[HN Gopher] Group of monkeys kill over 250 dogs for 'revenge' in...
___________________________________________________________________
Group of monkeys kill over 250 dogs for 'revenge' in Indian town
Author : prmph
Score : 241 points
Date : 2021-12-18 13:50 UTC (9 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.newsweek.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.newsweek.com)
| cryptica wrote:
| Great... Now even the monkeys have a functioning justice system
| and we don't.
| wiseowise wrote:
| How is that a functioning justice system?
| cryptica wrote:
| At least they punish the perpetrators... They over-punish
| whereas we under-punish. Under-punishment is worse because it
| implicitly punishes those who do the right thing by allowing
| perpetrators to get away with crimes; it encourages crime.
| Just wait 10 years and you will understand what I'm talking
| about. You severely underestimate how bad things have become.
| It will dawn on you suddenly like a nightmare from which you
| can't wake up.
|
| Maybe this comment seems alarmist but I'm trying to help.
| Read it with an open mind and a grain of salt. Better be
| alarmist than sorry.
| jeidz wrote:
| A devastating rampage of monkeys? I can think of some
| parallels.
| jimmyed wrote:
| Trying to wipe out the other side is "a functioning justice
| system"? It was in 1942 after Reinhard Heydrich's killing.
| fallingknife wrote:
| Why are people surprised and shocked by this? If a pack of stray
| dogs killed a human child, we would exterminate them without
| further thought, and we would call it "animal control." Even when
| an otherwise protected species like a bear in a national park
| kills a human, we make an exception and kill that animal.
| tantalor wrote:
| > Why are people surprised
|
| Who said anybody is surprised?
| fallingknife wrote:
| It's posted to HN. You wouldn't see "${western_city} Animal
| Control Removes Stray Dogs from Park After Child Killed" on
| HN.
| johndevor wrote:
| This is not a small group of dogs, but a prolonged war
| between two species.
| tantalor wrote:
| It's newsworthy because it's unusual, not surprising
| tsegers wrote:
| And neither would you see headlines about a human child
| learning to read, yet if a monkey were to do the same it'd
| be up here in no time. The noteworthy thing here is not the
| activity performed, but what entity the activity was
| performed by.
| cdrini wrote:
| Um, because it was monkeys that did it, not humans? And humans
| =/= to monkeys?
|
| It's surprising because (a) we generally consider revenge to be
| a human emotion, so seeing it in animals is a bit surprising,
| (b) seeing a coordinated attack between two species that are
| kind of adjacent on the food chain isn't super common. Killing
| in the animal world is primarily done for hunting. The monkeys
| aren't eating the dogs, they're just killing them.
| oxymoran wrote:
| This sounds just like human behavior of retribution in the mob
| and street gangs. Or even Twitter. Fascinating.
| fnord77 wrote:
| So I'm guessing that without intervention, two distinct sentient
| groups would be at constant warfare with each other until one
| group was extinct.
|
| Is this what happened with early hominids and why there aren't
| other creatures that have evolved to the same level of
| intelligence as humans?
| xwdv wrote:
| Eating diets rich in fat was key for early hominid brain
| development. Probably why other creatures haven't evolved to
| our levels of intelligence.
| jessaustin wrote:
| GP referred to other hominids. I'm pretty sure Neanderthals
| liked eating fat too.
| fault1 wrote:
| This story reminds me of Jane Goodall writing about the Gombe
| Chimpanzee War:
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gombe_Chimpanzee_War#War
| 29athrowaway wrote:
| Sounds like a story taken from Dwarf fortress.
| throwawaysea wrote:
| If an instinct or circuitry around revenge can exist in monkeys,
| I wonder if humans can ever fully escape that tendency, or if it
| is just built into who we are.
| HamburgerEmoji wrote:
| We can train ourselves. The methods are very old, but hardly
| anyone knows about them, much less actually does them every
| day. They are things like the Brahmaviharas.
| true_religion wrote:
| When humans cull all the wolves in an area because they killed
| a child, we don't call it revenge. We call it animal control.
| 323 wrote:
| The purpose of revenge is to cause pain.
|
| Animal control tries to do just that, control. If a written
| sign would be enough, those wolves would not have been culled
| (except maybe the ones which actually killed tje child).
| pvaldes wrote:
| > When humans cull all the wolves in an area because they
| killed a child
|
| Wolves normally don't do that. Not unless they have rabies.
| We should stop seeing the nature as if we were still in the
| XVII century.
|
| The logical answer would be to direct the revenge against the
| real culprit, the rabies virus. Kill the rabid wolf and
| vaccinate other local wolves against rabies. Wolves learn
| quickly that must keep their distance with humans. Culling
| all the wolves in the area leads to _more_ humans killed, by
| herbivores.
| tantalor wrote:
| HG Wells speculates about this in The Time Machine. The
| futuristic humans lost their revenge instinct and are helpless
| against their subterranean tormenters.
| cdrini wrote:
| I don't remember the loss of the "revenge instinct" being a
| part of that book. The future humans had optimized for
| comfort/happiness so much that they evolved to be more and
| more docile and childlike. They lost their intelligence and
| evolved into stupid beasts again because they had no
| evolutionary pressure to become anything else. They didn't
| lose their self-preservatory instinct -- they just lost the
| only defensive tool humans have evolved that lets us
| compete/win against all other animals: our intelligence. Kind
| of like those birds in a New Zealand island that evolved to
| be too fat to fly, because the island had no predators. And
| then cats got accidentally introduced to the island.
| doovd wrote:
| Why is it something humans must "escape"?
| newsbinator wrote:
| Revenge is counter-productive most of the time. It's only
| really useful when you want to galvanize a population into
| suicide.
|
| Otherwise you get into a cycle of revenge for revenge for
| revenge that wastes everybody's energy.
| fidesomnes wrote:
| "Revenge is counter-productive most of the time. It's only
| really useful when you want to galvanize a population into
| suicide."
|
| Just offer a free vaccine that eliminates by heart attack
| and stroke 1% of the population group every year.
| cdrini wrote:
| Of course we can; the point of having such huge brains is that
| we can override our animal instincts if we want to. Same reason
| you can convince yourself to jump off a cliff into water even
| if you're scared of heights. Or how you can convince yourself
| to skip meals to get your work done. Or to not physically fight
| someone when you're in a disagreement. Or to not cheat when in
| a relationship.
|
| Not being slaves to our animals instincts is kind of what makes
| humans human.
| PeterisP wrote:
| "Circuitry around revenge" is probably a beneficial social
| "skill" for facilitating group cooperation, there's all kinds
| of game theory (e.g. basic things like iterated prisoners
| dilemma tit-for-tat strategy) that suggests that knowing about
| the presence of revenge acts and a likelihood of punishing
| defection (even at extra 'expense' for the punisher) deters
| defection, and allows to reach a better shared result.
|
| I.e. if we simply could abandon that at the flip of a switch,
| I'm not sure if we should, it's plausible that it would make
| all kinds of abuse less risky and thus more attractive,
| increasing the abuse happening in the world.
| Comevius wrote:
| Macaques are very intelligent animals, more importantly they
| are successful because of their Machiavellian tendencies, just
| like we are.
|
| Unfortunately while this behavior is useful at conquering the
| world, it becomes counterproductive later on.
| gtoast wrote:
| This is the relevant news I need to stay up to date in the fast
| moving tech world. Thank you hacker news.
| sslayer wrote:
| Witness the slow decline as censorship forces us to the last
| bastions of free speech
| iLoveOncall wrote:
| This is about as relevant to most people as the "article" about
| "x86, X64 Instruction Latency, Memory Latency and Cpuid Dumps"
| that nobody will read and is yet also on the frontpage today.
|
| HackerNews upvotes 2 kinds of content: interesting content, and
| content that makes HN readers look smarter than they are.
| Regardless of their relation to technology.
|
| This one is in the interesting category.
| vmception wrote:
| > villagers began attempting to rescue the dogs on their own. But
| some of them have found themselves subject to the monkeys'
| retaliation, and some have even injured themselves or fallen from
| buildings
|
| how strong are these monkeys?
|
| I mean I know monkeys are strong but can they really ambush a
| human, and push them over a ledge? can they kidnap a human, carry
| them upward and drop them over a ledge?
| itsthecourier wrote:
| if a monkey tries to hurt my dogs, i will fight to death for
| them. mentally they are my children.
| FlyingSnake wrote:
| The Langoor monkeys are really strong and I have personally
| witnessed their menace. There are countless instances I can
| recall where the monkeys attacked humans, pets etc.
| mannykannot wrote:
| My guess is that in these cases, the humans put themselves into
| a vulnerable position in pursuit of the monkeys.
| true_religion wrote:
| I think it's implied that the people are just falling because
| they are startled or otherwise defending themselves against
| monkey strikes.
| tebruno99 wrote:
| Have You ever tried to pull Yourself up to the top of a tree
| with 1 arm in 30 seconds?
| wiseowise wrote:
| Has little to do with strength.
|
| Haftor can't really do this, but I'm pretty sure he can rip
| one of those monkeys in half if he catches it.
| [deleted]
| olalonde wrote:
| Chimp muscles are stronger than ours but we are often
| stronger than them in absolute terms because we are bigger
| (more muscle mass).
| seunosewa wrote:
| We are not stronger than chimps. Our arms certainly aren't.
| clairity wrote:
| yes, a chimp could literally rip the arm(s) out of a
| human without a sweat. 1 chimp arm is roughly equivalent
| to 2 of the strongest human arms.
| olalonde wrote:
| > This result matches well with the few tests that have
| been done, which suggest that when it comes to pulling
| and jumping, chimps are about 1.5 times as strong as
| humans relative to their body mass. But because they are
| lighter than the average person, humans can actually
| outperform them in absolute terms, say O'Neill.
|
| https://www.newscientist.com/article/2138714-chimps-are-
| not-...
| sudosysgen wrote:
| Chimps, no, but a small 20kg macaque, yeah definitely.
| You could yeet such a small animal, for lack of a better
| word. That's why they band together :)
| andrewl wrote:
| For a good idea of what chimpanzee musculature looks
| like, do a search for "hairless chimpanzee." Here's one:
|
| https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-
| leicestershire-36924808
| sudosysgen wrote:
| I certainly agree, you wouldn't have much of a chance
| against a chimp one on one without weapons. It's just
| that the article isn't about chimps, but about much
| smaller macaques.
| krona wrote:
| Generally true, but the average chimp is only 50%
| stronger in relative terms and the average chimp is only
| 4ft tall.
|
| https://www.pnas.org/content/114/28/7343
|
| https://www.newscientist.com/article/2138714-chimps-are-
| not-...
| abc_lisper wrote:
| We are not stronger, we have more stamina. There is a
| difference
| WastingMyTime89 wrote:
| We both are stronger and have more stamina than macaques.
| The biggest male adult macaques are 18kg. That's probably
| more that the average adult can raise with one arm but
| not by much and I insist on average. That's nothing
| exceptional for someone in shape.
|
| Considering the weight and power in a human leg, a swift
| kick would seriously harm and probably kill an average
| macaque. The issue is not strength here.
| sudosysgen wrote:
| The average adult can't lift 18kg with one arm, even with
| improper posture? That's pretty sad if true.
| h2odragon wrote:
| I'd bet a pair of them could pick up and throw a human; if they
| could get the co-ordination right.
|
| 50lbs of dog is a bad opponent for a human, 2 of them and
| humans _lose_ that fight fairly often. Some of the dogs in the
| video I saw were that size and larger; so if the monkeys can
| harass and herd them effectively then I 'd expect them to be
| able to do it to a human as well.
|
| A human prepared to fight and ready to start killing things is
| a completely different matter; but I don't think these critters
| have encountered that yet. They're probably about to.
| analog31 wrote:
| The article said the humans have "culled" about 1000 of the
| monkeys. It's interesting that we use different euphemisms
| depending on who's doing the killing.
| pdpi wrote:
| We have different words for different types of killing. We
| say "slaughter" when we're talking about killing a farm
| animal for food, and "cull" when talking about killing
| animals for the purpose of population management. Likewise
| we have "murder" for intentionally killing a person vs
| "manslaughter" for an accidental/less-culpable killing, and
| "euthanise" to describe killing something that is already
| dying so as to end its suffering.
|
| What the article describes is accurately described as
| culling, or killing for population control.
| fsckboy wrote:
| culling actually means selecting out from a group on the
| basis of some criteria.
|
| harvested lobsters with one claw have less commercial
| value so they are separated out. They are sold more
| cheaply and called "culls". A difficult entry level
| university course in an academic department like Chemical
| Engineering could be used to cull the class of students
| down to only those who are serious about pursuing the
| field; in such a case, the culls are not killed.
|
| it's the nature of metonymy
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metonymy that the word cull
| can take on extra meanings depending on the context.
| kerneloftruth wrote:
| The same term is used for cattle. I guess species at the
| top of the food chain choose the terms of art. I wouldn't
| be surprised, though, to learn that the monkeys have their
| own sound/ utterance to mean the killing of people.
| jimmyed wrote:
| What do you mean same is used for cattle?
| IAmGraydon wrote:
| He means "cull" is a term we use for killing cattle.
| jessaustin wrote:
| That's not precisely correct. With respect to cattle or
| any other domesticated ungulates, "culling" means
| removing from the herd. That might occasionally be
| slaughter, but usually means selling the animal. Of
| course the new owner might buy the animal in order to
| slaughter it, but we can't assume that.
| option_greek wrote:
| In Malaysia not in India. In India, laws don't allow
| killing of even rabis infested dogs forget about monkeys.
| Not to mention monkeys are considered sacred.
| [deleted]
| h2odragon wrote:
| IMO they don't need to be "culling," which would imply more
| "humane" means of killing like rifle shots or poisons. They
| need to go out and kill some monkeys in full sight of the
| other monkeys, in a personal and ugly way that _the moneys
| understand_. Swords and clubs time. Hang bits of the
| victims where the rest of them hang out.
|
| Works for coyotes.
| oblio wrote:
| Drag them down to our level and beat them with
| experience:-D
| greedo wrote:
| pour les encourager les autres
| mrleinad wrote:
| They're macaques, so maybe they can handle small children. Not
| adults.
| tomaskafka wrote:
| A small lovely looking gibbon can break your arm off your body
| easily.
| fossuser wrote:
| If the monkeys start pushing people off buildings that seems
| like an escalation? If war breaks out between the monkeys and
| the humans - I'd think we'd have a decisive advantage?
| sjg007 wrote:
| Yes.
| jason-phillips wrote:
| > how strong are these monkeys?
|
| I believe the right question is, how intelligent and
| distempered are these monkeys?
|
| Intelligence > brawn
|
| Strength is mostly immaterial once I (as a hypothetical monkey)
| understand that I can use my agility to rip your eyeballs from
| their sockets, which then effectively removes your ability to
| pose a threat to me.
| wiseowise wrote:
| > Strength is mostly immaterial once I (as a hypothetical
| monkey) understand that I can use my agility to rip your
| eyeballs from their sockets, which then effectively removes
| your ability to pose a threat to me.
|
| Strength is material once you understand that this
| hypothetical human can use some kind of weapon or just
| something long and blunt to bash your brains out.
| qvrjuec wrote:
| That's a silly way to think about it, strength just gives you
| more tools that you can work with if you're intelligent. If
| you aren't strong enough to rip eyeballs from sockets, how
| does being intelligent enough to know you can do that help
| you?
| jason-phillips wrote:
| > strength just gives you more tools...
|
| I believe the opposite is true.
|
| If I'm smart, I will use your strengths against you.
| wiseowise wrote:
| "Everyone has a plan until they get punched in the
| mouth." (c) Iron Mike
| jasondigitized wrote:
| I am not sure how you reverse body slam someone.
| bckr wrote:
| Judo and other throwing-style martial arts could be
| described as using "reverse body slams".
| pawelmurias wrote:
| The stronger you are compared to your opponent the better
| Judo works not worse. The martial arts that use the
| opponents strength depend on the "opponent" being
| compliant.
| diordiderot wrote:
| It's called a suplex
| kland wrote:
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z9BL59uiAz8
| pharmakom wrote:
| Weirdly specific.
| vmception wrote:
| It's something primates do to human captors.
| oblio wrote:
| Really? Do you happen to have an article handy?
| t-3 wrote:
| It's also something that humans notably do when fighting
| each other. Thumb in the eye is an instinctually
| intuitive move.
| ogma wrote:
| Completely ridiculous. Intelligence matters in a fight, but
| raw strength is always more important. Try fighting a gorilla
| and see how you do.
| abc_lisper wrote:
| All wild animals are stronger than they look. Humans are
| comparatively weak.. most of us can't fight a deer. Monkeys are
| intelligent. They are aware of leverage and potential danger.
| They jump on people, chase, scratch and bite them
| mc32 wrote:
| Deer? Those are from 500 pounds to over one thousand pounds.
| Oh courses a person can't engage in a physical fight with
| them.
| riazrizvi wrote:
| In the San Francisco Bay Area, our native California Mule
| deer that commonly roam suburban streets, weigh in between
| 100 and 300lbs.
| bargle0 wrote:
| White tailed deer on the east coast and midwest are in a
| similar size range.
| technothrasher wrote:
| And the little Key deer down in Florida, which are the
| smallest of the North American Whitetails, are typically
| about 40-50 pounds. One night when I was down in the
| Florida Keys, typing away at my laptop on the beech in
| the dark, I felt something cold and wet touch my elbow. I
| looked over my shoulder, and a little Key deer was
| sniffing my arm. I jumped a bit, and then the deer jumped
| a bit, and with one last curious look, she ran off into
| the dark. Very cute little thing.
| iamthepieman wrote:
| What deer are these? Deer in my area rarely weigh over 200
| pounds.
| hn8788 wrote:
| I'm guessing you're from Europe, because what you call
| Deer, the USA call Caribou or Elk, and what we call Deer
| aren't nearly that big.
| [deleted]
| TedDoesntTalk wrote:
| Male deer with antlers routinely gore dogs where I'm
| from. Deer, not elk.
| allendoerfer wrote:
| Or he has seen Disney movies and thinks caribous are male
| deers.
| 127 wrote:
| I can't fight a pet dog that's 2/3 of my weight.
| sudosysgen wrote:
| You could if you trained for it. You would probably be
| maimed after, though. That said these monkeys are more like
| 1/10th your weight
| imbnwa wrote:
| Any large dog is a lot to handle for most people should the
| dog get aggressive. Trained attack dogs demonstrate this
| quite well.
| hownottowrite wrote:
| Pound for pound they are about 1.5X stronger than humans due to
| the density of fast-twitch muscle fibers. This also makes them
| quicker and more nimble.
|
| If they attack from behind they can easily knock down an adult
| human. They use this tactic to attack motorcycle delivery
| drivers quite often and steal food. They would have no trouble
| nabbing a child.
| rg111 wrote:
| > how strong are these monkeys?
|
| One, or even two monkeys won't usually attack or even threaten
| an adult male. Although, a monkey will easily beat an adult
| male human.
|
| They are like 2-3.5 ft, and weigh at least 20 kg.
|
| They are also sneaky. You will be bitten and scratched badly,
| and will be fighting for life.
|
| One monkey cannot lift a human.
|
| I have lived in a monkey infested area for decades, and I have
| never even heard of someone dying by monkey attack.
|
| They also come in packs. They totally avoid directly messing
| with humans. But if some reason is given, then they can attack.
|
| I think they cannot lift a full grown human being. Or kidnap
| one.
|
| I think these injuries are from people getting on the roofs by
| themselves to save dogs, and falling due to bad control, panic,
| being attacked, or all.
| rhn_mk1 wrote:
| > at least 80 kg
|
| Are you sure? That's on the big side for a human.
| rg111 wrote:
| Need to correct. Thanks for catching.
| setum wrote:
| > can they really ambush a human, and push them over a ledge?
|
| I would say male adult monkeys in my village can (males are
| bigger and stronger), although they don't. They are fast, agile
| and acrobatic. Except for well prepared adult humans, monkeys
| can throw everyone else off a ledge.
|
| Reason so many monkeys exist in India is because they are
| sacred animals (to Hindus, 80% population). In our village, no
| one can kill them. The most one can do is throw a stone to
| scare them away.
| xwolfi wrote:
| Do you think this could change ?
| riazrizvi wrote:
| Possibly but Hinduism is 4000 years old, so it might be a
| while before we see that change.
| leephillips wrote:
| Where does the 4000 figure come from?
| rronalddas wrote:
| The Vedas are supposedly that old
| leephillips wrote:
| Yes, but (without being a scholar of religion) I had
| always assumed that Hinduism was far older than its
| oldest surviving texts, just as Judaism, in some form, is
| older than whatever year we date the Torah to.
| fault1 wrote:
| it depends on what you call 'hinduism'. it's one of the
| world's most heterodox religions and has absorbed a huge
| amount of cultural tradition from at least 300 languages.
|
| The rig veda is probably what most people agree is one of
| the foundational texts of hinduism, but it dates to about
| 1500 BC.
|
| However, the vedas probably absorbed a lot of earlier
| cultural tradition from the indus valley civilization,
| especially worship of Shiva-like deities. How much is
| however, debated.
|
| just like mesopotamia, there was a lot of syncretism.
| riazrizvi wrote:
| I imagine that when your career is arts based, you've
| likely assimilated that society's labels are arbitrary
| and determined in large part by competitive interests,
| because there is less of a fundamental truth than they
| would imply once established. Since this is a software
| engineering forum, we tend to expect more objectivity in
| our labels. Ironically when you think about it because
| software labels are so obviously artificial.
| phonypc wrote:
| My read is that it's the other way around. i.e. what one
| could reasonably call Judaism is a good deal younger than
| the Torah, Hinduism a good deal younger than the Vedas.
| There are of course traditions within the religions that
| go back to those writings and further, but take that to
| its extreme and they all presumably stem from some ur-
| religion.
| leephillips wrote:
| I guess like so many questions it comes down to how you
| choose to define and name things.
| JadeNB wrote:
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Hinduism traces
| the roots of Hinduism as far back as _possibly_ 1900 BC.
| fault1 wrote:
| yes, could happen.
|
| modernity tends to change culture (and especially
| homogenization that the interwebs promotes), and india is
| modernizing rapidly especially cities. culture can change
| very rapidly.
|
| that being said, hanuman (rama's monkey companion) is a
| important diety in hinduism, and has been worshipped for
| many thousands of years in india and other parts of
| southeast asia.
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanuman#Historical_developmen
| t
| bayesian_horse wrote:
| With small children, sure.
|
| With bigger humans, they don't need to throw them. It may be
| enough to drive them strategically by screaming and biting in a
| big enough group and with an unprepared enough victim.
| option_greek wrote:
| Strength doesn't come into the picture with monkeys. They
| attack by biting and scratching and often from hidden places
| like tree tops or rooftops. In many parts of India, the dogs
| are afraid to even bark at them.
|
| That said, adult monkeys are pretty big (3.5-4 feet) and aren't
| all that light weight.
|
| Anecdotally, a baby monkey fell into our neighbors house
| through bars on the roof and a group of almost 100 monkeys
| surrounded the house and took them all hostage till the baby
| was given back.
| mistrial9 wrote:
| well, the anxious animals got the baby back.. I am certain
| the monkeys did not ask nicely! but let's look at it
| differently, the monkey pack acted together right away for
| the safety of the smallest one.. did they hurt the humans?
| the story does not say that; a more aggressive animal would
| certainly hurt a human right away for the sake of a small
| one.. but those animals have been hunted and removed.. +1
| monkeys from me
| [deleted]
| amitheonlyone wrote:
| The story does say: _Now, villagers reported that the
| monkeys are targeting small children which has created a
| panic within the village._
| birksherty wrote:
| We don't know the whole situation. Article says
| "villagers began attempting to rescue the dogs". But how?
| May be villagers tried to attack monkeys and they felt
| threatened.
| [deleted]
| mistrial9 wrote:
| > These people need guns
|
| this exactly is what I have to deal with in the USA for
| neighbors.. small wonder anything larger than a dog is
| now extinct in most of North America.
|
| meet up at the big truck rally
| laurent92 wrote:
| But how do other monkeys know they participate to a
| legitimate cause? They don't have language to express
| reason, facts, inferences or values.
|
| Which strikes me, because they really did "ask nicely", not
| attacking humans and behaving in a measured way. Where I'm
| coming from is:
|
| Is language necessary? Human crowds are most often fair
| (doing a revolution is quite fair, even if individual
| events are a bit... messy. But crowds stuff up sometimes,
| ie Jesus vs Romans). Might we (humans) act about as fairly
| if we didn't have language at all to express our griefs?
| All that bullshit that goes on in courts, sometimes fair
| sometimes not; all the bullshit that goes on in companies
| about metoo: Does it "average out" the same as a crowd of
| angry monkeys, or are we effectively more efficient at
| delivering justice? Is our language a vehicle for reason,
| or is it just a vehicle of feelings and anger that happen
| to translate itself into words that seem rational?
| BrazzVuvuzela wrote:
| > _But how do other monkeys know they participate to a
| legitimate cause?_
|
| The legitimacy of a cause depends on your value system,
| and who is to say what sort of value system the monkeys
| have. Perhaps their value system places "stick up for
| other monkeys" before other considerations like impartial
| assessment of guilt or blame.
| Dudemeister_ wrote:
| That is some "planet of the apes" level situation
| arthur_sav wrote:
| Add a mysterious global virus to the mix and you have a
| movie. Oh wait, that's reality.
| bluedino wrote:
| "How many two year old...monkeys could you take in a fight?"
| hungryforcodes wrote:
| Clever. At least the problem of your babies being killed by
| errant dogs (from the monkies' point of view) is solved.
| rejectfinite wrote:
| This site really has become india central. Holy shit.
| nitrogen wrote:
| Probably depends on which time zones are in daylight when you
| visit.
| rcpt wrote:
| Great. Get the cats next
| Bendy wrote:
| Even if you fight, you cannot win.
| garyclarke27 wrote:
| I'd like to see these Monkeys try and capture my 54kg (129lb)
| Doberman. He is ridiculously strong, has broken a few collars and
| is impossible to move if he decides to stay put.
| Ansil849 wrote:
| > I'd like to see these Monkeys try and capture my 54kg (129lb)
| Doberman.
|
| You're saying you would like to see a pack of monkeys attack
| your dog? Your post is either internet bravado or an injunction
| for someone to call and alert animal welfare about your
| conduct.
| pvaldes wrote:
| Is obviously an hypothetical situation expressing that the
| dog would strike back if attacked.
|
| And yes, the dog could kill some macaques easily. Stray dogs
| are often malnourished and weak. A well feed dog of a
| respectable size in open field is a different situation.
| distantaidenn wrote:
| Sorry buddy, but a troop of larger monkeys would tear any dog
| to shreds -- doesn't matter the breed or size. They're fast,
| strong, agile, and smart.
| option_greek wrote:
| I hope the dog is stronger than these guys:
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IAWy9DqsnU0
| wiseowise wrote:
| Those are tiger cubs. I'm pretty sure even juvenile tigers
| would rip it to shreds if they wanted to.
| 323 wrote:
| Smartness always trumps brute force. It's why we are kings of
| the world, and not the tigers.
|
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-LMLGuOkK6w
| IAmGraydon wrote:
| An article on the internet tickled the same insecurity trigger
| that led you to adopt a tough guy dog in the first place.
| Observe yourself a bit more.
| TedDoesntTalk wrote:
| Great insight. I wonder if it applies to him. Perhaps the dog
| was gifted to him without any choice of his own.
| rad_gruchalski wrote:
| There's alway a choice. For example a choice not to accept
| a doberman puppy.
| pvaldes wrote:
| > Observe yourself a bit more.
|
| This sounds really condescending, Please lets don't do
| this here. Everybody is free to have exactly the dog that
| they want. Period.
|
| I can't see the need to invoke the dusty ghost of Freud
| all the time with those dumb cliches. In the real life,
| not all is always related with penises.
| tomaskafka wrote:
| Read also a study of car makers on correlation of big SUVs
| and insecurity.
| newsbinator wrote:
| Monkeys are ridiculously strong and vicious when they go to war
| in groups.
| Consultant32452 wrote:
| Monkeys are also capable of tool/weapon use.
| AzzieElbab wrote:
| I don't think Indian villagers would be thrilled by your dog if
| they had to feed it
| lolcomeon wrote:
| Calm down, internet tough guy.
| [deleted]
| wefarrell wrote:
| This is the most interesting part:
|
| "We've seen that when an individual is attacked in some way, the
| likelihood of them attacking someone related to their aggressor
| is higher," Poindexter told Gizmodo. "Typically there's a
| preference for attacking a third-party associated with the
| original aggressor, as opposed to the actual aggressor...for the
| most part, these acts of 'revenge' take place shortly after the
| attack."
|
| Poindexter also explained that groups of hyenas have been known
| to seek revenge on the aggressor's relatives instead of the
| actual aggressor.
| noisy_boy wrote:
| I mean based on their intelligent behaviour it wouldn't be
| surprising to find out that they feel emotions like love
| towards their offspring (even if not necessarily in the exact
| same way as us) and they know how one feels at the loss of a
| loved one. So by extension, if they want to cause the greatest
| hurt to the opponent, hurting their loved ones would be quite
| effective.
| teawrecks wrote:
| > But when officials attempted to catch the monkeys, they were
| unable to capture a single monkey.
|
| Sounds like they're in cahoots
| sriram_sun wrote:
| A relative who is a recent grad. from IIT Chennai/Madras has lots
| of monkey stories. They rule the dorms. No food in rooms, don't
| make eye contact.
|
| It's not like don't make eye contact if you ever see one. The
| monkeys are sitting on the ledge all the way up on both sides of
| the stairs up to the second or third floor as you walk up to your
| dorm room!
|
| They also "adopted" a stray dog just to chase the monkeys away.
| darkwater wrote:
| Philosophical question, assuming kt's not a fake news: are those
| monkeys "evil"? If they revenge is agains siblings of the
| aggressor or just dogs in general, I would say so. Looks like
| they are intelligent enough to be evil.
| hiptobecubic wrote:
| If you're going to go that far, maybe they are just trying to
| encourage the dogs to self-regulate.
| wly_cdgr wrote:
| To me it sounds more like a straw that broke the camel's back
| moment. They've had enough and they can't take it anymore and
| are lashing out in a madness of grief and rage
| [deleted]
| froderick wrote:
| To begin to answer that you would need to start out by defining
| what you mean by 'intelligent' and 'evil', since both are
| subjective concepts that only exist relative to your
| perspective.
| rp1 wrote:
| Why are they evil? Or at least more evil than humans? Humans
| have eradicated wolves almost everywhere due to the danger they
| pose humans, particularly children. How is this situation
| different? The monkeys are even targeting the very same species
| that humans have long targeted.
| _jal wrote:
| The problem you have here is that your conception of this
| requires the potentially-'evil' to be intelligent - your
| assumption seems to be that these monkeys are smart enough to
| 'know right from wrong' or some such.
|
| But 'evil' is a human concept. I'm not saying some animals
| aren't capable of having a similar concept, but 'monkey evil'
| would not be rooted in the human evolution of societies,
| religious and philosophical traditions, etc.
|
| Try this one out:
|
| Are humans who kill monkeys for science "evil"? Not to (many)
| humans. But to monkeys?
| fidesomnes wrote:
| A terror attack on Christmas parade revelers in Wisconsin is
| what?
| volent wrote:
| > evil > profoundly immoral and wicked.
|
| I think the concept that animal _can_ be moral / immoral is
| already a philosophical subject. See the book "Can Animals Be
| Moral?" for reference.
|
| And in order to say that these monkeys are evil, you must first
| prove that they can be moral.
| tantalor wrote:
| Which is to say they know right from wrong.
|
| I doubt it
|
| "Law of the jungle" and all that
| foxfluff wrote:
| It depends on whether you view evil as something absolute or
| relative.
|
| If evil is absolute, then an animal (or an entire species)
| can be seen as evil by nature. Another species may be seen as
| good or neutral by nature even if the animal itself has no
| sense of right or wrong.
|
| It is indeed very philosophical and also up to your beliefs
| and values.
| resoluteteeth wrote:
| If it's evil for primates to kill 250 dogs after one primate
| infant was killed is it evil for primates to kill 17 million
| minks because they could get a virus and theoretically spread
| that to primates?
| GekkePrutser wrote:
| Take into consideration though that these minks were bred
| specifically to kill them for their skin.
|
| The end outcome was a ban on mink farms which is a pretty
| positive one for animal rights.
|
| I also think the e culling of all those minks was horrible
| but it's not as black and white as that.
| Ansil849 wrote:
| > Take into consideration though that these minks were bred
| specifically to kill them for their skin.
|
| Is that not much more 'evil', to breed something
| specifically to kill it for its skin? If it's not, then why
| is it not allowed to be done by the same species to itself?
| adventured wrote:
| > Is that not much more 'evil', to breed something
| specifically to kill it for its skin?
|
| That depends on what value/s you place on the thing being
| bred for its coat. Pretty much all cultures around the
| world are different, subtly or dramatically, on such
| issues.
|
| > If it's not, then why is it not allowed to be done by
| the same species to itself?
|
| The answer to that is: because the humans judge that the
| minks (and their existence) are not equals in value to
| the humans, rather, they're considered property, to be
| disposed of as the owner sees fit. And obviously that
| aspect (as the owner sees fit) varies by
| location/culture.
|
| Your question - then why is it not allowed to be done by
| the same species to itself? - starts from the incorrect
| premise that values are objective, such as whether a mink
| should or should not be considered property (your premise
| requires starting from the notion that minks have
| protected rights and are equal to humans generally).
| Instead, those values are in fact subjective and will
| vary depending on which culture you're dealing with.
| GekkePrutser wrote:
| Probably yes. I think both are pretty bad. I eat pretty
| much vegetarian for this reason (not entirely because
| here in Spain it's impossible to be totally vegetarian
| especially when you go out for dinner)
| pcthrowaway wrote:
| Curious where in Spain you are. I'm vegan and was looking
| at spending some time in Spain (mainly Granada at one
| point because of low cost of living, location, and
| availability of vegan food). In the bigger cities,
| Happycow shows hundreds of fully vegan and vegetarian
| restaurants.
|
| As of yet I haven't actually been to Spain, but from
| traveling around Europe I did learn that eating vegan can
| (sometimes) be incredibly challenging. In a smaller
| coastal city in Italy I remember one night where the only
| food I could find to eat was a tomato salad (modified by
| removing all the non-vegan ingredients from a salad menu
| item).
|
| But overwhelmingly through my travels I've been able to
| find more options.
| 323 wrote:
| That ban was going to happen anyway, but in 2024.
| 323 wrote:
| Bad example, those minks were going to be killed anyway,
| that's the single reason so many of them were allowed to
| exist in that place to start with.
| qwertyuiop_ wrote:
| They even have a monkey god. May be the legend stems from the
| furious monkeys.
| ipeefreely wrote:
| I'm not sure if monkeys experience revenge the way humans do. As
| one of the comments mentioned in the article, it's probably just
| a survival instinct.
| [deleted]
| option_greek wrote:
| I doubt that. Try shooting an arrow at a crow (obviously not
| killing it) or throw a stone at a group of monkeys the next
| time chance presents it self. Not a good idea. One of my
| childhood nemesis were a group of crows from a tree nearby at
| which I shot an arrow with a home made toy bow (none were even
| hit). Those things harassed me for months before eventually
| forgetting (forgiving?) the incident :)
| itronitron wrote:
| Corvids are interesting, I've definitely been checked out by
| the ones in my neighborhood.
| [deleted]
| rambambram wrote:
| Sounds like a story I once read in a children horror book.
| xwdv wrote:
| It is also possible to make friends with crows. You should
| have brought an offering of roasted nuts, and they would
| likely have made a truce.
| stef25 wrote:
| > throw a stone at a group of monkeys the next time chance
| presents it self
|
| In places like the Monkey Temple in Bali that's exactly how
| you keep them at bay. In our local zoo where you can interact
| with lemurs, they can be chased away with a small water
| spray.
| rmah wrote:
| Perhaps revenge is just a survival instinct that humans
| sometimes try to suppress through "logic".
| steego wrote:
| How would humans experience revenge differently? What makes you
| think revenge isn't an instinct in humans?
|
| I recall reading (the book escapes me), that just about all
| animals employ a Tit-for-Tat mechanism for dealing with other
| animals of the same species that cheat.
|
| Revenge is a very useful social tool, especially against other
| species threatening their offspring.
| jimmyed wrote:
| Dawkin's The ancestors tale?
| adventured wrote:
| > What makes you think revenge isn't an instinct in humans?
|
| An instinct is something you have no choice over, it's
| automatic.
|
| Humans very clearly have a choice as to whether they pursue
| revenge or not. If someone wrongs me in a given way, I can
| choose how to respond, or to not respond at all; and I can
| spend as much time as I like (decades if I choose to)
| pondering on that. It's doubtful these monkeys function quite
| at that level.
|
| It's unknown whether, for example, these monkeys have any
| choice in the matter. Their programming may be purely
| instinctual when it comes to a revenge response.
| Amezarak wrote:
| > An instinct is something you have no choice over, it's
| automatic.
|
| I think this is a common but entirely wrong model, and I'm
| not sure why people hold it.
|
| Do you think humans have no instincts? I would argue
| exactly the opposite, humans, like all animals, are driven
| almost entirely by instinct, whether it's prosocial
| instincts causing you to have a moral code much like those
| around you, inspiring guilt and shame when you break it, or
| causing you to feel a need to talk to people and comment on
| Internet stories, reproductive instincts driving you to
| seek a mate, or survival instincts to ensure a regular food
| supply.
|
| I think it works exactly the same way in all animals. They
| are equally capable of making choices, because choice is a
| preconscious thing, not something that occurs as a result
| of careful, reasoned intellect. Obviously, humans are
| _capable_ of making more informed choices, but "reason" is
| mostly a post-hoc rationalization engine.
| mardifoufs wrote:
| My great grand uncle is known in my mother's family side for
| getting killed by a camel that he mistreated years earlier. He
| apparently was usually very gentle with his camel herd but at
| some point that particular male didn't want to move so he hit
| him with a cane, and _years_ later when he was working behind
| that male again he just got stomped to death.
|
| I'm sure the story has been "embellished" a bit though and
| there's probably tons of confounding factor but I've heard a
| lot of similar stories about camels and their famous penchant
| for revenge :).
| truculent wrote:
| Why do you say "probably"? Do we have any evidence on which to
| base our presumptions of the inner experiences of monkeys?
| t-3 wrote:
| The extremely similar brain structure of all mammals?
| nashashmi wrote:
| Most animals are capable of revenge. Story: A family in
| Palestine were doing a routine cleaning of the house. They had
| a snake nest in the house and it was no pet snake. So to clean
| better they put the nest and eggs in a different corner.
|
| The snake came back looking for the nest and could not find it.
| It looked around with no luck. It went to the family water vase
| (because there was no piped water supply) and spit inside. The
| mother saw this and told the other to put the nest back.
|
| The snake saw the nest, went immediately back to the vase,
| coiled it and flipped the water over over to empty it.
|
| It had spit poison in the supply to hurt the family for revenge
| of its nest. And then sought to undo that act.
| bckr wrote:
| That's an interesting story, albeit one that sounds like a
| good fairy tale. Any source for this?
| Gunax wrote:
| While normally people differentiate 'venom' from 'poison'
| to be pedantic, I don't think snake venom is particularly
| harmful if ingested.
| stef25 wrote:
| I'd be surprised if snakes have the capacity for that kind of
| reasoning.
| drclau wrote:
| If you are in doubt about this being revenge, because you think
| revenge is exclusively a human behavior, then have a look at the
| Gombe Chimpanzee War [0].
|
| [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gombe_Chimpanzee_War
| xeromal wrote:
| Thanks for sharing this. What a read though I wish it had more
| details!
| JadeNB wrote:
| It looks like the Morris book "War! What is it good for?"
| referenced at the end might have more details.
| tim333 wrote:
| The book https://www.amazon.co.uk/Demonic-Males-Origins-
| Human-Violenc... has more info.
| snek_case wrote:
| People have this funny idea that war is a human invention and
| that nature would be peaceful and quiet without us.
|
| But it turns out ants and termites have been at it for probably
| over 100 million years:
| https://www.wearethemighty.com/articles/why-ants-and-termite...
| skyfaller wrote:
| Thanks for suggesting an interesting research topic!
|
| I found this article comparing how ants and humans wage war
| to be more insightful :
| https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/when-it-
| comes-...
| juanani wrote:
| I think that some people have noticed that greater progress
| is made through cooperation which is why they gape their
| mouths when the people running the war machine buy an extra
| yacht for their great grandkids.
| gherkinnn wrote:
| The only difference is that we're capable of industrialising
| that effort.
|
| Thinking otherwise is a mere extension of the Noble Savage.
| oblio wrote:
| https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=cqECNYmM23A
| enaaem wrote:
| There is also an otter war in Singapore
|
| https://mothership.sg/2020/03/bishan-marina-otters-fight/
| arcticfox wrote:
| Well that's super interesting.
|
| I'm wondering, what does the article mean by the 3 enslaved at
| the end? I'm not sure what that would mean in the context of
| chimps
| cm2012 wrote:
| The female apes were forcibly taken as new mates in the
| tribe.
| jessaustin wrote:
| Chimpanzees are more closely related to humans than they are to
| monkeys.
| bopbeepboop wrote:
| Humans are monkeys: there's no way to draw "monkey" that
| doesn't include "ape" in its clade.
|
| But yes -- chimps (and bonobos) are our closest relatives.
|
| https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hominidae#/media/File%3AHomi.
| ..
| zuminator wrote:
| I am still in doubt about this being revenge. I'm not
| necessarily saying it isn't, but doesn't _culling the dogs as a
| means of pest control_ also fit the hypothesis? I mean, if a
| baby in a human town was bit by a rat, we humans would react by
| trying to eradicate the local rat population. You could call
| that revenge I guess, but normally we wouldn 't ascribe such a
| passionate motive to our behavior, we would say it was logical
| to eliminate a source of danger.
| victornomad wrote:
| Once I was walking in the street in the north of India and
| sudenly I was surrounded by a pack of dogs and monkeys, they
| started to fight, with me in the middle... a dog was nervous and
| bit me as well. I went straight to the hospital to get the
| rabbies vaccine... apart from that I have very fond memories of
| India!
| cynusx wrote:
| I remember from a visit in Kenya that the way they control
| monkeys was to keep shooting the alpha until eventually their
| next leader forces the group to retreat and leave the human
| settlements alone.
| jimmyed wrote:
| Wonder how many times this has been done with humans throughout
| history
| tejtm wrote:
| It appears to contribute to our decreasing brain size for the
| last 17k years.
| Wiseacre wrote:
| The assassinations in the 60s serve as examples.
| rjsw wrote:
| Probably taught in the first week at the School of the
| Americas [1].
|
| [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Western_Hemisphere_Institut
| e_f...
| jdavis703 wrote:
| When America was trying to install a "democratic" government
| in Iraq there were a series of assassinations. In that case
| however the situation eventually stabilized.
|
| So that strategy is only as good as your opponents will. And
| it turns out there's a lot of men who are willing to throw
| away their life in the hope of the power, money and prestige
| of being the top boss.
| polishdude20 wrote:
| I wouldnt be so quick to say they're throwing their life
| away. Imagine being in a group with a tyrannical boss.
| Installing yourself as the boss may actually help save your
| life and ensure a future for you and your community/tribe.
| cgriswald wrote:
| Regardless, I wonder if _there 's a lot of men_ is the
| key factor here. Even if a reasonable fraction of a
| percent of the population isn't deterred by previous
| assassinations for a population in the millions, that's
| still a lot of replacements. The replacement rate of that
| subset of the population is almost certainly higher than
| the assassination rate.
| dukeofdoom wrote:
| Baboons have been know to kidnapping puppies too. They live with
| the troop and offer protection as warning/guard dogs.
|
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U2lSZPTa3ho
| technothrasher wrote:
| A professional baboon researcher disagrees with the conclusions
| of that youtube clip:
|
| https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/animals-and-us/20150...
| csomar wrote:
| Wow. It might be possible that our relation/domestication of
| dogs started well before we become sapiens. Because, why would
| the baboons pick a dog and not a tiger.
| IYasha wrote:
| Don't know why people are so reluctant to admit animals are
| highly developed intellectualy. The cocncept of revenge is
| usually just denied, despite common observations. Wild animals,
| mostly, of course. Ask farmers - they'll have one or two stories
| of crows taking revenge. Even on humans.
| DangitBobby wrote:
| The people commenting on the Newsweek page were saying exactly
| this, that there was a simpler instinctual mechanism to
| describe the monkey's behavior. Who knows why.
| gswdh wrote:
| This is a gem for Karl Pilkington, true monkey news!
| sergiotapia wrote:
| >Villagers reported that now there are barely any dogs left in
| the area but that the monkeys have not stopped even after a month
| of attacks. Now, villagers reported that the monkeys are
| targeting small children which has created a panic within the
| village.
|
| That's when you start shooting these monkeys on sight. Cull their
| numbers a bit. I've been bitten by a monkey as a child and it
| sucked. I hope the village starts splitting their wigs. Do they
| have guns?
| ilamont wrote:
| In Singapore last week, an older man was taking a morning walk in
| a park and spotted a pack of otters on the path ahead of him. At
| the same time, a jogger ran through the pack and startled them
| (some reports said trampled one of the pups). The reaction of the
| pack was to attack the nearest human - the older man:
|
| _As the runner ran past Spencer and disappeared into the
| distance, the otters instead set their sights on Spencer and
| "went crazy".
|
| "I didn't move quick enough and they just jumped me and they
| [were] on me and severely bit my ankle, made me buckle, and they
| jumped on my bottom and pushed me. And these things like...
| massive... [these] things [are] like dogs."
|
| Spencer said that the otters even tried to bite his face, but
| their teeth sank into his finger instead when he raised his hands
| to defend himself._
|
| https://mothership.sg/2021/12/otters-bite-man-botanic-garden...
| (Warning - graphic)
| peanut_worm wrote:
| Otters are relatives of weasels and badgers and like their
| relatives they are very aggressive.
| lgvln wrote:
| I believe they are aggressive only to the extent of defending
| their territory or defending their pups.
|
| In fact, all carnivorous animals can be aggressive. They are
| not aggressive like how a lion or tiger is to humans. Their
| main diet consist of fish, invertebrate and shellfish.
| borski wrote:
| Having dived with pacific otters, they are just plain
| aggressive. They seemed to genuinely just enjoy being mean.
|
| Sea lions, on the other hand, are super pleasant and
| playful.
| lgvln wrote:
| Sea otters are known to be more aggressive than river
| otters but I do not think they view humans as preys. It
| is probably a territorial or mating reason in your case.
|
| I have read different reports of what the OP mentioned.
| The official statement by the park is that he (as
| reported to them by himself) ran through the pack of
| otters because of poor visibility (early morning) and
| tried to get them to do something about the otters. That
| is quite different from what the OP claims.
| lgvln wrote:
| FYI, he ran into the path of a pack of otters during his
| morning run and that is the reason why he was "attacked". It is
| very possible he stepped onto an otter while doing that too,
| which would explain their behaviour.
|
| What is interesting is he lawyered up, fabricated a fantastical
| story and somehow got the attention of Western media, all to
| seek compensation from the park. (And how many people believed
| him)
|
| Play stupid games, win stupid prizes. Think twice about running
| head-on into a pack of animals regardless of their size.
| lgvln wrote:
| My comment is getting downvoted but I still stand by my
| opinion that otters are not inherently aggressive like how a
| lion or tiger is.
|
| Extra care should be taken when dealing with wild animals,
| even if they look small and adorable. Running into a pack of
| wild animals is not something anyone should do.
| FlyingSnake wrote:
| I grew up and studied in a University town in Central India, not
| far from Majalgaon FTA. I've personally witnessed the rivalry of
| the monkeys and the pariah dogs. In one particular instance a
| youngish dog was chasing the monkeys and wouldn't let them get on
| the ground. The leader of the monkey gang made a sudden move,
| swooped down and carried the dog pup on the tree and just dropped
| it from there. The pup survived and the dogs never tried to
| attack the monkeys after that instance. It was such a surreal
| scene that me an my friends couldn't believe what we witnessed.
| Monkeys, esp Langoor monkeys are a fearsome force in India and
| not to be messed with.
| [deleted]
| riazrizvi wrote:
| Someone could crowdsource a documentary and launch their career
| with the money it would raise...
| Rebelgecko wrote:
| I've been reading Mary Roach's new book (Fuzz) that has an
| interesting chapter on monkeys in India. Because macaques are
| afraid of langurs, some people would tie up langurs outside
| their houses for security. This was eventually deemed
| inhumane but it probably still happens in wealthy enclaves.
| Nowadays the Parliament building is protected by 40 humans
| who imitate langurs.
| frontman1988 wrote:
| https://youtu.be/nEjkibv6KFQ
|
| Natgeo already has a full season on Monkey thieves.
| [deleted]
| spaetzleesser wrote:
| I remember when I travelled in India there was a bus stop where
| monkeys had specialized on stealing food from women. They would
| leave men alone and only go after women's backpacks. They were
| also really good at unscrewing the caps of water bottles.
| unmole wrote:
| > Langoor monkeys are a fearsome force in India and not to be
| messed with.
|
| I thought langoors were more friendly towards humans compared
| to macaques?
| whatevertrevor wrote:
| Yeah I don't think the GP is correct, langoors are more
| passive and mostly mind their own business (at least in North
| India). Macaques are a menace everywhere.
| nomoreusernames wrote:
| indian kids throw rocks on dogs and monkeys when walking home
| from school to let off steam. i've personally seen a dog go
| after the kids for it. same with monkeys
| FlyingSnake wrote:
| As a general rule, animals never attack first. When humans
| encroach the traditional lands of the animals there are
| conflicts waiting to happen. Monkeys are smart and usually
| don't bother humans, unless it's a matter of food or threat
| to their group.
|
| Edit: I'm surprised at the downvotes, isn't human-wildlife
| conflict in Indian forests well documented?
| bongoman37 wrote:
| This is some nature is benign nonsense. Plenty of animals
| will attack humans without provocation. E.g., mosquitoes
| are animals. More seriously, stray dogs etc. attack
| children quite regularly in India. Man eating tigers etc
| are documented to track down and hunt humans.
| Retric wrote:
| As a general rule that's true but useless. Humans are
| relatively large animals that most creatures don't want to
| mess with. But a hippo for example isn't discouraged by
| this.
|
| Also the deadliest North American wildlife is the deer
| almost entirely because they're jumping in front of cars.
| hulitu wrote:
| As a general rule stray dogs and wolfs in packs will
| attack humans.
| technothrasher wrote:
| > Also the deadliest North American wildlife is the deer
|
| Actually, the deadliest North American wildlife is the
| mosquito.
| the_only_law wrote:
| Are they particularly deadly in NA? I'm not downplaying
| the disease spread by mosquitoes, but I would have
| imagined that they're significantly deadlier in less
| developed continents and that then acesss and quality of
| healthcare would make them less so in North America.
| selectodude wrote:
| Depends on what you consider North America. Mexico down
| to Panama still have significant mosquito-borne illness
| and none of the access and quality of healthcare we enjoy
| in US/CA.
| Retric wrote:
| Mexico with a population of 130 Million only had 641
| cases of Malaria in 2019, it's not at great risk from
| mosquito-born illness. Central American countries are at
| a significantly higher risk, Panama for example has 4.4
| million people and had 1,597 cases of malaria in 2019.
| Other diseases show similar trends.
|
| Still in terms of total deaths from Mosquito born illness
| it's likely lower than most assume.
| Retric wrote:
| Personally, I consider Mexico, Canada, and most of
| America as North America with the Caribbean, and Central
| America being separated.
|
| I wouldn't call Malaria etc wildlife, mosquito's on their
| own are harmless.
| fundad wrote:
| They big mad if you say humans are killers. The monkeys
| would do that to any species once threatened.
| PicassoCTs wrote:
| At least one animal does. Homo sapiens. We are not separate
| from nature, we are just a extreme of nature.
| formerly_proven wrote:
| Most humans actually don't run around attacking stuff.
| EamonnMR wrote:
| More generally, all predators do. We aren't the
| relentless killing machines that cats are though.
| frosted-flakes wrote:
| That's one interpretation of the word "animal". The use
| above clearly meant non-human animals.
| tgsovlerkhgsel wrote:
| I would expect most animals that still exist to at the very
| least not be a major threat to humans - because if they are,
| they tend to cease to exist.
| pizza wrote:
| This world of ours has a tendency to evade equilibria
| rg111 wrote:
| These monkeys are not fatally dangerous if that's what GP
| is saying.
|
| But they cause heavy and serious nuisance.
|
| Where I live, these monkeys _invade_ gradens, agricultural
| fields, house rooftops at least 4-5 times a month.
|
| The locals drop anything they do, and chase away these
| monkeys.
|
| When chased by an adult male human, these monkeys don't
| fight back and are easily frightened. They don't mess with
| adult males or groups of humans.
|
| A kid or a lone woman is not safe, though. When faced by
| them, monkeys gesture retaliation, and that is enough
| frightening.
|
| An adult male cannot physically take on a monkey. It is
| impossible. Still they don't attack.
|
| They steal bananas, mangos, guavas- all kinds of fruits,
| any food item not indoors, and destroy flowers and plants.
|
| Thus, for families depending on these as their source of
| income have to always remain vigilant to monkey invasions.
| Common methods include- stone being thrown directly at them
| intending full harm, pebbles thrown by slingshots, and
| firecrackers. Banging metal objects loudly also seems to
| help.
|
| We have mango groves that we lend on a yearly basis. The
| people who lease them from us establish outposts during the
| mango season which are always manned by at least one man
| with ready reinforcement in case of monkey invasion.
|
| For those families not depending financially on tree
| products are also harmed. They make growing flowering
| plants difficult. They steal food from outdoors, and not to
| mention the awfully smelling solid and liquid excretion
| they leave on your rooftops.
|
| (All rooftops are flat in the plains region, and they are
| important in our lives.)
|
| By the way, I lost one pomelo ( _Citrus maxima_ ) to a
| bunch of monkeys this very afternoon.
| cute_boi wrote:
| I understand but aren't we to be blame for this? We took
| their home, we took their shelter and what can they do?
| And they don't have enough wisdom to know who they should
| harm and who they shouldn't.
|
| And many of monkey i know here are too friendly but yea
| after they starts to live with humans they learn to
| hoodwink people because many thieves are known to use
| monkey to snatch valuables from tourist by providing
| bananas as incentives to them.
| throwaway2331 wrote:
| > An adult male cannot physically take on a monkey. It is
| impossible. Still they don't attack.
|
| Are you positive?
|
| A chimpanzee: yes. A guerilla: indubitable. But a monkey?
|
| They seem like medium-sized dogs, that can move around
| quicker and more freely. They'll bite out your flesh, and
| perhaps maim you to a semi-serious degree (including
| infection), but I cannot fathom a _monkey_ seriously
| killing a grown adult male human being.
|
| These are 20-40lb, very aggressive racoons. If you shock
| them with anything, they're most likely going to flee for
| fear of serious injury.
| polotics wrote:
| A Macaque, maybe 15 kg in weight, has the aggression
| claws and muscle to take on any non-beefy human and win,
| not doubt about that.
| vijaybritto wrote:
| > But a monkey?
|
| Oh boy never test this out. They will attack violently
| and will not spare you. If they have enough numbers or
| have the pack leader(usually the one with the biggest
| balls) close by then they will retaliate. I'm from south
| India and I have seen a lot of grown up men get roughed
| up by monkeys
| 2-718-281-828 wrote:
| "roughed up" sounds like getting a beating. but I'd
| assume they rip your face off and stuff. care to
| elaborate?
| olalonde wrote:
| As a side note, I've read that polar bears are one of the
| most fearless animal towards humans because they had so
| little interactions with us.
| unmole wrote:
| Depends on your definition of _major_. Mosquitoes still
| exist despite nearly a million people dying from the
| diseases they transmit each yaar.
|
| Stray dogs in India are responsible for tens of thousands
| rabies deaths annually. Yet it's illegal to cull them.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2021-12-18 23:01 UTC)