Exposure, Travel, and Aquaintance

Where would the impulse lie to spread awareness of a sentient animal? If you have been following my posts, you would know the awareness was widespread enough. Everyone knows. Everyone is cognizant of the experiments that lead to sentient animals being created. However, the depth of knowledge would most definitely be superficial. Somewhere along the lines of the fact there exists one, the lab or research facility that created it, and possibly the name of the scientists and researchers and the creature itself would be common knowledge. But what steps would the facility take to protect the creature in such travels? What would each conference be about, whether it's to an audience of research professionals, or a regular (and somewhat) exclusive public audience?

Creature's Willingness

Something that's become a common theme of this thought experiment is asking if the creature for its opinion on the matter. Strange but true. We are aware some animals and some individuals between species are prone to panic in crowds, and loud dins from the roar of an audience. And given some animals are easily considered more aggressive than others, what we must consider are the audience reactions to a 'wild' animal being brought to the stage.

Socks the cat

The answer may be as simple as a remote skype event where the animal is placed in from of a live camera for the event. Where hopefully the animal has a valuable view of the audience and therefore gains some awareness of the magnitude of the situation they are born in. Possibly at the end, the media can ask questions in which the animal responds. The likelihood is that the animal has a support human, (teehee, animal with a support human) can express themselves and their own personal desires. A question comes up about what the animal's bigger picture and long term goals are, and the animal would probably give its own personal long term goals.

After a few events of skype communication, would a time come to bring the individual animal in real life in front of a group? Possibly, assuming that many courtesies would be observed. Flashes are disabled. Electronics, especially those with UHF, ultra high frequencies are turned off, and movements are kept nonerratic. In the beginning this may seem like tedious restrictions, but we would have to consider this is an animal who has never been in a crowd before. That this is a new and scary experience for the sentient animal which is natural. But should the animal react or cry out in any way, it would only be the consensus, however unfair that the animal is unstable, and possibly even hostile. Especially if it was a canine or feline predator. The reaction would be mitigated against sentient species of another, more seemingly docile variety, i.e. horse, cattle, household cat or dog. Which brings up a personal question to ask. Would we already be preprogrammed with prejudices against predatory sentient species? It is tempting to use another work for racism, such as speciesist, and it would be true. 'Prejudice against individuals of a species different than your own.' On the one hand, it would be prejudice, as people would obviously react differently to the species. However, would these suspicions be unfounded? I would kinda argue not, as we are considering that there are genetic bases for an animals' actions, moreso than a human. So the exposure would be the benefit of both the animal and the humans.

Effects

What was the point of all this? Obviously, it was stated above, to work to inform and encourage the public to accept a new member of society that can think, feel, and reason the same, (or almost the same) as us. So then, what happens after? What could be the effect after supposedly the average population were to be informed to accept sentient animals.

Luckily that would be for another time. Interesting to consider the larger scale effects of having to accept sentient species as equals.

So for now, always consider what things have reverse effects, and as always,

Happy Thinking!