The Cove, the provocative film that documented the hidden dolphin slaughters in Taiji, Japan, made its Japan debut at the Tokyo International Film Festival this week, and director Louie Psihoyos was there to bear witness to its unveiling. I talked to him just two hours after he got off the airplane from Narita on Thursday morning. Here's what he had to say about his experience in watching the film with the actual dolphin killers in the audience:
All the bad guys there, front row center. The mayor, the International Whaling Committee delegate, fishermen dressed up in suits...I couldn't have dreamed of a better screening. They had all come to Tokyo with their lawyers to see if there would be any kind of litigation against the film. The screening sold out within a few hours, so I offered to give them tickets. At one point, the mayor stormed out, and the IWC delegate held his head in his hands.
I thought I might get arrested when I got off the airplane in Tokyo — there are arrest warrants out for me in Taiji for things like trespassing, conspiracy to disrupt commerce, and photographing undercover police. I was invited by the TIFF, though, so that's probably what kept me safe.Stories about dolphin hunting have been taboo in Japan for the past 30 years. The only reason this film was able to show there this week was because the Liberal Democratic Party was voted out. The government is a major sponsor of the film festival, and about two weeks after the regime change, the festival's director contacted me and said, "Given the 'environment' theme of this year's film festival, it would be hypocritical not to show The Cove." Still, the festival did seem to bury it — we had a 10:30AM screening and not a single promotional poster in sight.
All the Japanese who approached me about the film had very positive things to say about it. It was mostly young people, 18-35 year olds. They said, how can I help you get this film out in Japan? I think many were in shock. I told them that this was just the Disney version of what really happens at the cove.
During the Q&A session, I pointed out that this is not just an animal rights film, but that these dolphins have about 5000 times more mercury than allowed by Japanese law. Unfortunately, it's not enough to argue that these are the only animals in human history that have saved humans. The only way we can save them is by reminding people that human beings have made their environment so toxic that we can't eat them anymore. The question of intelligence of other animals as judged by our own intelligence is such a specie-centric thing. We're about to go through our sixth major extinction now, so how smart does that make us really?
I think the most important thing that could happen is that the film would show in Taiji. I've sent them a formal letter to see if they'd like to do an ocean-themed film festival at a national park that would include The Cove. I also told the Taiji mayor and councilmen that all profits generated from the film in Japan would go directly to the dolphin hunters if they stopped their dolphin hunting. I would gladly support them if they switch to crab hunting or whale watching.
I was only in Japan for two days — the whole thing was so surreal. At Sundance earlier this year, people thought that this movie would never screen in Japan. Now there are two major distributors in Japan negotiating for the rights. And flying back over the Pacific today, I knew there are now several thousand dolphins swimming free because of this movie.
RSS Feed
As much as I respect the intent behind this film and as much as I love dolphins, they are not "the only animals in human history that have saved humans". There's plenty of records of dogs pulling their owners from burning buildings. Hell, even elephants have protected the lives of their riders from being taken by angry tigers.
why was this "a Disney version of what really happens at the cove"?
Little John the context of the two directors is pretty far and effing wide different.
Roman Polanski raped a goddamn child this guy made a movie about a predatory industry
Interesting that the director brings up the mercury issue. That doesn't get brought up much. But it makes sense. If tuna have nasty levels of mercury, it makes sense that the next thing up on the food chain would be even worse.
Oh yes, please berate our country some more oh, western overlords. We all know that Americans, Europeans, Chinese, Russians, Scandinavians, certainly don't overfish their oceans and live at peace with the undersea inhabitants. (No emoticon with eyes large enough to roll for this one)
When all of you stop fishing, whaling, slaughtering, and cooking life on this planet for yourselves, please feel free to make an arrogant supercilious documentary and I'm sure we'll all file in to listen to your moving sermons.
The only reason the anti-whaling/fishing crowd (Sea Shepard, I'm looking at you) and their ilk continue to reproach Japan is because any other country would call in their navy to lay the smackdown on these hypocritical troublemakers.
It's the Disney version because in reality it is worse.
Dog's save lives too, and every now and again a cat or two, now werz the cheezeburgers?
"..he only animals in human history that have saved humans."!!!
King, the Wonder Dog, and Trigger, the Wonder Horse, are spinning in their graves. And let's not even get into Mowgli and Tarzan's foster parents....
Benher - Well I, for one, welcome our new Western Overlords.
If we eat all the big farting fish will we have to back in time to save Flipper?
@benher:
Being a norwegian, and eating a fair bit of fish (not so much whale - not entirely keen on the taste), I generally see your point.
However. Harpoon grenading whales is intended to be as quick a kill as conveniently possible, and I honestly don't worry overly much about the pain experience of fish. This dolphin hunt, on the other hand, is supposedly more cruel - of the "cut them up and let them bleed to death on the beach"-type. That specific side of it seems unnecessary, if my impression of it is correct, and is probably another reason this gets more attention.
Nice loaded language by the way, "Dolphin Killers." You know, all us meat eaters are just co-conspirator in this genocide afterall.
Holding people morally culpable for feeding themselves is like holding a wolf responsible for eating a sheep... perhaps Lou should concern himself with the American slaughter of human beings before picking a proverbial bone with the Japanese.
benher - Fact is that commercial whaling (currently being done by Japan, Norway and Iceland) is a bad idea. It's both cruel and unsustainable.
Saying that other people also do things that are bad ideas doesn't get Japan off the hook.
And by the way - Japan is one of the richest countries in the world. So don't try to play that "west bullies east" silliness.
@ADavies: you don't think America or Europe has any sway over Japanese policies? If you don't count the last 65 years or so perhaps. Stop pretending to know what you're talking about - anyone who has spent even an iota reviewing the history of Japan knows otherwise. And by the way, this lets your country off the hook for it's particular blend of animal/fish killing how?
BTW re: the original post, The festival buried it? I find that highly doubtful. Sounds like a persecution complex. Who in the world wants to hear their country berated by Americans? Picking on the weakest kid in the playground is hardly worthy of bragging rights.
Disclaimer: I hate the taste of whale and dolphin meat - but I respect this country's right to do what they want in their own waters. (they are a freaking maritime people for crying out loud)
Hey Benher...I got 3 words for you when it comes to the Japanese.
"Bataan Death March".
Unfortunately, it's not enough to argue that these are the only animals in human history that have saved humans.
Because it's so obviously a false statement?
(Vegetarians and Vegans are obviously exempted from this berating)
By the way, here's a link to Taichi's page where they explain the festival to honor the whales.
http://www.e-kujira.or.jp/topic/tra/07/0429/index.html
That's right, Honor them. Seriously, when was the last time you felt a thankful attitude to the animals and sealife that die to feed you on a (semi)daily basis? I'm guilty of this as well. I feel that it is important to recognize that the attitudes, rituals, and festivals of the Japanese and part of their culture and take place on their sovereign soil.
From what I recall from my time in the States, it was very rare to eat an animal with the head or limbs still present in the dish presented. However this is not uncommon throughout Asia. Mostly because there is an inherent attitude of reverence for the sacrifice of that life.
If Lou is still feeling surly maybe there are some Native American fisherman you can go pick on for overfishing lakes containing fish with excessive mercury levels.
@Mojave Don't you go and try to Godwin this discussion. Here's 3 words for you regarding Americans vs. Japanese: Manzanar, Hiroshima, and Nagasaki.
Gee, how constructive.
If there's nothing wrong with the dolphin hunt then why do they hide it and persecute people that try to document it?
"However this is not uncommon throughout Asia. Mostly because there is an inherent attitude of reverence for the sacrifice of that life."
Can't argue this *isn't* true, but wow. Can Asians do anything for practical rather than spiritual reasons? We "display" the head and limbs of an animal in a dish *because we eat them.*
(And yet my family has no qualms about eating tripe, but we throw away the butts of chickens and ducks. I still find this a weird contradiction.)
So, since I eat fish and pigs with their heads still attached (and yeah, I can stare into their eyes while I eat them), I'm exempt from criticism? Nice to know.
Nobody here has said America or Europe has clean hands because of Japanese deeds. You're the *only one* who implied anything of guilt negating guilt.
@dculberson Hide it where? On their public web page perhaps? Everyone in Japan knows about this festival. Don't blame us if you can't read kanji.
Perhaps you refer to the "keep out" signs? Those are probably posted because they fear invasion on their sovereign territory by "activists" from some other country.
And exactly how as Louie "persecuted" by the way? When the Japanese companies mentioned in the article offered to distribute his film? Oh, persecute me some more with lucrative film deals!
"... maybe there are some Native American fisherman you can go pick on for overfishing lakes containing fish with excessive mercury levels."
I live in Minnesota. There is ongoing trouble in nearby Wisconsin between Native Americans and non-NA's ("whites") about fishing rights:
"During the 1980s and early 1990s, there were many violent clashes in northern Wisconsin over the issue of Ojibwe spearfishing. Violent scenes at boat landings received national and even international attention. Sometimes thousands of White protesters showed up at boat landings as Ojibwe fishermen prepared to spearfish walleye and other species of fish. These crowds often shouted racial slurs, threw things at the fishermen, and even assaulted them. While this violence has receded in recent years, it has not disappeared."
http://www.mpm.edu/wirp/ICW-112.html
The Native Americans claim treaty rights to spearfish on lands where white law prohibits white folks from spearfish.
"I can, but you mustn't" -- there are few quicker ways to stir up resentment into hatred and violence.
Benher's logic is completely faulty. Regardless of what the US Government has done throughout time and space, whale and dolphin hunting practices by Japan go beyond the ordinary line of ethics into the completely wild waters of insanity. Using one to defend the other is completely irrational. Who cares whether the filmmaker is American, Japanese or Martian? He's pointing out a clear problem that requires a lot more world attention than is currently being given; to get indignant because of his place of origin is pure ignorance and arrogance. I know the U.S. government is as corrupt as they come- so what? You're going to ignore anything intelligent that comes from this continent because of it? That's pure stubborn stupidity; meanwhile, an ecological disaster is waiting to happen simply because we want to spend our time arguing over who's the bigger bully on the block. When you're done trying to inflate your ego, try paying attention to what's going on around you and lend a hand to a positive effort.
Mahi Mahi is dolphin. Just sayin'.
But dolphins and some whales are cute! And you see, cute things can't be slaughtered.
They're also more intelligent than your average trout. Where's the movie about people eating apes? Or parrots? or dogs?
Every maritime community overfishes their waters until there is some sort of local government intervention stopping it. Salmon, cod, lobster, etc.. When the hammer is finally brought down, there's an uproar from the fishermen and their communities about how their jobs are being sacrificed for some fish. It always struck me as amazing that they can't seem to grasp the concept that if they fish ALL of the fish, then there WON'T BE ANY MORE LEFT AND THEY'LL BE UNEMPLOYED ANYWAY. With no chance of recovery. These measures are usually brought in once the population of the species is near the point of no return, sometimes after trying to promote conservation efforts, and sometimes simply due to bureaucratic slowness.
So what does Japan do when they've obliterated the dolphin population in their waters? All the festivals in honour of the dolphins won't bring them back.
I find it hard to be upset about a specific species being used for food. Dog, horse, rabbit, or whale might not appeal to me, but I'll happily eat pig, cow, any variety of domestic fowl, elk, and other animals, so who am I to judge? What does upset me is the ignorance of people when they endanger a species - that there will soon be no more. Ever. They hurt not only the species, but themselves.
OK folks, if he said "the only wild animals in history to save human lives" would that be acceptable? We all know that domesticated pets have saved human lives-- there's nothing amazing about that, but wild animals? Let me know when you find a story of a dingo saving some woman's baby.
And sure, the west is overfishing and polluting the oceans too-- we all have blood on our hands. Why is he not allowed to criticize this aspect of Japanese commerce/culture? Because he is a westerner? Maybe westerners shouldn't criticize North Korea's "culture" either. The world is full of atrocity and stupidity, and the more people who shine a light on it the better we all are.
Benher: Moreover, have you seen the film? It actually addresses this very topic -- the thorny issue of Westerners barging in on Japanese practises -- and provides footage of real Japanese people (albeit, as I recall, mostly urbanites) reacting in horror to videos of dolphin slaughter.
@das memsen quoth: "dolphin hunting practices by Japan go beyond the ordinary line of ethics into the completely wild waters of insanity."
Says you. Perhaps you'd care to explain why Norway or Canada's policies aren't insane?
I have no interest in trying to inflate my ego. In this case, I have an interest in defending my country and my people's policies, rights, and traditions against pompous self-styled crusaders such as yourself.
@Gloria - no, I think that labeling a fisherman as a "killer" means that the author is attempting to illicit a guilty feeling out of the subject of said labeling. Hence the "go stuff it" response.
Simply, leave the damn fish alone and stick with the unloved, irreverent, non-spiritual, scrawny old chicken. Then, we can all swim upstream together in spiritual bliss. Now wouldn't that be lovely?
I haven't seen the film, nor am I overly knowledgeable about the practices depicted in it. I am however very familiar with the Canadian seal hunt (family members engage in it)and there seem to be parallels.
I really don't understand making a hierarchy about which animals are "okay" to kill and eat (sealers and their families eat the meat btw, it's not just about the fur industry)and which aren't. What makes a seal or a dolphin more important to save than a chicken or a cow or a pig or a frog? Isn't there something more intrinsically respectful and natural about hunting rather than growing animals with hormones and vaccines on an industrial farm?
And as far as the political economy of Japan verses some monolithic "West" is concerned, I think people need to think about economic stratification within states. To say Japan is one of the world's richest countries has absolutely nothing to do with the economic realities of the members of the Japanese population who engage in this hunt. Canada is also one of the richest countries in the world, but I can assure you that people engaged in the seal hunt certainly do not benefit from the wealth that flows down Bay St or in the Tar Sands of Alberta.
That being said, I don't like either practice and think that work can be done through international organizations in partnership with local community groups to retrain these hunters in more sustainable jobs, while still allowing them to live off the sea.
I unapologetically favor some species over others, but it's more to do with mental complexity than cuteness. I won't raise dolphins, chimps, or humans for food. I will eat adorable little bunnies, salmon, turnips, etc. Everybody has to draw the line somewhere. My line is arbitrary but not senseless.
Benher: Aiya. Then your beef is with the post's author, Lisa Katayama, is it not? The filmmaker, in his statement posted here, never uses the term "dolphin killers." He, in fact, describes them as "fishermen."
Granted, he also calls them "bad guys," but I think that's more for some light-hearted colour and movie short-hand.
Astin,
Mahi mahi, also called dolphin, is not a cetacean but Coryphaena hippurus - a fish.
They are very pretty, though "cute" would be a matter or personal taste. Ahem.
@ill lich I get your point, but this thread isn't about the DPRK, it's about Japan. I choose the US as the malefactor in this case because the director hails from the miswest. As far as the US is concerned, as of the last decade they invade and topple sovereign nations, execute their leaders, and then procede to torture the occupants of it and surrounding territories. So I imagine sitdowns at with Kimmy at the Peninsula have very little to do with society, morals, and ethics.
And again, I don't see the dolphin hunt as any more of an atrocity than a US or Australian slaughterhouse.
There's nothing pompous or self-styled going on here- it's basic criticism. There's a problem, and people are pointing it out. I have no problem when people criticize the US' many terrible practices, hell, I criticize American living all the time in my comics and films. Nor do I have a problem with people criticizing Mexico, my country of birth, as it, too, has plenty of corruption going on. Why you feel the need to defend Japan as a nation, when this is about an issue that a specific group or people are creating, is beyond me. The right to fish and eat is not the issue here; we're no longer living in 1600 AD and the cultural habits that worked then do not work now, for obvious reasons. This is true with all cultures, everywhere. American's bloated lifestyles can't continue; India's habit of throwing all trash out the window can't continue; Japanese fishers' practices of mass dolphin and whaling can't continue. I don't mean it shouldn't continue, I mean it literally can't continue, even if you want it to, because we're running out of resources at an incredibly faster and faster rate. Why would you want to defend a suicidal practice, just because it's being done by people that live near you? Just out of a feeling of patriotism? That's completely illogical.
If you see problems with Canadian fishermen, then go make a film about it. That's the point.
benher: "We all know that Americans, Europeans, Chinese, Russians, Scandinavians, certainly don't overfish their oceans and live at peace with the undersea inhabitants"
What is this whole "shift the blame" argument? Everyone does bad stuff so that excuses Japan? Because my neighbor kicks puppies, I can kick puppies, too?
Sorry, dude, bad is bad and bad deserves to be called out as bad when bad is. This is bad. You wanna make a movie about Scandanavian overfishing, please do. Please, please, where you see evil, regardless of the nation participating in it, call it out and crusade against it!
You're right that other countries also do horrible things in their (or international) waters. You're wrong to think that this somehow excuses Japan from doing horrible things. The best way to defend the country you love is to turn it into the country that everyone aspires to be, to hold it to a higher standard, and to not excuse the cruelty that happens there. "Be the change you want to see in the world." Stop justifying the problem, start fixing it.
While I find dolphin killing(the Flipper kind, not the Mahi kind) personally offensive, that is a personal idiosyncrasy that has been fostered by Hollywood and Western culture. Dolphin the fish, not the mammal, are quite tasty and I have no qualms eating them. What I also find extremely offensive is the amount of US bashing going on on this blog. As a hypothetical, how would all of you anti-US posters feel if we Americans decided to stay home during the next natural disaster because of lack of interest? We get bashed incessantly and yet we (our government which as one poster put it, is the most corrupt around) give money at a rate that far outstrips next closest contributor. Take the tsunami that hit the Pacific Rim a few years ago. Alas, our humanitarian efforts are dismissed because we happen to also be a military force unrivaled in the history of mankind.
My wish if I could have only one...let us stay home for the next war and see how quickly our 'batphone' rings.
I saw this movie a few months ago, and have to say that it has problems. First, their argument hinges on the idea that we shouldn't be killing dolphins because they are mystical creatures (have saved human lives, are possibly smarter than us, etc). There is some terrible, almost unbelievable footage of the slaughter in the movie - the cove literally turns red with dolphin blood - but is it really much worse than a slaughter house?
Secondly, having lived in Japan for 15 of the last 20 years, I couldn't help but think that they were going about it the wrong way, and that they simply didn't get to the bottom of the issue. I witnessed again and again the familiar feeling that neither side understands what the other is thinking. I can understand to a degree where the fisherman are coming from, though I don't agree with them, but they are portrayed as wantonly evil in the film.
I don't think there is anything implicitly wrong with critiquing Japan. Believe me, if you had any idea what I went through with the Osaka police last week including a home invasion which panicked my poor wife you would understand. This country has it's problems and I will certainly concede that.
I merely wish to say that I find it unfair that Japan is constantly singled out and targeted for it's fishing practices while Alaska, Norway, et al ad naseum are constantly exempted. Especially when the originating countries of said criticism are engaging in acts of equal or greater environmental consequence.
These attacks are endured for 2 large reasons.
1.) Japan is a rich nation with access to vast amounts of knowledge in native Japanese. As such, many of them do not learn English adequately to participate in worldwide discussions on such sensitive subjects. I am not excusing them, but I am explaining why the phenomenon is what it is.
2.) The Japanese are a gentile people and generally treat outbursts as infantile. See for example, the Aussies (search youtube) who threaten to 'kill' Japanese tourists as a joke/activist type wakeup call to whaling practices. This is generally not the way to have your point taken well and people here are generally tired of it.
I lived in a small fishing town for 2 years - less than 2000 people - most of them made their meager livings off the sea as have their ancestors before them. There was no excessive or wasteful lifestyles here.
These people still remember being bombed back into the stonage. If anyone knows how to conserve and protect the environment it is Japan - one of the first societies on earth to institute a forestry program as early as the 1500s (see Jared Diamond - Collapse)
I have no intent to spurn criticism providing that it is both fair and balanced criticism - which I do not find that criticism of Japan's fishing practices is.
I know that my stance is not a popular one and that dolphins are certainly cuter than I am but I think that westerners should work on fixing the issues in their own backyards before assaulting a country which is currently striving above and beyond international standards to be environmentally friendly.
Come on, let's be honest, the only reason we feel sad about dolphins is because we all grew up on the television show FLIPPER. Admit it, cute dolphin that jumps out of the water and does tricks = NO CAN EAT! Being in Southern California is even worse - I grew up going to MARINELAND at least once or twice a month and SEA WORLD a few times a year. When you see those dolphins jump in the air in unison, jumping through burning hoops, and waving to the crowd with their flippers, HOW IN THE WORLD COULD YOU EAT THEM!
This has nothing to do with the supposed intelligence of animal species though. Pigs are smarter than dogs and most other domestic breeds that we have for pets, but damn I love bacon and everything else that comes from harvesting the loving goodness that we get by cooking pig stuff. I also think pigs are cute too, but they taste better than anything you can get out of a dog - so we eat pig.
At least in America, let's call our love of the dolphin 'THE FLIPPER' - and tell those silly Japanese and their big-eyed manga girls to stop killing the cute and comical dolphins - BUT WE WILL NEVER STOP KILLING PIGS!
Hypocrisy is how we roll in America!
@benher - you're right that the dolphin hunt probably isn't any worse than what happens at a slaughter house. But it doesn't mean that you can't make a movie to raise awareness about it, particularly when the terrible state of slaughterhouses have been depicted numerous times.
Also, you argument early on of "can't get mad at man for feeding itself" is just a terrible, terrible argument. People can be upset considering there are other perfectly fine and healthy ways to feed yourself that don't involve this sort of behaviour. Just as someone can get mad at you for clothing yourself in clothes made by slaves.
And by that token, dolphin killers is an appropriate term. Are the dolphins not being killed?
@behner:
There's nothing wrong with someone from one country making a film that points out an ongoing problem in another. As an American I certainly don't mind when foreign filmmakers challenge my country's propensity to use military force or produce untold amounts of pollution. In fact I welcome those films because there's a chance they might actually convince some of my countrymen to change for the better.
I sincerely apologize for any disrespectful stances that people may take towards Japan- people love to generalize and throw blanket statements around. I've always loved Japanese culture, ever since I discovered (I realize this is not the most cultured doorway into the rich history of Japan, but so be it) "Usagi Yojimbo" over 20 years ago, and it kindled an interest in Japanese culture that has spread to all sorts of media. However, the fishing practices of individuals in a small village don't really compare to the practices of large, industrial fishing companies that fish on a wide scale to ship their food all over the world. I realize people need to eat, but do you really not see the practical, environmental and economic realities these practices are hitting up against? Perhaps you are thinking of one set of practices and the film is discussing another, hence the disconnect. I don't know. But something isn't computing here- I find it difficult to believe that an issue like this could be so disputed. It seems pretty clear, to me, from everything I have seen and read, that the issues raised in the film (which I haven't seen, but I'm familiar with the subject) are pretty much impossible to dismiss. What are we Westerners missing that you are seeing?
I am working on a documentary about the American meat industry, so believe me, I am aware of the mess in our own backyard and am trying to clean it up a little. There's plenty of blood on our hands, too.
@ Benher
If Japanese citizens want to go ahead and make a film documenting actions that they believe to be wrong in their own country, they can go ahead. If Japanese citizens want to make a film about actions that they believe to be wrong in the United States, they can go ahead. The same can be said for any citizen of any country regarding any country in the world. It's called free speech, and it's something we support in the United States, even if we don't like or agree with what is being said.
Furthermore, there is plenty of criticism within and without the United States about our own practices regarding animal cruelty, as well as those practices in other Western countries. Have you ever even looked at the websites for the Humane Society of the United States (www.hsus.org) or People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (www.peta.org)? Right now, PETA is blogging about how my home state (Virginia) won't stop shark fin fishing, which is a 'disgusting practice.'
Your claim that Japan is being unfairly targeted while other such inhumane practices are going uncriticized in other parts of the world is just false. Americans, and Westerners in general, are pointing fingers at inhumane practices across the world, not just victimizing the 'gentile' Japanese who don't know how to speak English well enough to defend themselves.
Japan is a rich nation with access to vast amounts of knowledge in native Japanese. As such, many of them do not learn English adequately to participate in worldwide discussions on such sensitive subjects...
The Japanese are a gentile people and generally treat outbursts as infantile.
You're not native Japanese, are you?
benher: "I merely wish to say that I find it unfair that Japan is constantly singled out and targeted for it's fishing practices while Alaska, Norway, et al ad naseum are constantly exempted"
I look forward to your scathing documentary on the Arctic Sea's cruel fishing practices. Let BoingBoing know when it's out!
Mahi Mahi is dolphin. Just sayin'.
Yes it is, dolphin fish, not the mammal blowhole caught in tuna net mine finders.
Okay, it's time to stop eating fish, Beef, chicken, pork, and hell everything except yeast!
Grow yeast in molds of chicken etc, a little drop of flavoroids a dash of colornoids, a sprinkle of cancerals and we all can eat something yummy and guilt free! Either that or Soylent Cola, now with more people!
Whale is not a fish sweetie. It is a VERY intelligent mammal.
The problem isn't that we eat meat; it's that we eat too much meat, and we raise it in ways that make no sense on any level. Even if you don't have a problem with killing animals (which I don't) there are huge economical, environmental and health problems with our current systems. The people in those industries, for the most part, are not bad people. They simply put their faith (and money) in a system that is fundamentally limited and self-destructive. The answer lies in our changing of our habits, which is tough to do when you're talking about billions of people... but if we don't change them, nature will do it for us. Take a guess as to which will be more painful.
I'd like to second Astin's point. If you hunt a species into extinction there is no more of that animal. Is Behner really trying to defend the active fishing of the dolphin into extinction?
On a somewhat related note, it seems it falls on me to defend Norway's whale hunting, at least from an extinction POV. The only whale being hunted by Norwegians these days are Minke whales. There's an estimated 185 000 or so of them, and the quotas are set to be low enough to not threaten the population. (The newest number I could find was from 2005: A fairly modest 650.)
—benher,
Your statement, "Holding people morally culpable for feeding themselves is like holding a wolf responsible for eating a sheep…" is absolutely incorrect. Animals do not have the moral and ethical underpinnings to make that decision—they kill because they function within an ethic of absolute survival. Humans, on the other hand, can decide whether or not to kill an animal because of a multitude of rational choices we are able to make: Is the animal endangered? Do I have to kill it in order to ensure my own survival? Am I able to kill the animal? Should I kill the animal? Etc. In short, humans are able to make the choice.
Animals, on the other hand, do not have the benefit of GPS, or Dept. of Agriculture Economic Research Services, or even television/radio/internet to help them make more sustainable choices in their lives. (It's not worth pointing out that they wouldn't understand the data anyway). It is kill or be killed in their world. Theirs is not a choice informed by rationale, it is a choice created from survival.
Sadly, humans have allowed corporations to make our food choices for us, and we have wholly disregarded the conditions under which those animals are raised and slaughtered, as well as the sheer numbers of slaughter that occur each day. According to the US Govt, we imported about 2.5 billion pounds and exported just under 2 billion pounds of beef last year (i.e. about 4.5 million steer carcasses total, according to http://www.ers.usda.gov/data/meattrade/LivestockMeatYearly.htm). That's the 2008 version of environmental stewardship, I suppose.
That said, I completely agree with your statement re: the relative cuteness of animals and their resulting place on the food chain. As well, I also feel that Americans need to recognize their own eating habits and the toll being taken on the planet because of us. However, and I say this with the utmost sadness, Americans love to be told what to do. It's like the old beef commercial, "I just don't trust a man that doesn't eat beef."
I think the very REASON that Japan is critiqued for this is precisely because those doing the fishing are hardly subsistance fishermen.
In addition, it's not like there isn't an outcry over native whale hunts here in the Pacific Northwest - there is, every single time. The only people who can have a logical claim to the right to hunt an endangered species has to deal with protests galore. So your persecution-by-proxy complex is unwarranted.
Japan deserves every bit of criticism that is thrown its way. As does Canada, for their seal hunts.
Japan fishes as much as the US, not per capita adjusted, and more than twice as much as Norway. Furthermore, here in the real world we do not require the one leveling criticism to hail from a country free of blame. The way Japan handles its fishing fleets, for whales in particular is against international law.
Oh, and putting Louie Psihoyos down as an American when he is a second generation Greek immigrant is quite telling of your biases.
For heaven's sake, please stop proclaiming your ignorance by referring to whales as fish! They have the biggest brains on the planet, even dolphin brains are bigger than ours. And before you start in on the question of intelligence, I only bring up brain size to underline the fact that they likely experience pain much the same way we do: they are mammals, despite all you people who want to denigrate them by calling them fish.
Truth is a good thing. Things that are purposely hidden are often bad things. Observe the truth and decide for yourself- probably what the filmmaker had in mind.
The more someone objects to this film, the more I want to see it.
Hiroshima, Nagasaki, etc. saved MILLIONS of lives.....and you know it.
Oh, and the US won anyway, so there!
I hope that was a joke. Nobody knows what would have happened had the U.S. not leveled those two particular cities.
Manzanar, Hiroshima, and Nagasaki? I have three more words: You started it.
I've seen the videos out of Taiji. If the Japanese want to kill dolphins, then they'd better be prepared for the repercussions when it hits the big screen. If the fishermen recoil from a little sunshine, then they shouldn't be doing what they're doing.
It seems to me that this thread has drifted from the topic. All nations and cultures in history have at one time or another destroyed, misused or driven into extinction one or more species. Do past actions justify inhumane treatment of any animals or people for that matter? Obviously not. Abuse of any species is wrong-no matter what the cultural or historical precedents may be.Is it more immoral to destroy a species that may be self aware or even sentient than one that is not? We can argue that point forever. We all need to wake up and realise that all of our actions have consequences- wether it is the destruction of a species or the genocide of a people. Both are symptoms of the same disease-a world view that an ethnic group or country's percieved "needs" are paramount over all others. Unless we all wake up and realise that we are all human beings with only one planet to live on we are doomed.
Oh, and putting Louie Psihoyos down as an American when he is a second generation Greek immigrant is quite telling of your biases.
Umm, what? Psihoyos is American. He was born in Iowa. His ethnic background has no bearing on whether he's American or not. You do realize that a son of a foreign student is the President of the United States, right?
THe other content of your comment aside, I would like to address the Sea Shepherd "Whale Wars" "cause kids". Will someone please blow them out of the water? Look, I love whales. They are intelligent, beautiful, and don't need to be captured for consumption or production; but these people have to be stopped. They are self-righteous, whiny, and giving people who are taking the proper methods of stopping or reducing such activities a bad name and a hard time. Forgive me if it's a childish thing to think or say, but I really can't wait until the day they storm someone's boat, yelling with their bullhorns and doing whatever they can to disrupt or damage the vessels they are attacking, and they are met with large explosives or some other kind of pain or death. You can't go around attacking people like that without someone eventually retaliating.
Try to imagine this...when our great grandchildren are learning about extinct species such as whales, dolphins sharks etc etc. will they say that Greenpeace and other orginizations went too far or not far enough....?
This strange equation of a person with their government - I don't understand it. Why should a person not be able to criticize someone else's actions just because the government of the place where the former happened to be born has done things which are just as bad as the latter's actions? The former is not his government, he is an individual who must be judged only by his own actions, and should judge others only by their actions.
The value of a criticism is entirely independent of the critic. To pretend otherwise is the definition of ad hominem.
benher wrote: "Mostly because there is an inherent attitude of reverence for the sacrifice of that life"
=========
Hardly. I grew up overseas and yes, there's a definite connection between the meat on the plate and its source -- the animal. Part of the reason I'm a vegetarian. But that doesn't in any way imply reverence.
Go to markets in Asia, in various parts of Europe, Africa and tell me the way these meat animals are treated is with respect. They're as much a commodity as the shrink-wrapped meat here. People are as inured to the sight of a boar's hoof as we are to ground beef at the meat counter. It has no impact.
I agree that in the U.S. people tend to be way too removed from the suffering that led to the meal on their plate . . . maybe less so now. But understanding that relationship does not in any way suggest respect is being given to the animal who died for that meal. Hunters will use this argument too, but I've seen plenty of duck hunters blast away on ducks and not worry too much about the "cripples" they leave behind.
It's a flawed syllogism. If a chicken on a plate has its head and feet, yes, we know it's a chicken. Doesn't mean we have reverence, or ever had reverence for that animal's life.
Lets be realistic here. No matter what PETA says killing an individual animal is not too much of an issue from an environmental perspective. Good animal husbandry practices aren't too bad nor is selective extraction of resources (florae or faunae). It is the extreme level we have taken these things to in disrupting ecosystems that has becomes a problem, our present state of extraction on steriods. Its stupid that only charismatic megafauna attracts our attention but nonetheless we need to cut back on resource consumption quite a bit to not threaten both the extinction of species of the earth and our own survival within it. We are all part of this problem.
It is unlikely that you will find too many dominant cultures in the world that have not oppressed other ones at some point in history. The Japanese are altogether too eager to erase what they did in the mainland from their history books, just as the Europeans are eager to forget their misadventures in Africa, and America in its present imperial hubris. Now the new elite in the global south just oppress their own people.
But sadly we take affronts to our nations practices personally, which we shouldn't do because it doesn't solve a damn thing.
From what I have heard in interviews with the filmmaker, the hunting style is more like running Buffalo off cliffs than what we associate with the modern meat industry. The ruthlessness is exacerbated by tremendous waste and unnecessary pain... with animals that get really obviously depressed.
Generally speaking, America doesn't attend wars, it produces them.
On all the lists I've come across America is, considering its wealth, one of the stingier countries.
Also, we eat bunnies! Mmmm...
I also wonder how this cultural/"we need to eat" defense applies to the capture of dolphins for sale to marine playgrounds. Half of outrage in the film is devoted to this -- the fishermen in Taiji earn much, much more for the sale of a live dolphin (in the desired shape) than one destined for slaughter. From what I can recall, a dolphin sold for training is worth up to $150,000 (USD, I presume) whereas one killed for meat is worth maybe $600. And yes, I'm quite aware marinelands are very popular in North America -- and yet, though I live here, I don't support them.
The film touches on multiple problems with the hunt. Many people who support the film do so because it's actually a solid piece of filmmaking and because it manages to look at so many facets of the issue.
Whoops, I accidentally hit "report" on earthmann's message when I intended to hit "reply."
I want to just repeat after other commenters that we are talking about dolphin mammals, not dolphin fish. I get the sense that not everyone is clear on that.
Regardless, though, our sea life in the world is suffering from dumping etc., and as a result many fish and dolphins have high levels of mercury in them. The dolphin meat sold in Taiji supermarkets tests *well* above what the Japanese Health Ministry recommends eating. Not only are they using unethical means to catch the dolphins, but the community is exposing itself to major health risks by eating the dolphin. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dolphin_drive_hunting#Human_health_concerns)
Despite what some of you are suggesting, no one here has said that this means we should eat no more meat ever. You have to be willing to accept the consequences of what you eat, though, and in some cases, like this one, recognize that what you want to eat has too great an environmental and personal health toll.
No worries, man. I won't take it personal.
Generally speaking, America doesn't attend wars, it produces them.
What i was going to say was that this formulation works for a lot of wars the US has been involved in, but our involvement in WWs I and II were almost textbook cases of attending wars.
@ Behner and the other concern trolls: narrative is about selection and exclusion. A documentary on Japanese dolphin killing can't reasonably focus as well on whale hunting, Palestinian rights, or any other cause du jour. How would that work as a movie, book, television show, etc.? That's diffuse and sloppy thinking, and would result in a diffuse, sloppy work: other issues are excluded because they're largely irrelevant, not because a particular artist wants to hate on you or to bury other inconvenient truths.
Tell that to the Omaha Beach gay-rights octogenarian: he fought at, not attended, D-Day.
Be respectful: the US lost 416,800 military personnel in WWII. A drop in the bucket compared to the Nazis or the Soviets, but, wow, way to discount a whole lotta deaths.
Has anyone here seen the film? The fishermen are brutal in their slaughter of the dolphins, but they aren't overfishing this particular species, the dolphins aren't endangered, and the primary reason for the killing seems to be neither profit nor religion but revenge--the dolphins eat the fish the fishermen want to sell.
Yes, I've seen it twice. You're correct -- there's absolutely no concern over extinction in the film.
@benher
Commercial whaling is illegal an you know it. It's even illegal in Japan as they're a party of the International Whaling Convention. The "scientific" whaling is an obvious front. There's simply no reason to kill the animals, let alone hundreds every year.
Stop going so nationalist. It makes you look like a spoiled whiny brat.
As a hypothetical, how would all of you anti-US posters feel if we Americans decided to stay home during the next natural disaster because of lack of interest? We get bashed incessantly and yet we (our government which as one poster put it, is the most corrupt around) give money at a rate that far outstrips next closest contributor.
I'm American too, and I can't help but think that lots of people the world over would be in fact very pleased if our military, CIA, multi-nationals etc. didn't make their lives a living hell. Seems to me that our imperialism and intervention (on the behalf of the elite) has caused more lives misery than our humanitarian missions have helped.
@anon:
You'll find that I never said they were. I was following up on the double theme of the previous sentence (whale and fish) with another double-theme sentence (ditto).
Looking back at the sentence construction, it could probably have been clearer. In my defense, it's unclear exactly because I was thinking about whale and fish as unrelated groups when writing it ...
Oh, and drop the "sweetie" - it looks extremely condecending. I had to stop and rewrite this a few times to not be acidly sarcastic.
I have been a strict vegetarian for fifteen years, and I am daily blessed to know I hold no personal responsibility for any of the extraordinary suffering bestowed on animals around the world in the name of feeding humans. My vegetarian diet is also dramatically less destructive to the environment in which my son is growing up. An added benefit, of course, is that my vegetarian diet makes me much less likely to suffer from cancer, heart disease, and just about every other chronic ailment.
Vegetarianism is "state-specific." The physical, emotional and spiritual benefits can't really be described but must be experienced. How lovely to be able to eat without having to maintain a stance of willful denial about how that chicken, hamburger, or tuna got onto my plate! I recommend it to everyone.
"The human appetite for animal flesh is a driving force behind virtually every major category of environmental damage now threatening the human future—deforestation, erosion, fresh water scarcity, air and water pollution, climate change, biodiversity loss, social injustice, the destabilization of communities, and the spread of disease."
--Editors, World Watch (July/August 2004)
"You have just dined, and however scrupulously the slaughterhouse is concealed in the graceful distance of miles, there is complicity."
–Ralph Waldo Emerson, writer and philosopher (1803-1882)
"As long as there are slaughterhouses there will be battlefields."
-Leo Tolstoy, author (1828-1910)
A drop in the bucket compared to the Nazis or the Soviets, but, wow, way to discount a whole lotta deaths.
Whoa, whoa, that's not what I meant at all. I meant to defend the U.S.'s involvement in the World Wars, not denigrate it.
Maybe I was misinterpreting what the original poster said, "Generally speaking, America doesn't attend wars, it produces them." To me, that meant that the U.S. went around choosing or starting its wars, and not coming along as an ally to those who were more directly involved. With WWI and at least the European theater in WWII, the U.S. was not involved in the start of the war (i.e., did not "produce" the wars) and instead came along to help our like-minded allies (i.e., "attended" them) a couple of years into the conflict. This, in contrast to, for example, the Iraq War or the Mexican-American War.
Why is there a discussion of WWII in a thread on dolphins when there's a live thread about the BNP and fascism?
First off, for those that will check my comment history, long time reader and first time poster - I generally follow the xkcd take on arguing on the internet...
Many people have described the concept of speciesism above, and it is true that to care more about dolphins than other species doesn't make much sense.
However, neither does caring more about the rights of humans than animals in general.
I encourage everyone to look into the philosophy of animal rights, particularly as developed by Tom Regan. A good primer can be found here:
http://www.cultureandanimals.org/pop1.html
Please realize that animal rights has nothing to do with PETA, and in fact PETA violates the true philosophy of animal rights in many ways. But that's another topic, and an unfortunate disclaimer I seem to have to always make...
The factory farming of the U.S. and anywhere else in the world is very wrong; but so is killing sentient animals at any time just as a matter of taste (since we have no real nutritional need for meat or any animal products). Please see PCRM for more information on that:
http://www.pcrm.org/health/veginfo/nutritionfaq.html
Fishing everywhere is strictly speaking morally wrong (and when one factors in overfishing, wherever it occurs, it is extremely damaging to the environment). There have been several studies that confirm the ecological impact of overfishing by Western nations and any other nation. We are literally killing the oceans through overfishing and through various other environmentally damaging behaviors (for which Western nations hold the predominant blame).
To the point of this story, the slaughter of dolphins for human consumption or to eliminate fishing competition is morally wrong. It doesn't matter whether Japan does it, or any other nation does it. Fishermen from the U.S. routinely kill dolphin by fishing with nets (and this is still a problem despite the industry's promises to improve). This movie holds so much emotional impact because it is obvious how much pain, emotional and physical, the dolphins can experience during their slaughter.
It is wrong if the Japanese people in general are attacked for the practice - it is stereotyping, and there are plenty of Japanese that support animal rights. One should not decry the message of ending the dolphin slaughter, or ending the whale hunt, because some who back these causes are admittedly racist about it.
Anyone who believes in animals rights must also believe firmly in human rights to be consistent - and that means that anyone who believes in animal rights should not be racist, sexist, or attack an entire people for the practices of a few.
The only way to truly attempt justice in our dealings with non-human animals is to embrace the philosophy of animal rights and eat a vegan diet. Please see the following links for more information, even if you disagree - you could change your mind, or you may form a better argument against me (which I am happy to hear - my philosophy is worthless if it can not stand up to strict scrutiny):
http://www.earthlings.com/earthlings/video-full.php
http://www.veganoutreach.org/whyvegan/
Thank you for your time!
Above, anonymous says "Lets be realistic here. No matter what PETA says killing an individual animal is not too much of an issue from an environmental perspective." That may be true... but approving of the *rule* that says "It's okay to kill [capture, otherwise violate the rights of] an individual animal [for food, for entertainment, for science, etc.]" is extraordinarily damaging environmentally.
The factory farms that sustain the West's taste for meat are not sustainable, despite years of research in trying to make them sustainable. And to be fair, China and the East are getting in on the same CAFO plans we have here, and are making the same mistake we did. The world can not be fed with meat - the economics of it, the resource dependence of it, are simply not possible. This ignores the massive violation of animal rights as well, which should certainly be taken into account.
Meat production is one of (if not the largest) producer of greenhouse gases. This is not primarily caused by cow methane or the such - it is primarily caused by the extra amount of energy that must be spent to produce meat over simply using farmland to produce grains and vegetables. Violation of animal rights isn't only wrong - it is potential suicide for humanity.
Just blame the old tv show FLIPPER. And Sea World etc. The West reacts the same way when they find out in Asia dogs & cats are considered yummy. Why can't they just eat cow meat? asks the Texan (me.) Well, that leads to heart disease & strokes. Plus that newfangled disease Mad Cow. In Texas, a rancher wanted to test all his cattle for it so he could ship them to Japan, but the USDA under Bush said no. (Good thing I smoke a lot of pot.) And don't forget, hunters, deer in the US seem to be having an epidemic of scrapie, which seems to be a form of Mad Cow. Vegans, feel smug.
No offense, PeaceLove, but the vegetables you eat were once alive as well, and have every right to life that any other living thing has, which is to say "none." Life involves death. Telling yourself that your brand of death is better than anyone else's may make you feel superior, but it doesn't make you any less of a killer. Just a killer of a different kind.
Why is the death of a broccoli or a turnip any less tragic than the death of a fish or a chicken? Because they are cute? Because animals react to threats (so do plants, by the way)? Because you can relate to them more? Because it is easier to place an arbitrary value on something that is more like yourself? Do you imagine that a trout feels complex emotions such as fear or sorrow? Would it matter if it didn't? How do you know that a tree doesn't have something alien yet akin to emotions or thoughts, just as complex and deep? Does it matter if it doesn't?
There are certain things that I won't eat - starting with people, and then working my way through various animal or plant species for my own arbitrary reasons. But I recognize that those reasons are arbitrary. I also don't "maintain a stance of willful denial" about my food. I recognize that I have to eat other organisms in order to continue my own life, just like every other living thing on this planet. Sounds to me as if you are the one in blissful denial. How can you eat that apple knowing that it was ripped from the still living tree, leaving the tree to bleed sap as it keened in silent agony?
And shame on the Japanese for eating apples.
I have been a strict vegetarian for fifteen years, and I am daily blessed to know I hold no personal responsibility for any of the extraordinary suffering bestowed on animals around the world in the name of feeding humans.
Sorry. I don't think you qualify for this level of self-satisfied smugness until you're a level 5 vegan (you can't eat anything that casts a shadow). As a vegetarian, you can smile knowingly and somewhat condescendingly at fat people eating a cheeseburger. You're not allowed daily personal blessings just yet. Remove all animal products from your home and abstain from helping, directly or indirectly, anything that negatively affects animals (e.g. paying taxes to support a school system that buys meat for the childrens. You're buying some of that meat.) You can submit your application for self-congratulating deification next year. Do make sure it's on recycled paper and filled out with soy-based inks. Thanks.
As for the rest of you picking on benher, leave him alone. If a Japanese film crew made a documentary about beef slaughterhouses, the American analog to benher would be stamping his bare feet, biting his corncob pipe in half, and twisting his overalls into knots about foreigners coming in and making his country look bad. He's a patriot.
Regardless of how you feel about Polanski, comparison is apt. Getting invited into the country to attend an event isn't entrapment in any nation I know of, and you most certainly will be arrested if there's a warrant for you in that country.
I think what he was saying was that the warrant was entirely a local matter, and the locals would have had to press the issue nationally. To do so when you're in to attend a film festival would have been politically touchy, possibly moreso in Japan than elsewhere.
Legally, it's true that he took a big risk, but his rationale is probably fairly reasonable.
OK, I gotcha. I'd heard your "attend" as dismissive: attending as in attending a party or something. Should've thought more about that. :D
Antinous, sorry, we were digressing. I trust we haven't "jacked the thread," or whatever. But I did want to respond to adamnvillani, thanks!
@thivai: and I would be criticizing that person just as much. Indeed, he is a patriot. That is the problem.
PeaceLove, there are more constructive and less, for lack of a nicer word, smug ways to get your point of view across. I certainly appreciate your concern for the animals, but you did come off in your message with a negative tone. I'm sure you didn't intend that, but from some comments I'm sure you can see people were offended.
And being vegetarian or vegan is not enough in this world by a long shot - everyone, please don't think veg*ns are self-contented people. We worry as much about the problems affecting humans as we do animals, and none of us can ever be perfectly vegan given the nature of our current society (tires have rubber containing animal products, it is impossible to find a doctor or dentist that doesn't use latex which contains animal products, and many other examples).
That said, it is not a defense to continue destructive behavior by saying that no one can be perfect - if we all thought that way, there would be no reason to have any ethics at all and the world would be a far more horrible place. Everyone should do what they can, and try to be truthful about exactly what that is.
Mahi-Mahi is not dolphin, you'd have known that if you'd bothered to take a nanosecond to check.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mahi_mahi
Sorry I chimed out to sleep for a few hours before work.
Just so we're clear, no I'm not a Japanese native, but an ex-pat. I've lived, worked, ate, and slept here for a decade and payed taxes on top of it. All my money is in bank accounts here. I am an immigrant. So yes, matters that concern the Japanese concern me. Moving right along...
Re: Me being a nationalist - Since one of the primary goals of Japanese nationalists is to expel non-native Japanese from their 'homeland' than no, I am not nationalist - but thanks for assuming so anyway because I don't agree with you. I think we can find enough to disagree about without engaging in name-calling. This is both so laughable and off-topic I can't believe I'm even acknowledging it.
If fishing a species to extinction is the concern as so many here have mentioned than I concede that there is definitely a cause for action. But as was previously stated, that is NOT a concern in the film is it? (correct me if I am wrong) If it is unsustainable overfishing, than obviously the practice needs to be curtailed. Although nowhere did I attempt to defend this practice earlier so I have no idea where that particular attack is coming from.
Also, I haven't called for the blood of the director here. But let's be clear on the subject of the film. This film is about the slaughter practices of a small Japanese village. I have said nothing in support of illegal whaling, overfishing, or other human misdeeds in the ocean. I'm all about debate but there's an awful lot of people in here (no, not everybody) who have thrown in several additional concerns (many of which I would side with, actually) and projected it upon me as one of the only dissenting voices in this thread.
And just to reiterate what that point is, the west so often takes potshots at Japan because it is an easy target - compliant, subservient, and peaceful. Which I think explains why few midwestern directors are sneaking into China, the DPRK, or any of their sovereign neighbors and shooting doc on their slaughtering practices - which are far more detrimental to the environment - which again, I don't think is even the main concern in The Cove.
Please just watch the film so you *can* address the concerns *in* it. The concerns are:
1. Humanitarian grounds. There is, undeniably, a lot in the film that is concerned for the dolphin because it is an intelligent animal. Probably its most arguable.
2. Health reasons. Many dolphins are sold for human consumption, despite toxic levels of mercury.
3. Animal confinement. The most lucrative aspect of the dolphin hunt is selling young females to marine parks. It *is* interesting to know that marine parks are still quite popular all around the world, while circuses are in general decline (well, from what I know to be true in Canada, at least).
"Which I think explains why few midwestern directors are sneaking into China, the DPRK, or any of their sovereign neighbors and shooting doc on their slaughtering practices"
Oh, but they are. It's just their slaughtering practises of *humans.* The fact that we're only picking on Japan for killing dolphins, really, should be a fact of comfort.
why are you making this country against country? this is one human's view - a view that is shared by many but not enough. No one is saying that non-Japanese entities are guilt free. Far from it. Far Far from it.
stop all animal torture. everywhere. now.
Hiroshima/Nagasaki/You started it:
Not only is this way off topic, it's woefully ignorant of history. (And while I can't speak for the motives of the posters, it comes off as being intentionally offensive.)
The history of East Asia did not begin on December 7, 1941.
@benher
I live in Japan too. I'm not particularly for whaling or dolphin meat (tasted whale but didn't like it, Japan has way better fish like tuna).
Don't you think though that the argument has been framed too much in the sense of nationalism as opposed to the real environmental issues? Right-wingers always fear the loss of Japanese culture and say the West is killing their culture (even though I can walk around and see people in kimono, sushi dinners and enka on TV), but the real issue here is that those dolphins are full of mercury. Even Taiji officials have warned against eating them.
I also think its a particularly good quality of Americans to call out things that are suspect when they see them. I read Fast Food Nation, saw the movie and now isn't there a movement to try and get away from this type of a slaughterhouse system? I know there are free-range chicken eggs and they are supposed to be healthier.
There are a lot of Japanese people who disagree with whaling, but they've had to fight the entire whaling industry (of which those fishermen are just a small part). I think they're happy to get some support from overseas, because the way Japan works that kind of movie could never be made here.
Sometimes it takes a friend to tell you you're doing something wrong. Though it helps if that friend doesn't insult you or scream at you while they do it.
COMPLIANT? SUBSERVIENT? PEACEFUL? Which History are you reading behher? Just because they don't like to argue in public? Most of them are dead unfortunately, but as a younger person I met with a whole lot of veterans who would disagree with your assessment.
I was going to talk exception to his claim that dolphins are the only animals to save humans, but he must be talking about WILD animals, not domesticated ones. Obviously there is a long history of domesticated animals that have saved humans; however, it's pretty hard think of other examples of a wild animal intentionally protecting a stranger from harm.
I know that no one's gonna read this far down the list, heck I didn't. I'll post anyways:
There's an awful lot of piss and venom flying about on this page so lemme get a few things out.
For starters, yea dolphins are another edible-ish animal, but their brain capacity and aptitude towards emotion makes them more relate-able and so in the context that we are humans and act like functioning humans; dolphins are better than bugs- you don't go squish a dolphin and say 'oops'. Whales are just unnecessary, they don't over populate, they don't provide some life-saving serum, they just float and probably 'moo' to each other. Why BOTHER killing one. Like Scandinavian boy said, they don't even taste all that great. Their not the rice pudding of the sea. It'd be like slaughtering a hippo just to see what it felt like. Useless. Not that tasty.
And for anyone who's read "The China Report" (the largest dietary study ever undertaken in prolly the history of sentient beings this side of the universe) You already know that not only is it wholly unnecessary to consume animal protein (even in an un-supplemented diet) but it is by all currently accepted research also a bad idea. Diabetes anyone?
Note that I'm not asking for any belief, that's a dirty word; Just know what your talking about. Someone who grew up on Dolphin meat would be highly offended by the notion that dolphins shouldn't be hunted and someone who grows up on the American food pyramid is highly offended by the notion that meat is not only not-integral to health, but even *gasp* detrimental. Those emotions have nothing to do with weather or not the issue at hand and it's information is legitimate or not. DO NOT BASE OPINION ON BIAS. All it gets you is upset. Instead base opinion AND decision on the best available information.
Good luck. And good night.
~Tricia Stacey
As a frequent swimmer with wild dolphins, I am especially happy that this film has been made. It is an important call for awareness and action. Bravo to director, Louie Psihoyos for his generous offer to the dolphin hunters to reinvent themselves and by offering the proceeds of this film to create whale watching or other non-violent businesses. Let's hope they accept!
He said, "The dolphin is the only WILD animal throughout history"
Since there are so many more Japanese than there are dolphins, the solution is simple. We kill and eat them instead. Probably less mercury too.
Hiroshima/Nagasaki/You started it:
Frankly, I have a very little sympathy for the WWII Japanese. If you want to start a mud slinging match about who was the more atrocious, you will find that the Japanese win that by a long shot.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allied_war_crimes_during_World_War_II#United_States
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_war_atrocities
Oh, and dolphin killing is just dumb.
Can we stop already with the WWII comments?
Gosh. Did you miss the point intentionally, or do you genuinely think there's some kind of international competition going on?
Back on topic, for those wanting more details of the director's experience at the screenings in Japan:
http://www.thecovemovie.com/BlogRetrieve.aspx?BlogID=5047&PostID=93418
My opinion on whaling is that Japan, Norway and other whaling countries should not be stopped from doing so. As long as they whale at a sustainable level, they should never be stopped. A culture defines a people, whaling has been with them for centuries and it would be shameful for any person to pressure them to stop.
Pressuring Japan to stop whaling on the grounds that Dolphins are CUTE is selfish and ignorant.
It's like pressuring America to stop eating burgers because some Indian religion reveres cows.