaching-puppy video

appreciating animal intelligence: dog-coaching-puppy video

Jennifer G.
user 6937947
Group Organizer
Bellport, NY
Post #: 370
Somu: actually, I'm not positive there wasn't a crash sound effect added to the footage of the cat swatting the other cat. We weren't shown the result of the swat, and don't know what really happened to the other cat. I'm hoping there was no injury, of course.

Would I describe the top cat's action as cruel? I don't think I would. If a person did the same thing, that would be different—yes, then I'd describe the move as cruel and wrong.

But in this case, it's not so clear to me what the cat was thinking. In my experience, a cat's swat is usually a defensive move. As if to say, "You just got too close to me—get out of my space!"

I know the video maker juxtaposed these two videos to indicate naughtiness (bad intent) on the part of the cat, and that's where the humor arises, for me—seeing how the video maker concocted a story, using these two clips, and made an outlandish assertion about a supposed difference between these two species. In spite of what the captioning said, I don't think most cats push their young down stairs to teach them not to trust, and I think cats can actually be *very* trusting.

Sometimes it's hard to explain why something strikes us as funny. I think when I see a home video showing someone slipping or stumbling or the like, I've been conditioned to think, "They must have been okay afterwards" because years ago, the "America's Funniest Home Videos" tv show used to assure viewers that nobody was seriously hurt in the scenes they were showing. Maybe it's true, maybe not. But that's an important difference for me. If I see someone fall in real life in front of me—I don't know if there's a happy ending or not, and I'll rush over with concern to check if they're okay. When I see video of someone taking a tumble, I tend to assume (rightly or wrongly) that there was a happy ending, because it's on a video. Does that make any sense?
Jennifer G.
user 6937947
Group Organizer
Bellport, NY
Post #: 371
Okay, I watched it again, carefully, pausing & repeating those frames... and I have to admit, it's hard to see that cat's action as anything other than mischievous. I still wouldn't call that cat cruel, but yes, perhaps mischievous. wink

It really wasn't the cat behavior that motivated me to share the video, though. As the title of this thread indicates, the reason I shared the video was how impressed I was by the footage of the dogs.
Jennifer G.
user 6937947
Group Organizer
Bellport, NY
Post #: 372
I found the original video of the dogs— it's JUST the footage of the dogs: http://www.youtube.co...­
Karen N.
user 33415772
Amityville, NY
Post #: 86
I have 2 black cats currently, a BIG male (7) and a VERY tiny female (2) who was a "feral" and still very "skittish" and the behavior witnessed here is very common in my home. When she first came here the male was MEAN and was piked up "roughly" and scolded, but I know it was because the little one was fearful of everything and everyone, and therefor initiated the "chase" instinct in both the cat and my G'Ret. A year later this little bundle "felineness" has no fear of dog (likes to rub up against leg of 60lb dog as much as my leg), but the 2 cats display like 2 in movie when ever they "accidentally" cross the others path, other wise they are both careful to pass on opp. sides of furniture as they are obviously look where other is headed and go a diff way. Again I feel the films demonstrated average cat and dog behavior, and agree w'Jennifer the "crash" likely added for affect and cat unhurt. This scene had likely been repeated in the person's home often, just as I could take the time to make a similar film w'my 2 "swatting" at one another! BTW it's the younger and smaller one who now makes the big guy go out of his way to "get around" her!
Somu A.
user 85502112
West Sayville, NY
Post #: 12
"America's Funniest Home Videos" tv show desensitize people to violence. Not funny. Offensive.
Jennifer G.
user 6937947
Group Organizer
Bellport, NY
Post #: 385
Somu, if someone stumbles and falls down, would you call that kind of mishap "violence"? I don't think I would. (And as I explained above, in real time, it wouldn't be my reaction to laugh at another's mishap. Maybe you're right in that AFHV desensitizes people to other people's misfortunes, but I don't think that's the same as violence.)

When I used the term "violence," I think of intentional infliction of harm to another being.

I'm not particularly interested in defending that old tv show, but I hope you understand that the scenes I remember from it were usually accidents, incidents where something went awry or not as planned.

I'm not sure why physical comedy is funny in some cases, but I don't think it's the same as desensitizing people to violence (as in movies where characters are shown fighting or killing one another).

Come to think of it, I never really thought the antics of "The Three Stooges" were funny, and their actions simulated doing harm to one another (i.e., low-grade violence).
Somu A.
user 85502112
West Sayville, NY
Post #: 14
OK perhaps better I use word "injury" rather than word "violence" in my last message.

I don't think I would have used the word "comedy" to describe "America's Funniest." It was supposedly video of actual events. Comedy is a form of drama, portrayal of event, not actual event. Video of real events is not portrayal, not drama, and not comedy.

If mishap is portrayed, it could be funny depending upon how portrayed. But "America's Funniest" purport to be real. That's why present it as be funny, and laugh at it, both are wrong.

I did not think the simulated violence, and mishaps, perform by Three Stooges was funny either. Portrayals were not well-conceived. They were violence for its own sake, not to demonstrate or teach anything about human life or elucidate anything about human relations. That is why not funny. But portrayal of misfortune by more skilled actors, with better script, such as sometimes in movies Laurel and Hardy, sometimes funny.

Portrayal of injury sometimes funny, sometimes not. Real injury not usually funny. I hesitate say "never" funny as able to envision exceptions, but for the most part real injury or mishap that could lead to real injury, not funny. Even simple mishaps without injury are usually not funny. Actual video of someone accidentally or purposely breaking valuable item usually not funny. Harm come to someone as a result of loss.
Jennifer G.
user 6937947
Group Organizer
Bellport, NY
Post #: 386
Somu, I appreciate the way you've qualified some of your statements in your last post (by saying "usually," "for the most part"). I find this helpful.

I'm still not sure about declaring something wrong if you haven't demonstrated that it causes harm. I guess I might say, "I know that some videos showing actual mishaps are found to be entertaining by some, but this concerns me, because I worry that people may become less compassionate as a result."

In response, the other person might say, "Hm, that's an interesting point. I wonder if that's the case. "

Here's my point: I've found that when I tell someone they've done something wrong, they're more likely to feel defensive and less likely to come around to agreement with me. Does that make sense? I try express myself in a way that's less likely to provoke a defensive reaction.

(Also, I realize that you're communicating in a language which is not your first language! So I want to give you much credit for doing what I cannot do myself, which is communicate this well in a second language.)

Somu A.
user 85502112
West Sayville, NY
Post #: 15
Jennifer, I just say what I believe to be true, as simply as possible. That is what I know how to do; I don't have knowledge of what causes people feel defensive, what motivates people to agree, other than give them money to agree, or threaten or torture them until they agree or die, whichever come first. System used in much of the world, make threats, which I happen to think is wrong. I try to make clear difference which statement I make is what I believe fact, supported by published empirical evidence, and which statement I make is my hypothesis, my guess, my opinion, or my wish only, wish for how to be. Issue of right and wrong are always opinion, no way to prove or disprove. Self-evident they are opinion. Not need preamble "this my opinion." I am scientist. I am not a public relations expert, not a propaganda writer, not a marketing expert. So I do what I know how to do.

Some people are overly defensive, defend against threats where there is none. Not my ability to change them. However person want to defend something, that is ok with me. Maybe they will convince me to change my opinion, maybe not.

I understand sometimes my grammar is wrong, my syntax non-standard, and my language lack fluency. I am concentrating my effort on get thought across. You tell me my grammar is wrong, I am not defensive. Instead, I value your opinion, and try to improve my grammar. Not sure why I say laughing is wrong, people not act the same way.
Powered by mvnForum

People in this
Meetup are also in:

Sign up

Meetup members, Log in

By clicking "Sign up" or "Sign up using Facebook", you confirm that you accept our Terms of Service & Privacy Policy