Thanks! Share it with your friends!
Enough a day between rain to put fresh hay, before wind picks up.
This person feels to be on a mission from God. God gave him pigs, so he began to wonder what for. There has never been a "proper" use for pigs, but caged as pets. This does not seem to coincide with their nature, design or behavior when allowed, rather than made to do things.
Recently the internet came along, and their use became evident. Showing you. The YouTube platform makes it just concieveable that you like it well enough to clap eyeballs on them, for which they give the originator of content a proper pittance. There are many pittances out there. It won't amount to what any could call money, but it might feed pigs. To show you. To feed pigs. Circle of Life, and all that.
But natural behavior of males kept communally has its' price to them, too. They are a heirarchical species, constantly establishing who is boss of who. This has consequence, quite apart from the right and wrong we assume of our own affairs. The effects are visible, and therefore unattractive to those who wish to see the perfect pet, the ideal animal in every one of them.
It occurred to the originator that it would be far easier to end the unattractive animals for sake of appealing to the internet, leaving just the pretty and perfect ones for everyone's pleasure. Also that if they did not, eventually someone would.
This would result in the same effect pet stores and many shelters have, leaving the less than desirable behind to an unspecified fate.
The originator kept animals of every sort all his life, and thought to have learned something of compassion for them. Even in all their imperfections. He also thought others were at least so intelligent as him, and might be able to understand and forgive animals for their circumstance quite apart from their caregivers. They are often put into very difficult ones, and made to do the best they can.
This can only be another typical one, in which both are.
The Mission it seemed, was to show the truth of animals in general, these in particular, and get out of their way so people can form their own conclusions. The purpose was to let others understand that nature does not come with right and wrong, but consequence. It is entirely dispassionate and makes no judgement on any. That, it seems, we have taken up as our job.
We assume no blame on animals, because we also assume they are under someone's control. They are responsible for the effects, and their appearance. They are, but to degree. Animals are also part of the equation.
The question that needs answered, is why no one has done this before. The answer is that no one wants to see animals in less than perfect happiness. It is only a matter of time before someone presents them as such, at cost to those you do not see but still exist. Editing happens.
The solution, imperfect as it too is, would be to give the whole picture along with observations related to their reason for being. Understanding might then become available, resulting in something better than the horrible conclusions many come to.
If people come to accept animals for what they are rather than what we wish them as, we could admire the perfect "piggies" all the better for knowing we can't all be. This would make a safer world for animals, who can only do the best they can with what they're given.
Abusing a caregiver for their efforts will modify their behavior toward attempts to please you. Easily done, most often in hiding what you don't care to see. Hiding animals has poor effect on them. Neglect comes next, in their having no purpose to human ends, which typically have to do with profit. Human profit is very hard on animals.
Instead, the originator thinks many might understand we all hope the best for them, even if we expect the worst of each other. So there might well be some other reason for their less than perfect appearance, beyond indifference or incompetence.
Even absent understanding, acceptance is key to learning more. If we accept animals in what they are obliged to by their behavior and ours, we do not motivate others to please us at cost to animals themselves.
What is God to this person? He does not know, nor let others tell him. But he sees its' effects in nature and thinks if he watches quietly, listens carefully, he might be able to hear what it has to say.