Home | About | Donate

Repulsed by Animal Cruelty, Attendance (and Profits) at SeaWorld Plummet


Repulsed by Animal Cruelty, Attendance (and Profits) at SeaWorld Plummet

Nadia Prupis, staff writer

Since the 2013 release of Blackfish, a bombshell documentary exposing animal cruelty at SeaWorld, the aquatic theme park has lost increasing levels of both profits and visitors, reporting an 84 percent plunge in net income in just three months.

SeaWorld announced its quarterly earnings on Thursday, acknowledging the steep drop in profits as a result of "brand challenges."


Some day there will be a full isemiotic and anthropological assssment of the full history of the Disneyland model/phenomenon. From Walt Disney getting a start making labor propaganda to cultivate a Mexican labor force to the millions of cheap, ultimately environmentally toxic objects made in foreign factories that are the hyper version of 'planned obsolescence' and end up in garbage dumps. Sea world has as much to do with the actual sea dimension of the world as mickey mouse has to do with reality. And therein is the key. The word 'vacation' has at its core the word 'vacate'. What does it say about a society when the 'reward' for a 'job' well done', is an industrial sucking of savings "for the entire family" to vacate daily life for "an amusement park". Eddie Kendricks was right in the disco message of the 70s - goin' up in smoke


I continue to be amazed at how people can compartmentalize their brains. And prevent those compartments from talking to each other. They fully understand that Sea World abuses its animals and they properly boycott Sea World for that reason. But suggest that they should boycott the meat industry for the same reason and they go bananas. They even insist that killing "food" animals is OK. Or that killing vegetables is the moral equivalent of killing animals. Or that even mentioning the abuse of food animals is "off topic" when the article is about the abuse of animals considered to be more lovable than "food" animals.


And after Sea World spent all that money on "feel good" advertisements declaring all animals are treated humanely and with utmost care and concern by all employees (of course, the chosen actors are rosy-cheeked twenty-somethings posing as employees who are too young or too removed from what goes (and has gone) on over the years since SW opened. Granted, there have been improvements due to their bad practices being revealed but the manner in which they get the animals and then the quality of their lives in captivity is suspect. Went to Sea World once with my father years back and cried the whole time because I could not stand to see these wild animals confined as they were when they belonged out in the oceans (that is, when our oceans were still relatively safe environs before the advent of offshore drilling and spilling, massive waste dumping by multi-story floating hotels, garbage dumps, and rampant U S Navy sonar testing). SW at the time also had lions, tigers, jaguars, and other wild animals on display and they all seemed to be drugged as they were either listless or motionless. I asked why the Orcas' dorsal fins were bent and at that time, no one could/would say why: CAPTIVITY!


All I can say to your comments is, no shit!

And in addition, labeling people who actually do something in their lives to lessen the suffering, like taking action for animals or changing their diets as being nutty or over the top.

We're just not all there. Wouldn't it be a better world if we were.


This gives me great satisfaction.

In 1998, I was arrested and jailed (along with some seventeen others) for "unlawful assembly" after a protest against Sea World in Orlando. They couldn't prove the charges, so they eventually convicted us of "resisting an officer without violence". Our initial bails were set according to how much cash we were carrying at the time, and those who fought the case and lost were fined varying amounts and served a year's probation.


One way to help improve matters is for writers to frame their narratives using less-distancing language:


Willful ignorance aside, there are a number of different ethical views on where to draw the line: sentient, self-aware, etc. Orcas are 1 of a very few animals that pass the mirror test, i.e. are believed to be self-aware. I've spent some time with orcas and came to believe they recognize human self-awareness. The fact that this apex predator avoids harming humans in the wild could be interpreted that they seek to treat humans per an orca vision of morality. All the arguments for their physical unsuitability for captivity apply. It's not just that their confines are too small for profit reasons; it's not possible to build facilities equivalent to their natural habitat, In short, orcas represent the pinnacle case against non-human exploitation. Humans as omnivores can choose to be vegetarians. Orcas, as carnivores, have no such choice. They must kill to survive. Do you view orcas as "compartmentalizing"?


A being can be sentient without being self aware. But asking me if I believe that orcas compartmentalize their brains like people do is a ridiculous and disrespectful question. Are you planning to argue that it is not OK to abuse self aware animals but it is OK to kill sentient beings that are not self aware? At least you will have come up with yet another excuse to kill animals for food if that is your argument. By the way, in view of the climate crisis, humans now have a moral obligation to be vegetarians. It is not a simple choice of doing whatever you feel like doing. And even in the absence of a climate crisis, it is still unethical to kill animals for food when numerous substitutes are available. People who have empathy for animals do not kill them.


Yep, and it'll stay that way because we'd be "demoting" ourselves by accepting that we're "animals" because of all the negatives that have been unfairly ascribed to non-humans so that some humans can abuse and exploit them.. It'd be much easier, and even more accurate, connotationally, to "promote" non-humans, which is what including the word "humans" does preconsciously.

I don't know how we could generate a third term that wouldn't get euphemised, but if you have ideas....


No disrespect intended. I asked a question that I am struggling with. It appears to me that the logical arguments concerning killing sentient beings contain anthropomorphisms. I think considering these ethics from the perspective of highly intelligent, moral, carnivores [orcas] reveals the inherent anthropomorphisms. Unlike humans, orcas have not overpopulated, and live relatively peacefully in overlapping territories by eating different [sentient] prey species. They have not eradicated their other very intelligent near relatives. They don't have wars or genocides. Seems it would be beneficial to consider ethics from their perspective. An alternate/additional answer to climate crisis might be to not over-populate and to live sustainably, as do orcas.


Just so. But orcas are obligate carnivores and most of us are not. Plus we have better tools than orcas, so there's never any excuse to inflict pain on our victims, especially those whom we raise to exploit as food. They're tame, and have no expectation of ill-treatment from humans. Small wonder that they're terrified as they're chivied toward the abattoir.

Me, I'm all for making shojin ryori the diet standard.