Table of Contents
# Pulling Wings From Butterflies: The Indefensible Cruelty of Tercio de Varas
In the grand, often romanticized spectacle of the bullfight, there exists a phase so starkly brutal, so devoid of any conceivable justification, that it strips away any pretense of art or tradition, revealing only a raw, calculated act of cruelty. This phase is the *Tercio de Varas*, the picador's stage, and it is nothing short of "pulling wings from butterflies"—a deliberate, systematic weakening of an animal designed to facilitate its eventual demise. To witness it is to confront a profound ethical dissonance, a barbaric anachronism stubbornly clinging to the fabric of modern society.
This isn't merely a critique of bullfighting in general, but a focused condemnation of its most overtly sadistic segment. The *Tercio de Varas* is not a test of skill or bravery; it is a premeditated act of maiming, an unfair advantage taken under the guise of spectacle, and it demands our unequivocal rejection.
The Calculated Maiming: A Precursor to Suffering
The *Tercio de Varas* begins with the entrance of the picador, mounted on a heavily padded horse (the *peto*), armed with a *vara*—a lance with a sharp, pyramidal steel tip. The objective is not merely to "test" the bull's aggression, but to strategically wound it, weakening its neck and shoulder muscles.
The Mechanism of Mutilation
- **The Picador's Role:** Positioned to receive the bull's charge, the picador drives the *vara* into the bull's *morrillo* (a muscle mass on its neck). This isn't a superficial prick; the *vara* penetrates deep, twisting and tearing muscle and tissue.
- **The Physical Impact:** The wound causes significant blood loss, excruciating pain, and irreversible damage to the muscles crucial for the bull's head movements and charges. It compromises its balance, its ability to lift its head, and its overall stamina.
- **The Unfair Advantage:** This deliberate weakening fundamentally alters the "fight." A bull, naturally powerful and agile, is systematically debilitated, transforming a potential contest into a protracted execution. The subsequent stages, involving the *banderillas* and the *muleta*, are made significantly easier for the matador due to the picador's initial assault.
Tradition vs. Evolving Ethics: A Moral Imperative
Defenders often invoke "tradition" and "cultural heritage" to shield the *Tercio de Varas* from criticism. However, tradition, by its very nature, is not immutable. Societies evolve, and with them, our understanding of ethics, compassion, and animal welfare.
The Flawed Logic of Heritage
- **Selective Preservation:** If tradition were the sole arbiter of morality, many practices now universally condemned would still persist. Cultural practices should be subject to ethical scrutiny, especially when they involve inflicting intentional suffering on sentient beings.
- **Ignoring Sentience:** Modern scientific consensus unequivocally recognizes animals as sentient beings capable of experiencing pain, fear, and distress. To disregard this in the name of tradition is to cling to an outdated, anthropocentric view of the world.
- **A Stain on Culture:** Far from enriching culture, the *Tercio de Varas* arguably diminishes it, presenting a spectacle of unnecessary cruelty that clashes with contemporary values of empathy and respect for life. True cultural richness should elevate, not degrade.
A Spectacle of Unfairness, Not Art
The argument that bullfighting, including the *Tercio de Varas*, is an art form or a dance between man and beast crumbles under the weight of the bull's suffering. Art, at its most profound, seeks to evoke beauty, emotion, or truth. The *Tercio de Varas* primarily evokes anguish.
The Deception of "Bravery"
- **Skewed Contest:** How can there be bravery when one participant is systematically handicapped before the main event? The bull's initial charges are met with a weapon designed to incapacitate, not merely deter.
- **The Audience's Role:** For many spectators, the sight of a bull bleeding profusely, struggling against the *vara*, is not a moment of artistic appreciation but one of discomfort or even revulsion. The aesthetic appeal is overshadowed by the stark reality of premeditated injury.
- **Defining Art:** If art requires the deliberate infliction of pain and the systematic weakening of an animal, then our definition of art is tragically distorted. Genuine art finds its expression through skill, creativity, and profound emotion, not through the exploitation of suffering.
Addressing the Counterarguments
Proponents of the *Tercio de Varas* often present several arguments, each of which falls short under ethical examination.
- **"The bull is bred for this; it's aggressive by nature."** While *Toros Bravos* are bred for strength and aggression, this does not grant humans license to torture them. Breeding for a specific purpose does not negate an animal's capacity for pain or justify its prolonged suffering. An animal's inherent aggression is a defense mechanism, not an invitation for abuse.
- **"It's necessary to test the bull's bravery and allow the matador to understand its charge."** There are countless ways to observe an animal's behavior without resorting to deep punctures and severe blood loss. If the matador's "art" or "safety" can only be achieved by inflicting such harm, then the very foundations of that art are morally bankrupt.
- **"It's part of a ritual, and outsiders don't understand it."** While cultural context is important, it cannot override universal ethical principles concerning the prevention of unnecessary suffering. The capacity for empathy transcends cultural boundaries.
Conclusion: A Call for Compassion and Progress
The *Tercio de Varas* is a stark reminder of a past era when human dominion over animals was often expressed through brutality. In an increasingly interconnected and compassionate world, where animal welfare is a growing concern, such practices stand out as egregious affronts to our collective conscience.
To continue defending the *Tercio de Varas* is to defend the deliberate, calculated infliction of pain for entertainment. It is to prioritize a contentious tradition over basic empathy and modern ethical standards. Just as we have learned to reject other forms of institutionalized cruelty, it is time to recognize the *Tercio de Varas* for what it truly is: an indefensible act of barbarity. It is time for society to evolve beyond pulling wings from butterflies, and to demand an end to this brutal spectacle.
