Guest guest Posted August 1, 2001 Report Share Posted August 1, 2001 > http://www0.mercurycenter.com/opinion/perspective/docs/apes29.htm > > Published Sunday, July 29, 2001, in the San Jose Mercury News > > Movie rekindles species debate > > Species debate returns with `Planet of the Apes' > > A PROFESSOR ASKS IF WE SHOULD RETHINK HOW WE TREAT APES AS SCIENCE SHOWS HOW > CLOSE THEY ARE TO THEIR HUMAN COUSINS > > BY ROGER FOUTS > > The original ``Planet of the Apes'' first appeared in theaters in 1968. It > was the story of a powerful species exploiting and mistreating a powerless > species. The catch, of course, was that apes were in control and humans were > their captives. The movie was a runaway success, captivating audiences with > its upside-down view of the world. > > The movie came out at a time when the civil rights movement was riveting the > nation. It didn't take much thought to see how the movie's theme applied to > the exploitation and domination of blacks by the power-holding white > majority. But some viewers took away another message: The film implicitly > suggested that ``speciesism'' -- a prejudice against other species -- isn't > much different from racism. > > The 1960s were a time when our knowledge of apes was just beginning to > blossom. Jane Goodall, who observed chimpanzees in the field, published her > first popular book, ``My Friends the Wild Chimpanzees,'' in 1967, and her > first substantial scientific publication appeared in 1968. Her discovery that > chimpanzees made tools shook a scientific community that had assumed > toolmaking was something uniquely human. > > Then, in 1969, R. Allen and Beatrix Gardner published the first accounts of > how Washoe, a baby chimpanzee, learned American Sign Language. Washoe became > the first non-human being to learn a human language -- another ability > thought to be solely in the human domain. > > Now, Tim Burton has updated the ``Planet of the Apes'' story, in a film > released Friday, and at least some primatologists are hoping the film > jump-starts a discussion that didn't get very far in this country after the > first movie. That is: Should humans continue to treat apes the way we do -- > including using them for medical experiments -- especially in light of new > research that shows how closely related we are to them? > > We have come a long way with regard to our knowledge of our ape kin since the > 1960s. > > We discovered that we share 98.76 percent of our DNA with chimpanzees. Our > social and behavioral distance from our ape kin has shrunk as well. A 1999 > article in the journal Nature, co-written by nine top chimpanzee field > researchers, presented strong evidence that a real culture exists in the > chimpanzee communities in Africa. Different chimpanzee communities make and > use different tools, use different medicinal plants and even use different > gestures when they communicate. > > We have also come to realize that Darwin was correct when he told us that we > share emotions with our closest animal kin. Chimpanzees and other apes > display grief, jealousy, deception, love, compassion and so on. Goodall's > observation of Flint, a 9-year-old chimpanzee, mourning himself to death over > his mother's death (he refused to look for food), and Washoe's severe > depression when her baby died demonstrate the depths of emotional pain they > suffer over the loss of a family member. > > The observation of free-living chimpanzees and gorillas in Africa and > orangutans in Asia, along with the captive studies of Washoe and other > language-using apes, has also made clear that our ape kin have unique and > complex personalities. > > These findings have led some scientists to question whether we were in error > when we assumed personhood was something uniquely human. After all, what > makes a ``person'' if not unique personalities, emotions, and a sense of self > and others while living in a complex society? > > But even for those who don't agree that a major rethinking of personhood is > in order, the new discoveries should at least raise questions about how we > treat animals that we now know feel grief, love and compassion, live in > families with close ties and in communities that evince culture. > > So what is the state of the real ``Planet of the Apes'' for our ape cousins? > At the turn of the century, there were perhaps 2 million chimpanzees living > in Africa and probably a similar number of gorillas in Africa and orangutans > in Asia. Today, all the apes are endangered, while humans have an > overpopulation problem. > > Much of the reason for the dramatic decreases in population is that logging > is destroying their homelands. But logging has also led to a relatively new > danger: the ``bush meat trade.'' Chimpanzee and gorilla steak has become a > prized and expensive status symbol at markets in African cities. Some > estimates report that 6,000 chimpanzees are killed each year for their meat. > Experts say there may be as few as 80,000 to 120,000 chimpanzees left in > Africa. If you do the math, you can see that we could completely wipe out > chimpanzees in 20 years. > > In our country, we steal chimpanzee babies from their mothers so we can use > them in life-threatening biomedical research and for entertainment. Young > chimpanzees are regularly used not only as models for goofy greeting cards, > but also in TV shows and movies. > > Ironically, despite its anti-exploitation message, the ``Planet of the Apes'' > remake uses live baby chimpanzees, even though with new computer > technologies, that is unnecessary. Chimpanzees can be digitally created, as > will be done in the film currently in production that is based on my book, > ``Next of Kin.'' (The apes in ``Planet of the Apes'' are humans in costume.) > > The biomedical research on chimpanzees, meanwhile, subjects them to all sorts > of tests -- including biopsies -- as researchers work to study diseases > including AIDS and hepatitis. Chimpanzees used in AIDS studies are injected > with HIV and then monitored. Although these very social animals have proven > quite able to ward off the disease, they nonetheless face a life of > confinement in small cages because they could infect humans. > > Those of us who seek to protect our ape kin have made some progress. The > Great Ape Project, which began in 1994, is working to stop the torture and > killing of apes and the destruction of their habitats, as well as to make > sure those in captivity are treated with respect. The project -- whose 34 > contributors include primatologists and other scientists -- has already had > successes. It inspired people in New Zealand to mount a campaign that changed > the laws there, making it illegal to kill, torture or exploitatively > experiment on apes. In addition, England has banned the use of apes in > biomedical research. > > No such changes are being considered in the United States, where a debate on > using apes in biomedical research is raging, but hasn't spread much beyond > the scientific community. Studies that show how similar we are to apes have > only intensified the debate. > > Many scientists who study the cognitive and social nature of apes say > similarities in biological makeup and behavior argue against their use in > dangerous studies. But some scientists in the biomedical community say apes > should be used in research specifically because their DNA is so close to > ours. They say we should beware of the slippery slope if we grant apes the > basic legal rights proposed by the Great Ape Project. Will rats be next? they > ask. > > I would argue that we are going down a different slippery slope -- that > humans are too quick to try to save ourselves by exploiting others, > especially those who aren't in a position to protect themselves. Americans > have even done that to other Americans. Witness the notorious Tuskegee > experiment, in which black men with syphilis were left untreated in the name > of research. > > After reading this, if you do decide to see ``Planets of the Apes,'' you will > face a quandary: For whom do you root? Do you root for the apes because you > now know what humans have been doing to them in the real world? Or do you > root for the oppressed and exploited humans, who can be seen as symbols for > all oppressed and exploited peoples, regardless of species? > > ROGER FOUTS is a research professor at Central Washington University and the > co-director, with Deborah Fouts, of the Chimpanzee and Human Communication > Institute. He and Stephen Mills wrote ``Next of Kin'' about the Fouts > family's life with Washoe. He wrote this article for Perspective. > > ********** > Carry with you the lives of nonhuman great apes... Order an Equality Link. > Email gap for ordering details. > > ************** > Fair Use Notice: This document may contain copyrighted material whose use has > not been specifically authorized by the copyright owners. I believe that this > not-for-profit, educational use on the Web constitutes a fair use of the > copyrighted material (as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright > Law). If you wish to use this copyrighted material for purposes of your own > that go beyond fair use, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.