Femenist's views on dolphin (but also unavoidable human) problem.

I found few interesting modern works, and want to share  them here, too.

https://www.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:1141617/FULLTEXT01.pdf
 ARE YOU READY   FOR A WET LIVE-IN?
EXPLORATIONS  INTO LISTENING


 JANNA HOLMSTEDT

Very big manuscript, and very interesting. There are some quotes I picked up while reading it:


---copypasta!------
" As late as 1999, two years before his death, Lilly
presented an idea for a Future Communications Labo-
ratory where dolphins, instead of being held captive,
could voluntarily visit the lab in a variety of areas,
ranging from deep sea (most compatible for the dol-
phins) to dry house (most compatible for the humans).**
Human-dolphin communication would be facilitated in
different ways along this continuum from dry to wet.

** The idea for this lab was presented 1999 as a series of 3D renderings
on Lilly’s website, “The Future Communications Lab,” where a pixe-
lated Lilly at the close of the 20th Century described the concept
of the future facility. Accessed April 4, 2004, 

 http://www.johnclilly.com/futureComm20.html. On August 4, 2016, a film appeared on YouTube, “John C. Lilly: Interview at Future Communications Lab,” posted by “bigtwinNYC,” August 4, 2016, showing Lilly on a virtual set depicting the laboratory, designed by Bigtwin (a.k.a. James Suhre). Lilly was filmed and interviewed for this video in October 1998 in SMA Studios in New York City. Accessed April 17, 2017,
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s-knqVbghIA
---copy end-----

Interesting, I don't get it this (_voluntary_!) way, but may be I misread teh site .....

after some follow-up I watched video and re-read text at Lilly's website.

Andrew Randrianasulu "The priorities of society are such that our best minds and efforts are lost to a philosophy that if it cannot produce financial gain, it is not worth doing--at the expense of the truth and our environment." (c)

--anyway, I was wrong, yes, despite those elements from today's (and past) captivity it was supposed to be voluntary place. Still, for _inviting_ cetacea to someplace you already need some quite complex communication and trust - and confidence whole thing will not turn into trap (not something you can say about 'default society')! In absence of "tens of millions" (of US dollars) we are forced (hopefully!) to do all this communication thing with friends we have around.

Andrew Randrianasulu but yes, I was wrong and right at the same time - just next page openly demand keeping of current captivity intact, because, meh, "education"! Interestingly, at the same page very correct observations made about scientists who are NOT interested about communicating w/. dolphins because this doesn't bring them money! (and as side note, if they figure out how to make this 'communication' thing bring them money - they will be much interested in reinstansin this moneymaking effect, not any communication, esp. if it threatened their main monetary motive!). So, page is selfcontradicting ... Education imagined as something magical, like, you put 100 humans into dolphinarium, hit 'Educate" button, and they come out educated! Well, this doesn't work this way - without thinking, and critical thinking, years and decades of thinking - it all will be too fragmentary and just way to manipulate someone at best. No _accurate_ image of reality can be approximated this way, with just fragment of thinking drowned in sea of enforced stupidarity! Anyway, Lilly is dead for more than 15 years ..no point to argue with dead man..but lets not repeat very same mistake about 'instant (human) education' and underestimating power of monetary flow (not just amount!) have on current humans. Dolphinarium is place where money keep its owners captive, they keep their human workers captive, and those in turn keep captive audience/visitors and cetacea themselves, who are at the bottom of this sea of shit, not allowed to do anything! And while captivity CAN generate strong supporters of cetacea (me, Russell, Ken ...) - it does so only in conjunction with producing literally MILLIONS of sheeple, who are way too tolerant to any powerful voice who want to keep those beings captive(and/or do other intolerable things). So, captivity only support itself ...And very fact you can't do anything truely dolphin-centered today is very good indicator of this. Also, this utilitarian thinking 'oh, there are much more killings of cetacea in the world, so captivity is non-issue!' is BS. Same self-supporting acute disrespect/destruction at work here. Even worse, because it morphing into something 'quite acceptable' with all those TALKS about 'rehabilitation', caring, etc, etc. While in reality they just apply same non-ethics to real non-humans, it just covered more colorifully for humans!

Anyway, read for yourself:
http://www.johnclilly.com/futureComm41.html

*********************

-----------
In OOZ projects, for example, the concept of the zoo is turned around. Every
OOZ site consists of an “an architecture of reciprocity,”
and “an information architecture of collective obser-
vation and interpretation.” Unlike Hall’s Enki Experi-
ment, there are no cages or aquariums and the animals
are there by choice. In some set-ups the animals can
trigger a prerecorded human voice, that urges the hu-
man to act in a specific way, for example to deliver a
dose of beaver biscuits to the hungry beaver or provide
a service to a pigeon.24 Through these various reversed
system designs, where animals can trigger acousmatic
human voices, anthropomorphism could be said to
be used as a tool to address environmental concerns
and issues of interconnectedness. Communication is
approached in terms of shared ecology rather than as
a question of information transmission.*
------------

Another very interesting idea, very close to role-reversal thing I first found by reading Ken LeVasseur's texts. But I think we need to make it work at deeper, more complex level.


*************************

------------------
** In ancient Greece, it was believed that knowledge could not be
stored in books, only in living bodies inhabiting space. Writing and
reading were not regarded as tools for transferring knowledge. On the
contrary, Plato argued that the technology of writing would produce
forgetfulness – because the reader is seduced by the written word to
believe that thoughts and wisdom can be fixed once and for all and
tends to forget that knowledge is a living thing.
-------------

this is unusual (for me) reading of Plato ...still, I haven't read him at all, yet!


**********************

Art as a social action or event, thus, is at risk of being reduced to
spectacle or contributing to an aestheticization of the service economy where all critique eventually drowns or is hugged to death.
---end of quotation-------

There was reference to book "Cosmodolphins", I was unable to find full text online, but surely I found fragment of it:

http://archeologia.women.it/user/cyberarchive/files/lykke-bryld.html

Cosmodolphins. Feminist Cultural Studies
of Technology, Animals and the Sacred

by: Mette Bryld and Nina Lykke

 

 

well, re-watching Lilly's interview AFTER reading this fragment definitely was eye-opener!

 

 And finally, there was some thesis based on reading "Cosmodolphins" book!

http://www.etd.ceu.hu/2014/cserhati_eva.pdf

Andrew Randrianasulu
------------------
“When presented with the idea of making a major lifestyle change that would involve moving from land to sea, only 3 of the 107 women interviewed rejected their partner’s proposed change outright and chose not to cruising. Some of the 104 women who took the risk of embracing the idea were eager participants from the outset: their primary question was ‘how soon can we leave?’ […] 0 percent of the women let their fear of water or lack of sailing experience prevent them from making a change”(Cantrell 2000, 16–08).
-----------

this of course can be biased view ......


Also, I tend to disagree with Janna's view of Marino, Herzing and co as female alt.heroes - they unfortunately turned out to be too dominant type for actually becoming any alternative. But for some reason Janna's name in itself sounded much alike name of  female character in Vernor Vinge's sci-fi called "A fire upon the deep" - where contact with group-mind aliens was made by young humans, who were forced to find their way to make Contact..as additional twist those group minds communicated at ultrasound frequencies, but were good imitators. I don't think our real cetacea are group minds in classical sense - yet I found this interinfiltartion of ideas quite ...interesting!

Also, may be if humans will be able to tell _interesting_ stories to cetacea - it will be  something valuable for them, too! Thanks, Janna, for  digging out all this massive of info, and adding your own life/thinking to it!

What exactly we still mean under term social relations with cetacea

This is repost from our Facebook group.

Just something I think we better to define very clearly.
What exactly we still mean under term social relations with cetacea (from biggest whales to smallest porpoise-like beings, inclusive).
1) Making humans useful (!), callable by cetacea, _for specific or non-specific tasks_. See role reversal? Humans making themselves available for dolphin's tasks!
1.1) For this we better to learn how to recognize our true intentions, how to be honest, and how to guide themselves toward some very uncommon goal ...
1.2) This includes abandoning of this 'natural' for us hierachism as everyday practice.
1.2.1) Setting dolphins as 'higher' beings has unfortunate (?) side-effect of some active impotency - like, if they so superior - they don't need any help and we can't do anything meaningful for them. Drop this!
1.2.2) Our real empathy tend to be completely non-functional - humans _easily_ can command other humans to electroshock/kill some other humans - and all this considered normal! Within 'humanistic' society :( So, don't rely on this 'we are soo damn humane and civilized!" We are not, and our real empathy sense IS constantly killed and/or twisted. I don't think we really can feel directly someone's mental and/or physical pain - but we can and must 'emulate' such empathy with senses we have, and thinking we can develop.
1.3) with results of such new practice measured accurately, and not on basis 'I think I made progress, so no need for self-checking..'. Progress on those matters usually hard and painful, no happiness-seekers will make it far enough w/o not so harmless lying. There is one thing we better to follow absolutely, from philosophical/scientific toolbox - never allow some force to become invisible because you don't want to see it - be it force inside you, or in human society surrounding you. Of course just recognizing there IS force doesn't protect by magic - you must spend time accurately testing yourself (as always-here animal!) what you can do for realistically countermaneuring some of those newly discovered tendencies, and/or how to put them in good use for cetacea! {actually, this is applicable for non-cetacea, too)
2) For 1. you need _real_ communication, not just feeling of it...it can be of any nature, but you better to have it working, because life of everyone will be dependent on reality/consistency of such link. Of course, it better to start small, but eventually things will escalate to serious (=real) levels. Abstract linguistic communication thus become not just some trick, but vital component of common defense, and communal life. From avoiding man-created problems - to just simple social chat at free time.
3) Friends are much more than just players, at least in cetacea's world. So, giving something, protecting, worrying etc all must be real, and collective (with cetacea) work must be seen as real life, something to live until the end, not nice, droppable at any time thing.
4) Giving is MUCH more important than taking, because..I don't know, for dolphins and other beings who care about social relations it just work (unlike with humans!) - you give a lot - and shortly enough something good will come your way ..something bad will come too, sometimes...and friends are friends because they can live and help each other in turbulent times, not just when everything is ok-ish.
5) Focus on helping cetacea's themselves - not by human proxy (so, it about making human collectives, but NOT about lobbying some govt or similar power abuser) .. Its not about studying them, or anything of this sort ..under-standing, yes, like helping them, metaphorically speaking, reach surface in time ....cycle after cycle.
6) Making whole thing not easily killable by 'external' factors, like dominant ideology, or internal leveling-off ...
7) Allow cetacea actually act on you, physically. This tend to escalate into some kind of masochistic trend in me , but mostly because so many humans only accept _their_ right for touching (and handling, in worst sense of this word), and deny completely right of other side to do the same! I think our own desire to maintain our body unharmed more than enough for avoiding really bad things. But still, there is another moment - negative emotions like anger negative because they are painful! So, don't pain dolphins (and co) by angering them ...
8) Please drop individualism. From very physical to very fine aspects of psychology - individual human _alone_ can't effectively help even smallest cetacea, unless we talk about very short-timed episodes, not something lasting. If you drop poor beluga at top of me - we both will be dead as result! Don't do this metaphorically speaking too - don't force anyone to keep whole weight of responsibility - it all completely unnatural and impossible to do. Again, drop individualism and those unvoiced, but very feelable calls to "oh, just show us something uberheroic, and we will start to consider looking into your thinking .." Such BS! :( (this is often subconscious, but I actually got this voiced at me, at times, openly).
---------------