All Headlines >>
The photograph showed seven naked male student vets holding sheep 'tipped' in front of them so as to hide the students' spare parts.
That anyone should complain about sheep being tipped, a technique which the British Cattle Veterinary Association describes as: "widely recognised as being safe and pain-free for the animals" defies logic. But so they did, and according to The Times, it led to personal attacks, harassment and threats against the students who'd made the calendar.
Worse still was the fact that according to various newspaper reports, the complaint originally came from the Veterinary Vegan Network (VVN), a group of qualified and trainee veterinary surgeons and nurses, who reportedly posted on their Facebook page that the photo was 'deeply disturbing'.
Oh come on. 'Deeply disturbing?' Really? I'd argue that any vet who finds that photo 'deeply disturbing' should be asking themselves whether they're in the right job.
There cannot be a veterinary surgeon or nurse in the country who is not aware of the high suicide rate in the profession, or the problems it is facing with retention, so if the complaint did trigger a backlash against the students involved, the VVN should hang its head in shame and apologise to them immediately. Profusely. As the BCVA said in its statement, the vitriol aimed at the students is "both grossly unfair, unfounded and should be condemned."
The RVC's response was predictably politically-correct: Stuart Reid wrote an open letter apologising to those who'd taken offence. But it was pitched very badly. It was long on apology, long on hand-wringing and long on appeasement. It was jaw-droppingly short of an outright condemnation of those who'd harassed his students. Indeed, according to The Times report, an unnamed vet said the college had "thrown its students under a bus."
We live in an increasingly homogenised, politically-correct world in which people complain at the first opportunity and take offence at anything and everything. Our institutions then seem to fall over themselves in the rush to apologise to the perpetually offended Facebook fruitcakes. We all need to fight this. Stuart Reid, ewe need to grow a pair.
To the students involved in the calendar: well done for making the world a slightly less grey place, and remember that for every one fruitcake, there are a thousand more who support your charitable efforts.
No sheep were hurt in the writing of this article.
PS: Whilst you're here, take a moment to see our latest job opportunities for vet nurses.
When I'm restraining an animal at work, I don't need to check it's cortisol to see if it's in distress. Even for those that seem comfortable, I don't second guess that it may not be feeling stress either, I just handle it with consideration in case it does. I don't think you can argue that something doesn't cause mental stress without quantifying it either.
Therefore I wouldn't handle an animal against it's will (or against a willy), when not necessary for it's health. I.E. using an animal as a prop for a calendar to get a few laughs. Regardless of whether it makes money for a good charity, animals should be treat as individuals not props for our human entertainment.
And your argument about being crammed on a tube train. You would be choosing to be there, your choice, you could have stayed in bed. You may not find it that stressful but others may find it extremely distressing. These animals do not have a choice either way.
As you will read from my comments above, you will see that I wasn't arguing that the stress was so great that the sheep should not be given any veterinary care. Yes sheep will have been handled in this way regularly before, both for shearing and for medical reasons, this doesn't mean they will find it a positive experience. It doesn't matter how great the stress, this was not classed as 'veterinary care'. I don't think anyone mentioned suffering, but that's dependent on the individual anyway.
It's also about professional conduct. A vet, the most trusted animal professional, using animals as a prop in this way. It think it shows a lack of compassion and I don't think it helps to promote a good image of the profession.
Laura Totally agree with you that when extremists get hold of an issue, they often give a wrong impression of the rest of their group. But to be clear, I wasn't labelling vegans as fruitcakes. I was labelling Facebook Fruitcakes as fruitcakes. You know, the sort of people who go off on one on facebook, and are simply horrid to anyone who disagrees with their point of view. Yes, I think those sorts of people are a little crazy!
It is never ok to threaten or harass someone else, regardless of the issue. And when people behave in such an extreme manner it can give the wrong impression of an entire group of people, as is often the way with vegans, but I'm not sure referring to them as a 'fruitcake' helps matters either? While the actions were completely inappropriate and in no way acceptable, they are simply people with strong beliefs and I don't think it's fair to insinuate this makes them crazy.
J Ward I don't think you can argue that something causes mental stress without quantifying it. I might be slightly stressed by being in a crammed tube train. But it's not a big deal. If i was being tortured, that's something else altogether. Let's remember that these sheep will have been handled in this way regularly before, both for shearing and for medical reasons. Or are you arguing that the stress is so great that sheep should not be shorn or given any veterinary care. Don't get me wrong, I am absolutely 100% against the causing of suffering in any sentient species. But I fail to see any suffering here.
And with regard to suicide rates etc in the profession - we all know what happens when you get people fired up on Facebook about things like this. It unleashes a torrent of nastiness. So I would argue it is a COMPLETELY inappropriate way to complain about or disagree with colleagues in the profession. The complainers should have known that.
I don't know about deeply disturbing but I find it deeply disappointing and yes offensive. Perhaps disciplinary action is in order and I am not thinking for those that appeared on the calendar. Once again another little vipers nest on facebook causing problems.
You are missing the point!
The BCVA may describe tipping as "safe and pain-free" for the animals, but you'd find it hard to argue that these sentient animals 'enjoy' being held in that position? Or whether a technique where they are held in an unnatural way, against their will, does not cause any mental stress? Or that the technique is positive for the animals' mental health?
You could argue that this technique is required in veterinary day to day work, for the long-term health of the animal, however, to put an animal in this position for the sake of a calendar or for human enjoyment is not OK.
In other words, to put an animal through undue stress, for human enjoyment, laughter or entertainment is not OK, regardless of the goodwill intended.
I'd argue that any vet who would deliberately want to cause undue stress to an animal, even for a second, for human entertainment, should as you put it' ask themselves whether they're in the right job'. I believe the vet's involved meant well, but it is a clear oversight on the consideration for the animal's well being as a whole.
And to say that because there is a high suicide rate in the profession, that people who disagree with something should 'not complain' and apologise is ridiculous. Everyone has a right to disagree with something, and I agree that using personal attacks, harassment and threats against anyone to get a personal view across is not OK.
No humans or non-humans were hurt in the writing of this article either.