"Osuna's bullring: Why Game of Thrones shouldn't film there"

[Beric175]

Doesn't matter.The claim was that no matter what the intention (because D&D could well be against bullfighting or not have considered it as a factor in their decision-making to film there) people WILL go to a place because it is being filmed and that therefore D&D HAVE to change locations. And that is evidently false, as you and I well know.

The mayor and any other person can expect what they want from this, it doesn't mean that it's going to come true. Laboring under at best an unsubstantiated assumption that filming there will definitely lead to more people watching bullfighting in Osuna, which can only be assessed once everything is over and done, is a bit shortsighted in my opinion. At best, what will happen is that more people will use Spanish locations for American tv shows, just as GOT filming in Ireland has increased people filming in Ireland overall, not in the specific places in Ireland the show itself used. You can try to prevent a lot of things beforehand out of fear that something you don't like will happen but sometimes it turns out that this fear is unsubstantiated and just someone claiming that more people will visit in wishful thinkig to make money on the backs of killed animals does not change the fact that it is wishful thinking at the present stage.

[kn1tt3r]

I don't actually expect the decision to film there to have a huge impact on the acception for bullfighting. Sure, probably there will be some more poeple visiting this place and therefore support this specific bullring, but on the whole it won't change a lot. It's not like it will save the Osuna arena from closing or whatever - it will basically be how it's ever been, maybe with a bit more attention and money. I don't think either that this decision will be some great implicit statement to the world about bluffighting that should not have been made, because like 99% won't even get it. Also, I think even IF many people visit the bullring due to the show, it's ultimately not necessarily good promotion to present a problematic institution to a bigger audience (i.e. to people, like from the US, who haven't even thought about what bullfighting is and does).

However, I still think it's just a poor decision on HBO's part. Not really because it will have undesirable implications (doesn't even have to be true, see above), but because it COULD have, and most and foremost exactly because of petitions like this one here. I mean, this one here is harmless, but radical or even just "active" activists can really shut down a production and lead to way more costs than those they might have saved with this deal. It just an unnessesary risk they are taking.

[Darryk]

I don't like it and I wish they'd use somewhere else.

A place that hosts such cruelty shouldn't be promoted in any positive way.

[Darryk]

The world is full of liberal loons !!

If only it was.

I'm not championing animal cruelty but bull fighting as been part of there culture for centuries.

A brutal and barbaric part of their culture.

Maybe I would do something later with this very important matter, but there is war in my country, so I'm a bit distracted right now. Does anyone know if PETA can help stop the war or are they interested only in animals? Who knows, there may be some cows or sheep near the battlefield.

They can't stop the war because they're an animal rights organization, not the UN peacekeepers. (not that the latter would have much success either)

[Hodor's Dragon]

The world is full of liberal loons !!

And her is a nuclear explosion gif for you!

[LordStoneheart]

I feel like I'm opening a can of worms by saying this but I find the "it's their culture, leave them alone!" excuse weak . A culture can have bad elements that are not above outside criticism. From the extremes like reported human sacrifice of the mesoamerican cultures to scalping to enemy cannibalism, snake charming, and numerous other things, none of this should be considered off-limits to disagreement.

[Beric175]

I would agree with LordStoeheart but disagreementis the key word here, as it implies a multiplicity of opinions that can each have a valid point. Actually, being a cultural relativist, I would say that as a cultural outsider I am not in a good position to judge local Spanish traditions and I'd rather ask a large number of Spanish people why they or people they know consider it important enough to their culture to have kept it around for so long. Understanding is the main issue here but some people would draw the line even before that because it would imply that the other person might have a valid point to make in favour of the abhorrent practices.

I will go with an extreme and very emotionally charged example to demonstrate the value of cultural relativism: female circumcision. Even with the most extreme cultural practices, like female circumcision, you find examples of local groups and cultures that have reasons that are valid to them as to why they practice it. The Kono women in Sierra Leone practice not just female but also male circumcision and so one would be hard pressed to find female circumcision to be an indication of a chauvinist tradition bent agianst women in a discriminatory way. The Kono women say it is a rather empowering tool that helps thei psychological, social and spiritual well-being and is not administered as a sign of discrimination against women. People in Europe or the US might find it repugnant and/or objectionable but it is something that the local groups know more about in their own cultural contexts and to say otherwise is a bit arrogant, given that it would presuppose that the local people are primitive or stupid and hence don't recognize it for what we deem to be a disciminatory practice. Another example are the Okiek in Kenya that speak of circumcision in terms of cleanliness, beauty, rites of passage to adulthood, etc. and both men and women consider it essential to the idea of Okiek personhood. Now, to others it might seem repulsive but they do not necessarily have a say in these matters because of national cultural soveriegnty if the local population accepts it and to say that they accept it because they don't know better is to judge other values, standards, and ultimately cultures by a standard that is foreign to, or different from, the locals' anyway. So there is room for disagreement because not even this issue appears to be black and white unless one party to the debate wants it to be.

Cultural relativists do not judge because that would mean that they knew the local culture better than the locals, which is nonsense but thay want to observe and understand the rationale and reasoning behind certain cultural choices, not impose their own standards. Applied anthropology is meant to empower local groups to make their voices heard but not more than that and the pretension that we should change other people's practices because they offend us or because they differ from the Western idea of what a society should look like and because we don't understand them or their society has imperialist undertones that I don't like. Of course, in case of bullfighting the argument is that animals suffer needlessly but then again, so do the animals whose meat and other products we eat in some cases.

If one wants to be a true anthropologist and look at things objectively, then cultural relativism is a given and the same could hence be applied to bullfighting.

[Le Cygne]

That's an absurd comparison. Try some facts:

http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs241/en/

And no, they shouldn't shoot the scene at the bullring.

[sj4iy]

Simple solution for all:

If you have a problem with it, don't watch the show or buy the products.

That's your form of protest...not complaining about it endlessly on a message board. Cutting into the bottom line is what changes producers' minds- not internet protests.

Personally, I will watch the show as I did before. The show uses real fur and real animal carcasses. I would feel like a hypocrite if I suddenly said "I can't watch this now that they are filming in a bullring!" But if you don't want to support the show filming there, then don't.

[Beric175]

@Le Cygne: I've written two essays on FGM so I know that WHO page well enough, thank you. You didn't get my point.

[Le Cygne]

Cruelty is wrong. Whether it's cruelty to women or animals, it's wrong.

Also no one asked for advice for how to address issues of concern. People can object as they choose.

Here's some more information to offset what this person said, this isn't the thread topic, so I'll leave it at that.

http://www.theguardian.com/end-fgm

[cxvb]

Also no one asked for advice for how to address issues of concern. People can object as they choose.

It's by turns fine to mock them for choosing poorly, right?

[Le Cygne]

It's fine to disagree with someone, if that's what you are asking.

[PatrickStormborn]

The cultural relativism issue is realllllly not appropriate, considering the storyline we're discussing. Dany literally conquered three cities because she was so appalled by their culture, and her anger at the bloodsport in Daznak's Pit draws Drogon back to her. The scene filmed in the pit actively contradicts any cultural relativism argument, because Dany eventually comes to the conclusion that she should never have compromised on her values by allowing the fighting pits to reopen.

But lol why would D&D care about the story they claim to love when they can make a bit more money.

Simple solution for all:

If you have a problem with it, don't watch the show or buy the products.

That's your form of protest...not complaining about it endlessly on a message board. Cutting into the bottom line is what changes producers' minds- not internet protests.

Personally, I will watch the show as I did before. The show uses real fur and real animal carcasses. I would feel like a hypocrite if I suddenly said "I can't watch this now that they are filming in a bullring!" But if you don't want to support the show filming there, then don't.

LOL this is absolutely untrue and you know it. Protesting IS the way to make our voices heard and has been throughout history. Please don't make ridiculous statements like that. What you're saying is that YOU don't want to be confronted with the truth of the production. In that case, YOU can choose NOT to read our objections.

Unless anyone here has a HBO subscription, we're not going to "[cut] into the bottom line" by not watching the show or buying products.

[sj4iy]

The cultural relativism issue is realllllly not appropriate, considering the storyline we're discussing. Dany literally conquered three cities because she was so appalled by their culture, and her anger at the bloodsport in Daznak's Pit draws Drogon back to her. The scene filmed in the pit actively contradicts any cultural relativism argument, because Dany eventually comes to the conclusion that she should never have compromised on her values by allowing the fighting pits to reopen.

But lol why would D&D care about the story they claim to love when they can make a bit more money.

LOL this is absolutely untrue and you know it. Protesting IS the way to make our voices heard and has been throughout history. Please don't make ridiculous statements like that. What you're saying is that YOU don't want to be confronted with the truth of the production. In that case, YOU can choose NOT to read our objections.

Unless anyone here has a HBO subscription, we're not going to "[cut] into the bottom line" by not watching the show or buying products.

No, it doesn't. All the "internet protesting" accomplishes for a tv show is to gain it publicity. Look at Duck Dynasty, Jon and Kate plus 8, etc. Do something controversial and ratings shoot up. It's the Streisand effect.

[Ingelheim]

No, it doesn't. All the "internet protesting" accomplishes for a tv show is to gain it publicity. Look at Duck Dynasty, Jon and Kate plus 8, etc. Do something controversial and ratings shoot up. It's the Streisand effect.

Jennifer Lawrence for example was never more mentioned on the Internet than the last two weeks.

[PatrickStormborn]

No, it doesn't. All the "internet protesting" accomplishes for a tv show is to gain it publicity. Look at Duck Dynasty, Jon and Kate plus 8, etc. Do something controversial and ratings shoot up. It's the Streisand effect.

Animal rights is a very different issue - look at HBO's Luck.

Not to mention, the show is still 7 months away from returning, so there's no risk of any current controversy increasing ratings...

[Le Cygne]

And of course, people are going say what they want to say, not stay quiet because of some marketing strategy.

[myhalfgroat]

i just wanted to say that there is a factory in my hometown that contributes to its parent company pumping out an average of 114,300 processed hogs every day. it's called John Morrell's. i've been to the slaughterhouse and the only conditions that are more deplorable than the working conditions for the numerous legal and illegal immigrants, are the "housing" conditions of the animals. to me it seems like a far more important use of free-time to work towards getting these conditions improved for humans and animals than to argue over the 1,139 corridas that take place annually in Andalucia.

[Ran]

I take it that you are, therefore, absolutely in agreement that the torture of bulls for entertainment is wrong. That's good to know.

It's also good that people can pay attention to more than one topic at a time.