In society, we can always find something controversial to write about. There will never be a time where one’s opinions perhaps get in the way of the “Court of Public Opinion”. Everyone we believe was born with the same inalienable rights. The problem remains however when those inalienable rights that one chooses to perform get in the way of the rights of others. Then we have fights and wars on social media, and then the authorities can get involved. It could make major headlines if it gets into the agendas of the politicians. Before long, you have new laws, new arrests, perhaps eventually a social revolution, and then inter country wars. All of this could possibly happen because of one person’s point of view getting in the way, of the Public Opinion. Perhaps this is why safe spaces have been started to be instituted in the 21st century because people are afraid of dissenting opinions. If you can get your position to steamroll and make it popular, then with a little money behind you, you can control the world and even shape those laws in question.
So what happened that we bring this up? A Brazilian tattoo artist by the name of Emerson Damasceno decided one day that he was going to stress his opinion, and well frankly, it goes against the court of public opinion. As a result of this, he has been the subject of a massive online backlash after photos that seemed to show his dog with fresh tattoos on its ears, nose and face appeared. The guy is a tattoo artist by profession, and of course he loves tattooing himself, and probably everything in sight. Therefore, why not tattoo a dog? If you can tattoo a human being, then why not tattoo a dog? Many are shouting that this is a form of animal abuse.
Lawyer Fernanda Soares was one of the first people who noticed the pictures shortly after Damasceno posted and shared them online. Because she is one of the many in the court of public opinion, she had commented and helped to spread the post quickly like gasoline on a fire. Regardless, as you may have thought, it was the animal lovers who really caught onto it, and as a result condemned the man’s actions. Trying to cover himself as best as he could, Damasceno quickly deleted the pictures from his accounts and then deleted his social media accounts. Why he did not just delete the social media accounts first without deleting the pictures is beyond me. Furthermore, as we live in the social media age, some of us have learned the easy or the hard way that once you put a picture online it becomes public property. There is no going back my friend. It is a matter of public record. Damasceno is going to be known by animal rights activists as a villain, and he will have nowhere to hide.
I think we can call a spade a spade. But, there is pretty much no doubt that this is what we would like to call animal abuse. Perhaps the question would be how does the dog feel about the tattoos? Did anyone ask it? This is unknown and impossible to find out. But, what we may also never know is did he ask his dog if he could tattoo it? Did he charge the dog his normal going rate? According to the Humane Society of the United States, “Animal cruelty can be either deliberate abuse or simply the failure to take care of an animal. Either way, whether or not the animal is a pet, a farm animal or wildlife, the victim can suffer terribly. Don’t despair, though—anyone can take steps against animal cruelty.” There you have it folks. That is a pretty specific definition of what animal abuse is. Therefore, is this the same with the case of Damasceno and his dog?
Damasceno tried to defend himself in such a bizarre fashion, of course. He claimed that the animal’s tattoos, which included the LA Dodgers logo, several stars, and a diamond and a combination of anchor/brass knuckles design, were to prevent his from getting cancer. Well now doesn’t that just sound like a novel idea? After all, if you slap on a bunch of sun screen onto your kid to prevent it from getting cancer, and the kid yells and screams, and you tell it not to sit down or to put its shirt on, but it is still screaming, is that not considered child abuse? The parent would then argue that they know what is in the best interest for the child. This may definitely be true. But can we not say that Damasceno was also trying to be a good owner, and look out for the best interests of his pup? He apparently claimed that the ink would protect vulnerable areas from solar rays. That sounds like parenting to me. However, it is not. How do you know though? The answer is, several Brazilian veterinarians, as well as most people’s common sense have debunked this theory.
Damasceno’s girlfriend, who may have been the one to post the pictures, defended him by saying that the tattoos were sanctioned by vets in the southeastern Brazilian state of Minas Gerais. The clinic in question denied this and condemned the pair’s actions. It is unclear whether or not the case is being investigated by Brazilian authorities.
So there you have it folks. Sometimes being a parent or even pet owner is a very difficult job. However, one thing is clear. If even the board certified health professionals condemn you, and you cannot find even one eastern medicine professional to defend you, then chances are that you screwed up, and abused your dog. Next time, if I was Damasceno, I would suggest going the sun screen route. That way, if your dog barks and whelps from you putting it on it, nobody else will complain.