Tuesday, November 02, 2010

interview with anti-vivisectionists


In response to this fantastic piece of rantage and my own somewhat mischievous and inflammatory comments on an anti-vivisectionist blog that reposted the entire rant I have received a request for an interview from that blog's senior editor. This is a first for me! I don't know whether to be flattered or slightly apprehensive . . . Ultimately, this is not an opportunity any self-respecting scientist would turn down so I'm posting here to provide my bunny-cuddling friend with a forum to post her questions.


  1. This comment has been removed by the author.

  2. Am I your "bunny-cuddling friend?" That's sweet!

    Okay, I need to out a vivisector tonight, so I don't have much time to play here. You know how much they fear exposure!!! :D

    Thanks for doing this my sadistic animal-tormenting aberration.... I mean, friend. And, of course, I will be republishing this on Negotiation Is Over!

    There is so much I want to ask you. Let's start with this:

    1-What was it like the first time you mutilated a helpless animal? Did you have nightmares? Did the cries of anguish bother you at all or was your soul already black and you found it pleasurable?

    2-Is it empowering to murder the helpless?

    3-Would you prefer to experiment on your own companion animal -- dog, cat, bird, etc. -- or would you prefer a human child that you had no connection to?

    4-Isn't it a moral obligation to subdue and dispatch violent people if it will save the innocent from falling victim to their degeneracy?

    Can we start with that? Thanks! :D


  3. 1) I'm not sure whether you're referring to in a professional capacity or in my entire life. As a small boy I recall burning ants with a magnifying glass and catching hoverflies in the garden with my sister to throw into spider webs. I used to have nightmares, as most children do, but I don't think I ever had one where a giant ant was burning me with a magnifying glass. They were more along the themes of being pursued by dinosaurs, mosntrous black dogs and sharks.

    In a professional capacity I think the first animal I killed was a mussel that I dissected during an anatomy class for my honours degree. For obvious reasons there was a distinct lack of anguished cries. I think you're imagination is running away with you a little if you imagine that laboratories are filled with the screams of tortured creatures, although admittedly I have no direct experience of mammalian labs. I can confess to having toured the many badger setts around the university campus and played with bats that a colleague was nurturing through the winter but I don't think that's what you mean.

    2) I don't know what you mean by "empowering". Or "murder". The term generally used, and which I consider appropriate, is "sacrifice". Murder, according to Wikipedia, is "defined in common law countries [as] the unlawful killing of another human being with "malice aforethought"". The Oxford English Dictionary provides a similar definition: "The deliberate and unlawful killing of a human being, especially in a premeditated manner". Therefore it is not at all an appropriate word to use in reference to the death of an animal.

    As for 'empowering', it depends upon the use to which an animal's death is being put. If it is merely disposal of animals that I have been maintaining but no longer have a use for then no, I don't. If the animal in question is an experimental one from which I will attempt to derive data then yes, I do find the sacrifice of an animal empowering in the strictest definition of the word. The animal's death empowers me to obtain that data.

    3) Its a bizarre question because I don't work with children or companion animals. There are valid reasons for conducting experiments with both. I think that you are also assuming that any experimentation is inherently unpleasant. An experiment to see which flavour of ice cream a child preferred, or fish in the case of a cat, wouldn't leave me with many reservations. If you are referring to sacrifice of the experimental subject then your question boils down to the simple one of whether I would willingly kill a child, which is- of course- absurd and monstrous.

    4) Your question is paradoxical and bizarre. You appear to be asking whether I condone my own murder on the principal that it will prevent some greater injustice (the innocent deaths of my experimental animals). Firstly, I don’t advocate capital punishment. Secondly, ‘violence’ is not necessarily lethal and yet your language suggests death is an appropriate consequence of violent behaviour. This contravenes even the most mediaeval principles of justice (an eye for an eye). Whilst aggressive violence is reprehensible violence in self-defence is often justified.

    Don’t imagine for one moment that because I have entered into this exchange with you that I will hesitate even momentarily to defend myself against any further veiled threats of violence to my person. I will not tolerate it. I will notify the appropriate authorities who are empowered by society to conduct pre-emptive violence in defence of law-abiding citizens such as myself.

  4. Awesome interview. The questions sure show all or nothing thinking. For example, the last question assumes that the only way to stop violent people from harming innocents is to 'subdue and dispatch' them. Think again!

  5. Isn't it surreal! I mean, this character thinks that murdering a human is a reasonable reaction to the conduction of tests which might save hundreds, if not thousands - possibly millions- of human lives. It also shows a willingness to place the lives of animals above those of humans, which is truly monstrous. This reveals the fundamental ignorance of these people. They are unaware that humans are truly unique in nature. That's a pretty pathetic place from which to start lecturing other people.

    *sigh* T'was always the way.

  6. Question 1

    please excuse me, punk - i received no comment notifications and thought you had opted to not respond. i commend you for accepting my offer. not one other animal mutilating sociopath would openly discuss his/her violence or degeneracy.i commend your willingness to engage:

    i like that you're proud of your trail of bloody victims and i sense you're anxious to tell your story. and i'm here to listen in rapt attention

    1- it never occurred to me that you had some dormant sadistic propensity since you were a child. and given your recent observations and comments, it seems that you were drawn into a community that would support and encourage you you to explore and fully develop your perversions legally... supported within a community of your peers

    So you never carved open mammals? Why? You must have been most distressed... When you torture mussels, i imagine there's far less exhilaration since they can't satisfy you with screams and cries of anguish.

    as all torture murderers inflict increasingly horrorific tortures to enjoy tormented screams and agony as their victims suffer, were you disappointed that you couldn't reach that climactic state with a muscle.

    Did you ever torture your cat or dog, beat your girlfriend, punch your mother, or kidnap a neighbor's child.

    if you could cut open and violate any animal in the world, the screams or agony from which would you enjoy most?

  7. NIO Florida

    You might appreciate this from British documentary maker Chris Morris


    Al Quaeda are now using bomb-dogs - and to think I laughed at it...

  8. Dr PS you dont need to go upsetting people in Florida, your own party should give you rich pickings.


  9. If you kept up with this blog at all regularly you'd realise that that flyer is outdated. It was published in 2008, since when this happened.

  10. Yes, you sorted outthe embryonic stem cell research policy. Homoeopathy along with complementary ‘medicine’ were cleverly strangled without the bunny-huggers realising, by requiring that all treatments (real or imagined) need to prove their efficacy under NHS clinical tests. I stand to be corrected but as a GPEW friend explained, whilst animal testing policy on the health policy section got amended with a soggy compromise, GPEW animal rights policy remains unchanged, ergo anti-vivisection.

    And if I'm wrong there's still plenty of anti-vivisectionists in the GPEW for you to argue with.

  11. It's fascinating that the people opposed to animal testing always seem to picture the wild-eyed scientist cackling with glee as the trembling bunny, strapped to the table, has odd, medieval tortures inflicted on it's furry body.

    I especially like the slavering loon from Florida (and I'm truly, deeply sorry for her idiocy, on behalf of my fellow USians), who gave the impression that she was fondling herself as she wrote "as all torture murderers inflict increasingly horrorific tortures to enjoy tormented screams and agony as their victims suffer, were you disappointed that you couldn't reach that climactic state with a muscle."

    I mean, seriously? Come on, now, Lisa. The English language may not have developed in New Zealand, but if nothing else, it's only polite to punctuate and spell things properly. (And spellcheck isn't your friend, either. A "mussel" is not the same as a "muscle.")

    Let's go back to the post that started it all.

    "A suffering animal is, scientifically, pretty much useless... the logic of scientific research means it's essential that animal subjects experience as little discomfort as possible."

    The whole animal rights crowd seems unable to sort a single shade of gray (or "grey," depending) out of this world. It must be a nasty, scary, cartoonish place to live, for them.

  12. Just wondering, are you a maso, Camille?

  13. I also enjoy torturing coral, but you're right, it would have been hotter if such animals could scream in agony. I'm always disappointed if I cannot reach a climatic state.

  14. I agree with Nameless Cynic, Camille. Your prose makes me imagine you typing one-handed. You seem to derive some sort of fantastic thrill from visualising the tortures you describe. Please note that you are the one describing torture. Your visualisations are completely alien to me as a vivisectionist. You seem to think that I work with a scalpel in one hand and my cock in another. That's just perverse.

    Your armchair psychology is getting to be tiresome. I am keen to share my very positive experiences of vivisection with you and yet you seem uninterested, preferring instead to indulge in the cartoonish parodies of scientists which Nameless Cynic also recognises in your writing. This isn't a cartoon, Camille. Its real life. If you aren't prepared to behave as if it is and me a real person instead of some trashy sci-fi supervillain then I don't see the point in continuing to engage with you. Let me try one last time.

    1) Like every other vivisectionist I know I am not a sadist. A sadism is defined by Wikipedia as "the derivation of pleasure as a result of inflicting pain or watching pain inflicted on others". I work on invertebrates which are not sufficiently advanced, in evolutionary terms, to be able to experience the physiological response called pain. That is one of the reasons I deliberately chose to conduct my work with these animals. I do not find animal or human suffering pleasant. I do not lust to kill animals pointlessly. I happily spearfish and shoot vermin but those are two activities which have very functional purposes. The former is exercise, adventure and good food. The latter is to protect the ecosystem.

    In fact, lets just focus on that last point. How do you feel about culling animals and shooting vermin, Camille? What would you do if you woke up and found an enormous cockroach crawling up your leg? Or a rat in your cupboard, hungry and aggressive? What would you do if your house was infested with ants? Would you simply refuse to challenge them for dominance of your living space? Would you coexist with them and let them roam over your work surfaces, eat into your food and pollute your family's home? At what stage does your obssession with "animals" turn into revulsion for the less charismatic, creep-crawly things that we share our planet with? How do you feel about tapeworms? Do you consider administerring Praziquantel to people in Somalia and Ethiopia to be genocide conducted against the poor, defenseless Taenids?

  15. So, is that it then? Nothing from the bunny-cuddlers but insane hyperbole and snuff-fantasies? How predictable and disappointing.

  16. Did the "negotiationisover.com" website crash? All I get from it is "http 500 internal server" errors.

    Did they abandon ship because they were suddenly faced with logic?


Feel free to share your opinions of my opinions. Oh- and cocking fuckmouse.