4 ms·

So it's okay to have some animals live in terrible circumstances in order for people to not have to put effort into being empathetic? They might take "really g

by ysavir 2y ago

So it's okay to have some animals live in terrible circumstances in order for people to not have to put effort into being empathetic? They might take "really good care" of the animals, feed them well, give them the best veterinary care, etc, but that's not a good life for an animal. When they have so little space to roam, so little engagement or interaction with other groups of the same species, no agency over their food or other aspect of their life, and all the while having humans gawk at them whenever they aren't hiding away. It's just a pitiful existence for the benefit of tourists. I can't buy into that.

Night_Thastus 2y ago
Animal behavior and stress is a little more complicated than that. Not having to worry about predators, be low on food, or get sick/injured also significantly reduces stress. Some animals need a lot of territory to roam and don't do well in captivity, some don't really care. I'm not saying zoos are perfect, but well-run ones are far from evil either. Calling it 'terrible circumstances' is too broad. Sometimes yes, sometimes no.