On page 8
of issue 7of MyM magazine (November 2012) there is an news article about the
animal rights group PETA releasing a spoof video game of Pokémon, on the belief that the game teaches children to tolerate animal
abuse.
The article in question from page 8 of Issue 7 of MyM magazine (November 2012)
The game,
PETA’s Pokémon Black and Blue (a play of words of the then recently released Pokémon
Black and White Version 2 games), is an interesting angle on the game. Instead
of a trainer played by you battling other trainer’s Pokémon, you play a seriously
abused Pokémon who battle’s his/her trainer (who are the game’s human
characters as depicted as they were the villains in a slasher film) for
freedom. Now, I do not like the idea of people abusing animals for
entertainment purposes, but I do know that not every single form of
entertainment that involves an animal is out right abuse. But this story has intrigued
me. As a kid who first developed an interest in the science of biology and
ecology thanks to the Pokémon TV
series (I don’t play much games), I’m interested right now on why an animal
rights group like PETA would look at the Pokémon
games in such a negative way.
According
to the article’s quotes from PETA, they say that “Pokémon games paint rosy
pictures of things that are actually horrible.” In other words, they think that
the games make children learn to tolerate the abuse of animals by making kids
battle virtual creatures against each other. It’s the same argument that says
that violet video games, like Grand Theft
Auto, encourage violence in the real world. I can understand why people
would think that, but I know that not every single teenage boy who has played
such a game later went out to get a loaded gun and… (I stop here). The point is
that the few people who would do it through ideas they got from video games are
the subject of other influences (e.g. social isolation). Children are not the moronic
simpletons the people who say such arguments say they are. They are not “monkeys”
who “see” something and then “do” it. One of the earliest lessons a child gets
is to tell the difference between fantasy and reality (well, I assume it is).
Children can learn early that what they see on TV, films, comics, books and
video games are all make believe (except the stuff that’s true). I can tell
from personal experience (been a high-functioning autistic child) that children
can tell when something is real and something is make believe. When I watch the
Pokémon cartoon, I don’t see poor defenseless
creatures been forced to fight against each other, I see imaginary creatures been battled. Although, when I watch the Pokémon cartoon, I can see animals been
taken out of their habitats against their will and treated badly…. by terrible
trainers, like Paul from the Sinnoh region, or the likes of Team Rocket. I see
good trainers, like Ash, who do care for the wellbeing of their Pokémon and
others. But this PETA stance against the franchise has put a spanner in the works
for anyone who has lived with Pokémon
since they first appeared in 1996. It has questioned the core beliefs of anyone
who has become a carer for nature (including members of animal rights groups,
like PETA) because of the environmental messages Pokémon seem to represent.
It’s like
PETA has reduced the game of Pokémon to, basically, a virtual version of cock
fighting (don’t snigger!). I can imagine that in the ancient history of the
cartoon universe where Pokémon room the Earth with “regular” life forms (the
aardvarks and zebras and so on) the battling of these critters was the
Unova/Kanto/Johto etc.’s version of cock fighting (you still sniggering?). Most
human beings back then didn’t look at animals as another form of being that has
intelligence and feelings. They just saw them as autonomous things that happen
to react to things and each other, which happen to be (if heated over a fire)
editable. It’s a throwback to the days of cavemen. A time when survival meant
taking what you can or else you die. In that world there was almost no time to
pause and think about stuff, such as what is lightning or why are leaves green.
In such as world, the idea of an animal having human-like characteristics
couldn’t have been conceived, hence their mass mistreatment in history. It was
only until the 19th century, thanks to mechanized farming providing
all our food, that the science of biology could discover and ponder such an
idea, courteously of the likes of Charles Darwin. Because of this more recent
development in our history, the issue of animal rights came about. Thanks to
campaigners, cock fighting (and other forms of clear-animal-abusing
entertainment) are illegal and that the only things been tried on mice in labs
is medicines (as human volunteers are near-impossible to get). I can imagine
the same thing happening in the Pokémon world. During their Age of
Enlightenment, Pokémon owners begin to treat their Pokémon with respect, and
over time as the knowledge of Pokémon medicine improves the days of severe Pokémon
battles ended. Soon the first organized competitions happen and the rest is
history. (When did this blog become a history lesson?)
In the
article, PETA has said that “if its organization existed in the fictional land
of Unova, its motto would be that Pokémon are not ours to use or abuse. It
argued that the message children should be getting is that these animals exist
for their own reasons.” Considering that PETA was founded in 1980, by then the
world of Pokémon had already moved on form the extreme abuses of ancient times.
I can imagine that their education system has the “Pokémon are not objects”
lesson as part of the nursery curriculum, so they wouldn’t have been a need for
PETA to set up a base there…. or they should, considering the behavior of certain
trainers and organizations. I do love animals, but I do know that the real
natural world is a cruel place. But the cruelty of a minority of people (i.e. poachers)
can be more extreme than any violent experience any animal could experience in
the wild. Children can tell that Wile E. Coyote is a fictional character that
suffers slapstick bad luck, but its thanks to the undertones of non-slapstick cartoons, like Pokémon,
that children learn the truth about the real grown-up world. I can credit Pokémon in shaping my views on the
treatment of animals and the environment and for making me study it. With this
PETA parody game, I can understand the reason why… when I watched the cartoon,
I was more interested in the drama between the characters and creatures (I didn’t
care much of the battles (hence, why I didn’t play the games).
On another
note from the article, PETA has had a problem with Mario wearing the Tanooki
costume that first appeared in Super Mario Bros. 3 in 1988. They think this
promotes fur. They are too quick to judge. To all we know, Mario may have been
wearing a suit made of synthetic fur. Although, on the other hand, PETA would
be angry about that as well, considering the millions of innocent ancient sea creatures
that were killed and crushed into a paste through millions of years of seismic
activity to make the crude oil that made that synthetic fur.
By the way, I did plan for my first post to be about why the colour blue keeps you awake at night, but this story surprised me so much that I had to comment about it, so thanks PETA (and the people of MyM magazine) for prompting me to write this blog. Things are going to get very interesting in deed.