17 DEBATING ANIMAL RIGHTS
184-191
Présentation de l’unité
Si le droit des animaux est un sujet qui préoccupe l’humanité
depuis l’antiquité, au-delà des frontières du monde anglophone,
les pays anglo-saxons ont vu, à l’époque moderne, l’émergence
et l’expansion de nombreux mouvements de défense et de
protection des animaux. Ces mouvements vont de pair
aujourd’hui avec la prise de conscience écologique mondiale.
Les progrès de l’éthologie, science qui étudie le comportement
animal, contribuent à reconsidérer certains animaux, dotés d’in-
telligence et de sensibilité. Parallèlement, l’expérimentation
animale permet à la médecine de poursuivre ses avancées,
encadrée par des chartes éthiques visant à limiter autant que
possible la souffrance animale.
A-t-on le droit de mener des expériences sur les animaux ?
De leur infliger des souffrances au nom de la science ? Quels
droits leur accorder ? Ces réflexions s’inscrivent tout naturelle-
ment dans l’axe 6 du cycle terminal « Innovations scientifiques
et responsabilité » et pourront faire écho à certains textes
étudiés par les élèves en classe de philosophie.
Cette unité propose un double ancrage culturel : d’une part en
confrontant divers points de vue liés aux droits des animaux
dans l’aire anglophone, et d’autre part en invitant les élèves à
débattre à la manière de lycéens américains s’ils le souhaitent,
ou de façon plus classique.
En effet, au cours du projet final, les élèves participeront à un
débat de classe à l’américaine, et argumenteront pour ou contre
l’expérimentation animale (selon le rôle qui leur sera assigné)
puis réagiront aux arguments de leurs camarades.
Les élèves étant relativement familiers du sujet (certains y sont
même particulièrement sensibles) le thème du débat ne posera
pas de problème. On invitera les élèves à réfléchir autant à leurs
arguments qu’aux procédés rhétoriques permettant de les
défendre avec conviction et cohérence.
Le projet final constituera un bon entraînement en vue des
évaluations communes, notamment en production orale, ainsi
qu’à l’épreuve du « Grand Oral ».
9782210112803_HTR_LDP_257-302.indd 257
EXTRAIT DU PROGRAMME DE TRONC COMMUN (B.O.)
Axe 6 – « Innovations scientifiques et responsabilité »
Quelles réponses chaque aire géographique étudiée apporte-t-elle
aux bouleversements technologiques et scientifiques actuels ? Le
progrès scientifique est à l’origine d’avancées très positives pour
l’humanité, mais donne également lieu à de nombreuses interro-
gations sur certains effets induits […]. La prise de conscience des
dangers éventuels liés à ces innovations scientifiques nourrit une
réflexion sur l’éthique du progrès dans une aire culturelle donnée.
Le savant est-il responsable des usages de ses découvertes ? Doit-il
s’impliquer dans la sphère publique pour peser sur les décisions
politiques ? Quelle marge de manœuvre possède le citoyen pour faire
entendre sa voix ? […]. Les citoyens tentent d’apporter des réponses
au quotidien, en adoptant de nouveaux modes de consommation.
[…] L’axe invite à observer ces aspects de la question dans l’aire
culturelle concernée et d’explorer les similitudes ou les singularités
avec d’autres cultures.
Mots-clés en lien avec l’unité : recherche génétique /
vaccins / éco-citoyen / biodiversité
EXTRAIT DU PROGRAMME DE LLCER
ANGLAIS, MONDE CONTEMPORAIN (B.O.)
Thématique 1 : « Environnements en mutation »
– Axe d’étude 2 : De la protection de la nature à la transition
écologique
La notion de respect et de protection de la nature est ancienne dans
le monde anglophone ; elle a connu une évolution au fil des siècles.
Une mise en perspective historique permet de mieux comprendre
les politiques et attitudes actuelles. […]
Exemples d’objets d’étude : La protection animale : droits de l’animal ;
mesures préventives des États pour la protection des espèces mena-
cées ; implication des États ou des citoyens contre la cruauté envers
les animaux ; obstacles rencontrés ; associations protectrices des
animaux (RSPCB, RSPCA).
EXTRAITS DES INSTRUCTIONS OFFICIELLES
SUR L’ÉPREUVE DE « GRAND ORAL » (B.O.)
Finalité de l’épreuve : L'épreuve permet au candidat de montrer sa
capacité à prendre la parole en public de façon claire et convain-
cante. Elle lui permet aussi de mettre les savoirs qu'il a acquis […]
au service d'une argumentation […].
Évaluation de l’épreuve : Le jury valorise la solidité des connais-
sances du candidat, sa capacité à argumenter et à relier les savoirs,
son esprit critique, la précision de son expression, la clarté de son
propos, son engagement dans sa parole, sa force de conviction.
PARCOURS EXPRESS
On pourra, selon le temps que l’on souhaite consacrer à l’étude
de cette unité, choisir de ne traiter qu’une partie des documents.
Néanmoins, il sera nécessaire de suivre le parcours suivant pour
réaliser la tâche finale :
Before class!
1 Animal Rights: A Timeline: Document 1.
2 Animals and scientific research: Documents 1 et 3.
Unit 17 257
22/09/2020 12:46

184
image d’ouverture
Présentation du document
Légende de la photo : Photograph taken at an animal rights
rally in Trafalgar Square in London on December 2, 2017. Ani-
mal rights campaigners demonstrate in support of all animals.
On peut lire les messages suivants sur les pancartes :
– “End speciesism, we are all earthlings”
– “Listen to science, all animals are sentient”
– “We do have feelings”
– “Why love me and eat me? Please wake up and go vegan”
– “For as long as men massacre animals they will kill each
other”- Pythagoras
Contexte de la photo : The protesters were responding to the
fact that a key animal welfare law in the EU stipulating that
animals are sentient beings was not going to be kept in the
post-Brexit UK. The Tory party voted not to keep this law on
November 15, 2017.
On notera que deux ans plus tard, la position du gouvernement
a changé : une loi sera votée, reconnaissant aux animaux le
statut d’êtres sensibles. Pour en savoir plus :
www.worldanimalprotection.org.uk/news/success-animal-sentience-
recognised-in-uk-law
Le contexte est fourni à titre d’information et n’est pas indis-
pensable à l’activité proposée ci-après.
Mise en œuvre
1. On pourra en premier lieu demander aux élèves d’étudier
la photo à la maison. On leur fournira la définition des termes
speciesism et sentient au moment opportun :
• speciesism /ˈspiːʃiːˌzɪzəm/ or specism /ˈspiʃizəm/:
This word coined by Richard D. Ryder and popularised
by Peter Singer’s Animal Liberation in 1975, is defined
by “the assumption of human superiority leading to the
exploitation of animals.” It means that we treat one spe-
cies better than another, even when their interests are
the same.
“Speciesism is a misguided belief that one species is
more important than another” (PETA).
• sentient /ˈsentiənt/: the ability to perceive or feel
things.
2. En classe, on pourra mettre en commun les remarques des
élèves. Les citations des pancartes pourront être commentées/
reformulées. L’utilisation du manuel numérique permettra de
mieux visualiser les messages en agrandissant l’image.
This photograph was taken at an animal rights rally in Trafalgar
Square in London on December 2, 2017. The theme of the pro-
test was to show that animals feel pain and we should all be
aware of the fact that they can sense things (they are sentient).
The protestors wanted to show that it seems hypocritical that
we consider certain animals as food, while we consider others
as pets (which is speciesism, an idea that we can see on one of
the posters in the background).
3. Pour aller plus loin, on pourra focaliser l’attention des élèves
sur les deux citations suivantes et leur demander de réagir.
– “Why love me and eat me? – Please wake up and go vegan”
– “For as long as men massacre animals they will kill each
other”- Pythagoras
258 Unit 17
9782210112803_HTR_LDP_257-302.indd 258
Pour guider les productions, on pourra poser les questions
suivantes :
– Do you think it is hypocritical that there are certain animals
we love (cats, dogs…) and others we eat (chickens, cows…)?
– Is it important that there is a law that states that animals can
feel pain?
– Do you agree with the statement by Pythagoras that if we
stop killing animals we will also stop killing other people?
184
BEFORE CLASS! VIDEO N°32
Présentation du document
Ce document vidéo de 2017 met en scène Christer Hogstrand,
professeur suédois de King’s College à Londres. Il émane de la
European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) et s’intitule « Can we
do science without animal testing? ».
Les élèves découvriront comment l’Union Européenne encadre
l’expérimentation animale, notamment en instaurant la règle
des « 3R » (Replacement [using other methods, like computer
models], Reduction [using fewer animals], and Refinement
[improving the welfare of animals that are used] ) :
– Remplacer les animaux quand c’est possible (en utilisant des
modèles informatiques ou des méthodes physico-chimiques,
des cellules ou des organes, in vitro) ;
– Raffiner (diminuer les contraintes et la douleur) ;
– Réduire le nombre d’animaux utilisés.
La vidéo dure 3 minutes mais ne présente aucune difficulté de
compréhension, de nombreux termes ou concepts-clés étant
illustrés.
Remarque : Si l’on souhaite faire le débat proposé en projet
final, il est préférable que les élèves voient ce document vidéo.
script VIDEO N°32
Professor Christer Hogstrand (King’s College, London):
Why do we do animal experiments? We need scientific
data to assess the effects, good or bad, of nutrients and
other chemicals in our food, medicines and other
products.
And with new products emerging all the time, the demand
for data is only increasing.
Most data come from laboratory testing. Sometimes, trials
are done on humans, and that includes testing on new
medicines.
In most cases, though, that would be too risky, so we tra-
ditionally rely on animal experiments. But for various
reasons society and scientists are increasingly unhappy
with animal testing. Most obviously, we don’t want
animals to suffer and our society is becoming less willing
to accept it.
And experiments involving animals are expensive so there
are economic considerations too. But, crucially, mice are
simply not people.
Organs on a chip, tissue cultures and computer models
can sometimes more closely mimic human biology. They
can help us understand what happens inside our body to
the things we eat. So, the good news is that new science
and technology are making alternatives to animal testing
not only viable, but in some cases even better.
What are these alternatives? We call them the three R’s.
Replacement is about recreating the conditions inside a
living being using cell technology or computer models
22/09/2020 12:46
 instead of animal experiments. So, in this way, along with
observations from animal experiments, we can use data
generated without animals too.
Reduction means obtaining similar information from fewer
animals or more information from the same. This can for
example be achieved through improved study design and
statistical analysis. The additional information can then
be used to minimise the number of animals needed in
experiments.
Refinement is about relieving the pain or distress of test
animals and improving their welfare. Laboratory condi-
tions of animals are better now, but more can still be done.
But, can we do risk assessment without animal data? Well,
more complex effects are still difficult to predict from
subculture experiments, such as what happens to chem-
icals in our body after we eat them.
And that’s why in some areas such as pesticides and food
additive authorisation, the law requires that we look at
animal data.
And a future without animal testing? With more scientific
innovations soon we may be able to ensure our food is
safe, with far fewer animals than today. Maybe one day,
we’ll be able to do it with no animal testing at all. And
wouldn’t that just be great guys? Come on…
Mise en œuvre
Les élèves pourront regarder la vidéo à la maison en suivant le
principe de la classe inversée, en flashant le QR code, au clic
dans le manuel numérique élève ou en se rendant sur le site
compagnon élève.
On leur demandera de faire un compte rendu en classe. On
pourra demander à un élève volontaire de jouer le rôle de média-
teur et de transmettre l’information à ses camarades.
On pourra guider la production en posant les questions sui-
vantes :
– Is it necessary to use animal tests? Why?
– Why are animals used by the European Food Safety Author-
ity?
– What alternatives exist to animal testing?
– Does the narrator seem hopeful or pessimistic about a future
without animal testing?
Production possible : This document was created by the Euro-
pean Food Safety Authority (EFSA) and deals specifically with
the way animals are used to test certain nutrients and chemicals
in medicines and other products. It demonstrates the potential
flaws of animal testing: expensive experiments, and the fact
that animals are not the same as people. The document then
goes on to present “the three R’s”: Replacement (using other
methods, like computer models), Reduction (using fewer ani-
mals), and Refinement (improving the welfare of animals that
are used) which are at the heart of trying to move away from
animal testing. As of today, there are still certain areas where
testing is needed, namely for pesticides and food additives, but
there is hope that one day there won’t be any need for this.
9782210112803_HTR_LDP_257-302.indd 259
Animal Rights:
1
185
A Timeline
1 Key dates
185
Mise en œuvre
L’activité proposée peut être réalisée en binômes. Les éléments
fournis dans la frise permettront aux élèves de voir comment
et à quel rythme les pays anglophones ont contribué à la ques-
tion du bien-être animal.
On pourra fournir, si on le souhaite, les informations plus détail-
lées ci-dessous, en accompagnement du document du manuel :
1780: Many of the ideas concerning animal rights come
from English philosopher Jeremy Bentham. He is best
known for the philosophy of Utilitarianism. The idea is
that the most ethical choice is the one that will produce
the greatest good for the greatest number. Jeremy Ben-
tham argued that nonhuman animals should also be con-
sidered in this equation, especially in instances where
they would suffer, such as vivisection.
1824: This is now known as the Royal Society for the
Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (RSPCA). It is the old-
est and largest animal welfare organisation in the world
and has inspired many similar societies in other countries
such as in 1866 with the American version, now known
as the SPCA with local and state branches all over the
United States.
1875: The National Anti-Vivisection Society is one of the
first opponents to the use of animals in science experi-
ments and it led to the creation of the Cruelty to Animals
Act in 1876 to regulate these practices. It was a major
advancement in the treatment of animals. The term vivi-
section refers to experimenting on live animals (as
opposed to dissection which is done on a dead
animal).
1906: Upton Sinclair’s novel is one of the most well-
known novels in American literature for its harsh look at
the meat industry in the United States. Upton Sinclair
was considered a “muckraker” because he was doing
investigative journalism and trying to expose abuses of
power. While his goal was to show how the workers were
exploited, the way that meat was produced is what really
appalled the public by depicting the offensive condi-
tions of the workers and animals in meat factories and
as a result the Federal Food and Drug Act was created.
1944: As more people became aware of how human
treatment of animals included food and clothing, the
term “vegan” was established to define people who
didn’t eat or use any animal derived materials.
1975: Peter Singer’s work became the basis of the ani-
mal rights movement (as opposed to the animal welfare
movement, which is about keeping animals as happy as
possible). His idea was that we should not be exploiting
animals for human gains at all.
Unit 17 259
22/09/2020 12:46
 1980: People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals
(PETA) is the most well-known animal rights group in the
United States and is often criticised for its opinions and
scandalous ads often using offensive images of muti-
lated animals.
2014: India has a large proportion of vegetarians (about
1/3 of the population) but it took until 2014 for them to
ban testing on animals and this is mainly for cosmetics.
2015: New Zealand recognised all animals as sentient
and as a result has limited testing on them.
2019: Another issue in animal rights is the use of animals
for clothing, and this has especially been directed toward
fur. California has been leading the way on this and many
major clothing manufactures have followed suit, as well
as celebrities. The Queen has even agreed to stop wear-
ing any new furs, but she will continue to wear her old
furs.
Au moment où on le jugera opportun, on proposera aux élèves
de réagir au document, en veillant à ce qu’ils reprennent les
éléments de la boîte Help!.
Exemple de production : It is appalling how animals used to
be treated. There has certainly been an improvement in the way
that animals are considered. I cannot believe they used to use
vivisection and I find this treatment of animals revolting/appall-
ing/odious.
Réponses aux questions
A. The issues at the heart of the movement are preventing
cruelty, ending vivisection, improving the conditions in slaugh-
terhouses, not eating animals, ending animal testing, and not
using animals for clothing.
B. If you ask me, the most important date in the evolution of
the animal rights movement was firstly Jeremy Bentham’s argu-
ment for a better treatment of animals. This is what started the
idea of thinking of animals’ capacity to suffer. Secondly, I would
say when Donald Watson coined the term vegan. This allowed
people who did not think we should be using animals for human
gains to finally come together. Thirdly, when the Queen
announced that she would stop wearing new fur. This must have
been a big signal to people that we should not be killing animals
for fur.
260 Unit 17
9782210112803_HTR_LDP_257-302.indd 260
186-187 2 Leading the Way
Depuis quelques années, sous l’impulsion d’associations de
défense des animaux, et sous la pression de consommateurs
écoresponsables, les sociétés britannique et américaine évo-
luent : le véganisme connaît un véritable essor (page de gauche),
tandis qu’aux États-Unis et notamment en Californie, des lois
protégeant certains animaux sont votées (page de droite).
Cette double-page peut être traitée librement par l’enseignant
(voir réponses aux questions ci-dessous pour chaque activité)
mais peut aussi se prêter à un travail de groupes, ce qui per-
mettra de gagner du temps.
Si l’on opte pour un travail de groupes, nous suggérons de
procéder comme suit :
1. Lors de la première séance : Diviser la classe en trois
groupes : le groupe A travaillera sur l’activité 1 (Veganism in
the UK), le groupe B travaillera sur l’activité 2 (Breaking down
the numbers) et le groupe C sur l’activité 3 (California laws).
2. Demander aux élèves de lire leur document individuellement
pendant 5 minutes, puis les mettre en groupes, pour qu’ils éla-
borent ensemble un résumé de leur document.
3. Reformer des groupes de trois (un élève du groupe A, un du
groupe B et un du groupe C). Chaque élève présente son docu-
ment aux autres à partir du résumé élaboré précédemment.
À la fin de la séance, les élèves pourront résumer collectivement
les trois documents.
4. On commencera la séance suivante avec le mini-débat du
«Your Turn! » p. 187.
Remarque : Avant d’aller plus loin dans l’étude de cette double
page, on s’assurera que les élèves savent prononcer les
termes vegetarian /vedʒɪˈteəriən/, vegan /ˈviːgən/ et veganism
/ˈviːgənɪzəm/.
1 Veganism in the UK
186
Réponses aux questions
A. Veganism was once reserved for hipsters, for example the
blogger Sean O’Callaghan and other more eccentric people.
Now it has become mainstream and popular for all types of
people in the UK. We can see that there are food festivals and
businesses everywhere in the UK and that major chain restau-
rants and shops are selling vegan items.
B. To name a few shops that are making veganism popular
in the UK there are now vegan options in Marks & Spencer,
22/09/2020 12:46
 Sainsbury’s and Tesco. Some big chain restaurants that are offer-
ing vegan fare/food are Prêt-à-Manger, Wagamama, Pizza Hut,
Pizza Express, Zizzi and Guinness.
C. Nowadays being vegan has become mainstream/normal.
It used to be a fringe movement and people found it difficult
to find vegan products, but now more and more people are
adopting this kind of diet and lifestyle. And as it has become
easier to be vegan, more people are changing their habits.
Remarque : Pour entraîner les élèves au résumé en anglais, on
pourra compléter par cette consigne : In your own words, sum
up the document and comment on how and why it is easy to
become a vegan in the UK.
→ This article from The Guardian highlights the extent to which
veganism has become something much more mainstream in
the UK. It is interesting to note how many of the major British
chains (Tesco, Marks and Spencer, etc.) are selling and promot-
ing vegan options, which shows just how common this is becom-
ing. The article is also important because it shows that there is
no single reason that people are becoming vegan, which is
perhaps another reason why it is becoming more and more
popular.
2 Breaking down
the numbers
186
Présentation des documents
These charts are inspired by a poll taken for the BBC in 2016.
The first chart indicates the reasons why both meat-eating and
non-meat eating Britons have reduced or stopped their meat
consumption. The second chart evaluates how many people
consider themselves to be vegetarian or vegan. Among the
vegans the statistics show if it is simply dietary or a lifestyle.
Remarque : Nous recommandons d’agrandir les schémas à
l’aide du manuel numérique pour une meilleure lisibilité des
données.
Si l’on souhaite faire travailler les élèves sur des statistiques plus
récentes, on pourra leur demander d’effectuer des recherches
en salle informatique ou à la maison sur le nombre de végéta-
liens au Royaume-Uni (en saisissant « Vegans in the UK » dans
leur moteur de recherche).
On peut également leur proposer les liens suivants :
www.vegansociety.com/news/media/statistics
www.finder.com/uk/uk-diet-trends
https://trulyexperiences.com/blog/veganism-uk-statistics/
Mise en œuvre et réponses aux questions
Erratum : La question C figurant dans le spécimen a été sup-
primée dans la version élève. Les corrigés ci-dessous tiennent
compte de cette suppression et de la nouvelle numérotation
des consignes.
Cette activité permet de faire manipuler les chiffres et l’expres-
sion des pourcentages en anglais. Par exemple (données
actualisées) :
At the beginning of 2020 vegans made up 2.1% (two point one
percent) of the UK population. The amount is set to rise to 4.15%
(four point one five percent) by the end of the year.
On pourra renvoyer les élèves aux activités de la rubrique
« Open your Ears » du manuel p. 33 pour réviser ces règles.
A. (Chart 2) In 2016 there were 1,684,000 (one million six hun-
dred eighty-four thousand) vegans and vegetarians in the UK.
9782210112803_HTR_LDP_257-302.indd 261
B. (Chart 1) The reasons why people eat less meat are for taste,
because they are worried about the use of antibiotics in live-
stock, for environmental reasons, for animal welfare reasons,
to manage their weight, and finally for health reasons.
However, unlike people who are interested in cutting down
meat consumption, non-meat eaters put forward animal welfare
as the main reason why people should eat less or even no meat.
C. Les élèves doivent réagir à une citation (extraite d’un article
du site https://happiful.com/5-types-of-vegan/). On incitera les
élèves à consulter la page 190 pour exprimer l’opinion, l’accord
et le désaccord.
→ According to the documents, it seems that for the people
who already do not eat meat, animal welfare is their main rea-
son for becoming a vegan or vegetarian, but for those who are
simply interested in eating less meat but not giving it up com-
pletely, health is their main motivator.
→ That is not strictly true. I think many people our age are
reducing their meat consumption for the environment.
→ I am on the fence about the reasons why I would ever choose
to stop eating meat. I have every reason to believe that it will
help the environment, but I am more worried about my health.
3 Californian laws
187
Présentation des documents
• La Californie a souvent été considérée comme un état pro-
gressiste aux États-Unis, et ceci se vérifie aussi dans la manière
d’appréhender la question du bien-être animal. L’article relate
le vote de deux lois en Californie : l’interdiction du commerce
de fourrures et l’interdiction des animaux de cirque – décisions
saluées par les militants des droits des animaux et notamment
PETA (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals). Pour en
savoir plus :
– Loi sur les fourrures : https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/
billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=201920200AB44
– Loi sur les animaux de cirque : http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/
faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=201920200SB313
• La photographie de l’acteur Joaquin Phoenix /wɔ:'ki:n ˈfiːnɪks/
date du 19 février 2019. Il tient une pancarte parrainée par
PETA demandant à adopter cette loi (qui sera finalement votée
en octobre 2019).
Joaquin Phoenix, lauréat de l’Oscar du meilleur acteur en 2020
pour son rôle dans « The Joker », est végétalien et est ardent
défenseur de la cause animale. Il est notamment le narrateur
du documentaire-choc de Shaun Monson « Earthlings » (2005),
film qui, à l’aide d’images en caméra cachée, révèle les atroci-
tés commises sur les animaux dans différentes industries (agro-
alimentaire, vêtements, divertissement, science…).
Les informations ci-après serviront à éclairer les élèves sur les
actions de certains acteurs en Californie en matière de protec-
tion animale.
California, and especially Los Angeles is considered to
have a higher proportion of vegetarians and vegans in
the United States. There are also many famous vegan or
vegetarian stars who live there and advocate for animal
rights. We can see an example of this in picture B, where
we can see Joaquin Phoenix /wɔ:'ki:n ˈfiːnɪks/, star of
“The Joker.” He has been a life-long vegan and is very
vocal about the subject.
Unit 17 261
22/09/2020 12:46
 Mise en œuvre et réponses aux questions
A. California passed laws banning the sale and manufacture of
fur products and also passed a law that prohibits most animals
from having to perform in circuses.
B. California was the first to ban the sale and manufacture of
fur products, but the third to keep animals out of circuses, along
with New Jersey and Hawaii.
C. The laws will be regulated by implementing fines of up to
$25,000 per day for circus violations. For fur, the law will go into
effect in 2023 and the fur industry is likely to try to get this law
repealed so it is unclear how exactly this will be implemented.
D. Cette question permettra aux élèves de rebrasser les
expressions de la cause (because of, since, for, due to, this is
the reason why, thanks to…), de la conséquence (therefore,
consequently, as a result, so/thus, hence…) et de travailler sur
les modaux.
→ Perhaps they will continue with banning leather goods since
California seems concerned by the use of animals for clothing.
→ They might continue by signing a bill against the use of ani-
mals in zoos as a result of their interest in stopping the use of
animals in entertainment.
→ So that animals can be liberated from unnecessary suffering,
California could pass a law stating that synthetic meat is used
whenever possible.
E. Cette activité pourra donner lieu à une interaction orale, les
élèves ne partageant pas nécessairement le même avis sur ces
photos. On invitera les élèves à manipuler les expressions de
l’accord, du désaccord, de l’opinion et de la conséquence. On
pourra les renvoyer si besoin à la rubrique « Spice up your
vocabulary » p.190.
Production possible :
Student 1: I would choose photo A. When you see how ridicu-
lous the poor bears are made to dress up and ride a bicycle,
there is no reason to have animals in circuses.
Student 2: I’m not sure about that. I would choose photo B.
We can see Joaquin Phoenix, a prominent animal rights activist
holding a sign to pass the circus act. I think he will be more con-
vincing and get people to read the article, since he is famous,
and people might want to know why he wants to end the use
of animals in circuses.
Student 1: I’d agree with you if it were an article about him, but
the article is about the bill passed in California to ban circuses
as well as fur. I might add that, seeing the bears riding a bicycle
is more likely to make people react than seeing a celebrity.
Student 2: Yes, perhaps, but generally speaking, if you ask me,
the bears are meant to be entertaining and there may be some
people who like that, and they may not understand that the bill
is against this.
4 Is veganism
just a trend?
187
Dans ce Your Turn! les élèves devront d’abord synthétiser
les informations recueillies dans les documents de la double
page.Ils formeront ensuite des binômes pour débattre.
On pourra leur demander d’enregistrer leur production, ce qui
permettra de leur fournir un corrigé ou des conseils personna-
lisés, avant la tâche finale.
On pourra également envisager de faire débattre quelques
binômes devant la classe.
262 Unit 17
9782210112803_HTR_LDP_257-302.indd 262
Les expressions suivantes compléteront la page « Spice up your
vocabulary » (p.190) :
Donner son opinion : To my mind…; To me ; In my
opinion… ; I think/I feel/I believe that;
Don’t forget that…/Don’t you think that…?
Exprimer son accord : I agree with you; I share your
view; That’s right / true; Exactly! Absolutely! Of course!
Exprimer son désaccord : I don’t agree with you;
I disagree with you; I don’t see it that way/(I think) you’re
wrong! ; Certainly not! ; Nonsense!
Donner des exemples / expliquer : For example/For
instance; Let me give you an example; We could also
say…; I’ll explain it to you.
Organiser ses idées : First of all/Secondly/Then; On the
one hand … on the other hand; On the whole ; In other
words ; To sum up I’d say …
Demander des explications : Sorry, I didn’t get that;
Can you repeat what you said, please? What’s that
again? What exactly do you mean?; What do you mean
when you say that …? ; I didn’t get your point.
Atténuer son point de vue, concéder : You may be
right, but…; It may be true, but…; I suppose you’re right,
but…; That’s all very well but…; In a way…/To some
extent ; Sure, but still…
Couper poliment la parole : Excuse me but; Sorry to
interrupt you, but…; Can I just say something?; Hang on!
(familiar)
Exprimer la cause : Because of; since; for; due to; this is
the reason why; thanks to
Exprimer la conséquence : Therefore; consequently;
as a result; so/thus; hence
Production possible :
→ Thanks to the statistics we can see that veganism is becoming
more mainstream and more people are starting to worry about
their health, how animals are raised for food, the environment
and the way we treat animals. As consumers ask for more of
these types of products, more are created. I think it is important
to listen to what customers want and the new generation seems
to be very concerned about these issues. More countries may
implement the same laws as California to outlaw fur trapping,
because fur is not a product that many people are using any-
more.
→ If you ask me, veganism will not last long. Right now, we can
see celebrities who are doing it and so we do it, but it will not
last.
→ I’m not sure about that… I think that our generation is wor-
ried about the environment and it certainly seems to be better
not to eat so much meat.
→ I beg to differ with that, look at why most people are eating
less meat. There are more people who are worried about their
health than anything else!
→ I’d agree with you if we knew who exactly was asked the
question. I’m sure if we asked our generation, the answers
wouldn’t be the same. If we do not implement changes in our
lifestyles, animals and the environment will suffer.
22/09/2020 12:46
 Animals and
3 ism. It puts the animals and humans on the same level
188-189
Scientific Research
Malgré les progrès accomplis depuis 1975, année où le philo-
sophe australien Peter Singer dénonçait les souffrances des
animaux de laboratoire dans Animal Liberation, le sort des ani-
maux cobayes continue de diviser profondément l’opinion
publique et la communauté scientifique.
Cette double-page offre aux élèves une variété de points de
vue dans laquelle ils pourront puiser des arguments lors du
débat proposé en tâche finale. Parmi les élèves, comme parmi
la communauté scientifique, il est possible que la conclusion de
ce débat soit… Let’s agree to disagree! tant la question semble
clivante.
Si l’on souhaite gagner du temps, on peut diviser la classe en
trois groupes. Chaque groupe prendra en charge un document
et répondra aux questions correspondantes. Les informations
seront ensuite partagées avec les autres groupes.
DIFFÉRENCIATION
– Le premier document (A patient’s point of view, p. 188) sera
réservé aux élèves fragiles.
– Le deuxième document (The American science community,
p. 188) est plus technique et peut intéresser particulièrement
les élèves scientifiques.
– Le troisième document (Dr Jane Goodall, p. 189) peut être
proposé aux élèves plus à l’aise.
1
188
A patient’s point of view
Présentation du document
Le texte est l’un des nombreux témoignages pro-expérimen-
tation animale que propose l’association britannique « Under-
standing Animal Research ».
Pour en savoir plus : www.understandinganimalresearch.org.uk/
why/life-stories
This open letter to the Oxford Times shares the opinion
of a patient who was healed thanks to research that had
been done on animals. The document offers this point
of view about the necessity of finding cures for humans
and is often an argument that is used when defending
animal experimentation: if the sacrifice of a few animals
helps the majority of humanity, it should be allowed to
9782210112803_HTR_LDP_257-302.indd 263
continue. This is a use of Jeremy Bentham’s Utilitarian-
and sees if the greater good for the most number is
achieved.
Mise en œuvre et réponses aux questions
A. This is an open letter to the Oxford Times. An open letter is
intended for the public, so we can assume that Kevin Elliott
wanted to make his opinion known to the British public. Since
it was a very important moment for him, he wants others to
know that animal testing saved his life.
B. The author had a serious spinal condition and because of
research using animal testing and eventually an operation, he
was left virtually pain-free. His first-hand account indicates the
usefulness of animal testing because, as he says, it was because
of animal-based research that he could have any hope of a cure.
C. The author is open to alternatives that work but remains
unconvinced right now. He says that he wants to see the « best
possible conditions » for animals, yet he thinks that currently
animal-based research is better than alternatives.
D. Cette activité permet de mener un débat. Les expressions
de l’accord et du désaccord et celles de l’opinion seront
activement rebrassées à cette occasion.
Remarque : Si la vidéo « Before Class! » a été travaillée, elle
pourra être rappelée aux élèves, puisqu’elle expose les alter-
natives ou les limitations à l’expérimentation animale (« The
3Rs » : Replacement, Reduction, Refinement) et pourra de ce
fait servir à étoffer les réponses des élèves.
→ Remember what was said in the “Before Class!” video.
I’m convinced that scientists are beginning to see the limitations
to animal research as technology has become more advanced.
In that sense, I agree with the author to a certain extent. Animal
experimentations should only be used when NAMs (New
Approach Methods) are truly impossible.
→ After reading the last part of this text, I agree that ideally,
we will find alternatives, but until then we need to keep doing
animal research to help people.
→ As far as I am concerned, I do not agree/I disagree. We should
not use animals to save humans. Even with animal tests, it’s very
difficult to know exactly how chemicals will affect humans, since
different types of animals react in different ways to the same
chemical.
2
The American 188
science community
Présentation du document
Ce document est une réaction du groupe américain « Speaking
of Research » qui demande d’annuler la nouvelle règle qui exige
de trouver des alternatives aux tests sur les animaux pour l’éli-
miner d’ici à 2035. Ce document montre à quel point les avis
sur l’utilisation des animaux au titre des bénéfices scientifiques
peuvent être tranchés au sein même de la communauté scien-
tifique américaine.
Les élèves intéressés par le droit pourront être orientés vers
ce lien qui explique comment et à quelles conditions les tests
sur les animaux peuvent être effectués aux États-Unis :
www.hg.org/legal-articles/what-are-the-laws-regarding-animal-
testing-31865
Unit 17 263
22/09/2020 12:46
 Pour mieux comprendre les NAMs (New Approach Methods)
voici la liste que l’EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) a
créée dans sa directive :
www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2019-12/documents/alterna-
tive_testing_nams_list_first_update_final.pdf
Les New Approach Methods sont principalement des tests réa-
lisés « in vitro » (sur des micro-organismes, cellules ou organes
en dehors de leur contexte naturel) ou « in chemico » (une étude
de la réaction des combinaisons des produits chimiques).
Le site officiel de The Environmental Protection Agency peut
être donné pour faciliter la compréhension du contexte (efforts
pour réduire l’utilisation des animaux dans les tests) :
www.epa.gov/research/efforts-reduce-animal-testing-epa
On pourra fournir si besoin, et au moment opportun, les élé-
ments suivants :
In September 2019 the chief of the United States Envi-
ronmental Protection Agency (EPA), Andrew Wheeler
announced that the agency would greatly reduce the
use of animals in toxicity tests with the goal of eliminat-
ing all routine safety tests on mammals in 2035 and only
doing tests when absolutely necessary and with special
permission after that. This document is the reaction to
this announcement by a group that lobbies for the use
of animal testing in science. With this document, one can
see that there is a raging debate within the American
science community over the validity and utility of animal
testing in science, and that currently steps are being
made to phase out this practice, angering many.
Mise en œuvre et réponses aux questions
Les questions du manuel aideront les élèves à cibler les infor-
mations les plus pertinentes pour la compréhension du
document.
A. The group “Speaking of Research” sent a letter to the Envi-
ronmental Protection Agency (EPA). This advocacy group was
angry about the new instructions to start reducing and eventu-
ally end chemical safety tests on animals. Their goal in writing
this was to have the EPA withdraw this measure, because they
believe that research on animals helps determine what is safe
for humans, other animals and the environment better than
alternative tests.
B. NAM stands for “New Approach Methods”. An example
would be to a computer-based mode, in vitro tests or in chem-
ico tests. These are the “replacement” examples of the 3Rs
mentioned in the “Before Class!” video.
C. The group believes that these methods have not been effec-
tive in proving if chemicals are hazardous or not. They think that
research on animals is vital to determining whether products
are safe for humans, other animals, or the environment. They
also think that there have not been enough peer-reviewed data
produced that demonstrates that NAMs are better than animal
tests. They also believe the deadlines are arbitrary.
D. The group believes that the tests need to be done on living
organisms and for this reason animals must be used. They go
even further by saying that someone who wants to value animal
lives should be in favour of the responsible use of animal
research in order to protect a greater number of animals and
humans in the long run.
264 Unit 17
9782210112803_HTR_LDP_257-302.indd 264
À l’issue de l’étude, les élèves en charge de ce document
peuvent dire s’ils sont plutôt d’accord avec The Environmental
Protection Agency ou avec Speaking of Research en utilisant
les expressions de l’opinion, de l’accord et du désaccord.
→ To my mind the EPA is justified in stating that more research
should be done without the use of animals. They’re not saying
that animals can’t be used at all, they’re simply saying that
whenever possible we should start using other methods. What
do you think of that?
→ I don’t see it that way. If scientists say that they need animals
instead of models in order to better do their research, we should
believe them! They know what works best and what will bene-
fit humans the most. If that means using animal tests more fre-
quently, we shouldn’t restrict it.
3 Dr. Jane Goodall
189
Présentation du document
Le 15 mai 2006 Jane Goodall prononça un discours à l’univer-
sité de Toronto au Canada sur les similitudes entre les chim-
panzés et les humains, dont nous reproduisons dans le manuel
quelques extraits. Le discours peut être visionné dans son
intégralité sur :
www.tvo.org/video/archive/jane-goodall-on-chimpanzee-and-
human-emotions
On pourra fournir aux élèves les informations suivantes :
Dr Jane Goodall (born in London in 1934) is the world’s
leading expert on chimpanzees. Her most famous work
is on primate family and social ties, which she began in
1960 in Tanzania. Her idea that each primate was unique
and had a personality was revolutionary at the time. She
was also one of the first scientists to notice the use of
tools by non-humans, when she noticed that chimpan-
zees would construct tools in order to get termites out
of their mounds. Her findings completely changed how
the scientific community regarded chimpanzees when
she observed that they were not pacifistic vegetarians,
but instead hunted, ate meat and even waged war on
one another.
She became famous in 1962 when the photos of her
studying chimpanzees were used in the first documen-
tary created by the National Geographic Society.
In 1977, she created the Jane Goodall Institute, which is
aimed at protecting chimpanzees but also conservation
and development in Africa by preserving forests.
She has also been an activist for animals since 1986
including being a president for Advocates for Animals,
which campaigns against the use of animals in science,
zoos, farming and sport and founding the group Ethnol-
ogists for the Ethical Treatment of Animals in 2000.
Among her many distinctions, she became a UN Mes-
senger of Peace in 2002, she received the title Com-
mander of the Order of the British Empire and became
‘Dame Jane Morris-Goodall, DBE’ in 2004.
In this excerpt from a 2006 speech, primatologist Jane
Goodall looks at the similarities between chimpanzees
and human emotions, preserving the environment, and
hope. Dr Goodall demonstrates that animals are capable
of much more than humans have traditionally believed,
including pain and suffering when “incarcerated… in
5 foot by 5 foot cages to investigate otherwise uniquely
human diseases” (l.10-12).
22/09/2020 12:46
 Anticipation
Avant de faire lire l’extrait du discours, on peut montrer le docu-
ment vidéo suivant (5’) sur Jane Goodall et son histoire (ou
demander aux élèves de la visionner à la maison pour gagner
du temps).
https://video.nationalgeographic.com/video/00000144-0a34-
d3cb-a96c-7b3d061b0000
Mise en œuvre et réponses aux questions
A. We share 99% of the same DNA with chimpanzees and we
could even get a blood transfusion from chimpanzees. Further-
more we have similar immune systems and can suffer from the
same diseases. They are also able to use tools and many other
intellectual performances such as learning and using sign lan-
guage. What’s more, they are also capable of emotions such as
happiness, sadness, fear, and despair. On top of that, they are
capable of suffering both mentally and physically, which is why
Dr. Goodall points out the irony of scientists realising that chimps
are physically similar to humans while ignoring their ability to
suffer from living in small changes.
B. Since the 1960s and thanks to the work that Dr Goodall has
done, people have understood how similar chimpanzees are to
humans. Scientists had discovered the physical similarities that
humans share with chimpanzees, that we can get blood trans-
fusions from them, as well as their susceptibility to the same
diseases. It took people longer to accept what Dr. Goodall dis-
covered, which was the fact that they are also very similar in
behaviour. They are able to make and use tools, which used to
be a defining characteristic of humanity compared to animals.
She has also shown that they are capable of communication
with us, something else that until recently people believed ani-
mals were not capable of. Finally, something that people are
still learning more about is the ability for chimpanzees to have
emotions.
C. Jane Goodall is telling us that we should have respect not
only for animals that are very similar to humans, like chimpan-
zees, but also for the other animal beings that we share the
planet with. She is using what she learnt about chimpanzees to
show that perhaps other animals are as worthy of our respect.
When she first started out, people did not know much about
chimpanzees, so she might be saying that it is the same for many
other animals that we do not fully understand. She is challeng-
ing us to change how we view animals.
D. Cette activité amènera les élèves à réutiliser les expressions
de l’accord, du désaccord, et également les expressions de
l’opinion. On renverra les élèves à la rubrique « Spice up your
vocabulary » à la page 190 du manuel.
Donner son opinion : To my mind…; To me; In my opinion…;
I think /I feel /I believe that;
Don’t forget that…; Don’t you think that…?
Exprimer son accord : I agree with you; I share your view; that’s
right / true; Exactly! Absolutely! Of course!
Exprimer son désaccord : I don’t agree with you; I disagree
with you; I don’t see it that way / (I think) you’re wrong! ;
Certainly not! ; Nonsense!
Donner des exemples / expliquer : For example / For instance;
Let me give you an example; We could also say…; I’ll explain it
to you.
→ I believe that that Dr Goodall’s research has had an important
impact on the way that humans view other animals. Thanks to
her research, we have been able to see just how much animals
9782210112803_HTR_LDP_257-302.indd 265
can feel emotions and suffer from pain. Let me give you an
example: in her speech she says “All these things that I’ve just
said were considered absolutely not possible when I first went
to Cambridge University in England in 1961. And now, finally,
all these years later, we’re moving into a world where even
science is beginning to accept that these things are true…”
(l. 30-35). While it’s difficult to know exactly what animals are
experiencing, luckily, we have people like Dr Goodall who acts
as the spokeswoman of the animal kingdom. Thanks to her
“gradually, the voice of the animals is growing” (l. 42-43).
→ Nonsense! Her research may have changed how we view
chimpanzees, but not all animals. As she’s shown us chimpan-
zees are 99 % similar to us in DNA, so it would make sense that
we would treat them differently, but she never said that other
animals are that similar to us!
your project
189
Les débats américains sont souvent formels et pratiqués dans
un « Debate club », « Forensics team » ou « Speech class ». Il y
a la « American Forensics Association » qui peut encadrer des
lycées et universités dans les débats contradictoires. Les élèves
reçoivent des notes basées sur le contenu, le style et la straté-
gie et savent uniquement quel avis il faut défendre quelques
minutes seulement avant le débat.
Le respect de la parole et des idées des autres est essentiel
et doit être rappelé aux élèves. Comme dans les débats amé-
ricains les élèves ne vont pas nécessairement défendre leur
véritable point de vue. Il est essentiel toutefois de rester sur
une ligne d’argumentation donnée dès le départ.
Pour faciliter la préparation de ce projet, la classe sera divisée
en deux camps. On choisira de laisser les élèves tirer au sort
leur camp, ou déterminer qui défendra quelle idée.
– Affirmative: the use of animals for research in science is nec-
essary.
– Negative: the use of animals for research in science is unnec-
essary.
Une fois que les élèves auront pris connaissance de la position
qu’ils doivent défendre, ils devront préparer/revoir leurs argu-
ments en prenant soin de ne rédiger aucune phrase, mais en
privilégiant les mots-clés, supports de leur argumentation.
On invitera les élèves à s’appuyer sur les arguments issus des
documents travaillés ou ayant émergé lors d’échanges.
En complément, et avant le débat, on pourra organiser une
séance en salle informatique pour laisser les élèves trouver
d’autres arguments. On leur demandera alors de citer leurs
sources.
Voici quelques pistes :
• Pour aider les élèves avec des arguments sur le sujet :
www.bbc.co.uk/ethics/animals/using/experiments_1.shtml
• Pour les expériences sur les animaux :
https://med.stanford.edu/animalresearch/why-animal-research.html
www.understandinganimalresearch.org.uk/contact-us/science-
action-network/forty-reasons-why-we-need-animals-in-research/
• Contre l’utilisation des animaux :
www.crueltyfreeinternational.org/why-we-do-it/arguments-
against-animal-testing
www.peta.org/issues/animals-used-for-experimentation/
animal-testing-bad-science/
Unit 17 265
22/09/2020 12:46
 Les élèves qui ont préparé le côté « affirmatif » créeront une La Worksheet n°38 ne servira que dans le cas du débat
fiche de révision en regroupant leurs arguments, et ils feront américain.
de même pour le côté « négatif ». Ces fiches aideront tous les
élèves à réviser avant le débat, ne sachant pas à l’avance la
position qu’ils devront défendre.
On renverra les élèves aux mots-clés du débat (p. 190).
Remarque : Pour des raisons pratiques de simplification,
on pourra décider de ne pas mener ce débat à la façon des
Américains, l’essentiel étant que les élèves interagissent selon
les règles d’un débat classique, en respectant le point de vue
adverse, tout en essayant de convaincre son auditoire.
Vous trouverez néanmoins ci-après quelques règles si le débat
à l’américaine est choisi :

In the United States there is frequently a debate team in

high school.
The students on the debate team compete with other
schools to see who has the most coherent arguments.
The format that is used is called the “Lincoln-Douglas
debate” (also known as the LD debate or the values
debate), which refers to the senatorial debate between
Abraham Lincoln and Stephan Douglas for Illinois in
1858 over the relevance of slavery.
These types of debates are about moral and ethical
issues and a common topic is animal rights.
This debate style is one-on-one and there are 7 rounds
where the affirmative and negative sides of a moral issue
have a chance to make their cases as well as cross-exam-
ine one another.
The traditional debate lasts 36 minutes:
– 7 minutes (introduction by the affirmative side)
– 3 minutes (cross examination by the negative side)
– 8 minutes (negative constructive)
– 3 minutes (cross examination by the affirmative side)
– Rebuttal stages:
– 4 minutes (affirmative side responds)
– 7 minutes (negative side responds and concludes)
– 4 minutes (affirmative side responds and concludes)
Worksheet disponible sur le site compagnon enseignant
(en version PDF et en version modifiable) :
http://113916.site.magnard.fr/ressources/1759
Vous trouverez ci-dessous quelques exemples qui résument les
idées présentes dans le manuel, que les élèves utiliseront pour
amorcer le débat.
Affirmative → Possible arguments: The use of animals in
scientific research to help humans is not done simply to torture
and kill animals, it is done for the greater good. This is what we
have used for centuries and thanks to these experiments people
like Kevin Elliot, who wrote an open letter to the Oxford Times,
has been cured. As he states himself, he would love to find
alternatives, but that simply is not possible yet. We need to find
cures to diseases and advance in medicine and test the safety
of food products before we can give them to humans, and this
is the best way we have of ensuring their safety. We wouldn’t
have many of the medicines we use today or vaccines to cure
illnesses without the use of animal research.

You may adapt these times to make it more manageable
(16 minutes, for example 3, 1, 4, 1, 2, 3, 2) or by having
“teams” to allow various students to participate.
The audience also has an important role of being the
ones to judge the validity of the moral arguments.
This is a great practice for students in Terminale who are
preparing for the philosophy portion of the baccalauréat
to allow them to analyse how strong moral arguments
are.
Negative → Possible arguments: It is not morally ethical to
inflict pain and suffering on animals. As Dr Jane Goodall has
pointed out, animals are capable of emotions and certainly of
feeling pain. Why aren’t we doing these experiments on
humans? Because it would be unethical to inflict harm on another
person or potentially kill them. We think that because animals
cannot communicate in the same ways with us that the use of
animals is more justified than a human, but we should consider
them the same. It is speciesism when we put one group of ani-
mals (in this case humans) above another.

For more clarification a document was created by the

National Forensic League in the United States to help
educators:
www.speechanddebate.org/wp-content/uploads/Intro_to_
LD.J.Roberts.7.5.27.pdf
A video that can help recap the information is available
at: www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q5_nAtHh9Xk

266 Unit 17

9782210112803_HTR_LDP_257-302.indd 266 22/09/2020 12:46

 Exercice 3
Critères Non En cours Acquis
d’évaluation POC POI acquis d’acquisition A. Fur coats must be banned.
L’élève respecte bien le B. Veganism may be an option for the future.
format du débat. C. Chimpanzees can be very friendly.
L’élève donne son point de D. You should reconsider your position.
vue et argumente de façon E. It must be difficult to be a vegetarian in France.
étayée pour convaincre.

L’élève illustre ses propos à Exercice 4

l’aide d’exemples précis (en
s’appuyant sur des chiffres, A The main thing is animals are worthy of being treated with
des avis de scientifiques, de respect and do not deserve to be put in pain.
philosophes…).
B. That isn’t exactly true, scientific research has relied heavily
La langue riche lexicalement on the use of animals. The goal wasn’t to put them in pain,
et syntaxiquement permet but we had to.
les nuances.
C. I’d agree with you if we knew that today absolutely no alter-
La prononciation est correcte natives to animal use exist.
et rythmée.
Exercice 5
L’élève ne lit pas et
les énoncés sont fluides. A. Jonathan tells me I shouldn’t wear animal fur.
L’élève écoute les arguments B. Vegans can’t eat animal products.
des autres et répond de C. Animal experiments shouldn’t exist.
manière logique.
D. You don’t have to be a vegetarian to love animals.
Voir aussi la grille d’évaluation critériée adossée au CECRL
Exercice 6 → Interactive Test
(A1 → C1), p. 399 de ce Fichier.

language lab 191

Autres ressources numériques pour les élèves

(QR code/site compagnon)

Audio Words: Sonorisation des principaux termes de l’unité :

Exercice 1
A. Sam does believe she understands the problem.
B. They did think they could get away with it.
C. I did realise I have been wrong all these years.
D. Animals do have feelings too.

Exercice 2
Animals deserve to be treated humanely. They are sentient
beings and shouldn’t be living in cramped cages or be exploited.
There is no reason to inflict pain or kill them just for human gains.
I think it’s too extreme to become vegan and stop eating any
animal products. Sure, I’m not saying we need to be cruel to
animals, but it’s a necessary evil to experiment on animals. Think
of all the diseases we can treat thanks to them!

Unit 17 267

9782210112803_HTR_LDP_257-302.indd 267 22/09/2020 12:46

 AUDIO MYSTERY MP3 n°90
Cet exercice peut se révéler difficile pour certains élèves qui
auront parfois du mal à repérer le début de chaque phrase.
Afin de simplifier la compréhension de cet Audio Mystery, on
pourra choisir de marquer une pause à chaque fois qu’une
phrase se termine.
script MP3 n°90
Listen to the audio recording carefully and write down the
first word of every sentence. With the first letter of each
word you will find the name of a major figure responsible
for changing how we look at animals. You have less than
a minute to solve the mystery. Ready? Let’s go!
Joaquin Phoenix is known to fight for animal rights.
Activists like him abstain from consuming any animal
products. Nowadays, this practice is more accepted. Even
so, not everyone understands it. Going vegan, what does
that mean? Other than not eating any animal products, it
is a whole lifestyle. Opposition to the suffering of animals
is the main reason to become vegan. Deciding not to wear
products made or tested on animals is common practice.
Adopting a plant-based diet is also helpful for the envi-
ronment. Lower CO2 emissions are associated with a
vegan diet. Limiting meat and dairy consumption will thus
help animals and the planet.
Solution : Jane Goodall
268 Unit 17
9782210112803_HTR_LDP_257-302.indd 268
Picture
challenge 191
Le but de ce « Picture challenge » est de rebrasser le champ
lexical étudié tout au long de cette unité.
Présentation du document
Légende de la photo : Animal rights charity PETA UK cam-
paigners staging a protest at the Russian Embassy in London.
The activists are angered at Russia’s plans to send live monkeys
to Mars in 2017.
Production possible :
– The girl in the picture has her face painted like a monkey and
we can read on her PETA-sponsored sign, “Monkeys on Mars:
One Giant Leap Backwards for Mankind.”
– This is a reference to Neil Armstrong’s famous utterance
when he stepped on the moon for the first time, “This is one
small step for a man, one giant leap for mankind”.
– We can imagine that this animal rights activist finds the
exploitation of monkeys in space exploration inhumane.
– She might have seen/heard one of Dr Jane Goodall’s
speeches/documentaries or read one of her many books on
chimpanzees and so, she now finds that humans have a moral
responsibility to protect sentient beings.
– She is advocating against the use of monkeys being sent to
Mars.
– Ordinary citizens are making their voice heard more often in
the question against animal use in research, as PETA has
gained more support.
– The protester may believe that using animals for human gains
is not a real innovation for humanity, because it is putting
animal lives at risk.
22/09/2020 12:46