A more compassionate approach to Pet owners from the "Non West"

[GaleriaGila]

Maybe it is just the blockhead indifferent New Yorker in me, but I rarely find any of the regular conttributors to be anythhing other than helpfull, concerned, informative and empathic. Ya a few topics seem to push cerrtain buttons and obvious stupidity can be irritating, but on the whole this forum is like a beautiful day in the neighborhood,, compared to others or Facebook.

As I'm reading and catching up on all of this...

I appreciate your blockheaded indifferent New Yorker state of mind, Al. Our regular contributors ARE passionate, compassionate people who care enough to grapple with hard questions, and this site IS a beautiful day in the neighborhood. Thank you for that interlude as we continue to sort out our thoughts.

 

[Flboy]

.......The original OP we are discussing here ended his first post with the sentence “I am just a parrot killer”, and I wonder if he was expecting members to tell him that his bird would be just fine and perfectly happy after he had released it, and help to assuage his guilt after what he had done. When the responses did not live up to his expectations we were rapidly branded as “haters”, with the OP becoming rather more interested in defending his actions than in hearing that he had simply done the wrong thing regarding the welfare of his parrot. Regardless of what part of the world you live in, some things are just plain wrong, whether you live in Brisbane, Barcelona, Baghdad or Baltimore.

This was my read of the post too! He came forward, giving himself a beating, I feel, looking for comfort!
Wrench13, you are a hoot! In a very good way! I have worked many years in Yonkers and the Bronx! Very straight forward folks! You instantly know where you stand! Being in Florida for 30 years, I still slip at times and forget to leave my conversational safety on!
I agree, I felt we were amazingly reserved! But I say this knowing I am one of those ‘rude Americans’!

 

[Anansi]

Hello, all. I think what's happening here is the unfortunate conflation of two things which, beyond the surface similarity of involving someone who is not from either the US, Australia, or Europe, is largely unrelated.

Is there an issue at times wherein members can be somewhat culturally insensitive in their responses to posters coming here for help? Absolutely. (Though I would also mention that these instances are outnumbered by the times where the members of this community show compassion and warmth to posters in need of advice and succor.) We mods are very much aware that this is a problem and have been working for some time now to change that tendency. Or mitigate it, at the very least.

And I must say, to a large degree our wonderful members have been responding positively to our efforts. For instance, we see a lot more people making the suggestion for a Certified Avian Vet with the proviso: 'if one is available where you live' attached. And there have been far less instances of people being lambasted if they actually do not. Same is true of cage sizes and such.These are 2 small examples, but they illustrate that members are learning, and they are trying to be more culturally inclusive in their thinking.

Of course, we still have a ways to go. There is always more we have to learn from one another. And dialogue will continue along this vein for some time to come.

But all that said, the situation with the OP of the thread in question is not one of cultural insensitivity. Take a read through it. There is no indication that there is an issue with his ability to successfully communicate in English. He expresses himself rather clearly and fluently, actually. Also, and this is key, he knows that what he did was wrong. This wasn't a case of him practicing a long-standing religious tradition for the sake of spiritual absolution or anything else. He did it because he got annoyed. With his bird.

On 23rd Feb I released my ring neck in the open field where palm trees surrounds the crop field. I did it since he was squeaking in the car cabin,I got annoyed and I released him...

There was no tradition, there. He acted out of annoyance. And annoyance is universal. While we all come from different backgrounds and cultures, we are all familiar with it. And I would think, regardless of one's views on releasing a bird into the wild, we would all agree that doing so out of sheer exasperation would be less than optimal as a rationalization.

But at the end of the day, the thread was closed because it had devolved into back-and-forth between the OP and other posters to the thread. There was no longer anything constructive about the conversation. He was defensive, some members were angry, and there was no changing what had already occurred regarding his bird. In addition, the fact the OP said his decision was, at least in part, spurred on by a bout of depression meant that we did not want him being beaten continually over the head about it, either. Leaving the thread open would just have allowed things to degenerate further. In short, we would not have been doing our jobs as moderators.

So, we closed it. And stand by our decision.

As for stickies, it wouldn't really be a matter of 'rewriting' or 'replacing' them. But new ones can be added. And old ones can be removed if they become outdated or are proven false. Here is the sticky process in a nutshell: A thread is created by a member, and if it is seen as both helpful AND completely representative of Parrot Forums' ideals as a whole, it is nominated by a mod to be made into a sticky. But, to help ensure that said thread is truly representative, it requires a unanimous vote to become... stickerized? stickified? stuck? stickied? You know what I mean. So, there is never a guarantee that any given thread will become a sticky. (Heck, there's a thread or two I've wanted as stickies for years that never made the cut.)

But, that said, a collaborative thread by Trish and Charmed would be enthusiastically welcomed, as both are highly respected and beloved members of this community. And there is every possibility it could become a sticky. But there is never a guarantee.

 

[GaleriaGila]

Just to be clear about being clear )), I am in full agreement with the decisions and sentiments set forth by the moderators. If I could express these ideas more persuasively or clearly, I would. Proud to be on the Team.

 

[Cardinal]

Ok! Typing this from phone. If that person did not have an Alexandrine , we can even afford to be even more harsh. The compassion is keeping in mind the bird in his custody and not exactly for the human. This is similar to the case of my neighbors who were about to leave their budgies unattended for a 10 day vacation. Even though I may internally feel like slapping them, I chose to be polite and compassionate or at least pretend for the sake of the welfare of the birds.

 

[Scott]

Ok! Typing this from phone. If that person did not have an Alexandrine , we can even afford to be even more harsh. The compassion is keeping in mind the bird in his custody and not exactly for the human. This is similar to the case of my neighbors who were about to leave their budgies unattended for a 10 day vacation. Even though I may internally feel like slapping them, I chose to be polite and compassionate or at least pretend for the sake of the welfare of the birds.

That is why you are such a great fit with this forum! We tend to be sympathetic for the bird's welfare to a fault. Last outcome we wish for is backlash against Rhomboid's Alexandrine. I was quite disappointed when he refused suggestions for care.

 

[Cardinal]

There is no indication that there is an issue with his ability to successfully communicate in English. He expresses himself rather clearly and fluently, actually. Also, and this is key, he knows that what he did was wrong. This wasn't a case of him practicing a long-standing religious tradition for the sake of spiritual absolution or anything else. He did it because he got annoyed. With his bird.

On 23rd Feb I released my ring neck in the open field where palm trees surrounds the crop field. I did it since he was squeaking in the car cabin,I got annoyed and I released him...

There was no tradition, there. He acted out of annoyance. And annoyance is universal. While we all come from different backgrounds and cultures, we are all familiar with it. And I would think, regardless of one's views on releasing a bird into the wild, we would all agree that doing so out of sheer exasperation would be less than optimal as a rationalization.

But at the end of the day, the thread was closed because it had devolved into back-and-forth between the OP and other posters to the thread. There was no longer anything constructive about the conversation. He was defensive, some members were angry, and there was no changing what had already occurred regarding his bird.

.

Yes I empathise with you. But my perspective is as follows.
India is a vast country with nearly 1.3 billion people. Even though it is a single political entity it is more comparable to the European Union than to say slightly more monolithic entities like China. Perhaps the closest entity that it can be compared to is Indonesia but that country has less than 30% of the population.

It is very rare for someone from India to come and ask for help in their own crude fashion. And though what I say is politically incorrect, some parts of India are far more "crude" in speech than others.

Now if this person had only one bird, I will also whole heartedly go with the moderators's decision. But this person has another bird that our collective expertise can help though the human involved does not seem to be recipient of good advice (at this moment).

So my suggestion is that if we have a greater patience threshold before we shut off communication with such members, it will be good for the welfare of the bird in his custody.
So instead of being tolerant towards 10 rude messages, we could increase it to 25 or 50 after which we realise we are hitting a wall and close communication.

I hope that made sense. Again I want to emphasise the compassion is not for the human being but for the hapless bird, which in current circumstances is probably best off with this person only.

 

[bill_e]

Cardinal,

I fully support the decision to close the thread although I would have done so the night before as it was clear what was going to happen then. Allowing for more posts to continue to degrade the relationship between the poster and forum members would only solidify the OP's negative experience as well as the forum members.

While the thread was closed, the OP was not banned and thus communication wasn't severed. The only thing I would have done differently other than closing the thread sooner, would have been to PM the OP and explain why the thread was closed and encourage him to start a new thread with a better attitude.....That may actually have been what happened and we just don't know about it.



Sent from my SM-T830 Galaxy Tab S4 using Tapatalk

 

[SailBoat]

Cardinal,

I fully support the decision to close the thread although I would have done so the night before as it was clear what was going to happen then. Allowing for more posts to continue to degrade the relationship between the poster and forum members would only solidify the OP's negative experience as well as the forum members.

While the thread was closed, the OP was not banned and thus communication wasn't severed. The only thing I would have done differently other than closing the thread sooner, would have been to PM the OP and explain why the thread was closed and encourage him to start a new thread with a better attitude.....That may actually have been what happened and we just don't know about it.

Sent from my SM-T830 Galaxy Tab S4 using Tapatalk

That is in fact Standard Protocol when shutting down a Thread...
Our Mods are kind to a fault in that regard...

 

[Betrisher]

Just being the devil's advocate, but supposing the OP has no clue there was anything wrong with his attitude? In many countries, an adult man's opinion is everything and no one would dare challenge him in anything he might do, no matter how ridiculous it might seem!

I once knew a woman who kept two SC2s in a cage that measured 4ft x 3ft x 2ft. I spoke with her many times and suggested her birds would be much happier in a larger cage. 'Just imagine' I said, 'if they could fly about a bit or climb around and play'.

'Oh!' she replied, 'they wouldn't be interested in that. All they ever do is just sit there!'

I watched those poor bl**dy birds sitting, doing nothing in that cage for over a decade! There is no law by which they could be seized (I checked with the local RSPCA, which is not worth a crumpet and only cares about cats and dogs) and the police wouldn't interfere because the birds were not (visibly) sick. This was in Australia, where we're supposed to be a developed nation.

There are no words!!!

Once I had exhausted my own welcome in chatting to the woman, the only hope I held for the birds was that someone at some point might eventually have penetrated her thick skull and made her see how cruel she was being. More than once, I had to walk away before I made her angry. My only hope was to drip, drip, drip like water on her ignorance. If I got her off-side, all hope would have been lost. As it happened, either the woman or her husband died and the birds disappeared from the yard. I hope like mad they found a decent home, but I doubt it. Ignorance is endemic where I live.

What Cardinal is trying to point out is that the entire *culture* in some countries simply takes what we see as cruelty for granted. People simply do not see an animal as anything special: it's more like a cactus or a pot-plant. While it's young and cute and interesting, it reflects well on the owner. Once those traits grow old, it's expendable. I have learned in life that berating a person is not the most efficient way of encouraging him to see things the way I do. That's all.

In the interest of poor birds that may be subject to awful cruelty, Cardinal and I are only asking that we try a different tack and recognise different cultures. Help might reach those birds if we just tried a little harder.

I won't beat a dead horse any longer over this, but the moral high ground can be a lonely place indeed.

 

[Scott]

So my suggestion is that if we have a greater patience threshold before we shut off communication with such members, it will be good for the welfare of the bird in his custody.
So instead of being tolerant towards 10 rude messages, we could increase it to 25 or 50 after which we realise we are hitting a wall and close communication.

I hope that made sense. Again I want to emphasise the compassion is not for the human being but for the hapless bird, which in current circumstances is probably best off with this person only.

Our patience threshold included three reports by senior members urging closure, and significant dialog amongst moderators. For more perspective and context, Rhomboid definitively closed the door to advice re surviving Alexandrine.

I don't need any suggestions regarding Alex, he is happy with me.

Rhomboid is welcome to create a new discussion thread without prejudice to the closure. Whether the hapless bird is better off with this person is conjecture. We don't know if the level of remorse is sufficient to prevent another release. Given the likelihood of further angst, the defensive posture would have likely hardened.

As a long term member, surely you understand the enormous compassion our members have for birds and their keepers/companions. That is our raison d'etre.

 

[Scott]

Just being the devil's advocate, but supposing the OP has no clue there was anything wrong with his attitude?

What Cardinal is trying to point out is that the entire *culture* in some countries simply takes what we see as cruelty for granted.
In the interest of poor birds that may be subject to awful cruelty, Cardinal and I are only asking that we try a different tack and recognise different cultures. Help might reach those birds if we just tried a little harder.

I won't beat a dead horse any longer over this, but the moral high ground can be a lonely place indeed.

Rhomboid clearly understood the gravity of release and expressed a bit of remorse:

yeah, he is gone and still gives me sleepless nights.

Cruelty to animals knows no borders and holds quarter in every nation. It is rife in the U.S. though we make steady strides. Leading by example and sharing our passion within these forums has proven helpful. While we celebrate the diversity of our membership, we have at times made judgments based on actions, not locale.

Moral high ground is relativistic and has been used as cudgel for millennia.

 

[Terry57]

If Rhomboid had actually been asking for help in trying to recapture his bird, I would have agreed with leaving his thread open. However, since he had no intention on going back to even look for his bird, it seemed he wanted absolution for his actions rather than help.

He was not asking for help with cage sizes, or food, or anything to make his remaining bird's life better. If he had been, I would agree that this is where compassion and help are required. He also made it clear that he wasn't asking for help with his Alex. If he did choose to ask for help for his Alex, then a new thread would be the most helpful without the baggage of his first thread.

The action of releasing a domesticated bird into the wild because their noise is bothering someone should not be glossed over, no matter where the person is from.

 

[charmedbyekkie]

The action of releasing a domesticated bird into the wild because their noise is bothering someone should not be glossed over, no matter where the person is from.

While I agree with that belief, I can't express how many times I have been asked:

It's a bird - shouldn't it be flying free with other birds? Isn't it cruel to cage them and keep them in houses?

It is a common belief in certain countries that birds are almost a symbol of freedom, of soaring where only our spirits can go, of dreams and well-wishes. And as a result, in certain countries, there's a belief that birds are better off free, flying in the skies with other birds, not brought down to our human level.

Given the choice between that and the life that most songbirds in Chinese tradition live (and as a result, many parrots live), I do wonder what to say.

 

[Terry57]

The action of releasing a domesticated bird into the wild because their noise is bothering someone should not be glossed over, no matter where the person is from.

While I agree with that belief, I can't express how many times I have been asked:

It's a bird - shouldn't it be flying free with other birds? Isn't it cruel to cage them and keep them in houses?

It is a common belief in certain countries that birds are almost a symbol of freedom, of soaring where only our spirits can go, of dreams and well-wishes. And as a result, in certain countries, there's a belief that birds are better off free, flying in the skies with other birds, not brought down to our human level.

Given the choice between that and the life that most songbirds in Chinese tradition live (and as a result, many parrots live), I do wonder what to say.

If he had released his bird because he felt that keeping it in a cage was wrong,this may have been a different discussion with more nuanced replies. However, he released him because of irritation at the noises the IRN was making. Comparing this particular situation to people being opposed to birds being caged or to how songbirds are kept in China confuses me. People commented on the actual situation, which is that he released a domesticated bird because of his irritation, and he never mentioned any ethical beliefs he may have had.

 

[charmedbyekkie]

I will leave this link here and have nothing more to say on this matter:

https://m.economictimes.com/news/politics-and-nation/birds-have-fundamental-rights-cant-be-kept-in-cages-delhi-high-court/articleshow/47315094.cms

NEW DELHI: Birds have the fundamental right to "live with dignity" and fly in the sky without being kept in cages or subjected to cruelty, Delhi High Court has said while holding that running their trade was a "violation of their rights".

Justice Manmohan Singh expressed anguish that instead of being allowed to fly free, they were "exported illegally to foreign countries without availability of proper food, water or medical aid".

"I am clear in mind that all the birds have fundamental rights to fly in the sky and all human beings have no right to keep them in small cages for the purposes of their business or otherwise," the judge said.

The high court issued notice to Delhi Police as well as the bird owner, Md Mohazzim, and sought their responses by May 28.

The high court made the observations and issued the orders while staying the direction of a trial court which had allowed some birds to be released to the same person from whom they were rescued on his plea.

The trial court order was stayed on a plea by NGO People for Animals, which had challenged the release of birds into custody of owners without hearing the NGO which had freed the birds.


The NGO, in its plea filed through advocate S D Windlesh, has alleged that the trial court released the birds into Mohazzim's custody despite arriving at a finding that he was not the owner of the birds.

Granting relief to the NGO, the high court said, "...This court is of the view that running the trade of birds is in violation of the rights of the birds. They deserve sympathy. Nobody is caring as to whether they have been inflicted cruelty or not despite a settled law that birds have a fundamental right to fly and cannot be caged and will have to be set free in the sky.

"Birds have fundamental rights including the right to live with dignity and they cannot be subjected to cruelty by anyone including claim made by the respondent (Mohazzim)."

 

[LaManuka]

The good Justice’s ruling in this case is absolutely correct! There are more than enough captive bred parrots and other species available to satisfy the demand of the pet trade without the need to continue taking more from the wild. When was the last time anyone saw a wolf being taken from it’s native habitat because someone wanted a pet canine?

Wild caught birds are often subjected to cruelty and their lives endangered in the way they’re housed and transported, to say nothing of how such illegal practices endanger the very survival of those species altogether. Yet the trade does continue, often on the back of trade in illegal narcotics or weapons, causing immeasurable suffering to all involved. We in Australia well remember in our not too distant past seeing deeply distressing film footage of various native parrot species being jammed into airless suitcases for illegal export through our airports, and many of them being dead by the time they were found by customs officers. Although we don’t see it here so much anymore it still continues in many parts of the world and is every bit as cruel. And unnecessary. The judge here has taken one small step in trying to stamp out disgusting illegal trafficking, yet I cannot help but wonder what was the fate of the birds who were caught up in this.

I've said before that I think the day is coming where humans will no longer be permitted to keep pets of any species purely for their own amusement, but we cannot in good conscience simply turn a domesticated animal loose and hope that it can fend for itself. Our companion birds are not as far removed from their wild ancestors, that is very true. But a bird who has spent it’s life in captivity should not be released into the wild where it will most likely starve or be killed by any number of predators, and certainly not because it’s owner acted on a momentary impulse which he now regrets, such as is the case with our original OP. The wider debate about whether any of us should be keeping any bird from experiencing the full richness of the life that it has evolved over millions of years for, with all of it’s splendour and potential danger, is however a very valid one, and one which should continue here on this forum and elsewhere for a long time to come.

 

[Anansi]

Let me just boil things back down to their basics, as the complexities of cultural perspectives seem to have muddied the waters on something that is far more basic and simple than this conversation would suggest.

The original premise of this thread was to contest the mod decision of closing the thread in question, yes? End of the day, it all boils down to that. Now, many points have been made since then advocating a need for greater patience with members who might hail from countries with different views and perspectives as regards the keeping of pets in general and birds specifically. And these points, generally speaking, are not without merit. Cardinal, among others, is absolutely correct when saying that we have to sometimes extend more patience than we might otherwise for the sake of the bird. You might be surprised to learn how often such discussions take place behind the scenes in the Mod Forum.

Because we feel the same way.

"Then great," some of you might be saying. "Why haven't they reversed their decision and reopened the thread, yet?" The answer, quite simply, is that those very lucid and well thought out points ranging from increased patience to cultural sensitivity have nothing to do with the reasoning behind the shutting down of the thread. The thread was shut down because it had become combative. It had devolved into the OP vs members who disagreed with his decision. Now, while I may personally disagree with the assessment that the OP of that thread made a decision based on culturally skewed perspectives, that does not factor into a discussion about the closure of the thread. The thread was no longer constructive, and was veering toward the OP being beaten over the head with what he'd done in releasing his bird to the wild. In short, the decision was largely for his protection and to prevent the further erosion of his relationship with this forum.

Remember, the OP has not been silenced. He is free to post whenever he'd like. But if a thread is no longer serving a constructive purpose, if it has become combative rather than positive and uplifting, we're going to shut it down. So, to reiterate, the thread was not closed out of lack of tolerance for the member's position or cultural perspective. It was closed due to an increasingly negative trend in its direction. Every other discussion here has been largely academic, and while valuable in their own rite, are simply not germane to the question of why the thread was closed in the first place.

 

[GaleriaGila]

Thanks to my fellow moderators and like-minded members for your patience, courage, and kindness in this discussion. I am always heartened to see us return so faithfully to our Cardinal (!) touchstone: "what helps a bird?" What might in any way help a bird (or a person) who is lonely, sick, frightened, hungry, and desperately needing for somebody, anybody... to pause... care... act... type? That is our beautiful question.

 

[Aspie_Aviphile]

LOL! The issue of bull-fighting just popped into my mind. No matter how much I hate and loathe and detest the practice, no amount of my preaching will budge the Spanish psyche one millimetre from enjoying its national sport. I think we're faced with something like that here. Maybe. I dunno. But I do know that we'll catch more flies with a spoon of honey... (Mum, 1959).

That's actually not true, most Spanish people are opposed to bull fighting, so much that it's close to being banned. Same as fox hunting with hounds which despite being an English practice got banned because most of us were opposed to it, *passionately* too. Protesters would even spit on the hunters and I remember as a child most adults sympathised with those spitting on them, regardless of other political views, it was that widely and deeply hated. Our Prime Minister offended the Spanish people by assuming they were mostly in favour of bull fighting and calling it "political correctness" that it might get banned, it backfired because the will of the Spanish people is to ban it but he assumed otherwise so to them he basically called them all evil bull fight supporters and stereotyped them based on a small minority's hobby. Just like fox hunting the high social class of those who supported it was the only reason it has lasted so long, money in politics talks. All humans all over the world are the same species, we are born with the same instincts including compassion and aggression that get brought out by different triggers of those instincts. The psychopaths in each culture who lack any compassion at all, develop and enjoy their own cruel activities that don't represent the will of everyone else. As psychopaths naturally become rich and powerful at a higher rate as they have no scruples to hold them back doing whatever they want, they get to donate to politicians' campaigns who do their bidding. So never assume that most people support whatever cruel practices that culture is famous for just because it's still legal, only psychopaths like such things. High functioning psychopaths who blend in by not murdering people are psychopaths nonetheless, because they have no conscience at all and just fake having any sense of justice to avoid being found out for what they are. Now when the *majority* of people in a culture are doing something cruel, like inadequate space or interaction for parrots, they can't all be psychopaths as the genes aren't that common anywhere, so it must be out of of ignorance of the suffering caused or sometimes perceived necessity, it's not because culture somehow erases the compassion instinct that all non-psychopath humans are born with, which is the implication of giving up on education and advocacy based on culture.

Hope that wasn't rambling and incoherent, it's late.