The debate over where Darwin belongs has been lively, acrimonious and filled with accusations, derision and rage from both sides of the divide. CTV News reports that the issue has engendered cries of slander and defamation on both sides, while a cursory glance at the Daring Darwin Monkey facebook page clearly shows that the issue of where primates (and indeed, other exotic animals) belong is fractured and subject to emotional excess.
It is no secret that I am disgusted at the "humanization" of Darwin. The saccharine videos of Darwin's early months (you know, when he was an infant and taken from his real mother - the cost of his mother's pain and his own descent into being a toy for a woman with no understanding or common sense) on the Darling Darwin Monkey facebook page clearly illustrate the paternalistic, selfish and twisted (in my opinion) views of people who refuse to accept that certain animals are simply not meant to be kept as pets.
Seeing him dressed in clothes, performing unnatural acts and being treated as an animate toy leaves me sickened and sad. Primates are incredibly intelligent. They have intricate, clearly defined social lives, are articulate, curious and are psychologically sophisticated. Those behaviours are clearly not conducive to a comfortable partnership with human beings - particularly as the monkeys get older and aggression becomes more of an issue. According to the U.S. based Centres for Disease Control and Prevention:
... macaque monkeys are prone to carrying harmful viruses and were found in studies to be aggressive toward humans, particularly children. For these reasons, the CDC deemed macaque monkeys "unsuitable" as pets.
On a page which Google found - Pet Monkey Testimonials - there are some pretty damning incidents of how monkeys often turn on their owners as they get older and their natural behaviour (already psychologically damaged by the lack of a natural environment) asserts itself. I found it particularly striking the number of individuals who commented on how they had brought the monkey up like a "baby" and were shocked and appalled when the creature turned on them as it aged. This is reflective of many of Yasmin's comments wherein she refers to herself as the "Monkey Mom" and to Darwin repeatedly as her "baby".
I'm not a big fan of anthropomorphism of animals. After many years exploring the best methods of interacting with and training dogs, I was lucky enough to find a trainer whose cardinal rule is LET THE DOG BE A DOG. After years of struggling with deep seated issues in my dogs engendered by abuse (they were rescues), I FINALLY learned how to let them be THEM and over time, saw immediate benefits and much happier dogs. The anthropomorphism of Darwin is even more distressing as monkeys are far more sophisticated, intricate and intelligent creatures. Denied a chance to develop normally, Darwin was, in my opinion, being abused by being forced into an unnatural role as a "monkey baby".
Clearly, the best place for Darwin WOULD have been with his own mother and living in a large social group (the natural state of these type of monkeys); however, that is no longer an option due to the immoral actions first of the breeder who ripped him from his mother's arms when he was literally days old (and studies have shown that the mothers go into a depression and mourn the loss of their baby - PLUS they are bred again- up to 10 x more than their natural state), then exacerbated by Yasmin buying him and then playing house and "mommy" with him.
Is Story Book Farm ideal? Of course not. But given that time can't be reversed, it is the only humane and moral place for Darwin to stay. He needs to be exposed and learn from his own kind - he deserves the chance to at least try to acquire and internalize "normal" monkey behaviour. What he does not deserve is to be returned to an individual who while claiming to "love" him, instead uses him to satisfy some twisted desire of her own.
No comments:
Post a Comment