According to Guthrie (1993), an anthropologist, anthropomorphism is really close to animating. He explains the differences between both terms and how we can relate them to our perception. According to Guthrie “When [humans have unconscious illusions], we are animating (attributing life to the nonliving) or anthropomorphizing (attributing human characteristics to the nonhuman).” Famous Disney characters like
Mickey Mouse,
Winnie the Pooh and
Bambi are animals that have been anthropomorphized; they have been given a specific language by humans. However,
Herbie, the Volkswagen Beetle, affectionately known as "
The Love Bug", is an example of animation. Herbie cannot speak with words but communicates through body language and a system of sounds made through his horn.
Kim-Pong Tam (2014) follows the same idea. In his study, he demonstrates how anthropomorphism is effective in understanding nature and animals. In fact, when humans use this concept, it creates a belief that they can more actively change the world. He supports Guthrie (1993) in saying that when you give the ability to speak to an animal, for example, you have the tendency to understand it better even if it is unconscious.
Winnie the Pooh is a bear who was anthropomorphized and that influences people’s minds on how the bear actually acts. It differs from real life in the book. Thus, anthropomorphizing animals in kids’ books is more
confusing for children because their brain is not developed enough to understand the difference between what is real and what is not.
How Parents Can Make a Difference
Too often, adults think that children are too young to understand what they say about a specific subject but they are wrong. To begin, a study done by
Melson (2013) explains that children have contact with wild animals everywhere; in zoos, natural parks but also in their backyards. After knowing them, they see those animals on TV, in books, etc. Children don’t lose a minute before associating the black bear at the zoo with their favourite yellow bear Winnie the Pooh, or the tiger with Tigger, the funny and caring tiger that is best friends with the yellow honey-loving bear.
Instinctively, they give feelings, autonomy and other characteristics to the wild animal. If children can do this on their own, imagine how the parent has a big impact on them?
![]() |
| Charlotte's Webb |
Murris (2013) wanted to learn if the feelings of disgust towards an animal experienced by a mother provide negative information about the species that will influence her child to develop that same hate toward that animal. His study revealed that
“... children to whom mothers had verbally communicated about a set of disgusting specimens not only displayed higher levels of disgust but also exhibited higher levels of fear.” This illustrates how parents have a huge influence on how a child will perceive an animal. For instance, if the mother has a fear and disgust towards
spiders, her child probably will develop the same fear until the age where they can decide what they like and don’t like on their own.
![]() |
| Photo © ONTD |
Our ancestors defined, based on their beliefs and religions, how humans should perceive certain animals. Preece (2002) explains how over time, animals were attributed more
rights and an identity. He demonstrates that stereotypes have been made for animals and even if we want to abolish them, it is difficult. For example, a majority of people consider
dolphins actually gentle but did you know that underwater they are more dangerous than sharks? These examples demonstrate that parents have a huge influence on the way their child learns how to perceive animals.
Relationships Between Animals and Children
Morris, Knight, and Lesley (2012) organized a study to discover tendency of children's emotions towards species of animals. They suggest
“... that familiarity with animals is an important determinant of belief about emotions in animals and animal mind in general.” pg no Thus, the emotions you feel towards an animal describes how you view it. The researchers found that children were more familiar with
domestic animals. They developed an attached emotion to them and have the tendency to value them as a family member, giving the domestic animal human-characteristics. It doesn’t happen with wild animals because we can’t actually have one in our house.
Mueller (2014) specifies that talking about the behaviour early in childhood is positive for the development of kids. From this standpoint, putting animals such as Winnie the Pooh in children’s book can be beneficial. In fact, the younger you start teaching that some animals are dangerous even if they are gentle looking in books, the quicker they will learn it. According to Newkirk (2005), zoos and
circuses are really popular with children because they see big animals from the jungle doing shows. The problem is that the relationship between the wild animals and the children is not reciprocal. As she states
“Children know intuitively that in real life, animals love and grieve.” In a nutshell, maybe Winnie the Pooh is a model for children because it teaches them to be nice to and
protective of animals.
Animals in Children's Books
Prokop, Usak and Erdogan (2011) surveyed 103 children on their overall interest in wolves after reading different stories with this animal as a principal character. They wanted to understand if wolves represented a negative role in the story and if they influenced children to have a fear of this animal. According to them the results
“... implies that if a child perceives a wolf in stories as a positive subject, then the child has greater sympathy for and a lower fear of wolves.” However, the opposite is also true. Daston and Mitman (2005) support this by showing how children are attracted to books with animals. Subsequently, those books are given the illusion that animals are like us: able to talk, to cuddle and laugh, exactly what children like to do.
Daston and Mitman (2005) pose an important question; If we give human characteristics to animals, does that mean we would accept giving human animal rights? Ask yourself, would you stop eating meat and wearing fur? Would people be willing to volunteer for experiments thus negating the need for animal testing? They argue that what humans say about animals is contradictory to what they are willing to do. We want to protect animals but we don’t take steps as a society to ensure their safety and proper treatment. In the end there is no actual right or wrong answer about whether it is ok or not to present Winnie the Pooh as a friendly bear instead of teaching children that bears are dangerous. What we do know for certain is that parents have a responsibility to ensure that children are made aware of the realities of the animals being depicted as they age and hopefully, in doing so, create a sense of responsibility and empathy within them so that perhaps one day animals will be afforded the rights that they so richly deserve.
References
Daston, L., & Mitman, G. (2005). Thinking With Animals New Perspectives on Anthropomorphism. New York: Columbia University Press.
Guthrie, S. (1993). Faces in the Clouds: A New Theory of Religion. New York: Oxford University Press.
Morris, P., Knight, S., & Lesley, S. (June 2012). Belief in Animal Mind: Does Familiarity with Animals Influence Beliefs about Animal Emotions? Society & Animals, 20(3), 211-224. doi: 10.1163/15685306-12341234
Mueller, M. K. (March 2014). Human-Animal Interaction as a Context for Positive Youth Development: A Relational Developmental Systems Approach to Constructing Human-Animal Interaction Theory and Research. Human Development, 57(1), 5-25. doi: 10.1159/000356914
Muris, P., Mayer, B., Borth, M., & Vos, M. (June 2013). Nonverbal and Verbal Transmission of Disgust From Mothers to Offspring: Effects on Children's Evaluation of a Novel Animal. Behavior Therapy, 44(2), 293-301. doi: 10.1016/j.beth.2012.10.002
Newkirk, I. (2005). Making Kind Choices: Everyday Ways to Enhance Your Life Through Earth-and Animal-Friendly Living. New York: St. Martin's Griffin.
Preece, R. (2002). Awe for the Tiger, Love for the Lamb a Chronicle of Sensibility to Animals. Vancouver: UBC Press.
Tam, K. P. (June 2014). Anthropomorphism of Nature and Efficacy in Coping with the Environmental Crisis. Social Cognition, 32(3), 276-296 doi: 10.1521/soco.2014.32.3.276
