How Elephants Become Robots
There are many obvious causes that explain why elephants are considered a main attraction in circuses, and continue to be to this day. These causes then relay the effects of elephants being beaten brutally in order to remain on top of the circus hierarchy.
For starters, as children we can not wait to go see the elephants because they are beautiful gigantic creatures that naturally entice the us to come see them in the shows. The high demand of the public to see elephants forces the trainers to continuously beat the elephants in order to continue the demand. An advocate for getting elephants out of circuses Matthew Wittmann says, “they’ve been fighting this fight for so long, and for over a century the icon of the American circus was the elephant” (Pèrez-Peña 2015). Us going to the circuses and paying the money that we do effects the elephants well being because they are being continuously beaten. If we did not have such a high demand to see elephants perform there would be no need to abuse them.
If we knew the immense cruelty that goes into breaking an elephant, most of us would be shamed away from circuses all together. Today, we are starting to realize the cruelty that is placed upon these beautiful animals and that effects the circus industry. Ingrid Newkirk, president of People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, commented on the removal of elephants and stated, “These are complex, intelligent animals, and this is a lousy, lousy, dirty, cruel business, and people see that” (Pèrez-Peña 2015). The circus and their harmful training tactics ended up hurting themselves because now their main attraction will be gone in just a few short years.
Another cause and effect that relates to elephants is how they are trained. Due to the fact that elephants are naturally wild gigantic animals that could pummel the trainers if given the chance the circus owners are forced to break them. The immense size of the elephants forces the trainers to use negative abusive tactics to train the elephants, a simple “good job” will not do the trick. The elephants are beaten with bullhooks, their legs bound, and kept in confinement to stray them from their natural instincts. This process results in elephants that are not elephants anymore. They become robots with routines drilled into their minds for each show.
By the decision to yank elephants from all circuses by 2018, Ringling Bros. is attempting to avoid outrage from the people and possible criminal proceedings. We hope that in the future circuses without elephants we are invited to see the real entertainment showcasing the natural beauty of these amazing animals.
Works Cited
Pèrez-peña, Richard. “Elephants to Retire From Ringling Brothers Stage.” The New York Times. The New York Times, 5 Mar. 2015. Web. 6 Apr. 2015. <http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/06/us/ringling-brothers-circus-dropping-elephants-from-act.html?_r=0>.
The Gamer 2.0
SleepyCat
Coffee Lover 03
doglover7025
Snowman10
excellentstudent27
Gymrat
hockeyfan
holistic25
ilovebeesss
ilovemydog
The Gamer
Naturechild101
BreakingBad45
ravensfan8
temporal111
thatpersonoverthere
toetio
username1132005
Calm&Patient
webbwrestler135
Counterintuitive Spring 2024 
feedback requested
Feedback provided. —DSH
LikeLike
Hey, skyblue! You are one of many constants in this class. I can count on several of your classmates to miss deadlines and ignore the process; I can count on you to post, ask for feedback, respond to criticism, and continuously improve.
P1. If you will permit me a slightly risky analogy, skyblue, imagine a strip club at which the performers subjected their audience to a running narration such as: I stand before you in my undergarments with the clear intention of removing even them for your enjoyment. The anticipation is most of the thrill, so that the actual reveal can be a letdown . . . .
I will demonstrate once the difference between that and actually showing something:
P2. This starts out so much better than P1.
—Your Wittmann quote is VERY confusing because it buries its context. What’s pretty remarkable? That they’ve finally decided to get elephants out of the circus? You don’t say so. Two ways to handle this: 1) start the quote with “they’ve been fighting . . .” or 2) provide the context.
—The transition from the Perez quote to the we contribute to the cruelty claim is VERY jarring and confusing.
In general, the paragraph contains plenty of significant material and reasoning but lacks an overall pattern that guides the reader through the logic.
Break it down:
We love the elephants.
They bring us to the circus.
We delight that they do tricks that require extensive training.
Circuses will do anything to maintain that profitable situation.
In fact, they will subject the elephants to extreme cruelty.
We have always been innocent in our ignorance of that cruelty.
The circus has gone to great lengths to keep the secret from us.
Now we are becoming aware.
The more aware we become, the less we can condone our own participation.
Your paragraph goes on WAY too long. Several breaks suggest themselves.
1. The We love elephants paragraph.
2. The Circuses are Cruel paragraph.
3. The Cruelty is Secret paragraph.
4. The We are Becoming Aware paragraph.
5. The We Cannot Allow this paragraph.
6. The Circuses Have Responded to Criticism rather than actually divulge the extent of their behavior paragraph.
P3. As it stands, your conclusion is unnecessary, skyblue. By the time you finish describing the mistreatment of animals for profit, you’ll have nothing left to say in summary.
However. You could make a bold new claim, conjecture, prediction, that would redeem your conclusion and keep readers thinking.
—By yanking elephants from their shows, Ringling Brothers hopes to avoid outrage and potential criminal proceedings.
—Considering their treatment of animals, it would not be surprising to discover that the circus abuses it acrobats and other human performers too.
—We hope for a new generation of circuses that awakens audiences to the REAL entertainment value of understanding these amazing animals for what they are . . . .
LikeLike