LECTURE HALL
Non-Human Primates

---

What's up with the term "Non-Human Primates?"

How many people remember a time in history when you there were signs in certain parts of the country referring to African-Americans and other minorities as "non-whites." Of course, these signs were written by "white" human beings to describe other human beings who were not "white."
It was a clear and obvious example of racial bias and prejudice.

For a number of years now, Science has adopted the term "non-human primates" to describe apes. We are told that it is accepted in the scientific community above the old-fashioned term "anthropoid" which means "human-like." Why? We aren't sure.

We just wonder if the term "non-human primates" might be considered as bias and prejudice as the term "non-whites."

It is clearly and obviously a term designed by human primates to describe another primate which is not a "human." Not only are apes "not human" in the eyes of Science, they are "non-human." Which is very misleading because of the simple fact that apes are very human-like in shape, intelligence, relationships and gesture.

Centuries ago Indonesians gave the red-haired ape they found in the jungle the name of "Orangutan" which means "people of the forest." Then Science came along and demoted them to being merely apes and "non-human" primates.

Perhaps it's time Science moved past years of bias and prejudice and invented a new term for describing our fellow primates in the animal kingdom.

Back