Dinner, dessert and a selfie with a lion: Is this Chinese restaurant the height of animal exploitation?

A few days ago, animal lovers were set to burn down the internet. It all began when photographs and videos started circulating that were shot by the clients of Wanhui restaurant in the Chinese city of Taiyun, located in the northern region of the country in Shanxi province. In the images, which were shared on platforms like WeChat and Weibo, customers embraced lion cubs as part of the gastronomic experience offered by the establishment. For a fixed price of about $150, one could enjoy a four-course meal that included a selfie with a wild creature. For those who preferred to pop out with another member of the animal kingdom, Wanhui also employs llamas, turtles and deer. According to Reuters, all can be seen on the profile of the eatery on Douyin, the Chinese TikTok.

In response to the graphic testimonies, animal rights associations and internet denizens have launched a campaign on social media targeting what they consider to be entertainment for the rich. The senior vice president of PETA told Reuters: “Tearing lion cubs from their mothers so diners can handle them over afternoon tea is exploitation, not entertainment. These animals are living, feeling beings, not toys.” He said the lions were being “treated like nothing more than social media props.” Wanhui, which opened in June and welcomes 20 people a day looking to eat and pet the cubs, has responded by saying the lions are very well cared for by specialists.

The tradition of humans paying to caress an animal made available for said service is nothing new. Interacting with animals in commercial environments is a concept whose modern version comes in part from Asian countries like Japan, where since 2004 it’s been the era of the neko (cat) cafes, establishments in which clients can pet cats and spend an afternoon with the felines and a cup of tea. The idea quickly crossed borders and today, it’s common to see local versions around the world, most locations being associated with adoption and shelter efforts.

But beyond the obvious difference of instrumentalizing wild animals to sell meals and facilitating the very necessary adoption of pets, it’s clear that photos with furry lion cubs meant to be shared on social media serve as illustration of our anthropocentrist relationship with animals. “It’s not all good,” Víctor Algra, a clinical veterinarian behind the 13,500-follower Instagram account @unveterinario tells EL PAÍS by phone. If such interactions are not associated with the wellbeing of the animals — and are instead conducted for profit, which is clearly the case at Wanhui — “we have to be very careful.”

The vet first points to a biological factor: the danger that humans can present to animals. Though he explains that science tends to have an anthropocentric view of health, which means “much of the time, we lack the data to have a complete view of what is happening and the real danger that is involved,” Algra says that there is concrete data about when is known as reverse zoonoses (infections transmitted to animals by humans) among wild species, above all primates. “Sometimes we forget that we too can be a source of infection for these animals,” he explains. “63% of cases of reverse zoonoses that have been documented are associated with serious or fatal symptomology. When a pathogen spreads to a new species, we don’t know what can happen.” He also delivers a reminder: “This is bidirectional, we can give animals a cold, but for them, it may not be just a cold.”

To tell if animal exploitation is taking place when we interact with them, Algra invites us to ask ourselves a revealing question: “Are we fulfilling needs that they have, or a need that we have?” That query is directly linked to the idea that animals are at our service to calm us, make us happy, and our life sweeter. In the words of the veterinarian, “Activities like these seek to fulfill our need to interact with animals, but we haven’t asked them if they want to participate. They’re not here to fulfill our desires.”

And even when we firmly believe that we are helping animals meet their needs, there is also the danger of misinterpretation of what, exactly, those needs are. In the case of dogs, Algra says, “Puppies are usually socialized with different people in a controlled environment and in the future, it can help them have better relationships with people. But it could be that within that environment there are lapses in control, like a careless child who makes a lot of noise or handles them too roughly. It could be that instead of creating positive interaction, the opposite takes place and makes them afraid of humans. Puppies can be very sensitive.” In the case of cats, the expert says, “They are much more about their space, they are the ones who usually control the interaction, who say when they want to interact and when they don’t. By forcing them to interact with people, we can cause them stress. In the end, our view is very anthropocentric,” summarizes the veterinarian.

In the case of interaction with wild animals, in Algra’s opinion, “it looks good on social media,” but the expert has important questions. “Why cubs? Have you taken them from their mothers? What will you do when those animals get older? These animals are highly imprinted [influenced or marked by their experiences with humans] and will never be able to return to the wild. It’s a very selfish act,” he says. He concludes with a final reflection: “Luxury and power create these somewhat aspirational needs. By sharing the photo on social media or giving it a like, we are creating that need, feeding back into something that is not good for them. On social media, it seems that the only person who is doing harm is the one touching the lion, but all of us who are giving feedback, sharing and giving likes, are supporting a business where we are not meeting the needs of the animals, but rather, our own.”