What do you think?
Rate this book
No Animals Were Harmed: The Controversial Line Between Entertainment And Abuse
Investigative journalist Peter Laufer is back with his third book in a trilogy that explores the way we humans interact with animals. The attack of a trainer at Sea World by a killer whale in February 2010 is the catalyst for this examination of the controversial role animals have played in the human arenas of entertainment and sports.
From the Romans throwing Christians to lions to cock-fighting in present-day California, from abusive Mexican circuses to the thrills of a Hungarian counterpart, from dog training to shooting strays in the Baghdad streets, Laufer looks at the ways people have used animals for their pleasure. The reader travels with Laufer as he encounters fascinating people and places, and as he ponders the ethical questions that arise from his quest.
From the Romans throwing Christians to lions to cock-fighting in present-day California, from abusive Mexican circuses to the thrills of a Hungarian counterpart, from dog training to shooting strays in the Baghdad streets, Laufer looks at the ways people have used animals for their pleasure. The reader travels with Laufer as he encounters fascinating people and places, and as he ponders the ethical questions that arise from his quest.
- GenresNonfictionAnimalsHistory
272 pages, Hardcover
First published January 1, 2011
2 people are currently reading
114 people want to read
About the author
Peter Laufer
46 books39 followersPeter Laufer, Ph.D., is the author of more than a dozen books that deal with social and political issues, including "Mission Rejected: U.S. Soldiers Who Say No to Iraq," "Wetback Nation: The Case for Opening the Mexican-American Border," and "Iron Curtain Rising: A Personal Journey through the Changing Landscape of Eastern Eurpoe." He is the coanchor of "The Peter Laufer Show" on radio station Green 960 in San Francisco. More about his books, documentary films, broadcasts, which have won the George Polk, Robert F. Kennedy, Edward R. Murrow, and other awards, can be found at peterlaufer.com. He lives in Bodega Bay, California.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 9 of 9 reviews
April 27, 2015
I appreciate the author's genuine honesty and curiosity in exploring the question: when does the use of animals become the abuse of animals? Not exactly a comprehensive look at the way human society uses animals, but kind of a random, let's-see-where-this-takes-us approach that's a little frustrating if you're looking for a strong position or linear argument. Otherwise it's enjoyable and interesting. The author shows a lot of compassion for humans and other animals, and asks some very good questions.
Ultimately, I got frustrated at the inadequate representation of an animal rights position (i.e., that no use of another being is acceptable). Perhaps it's the selection of material, perhaps the inarticulation of the author's sources, or maybe he just didn't probe far enough, but I felt like there were some simple answers to the rhetorical questions he asks in the text that could have been answered by his interviewees. E.g., how can an animal rights activist condone killing a bear that attacks you? Pretty simple: the principle of self-defense holds across species as well, just as a bear should be able to kill a human that attacked her. Animal rights doesn't imply or require utter passivity and nonviolence in any and all cases (although in some philosophies they go hand-in-hand), just the equal weighting of human and non-human interests in 1) living, 2) enjoying our lives, and 3) controlling our own bodies and what happens to them.
No doubt my exact opposites reading this book would feel that the counter position -- that animals exist for human use and we should stop penalizing people for so-called animal abuse -- is not adequately represented either. The author doesn't come to any conclusion (did you expect him to?) but the last chapter has some weak moralizing about how humans are pretty abusive to one another, too, so...I guess...let's all just be nicer. It's as if one would end a book about child abuse with a hopeless sigh and concession that, well, adults abuse other adults too. Kind of lame, Mr. Laufer. Kind of lame. Also lame: subtle (and not so subtle) condemnation of animal activists who propose direct action (in this book, anything from setting fire to an empty building, to simply removing cows from a dairy farm).
Ultimately, I got frustrated at the inadequate representation of an animal rights position (i.e., that no use of another being is acceptable). Perhaps it's the selection of material, perhaps the inarticulation of the author's sources, or maybe he just didn't probe far enough, but I felt like there were some simple answers to the rhetorical questions he asks in the text that could have been answered by his interviewees. E.g., how can an animal rights activist condone killing a bear that attacks you? Pretty simple: the principle of self-defense holds across species as well, just as a bear should be able to kill a human that attacked her. Animal rights doesn't imply or require utter passivity and nonviolence in any and all cases (although in some philosophies they go hand-in-hand), just the equal weighting of human and non-human interests in 1) living, 2) enjoying our lives, and 3) controlling our own bodies and what happens to them.
No doubt my exact opposites reading this book would feel that the counter position -- that animals exist for human use and we should stop penalizing people for so-called animal abuse -- is not adequately represented either. The author doesn't come to any conclusion (did you expect him to?) but the last chapter has some weak moralizing about how humans are pretty abusive to one another, too, so...I guess...let's all just be nicer. It's as if one would end a book about child abuse with a hopeless sigh and concession that, well, adults abuse other adults too. Kind of lame, Mr. Laufer. Kind of lame. Also lame: subtle (and not so subtle) condemnation of animal activists who propose direct action (in this book, anything from setting fire to an empty building, to simply removing cows from a dairy farm).
April 10, 2017
Why why why why are you eating fish at the end of the book?!?! GRRR. I appreciated all the research he did, and I learned a lot from that, but his stance on the subject is both wishy-washy and frustrating. And I thought this was supposed to be about animals in entertainment, but we ended up spending a lot of time on food and clothing and animal testing as well? very random, and again, frustrating.
November 14, 2011
This book has the feel of a conversation with friends about the relationship between animals and man. The tone is civil even when Laufer is interviewing people with strong opinions. I think the draw of the book is eavesdropping on conversations with people you would never ordinarily talk with -- a heavily tattooed animal rights arsonist, a Cajun cock fighter, a woman dedicated to rescuing swans...
Laufer is not a disinterested observer or the passionate advocate. He describes his own eating habits. Over 30 years he's practiced as vegetarian, vegan, vegan with fish OK if you caught it yourself, with occasional variations on special occasions. Obviously he takes the questions he's raised seriously.
Reading this book can be a useful way of sorting through the conflicting emotions and values most of us have around animals. While I eat less meat than the average American, I've never been a vegetarian. Nearly 40 years ago I decided it wouldn't be right to eat meat unless I was willing to participate in killing the animal. Fishing, crabbing, and collecting eggs from your own chickens is easy. Killing farm animals is kind of hard, but after raising sheep and chickens for meat, I passed my own test. Maybe it is a cop-out not to limit myself to meat that I know was raised humanely, but I haven't made it that far yet.
Laufer is not a disinterested observer or the passionate advocate. He describes his own eating habits. Over 30 years he's practiced as vegetarian, vegan, vegan with fish OK if you caught it yourself, with occasional variations on special occasions. Obviously he takes the questions he's raised seriously.
Reading this book can be a useful way of sorting through the conflicting emotions and values most of us have around animals. While I eat less meat than the average American, I've never been a vegetarian. Nearly 40 years ago I decided it wouldn't be right to eat meat unless I was willing to participate in killing the animal. Fishing, crabbing, and collecting eggs from your own chickens is easy. Killing farm animals is kind of hard, but after raising sheep and chickens for meat, I passed my own test. Maybe it is a cop-out not to limit myself to meat that I know was raised humanely, but I haven't made it that far yet.
January 16, 2012
As a former English teacher, I was distracted by the apparent lack of thesis in this book. The author doesn't really take a stand on what constitutes animal abuse and indeed, keeps changing his mind. I guess the main idea is that it is up to individuals to decide what is abusive.
As a former employee of the American Humane Association, I was distracted by the title, which is a trademark and program of the Association, not just a public domain phrase. The author interviews one of my former colleagues and mentions the Association in this book, but still does not seem to know about the organization's work protecting animals in the entertainment business. I had thought, based on the subtitle, that I would find some comment on animals in the movies.
I found this book episodic and anecdotal. It must have been organized chronologically, but it seemed to jump back and forth between subjects.
As a former employee of the American Humane Association, I was distracted by the title, which is a trademark and program of the Association, not just a public domain phrase. The author interviews one of my former colleagues and mentions the Association in this book, but still does not seem to know about the organization's work protecting animals in the entertainment business. I had thought, based on the subtitle, that I would find some comment on animals in the movies.
I found this book episodic and anecdotal. It must have been organized chronologically, but it seemed to jump back and forth between subjects.
January 5, 2019
I’m giving it 1 star for effort and intent, but this book is really a mess. The author jumps around topics and is really disorganized. He also perseverates on cockfighting and cricket fighting and continues to bring it up throughout the book. Cockfighting should have ONE chapter, but why the hell is cricket fighting even in this book? It makes animal rights people look dumb—there is a hierarchy of animal abuse and cricket fighting is on the bottom of it. He also skips over many other animal abusive industries and more common ones than underground cockfighting. He just touches on circuses and Seaworld type attractions briefly when these should all have full chapters. Also, elephant and camel rides and dolphin swimming, etc. are not included. It’s not very comprehensive and the author sounds confused as hell sometimes. He claims he is a vegan but wears leather and has hand me down furs. He then says he isn’t going to let the book impact him and starts eating fish and occasional meat. It just felt like the author was having a mid-life crises while writing the book.
December 22, 2024
Interesting read that I picked up to pass time at work. Asks a lot of good questions but for better or worse is very open ended on giving us any sort of answer. It makes sense that there’s no definitive conclusion with the actual material being discussed, but you are left wishing the authors work culminated to more. Overall interesting, not the best book I’ve read by any means, but asked some good questions at least.
August 14, 2012
What’s the difference between enjoying a cockfight and munching down on crispy fried KFC?
In a nutshell, that’s the central question explored in the non-fiction book No Animals Were Harmed: The Controversial Line Between Entertainment and Abuse by Peter Laufer, PhD.
To amplify this: How can a person object to bloody cockfights and then turn around, sometimes literally on the very next corner, and eat up a piece of fried (or broiled, or baked, or whatever) chicken? The book is about more than just this specific question, of course. The author expands the context of inquiry to circus performers, zoos, pet ownership and more.
It’s a gray area. And a tough question.
I applaud the author’s willingness to take on this tough question and his thorough approach. I don’t agree with all of his conclusions, nor am I crazy about his writing style, but he has philosophical courage. The issue of animal rights is a central question of 21st century civilization. Laufer’s book will stand the test of time. Bravo!
From a stylistic standpoint, Laufer employs the “please, come along with me on my travels as I explore this question” approach. This style of “buddy” journalism has a predictable sequence – take a few trips, write about the revelations, string it all together in a chronological, reasonably entertaining narrative, and then close with a personal epiphany, extrapolated to the entire universe. I don’t care much for the narrative framework, but others may. Even so, I still like the subject.
From a content standpoint, for anyone interested in this topic, especially people who are new to the philosophy of animal rights, and for the vegan-curious, this book is well worth picking up. Go ahead and join the author on his stumble through this rich intellectual territory – Polish lion tamers, cock-fighting and more cock-fighting, entertaining or killer whales at SeaWorld, jailhouse interviews, more about cockfighting, along with his own very brief venture into veganism. (Fresh fish did him in, as it does many people.)
As Laufer realizes on his journey, veganism is an evolution, not a single galaxy jump. It's not for everyone. Laufer's conclusions make clear he, personally, is not ready for this step. The line between animal use and animal abuse is so wide, and animal use is deeply integrated into our civilization, rejecting it requires a life of constant vigilance. It can get tiring. And that's okay. But Laufer, in the end, rejects veganism with, in my view, a faux intellectualism designed to justify his choice when in fact, he's just not personally ready for the degree of vigilance. He need not be vegan. Laufer's curiosity on this topic is enough, and even inspiring. It’s okay -- for now -- if he wants to oppose cock-fights and still eat chicken.
Because his children, or maybe his grand-children, will someday give up chicken. It's the inevitable course of civilization. And his quest moves society an inch or two on that path.
In a nutshell, that’s the central question explored in the non-fiction book No Animals Were Harmed: The Controversial Line Between Entertainment and Abuse by Peter Laufer, PhD.
To amplify this: How can a person object to bloody cockfights and then turn around, sometimes literally on the very next corner, and eat up a piece of fried (or broiled, or baked, or whatever) chicken? The book is about more than just this specific question, of course. The author expands the context of inquiry to circus performers, zoos, pet ownership and more.
It’s a gray area. And a tough question.
I applaud the author’s willingness to take on this tough question and his thorough approach. I don’t agree with all of his conclusions, nor am I crazy about his writing style, but he has philosophical courage. The issue of animal rights is a central question of 21st century civilization. Laufer’s book will stand the test of time. Bravo!
From a stylistic standpoint, Laufer employs the “please, come along with me on my travels as I explore this question” approach. This style of “buddy” journalism has a predictable sequence – take a few trips, write about the revelations, string it all together in a chronological, reasonably entertaining narrative, and then close with a personal epiphany, extrapolated to the entire universe. I don’t care much for the narrative framework, but others may. Even so, I still like the subject.
From a content standpoint, for anyone interested in this topic, especially people who are new to the philosophy of animal rights, and for the vegan-curious, this book is well worth picking up. Go ahead and join the author on his stumble through this rich intellectual territory – Polish lion tamers, cock-fighting and more cock-fighting, entertaining or killer whales at SeaWorld, jailhouse interviews, more about cockfighting, along with his own very brief venture into veganism. (Fresh fish did him in, as it does many people.)
As Laufer realizes on his journey, veganism is an evolution, not a single galaxy jump. It's not for everyone. Laufer's conclusions make clear he, personally, is not ready for this step. The line between animal use and animal abuse is so wide, and animal use is deeply integrated into our civilization, rejecting it requires a life of constant vigilance. It can get tiring. And that's okay. But Laufer, in the end, rejects veganism with, in my view, a faux intellectualism designed to justify his choice when in fact, he's just not personally ready for the degree of vigilance. He need not be vegan. Laufer's curiosity on this topic is enough, and even inspiring. It’s okay -- for now -- if he wants to oppose cock-fights and still eat chicken.
Because his children, or maybe his grand-children, will someday give up chicken. It's the inevitable course of civilization. And his quest moves society an inch or two on that path.
April 20, 2014
This is a very eye opening book on some of the abuse that animals must withstand while living amongest us. Laufer explores, quite well, our relationship with animals and the very fine line between entertainment and abuse. The story follows his travels to zoos, chicken farms, chicken fights, circuses and roadside zoo attractions, and the exotic animals that are found there. His question is never really answered as he explores these areas, but he does find people who genuinely care about animals and values and respects the relationship they have with them. I'm an animal lover myself, and it breaks my heart to hear the stories of abuse and neglect that occur with these creatures who are not here for us to dominate over, but to share and better our lives. No matter your stances on animal rights, this book is a very even book, exploring both sides, and helps to provide insight into that world.
March 28, 2017
I found this book thought provoking but leaves me unsure of what I really gained by reading it... wish it were a bit heavier on the research and facts and included a bit less repetition and was structured in a more straightforward flow.
Displaying 1 - 9 of 9 reviews