58 points
*

“Stolen”. That’s not how you pronounce “rescued from a psychopath”.

permalink
report
reply
12 points

Agreed.

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points
*

Or it was all according to the artist’s plan anyhow.

Not that I would be surprised if the artist never cared about animal rights in the first place.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

Yeah, this feels like just another of those artists who want to sow discord for fame, without actually caring about the real topic they throw under the bus in doing so.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Or it was all according to the artist’s plan anyhow.

IMO, that’s still something a psychopath / Batman villain would do.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

How long were the piglets without food before being “rescued”?

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

only correct answer

permalink
report
parent
reply
51 points

I’m torn here. One person is forcing 3 piglets to starve, which is evil, to bring attention to a practice that allows tens of thousands of piglets to starve, which is also evil. The potentially 3 dead piglets get the attention the artist wanted, and someone intervened to stop it. Now we’re criticizing the artist, and no one is intervening to stop the starvation of tens of thousands of other piglets. I feel like the point was missed, especially in this comment thread.

permalink
report
reply
8 points

Agree. It’s a horrible act to draw attention to a horrible act millions of magnitudes larger. I don’t get how one could be angry at this and not angry at its more widespread equivalent.

permalink
report
parent
reply
31 points

The piglets were being denied food and water and would have been allowed to starve to death.

Does Denmark not have animal cruelty laws?

permalink
report
reply
28 points

“The Animal Protection Denmark welfare group says that sows are bred in the Danish pig industry to produce about 20 piglets at a time, but only have 14 teats, forcing the piglets to compete for breastmilk, leading to starvation of many.”

There’s a difference between being forced to compete with your siblings for food and intentionally being starved to make a point.

permalink
report
reply
20 points

Yeah. In one case you get rescued by an activist and have media write about you, and in the other you die in a factory and are thrown in the trash with many others.

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

Interestingly listening to an article talking about the hollowness of words, making unethical things seem ethical.

permalink
report
parent
reply
16 points
*

This stunt reminds me of the show Bellas Artes, which is about a museum director struggling to cope with his new job.

In the third episode, an artist sets up an installation using a large, dead marine animal as the centerpiece to draw attention to broader ecological neglect. The kicker is that not only is the animal quickly rotting, causing a huge commotion with the press and putting everyone on edge, but a big part of the intended artwork is the shit show that followed—something the artist anticipated. The artist wanted the whale to rot and stink up the place, close the museum, and give the media a field day. All of the artist’s actions and intentions led to the museum director’s epiphany about what the piece was really about.

And that’s exactly how I feel about this. People arguing that the piglets were “left to starve” are missing the point. Setting up the crime scene and rescuing the piglets is all part of the show.

permalink
report
reply
3 points

That’s my take, too. I’m not a huge fan of shock art, but it’s a great way of getting a message across and get a discussion started that changes the way people think.

His friend being involved in the supposed theft without telling him is, I think quite clearly a sign that this was set up. Rarer than artists doing stuff for sick value is people breaking into a museum.

permalink
report
parent
reply

Weird News - Things that make you go 'hmmm'

!weirdnews@real.lemmy.fan

Create post

Rules:

  1. News must be from a reliable source. No tabloids or sensationalism, please.

  2. Try to keep it safe for work. Contact a moderator before posting if you have any doubts.

  3. Titles of articles must remain unchanged; however extraneous information like “Watch:” or “Look:” can be removed. Titles with trailing, non-relevant information can also be edited so long as the headline’s intent remains intact.

  4. Be nice. If you’ve got nothing positive to say, don’t say it.

Violators will be banned at mod’s discretion.

Communities We Like:

-Not the Onion

-And finally…

Community stats

  • 1.6K

    Monthly active users

  • 732

    Posts

  • 4K

    Comments