|
|
|
Jewish World Review Sept. 1, 2005 / 27 Av, 5765 The ‘Human Zoo’ By Debra J. Saunders
http://www.JewishWorldReview.com |
The "Human Zoo," a four-day exhibit last week at the London Zoo,
was designed, zoo spokeswoman Polly Wills told The Associated Press, to get
the public to see "people in a different environment, among other animals,"
and teach "that the human is just another primate."
Bunk. If the humans were just another primate, other primates —
like monkeys — would make zoos. Ditto gorillas. Fact is, humans are the
only primates that create zoos, which means humans are not just another
primate.
So why the "human zoo" stunt? Don't blame science. If science
had been a factor, the zoo would have selected a representative sample of
homo sapiens. The human exhibitionists would have been racially diverse and
would have included disabled people and bent-over geezers. Instead, the zoo
picked five comely young ladies and three men — two buff, one with a beer
gut — then stripped them down and made them wear synthetic fig leafs. In
publicity shots, they look like the cast from an episode of the original
"Star Trek" series.
"Warning: Humans in their natural environment," a sign
explained.
Hardly. While the eight human guinea pigs were placed in a bear
enclosure, they spent the night in a hotel. They weren't au naturel, and
they weren't dressed as they normally would. They played board games, ate
catered meals and drank Starbucks coffee.
One participant who called herself Spinning Girl posted a blog
in which she wrote, "Nobody is willing to say: This may have been a stupid
idea." May have been? No. It is a stupid idea.
It reflects the compulsive need of trendy folk to squeeze the
meaning out of every word until their definitions have been rendered
meaningless.
Zoo: My paperback Webster calls that "a place where a
collection of wild animals is kept for public showing." Thanks to the
faddists, a zoo now can be a collection of tame Starbucks swillers.
What's more, while zoos are supposed to enthrall visitors with
the distinctiveness of wild species, Wills described the "human zoo" as an
exhibit designed to make patrons believe the human primate isn't all that
special.
What next? "Baboons, boring." Or, "Orangutans. Yawn." And "Ho
hum chimpanzees." No, you would not see a zoo exhibit work to lower the
public's opinion of an animal — unless that animal is human.
Then, the zoo's mission of educating the public evolves into the
latest fad, promoting human self-loathing. (They're free to push that
argument, but they delude themselves if they think they are original or
scientific.)
The Independent also reported how the "human zoo" highlighted
humankind's status as a "plague species" that threatens nearly 15,600
species, and has destroyed 844 other species and "some 800 million of its
own kind." So the zoo transforms itself from an institution designed to
inspire and teach about nature into an institution that departs from
science — with this phony natural habitat and erroneous claim that humans
are "the same" as other animals — to teach people that humanity isn't so
hot.
Defenders can argue they are trying to push people to think
about mankind from a different perspective. Except that the simplistic
conclusion — that people are bad unless they're the good people who lecture
about how bad people are — is so common these days that there is nothing
unique about the message. Man is a "plague species" — with few redeeming
qualities.
In short: Man is just like any other primate ... only worse.
Every weekday JewishWorldReview.com publishes what many in in the media and Washington consider "must-reading". Sign up for the daily JWR update. It's free. Just click here.
Comment JWR contributor Debra J. Saunders's column by clicking here. © 2005, Creators Syndicate |
Arnold Ahlert | |||||||||||
