Talk:Bambi Effect

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I question the validity of this as a psychological effect; isn't this just basic human compassion? References would be nice. --Marco Passarani 18:15, 19 August 2005 (UTC)

wouldn't the fact that not everyone feels that a gut reaction to the hunting of animals based on cuteness, and not all of those people are hunters, indicate that this is not basic human compassion?

Good point; compassion is relative. Now let me pose something: gorilla skin makes up a large portion of a country's GDP. Hunters of the gorillas kill them by bludgeoning them, because it keeps the skin in its best condition. One day, a newspaper runs a story about how hunter's kill them, and suddenly there is massive public outcry. People call for a ban on gorilla hunting. Gorilla skin, however, makes up enough of the GDP that a hunting ban would collapse the economy.

My point is that this doesn't seem to be some mental illness; it seems more like ignorance. Situations like this occur in politics every day. Because of the lack of sources, this whole thing seems like it was made up by hunters as a means of demeaning tree-huggers, not something with actual scientific grounding. Couldn't you could just as easily say that it's the hunters who have a psychological condition? "It is a condition among hunters in which profit dominates the afflicted's mind. This leads hunters to kill animals in ineffective, often cruel methods. The hunter will defend his actions thoroughly and always considers himself correct, even in the face of massive public outcry."

Anyway, this is quite excessive, especially considering how small the edit would be. Once again I'll ask whether this belong among psychology stubs.--Marco Passarani 23:11, 26 October 2005 (UTC)

Here's a simple argument for it being a psychological effect. I eat deer meat, I eat rabbit meat, I eat buffallo meant, I've eaten kangaroo, crocodile, alligator, snail (escargot with garlic butter sauce... heaven), and wouldn't mind trying rat or bear or many other forms of meat. Most people would balk at the idea of eating a rabbit (I'll use a cute example, to demonstrate the Bambi Effect; rabbit=Thumper) not because it is cute, but because of a psychological mindset that tells them that eating a (forgive my language, but it emphasises the piont) cow's ass, a chicken's boob, and a pigs thigh (pigs skin in some cases, quite a tasty snack :D) is acceptable and not "disgusting" while eating any part of a rabbit is not. Some people have a psychological aversion to eating some meats, not a compassion-based argument against it. The killing of a rabbit with a rifle and being taken home and skinned is far more humane than walking a cow into a booth, shooting it in the head and processing it as if it was a recycling plant. The examples chosen for this article are wrong. There are some public movements that are based on the Bambi Effect, but are caused by different motivations. The torture of an animal will always invoke some measure of compassion, but it doesn't properly emphasise the psychological aversion to the hunting of certain animals. Once again, it is considered far more acceptable to grow an animal simply to be eaten than it is to kill a relatively small number of wild animals (compared to the total number of such animals) for their pelts. Of course, when you get into overhunting, it becomes an ecological and economic issue, but I believe I've made my point.--71.235.66.254 03:24, 13 July 2006 (UTC)