Herbivores = friendly, carnivores = mean

[Lehcar]

Authors of books, movies, cartoons, video games, etc all seem to believe this, and honestly it's kind of bewildering.

 

Like in any work of fiction involving dinosaurs, people seem to believe that herbivorous dinosaurs are always friendly and harmless, even if they are large enough to crush you with one foot, and carnivores are always mean and will chase you to the ends of the Earth trying to eat you, even though they've never seen humans before and therefore logically wouldn't try to just eat one (what if we were poisonous??).

 

I mean in real life, herbivores are often far more territorial and aggressive than carnivores and will kill you deader than dead if you cross them. The hippo (which is much more dangerous and deadly, and was feared by the ancient Egyptians far, far more than the famous Nile crocodile), the elephant, the rhino, domestic cattle, and the cape buffalo are some of the most dangerous animals in the world. Oh, and herbivorous birds like swans, pheasants, geese, ostriches, and the cassowary are all extremely unfriendly and have been responsible for all unprovoked bird attacks against humans. Every single one. Just because it won't eat you, absolutely does not mean that it won't hurt you.

 

Then on the other hand, we have carnivores like cats, dogs, and ferrets, who are the best and most popular pets in the world.

 

Strange.

[MidbossVyers]

Simple logic to appease simple people.

[Oubliette]

Couple problems with your argument, comparing fiction to reality (fiction has to make sense, reality can constantly be full of wtf) comparing pets to wild animals is pretty much apples and oranges (they're both fruit but I wouldn't suggest a substitution of one for the other in a pie recipe) and comparing modern mammals to prehistoric lizardlike birdy things of which it's obvious we know next to nothing just by looking at the recent evidence that turns everyone's favorite terrifying giant lizard T-rex into a prehistoric chicken.

 

Anywho one by one shall we:

 

The hippo and rhino are both near sighted which makes them tend to strike fast and hard once they notice movement that they can't identify as safe, keep reasonable distance upwind and they're not at all likely to attack. Elephants have pretty good eyesight and happen to be big enough not to need to fear most modern predators but they're also smart enough not to take any chances when they see a viable threat, news flash people are BIG threats to elephants and have been for pretty much all of recorded history. Domestic cattle are, for the most part, very docile but again pretty damn big compared to a human; if they so much as make a wrong step let alone fall over they can crush a person pretty badly and besides instances in which the animal is deliberately riled up (bull fighting/wrangling, running with bulls) pretty much not just harmless but kind of nice. I don't know much about the cape buffalo. All of that leads to plenty of reason for the previously mentioned animals to injure someone.

 

Birds are birds, generally quite capable across the board of being pretty nasty in the same set of circumstances (too close to the nest, too close to the colony, too close to them) because they're also delicate creatures with ridiculously vulnerable offspring that are prayed on by pretty much everything including their own; to them being 'too close' (to what is up to them) is an act of provocation. That said, some of these bird attacks can be terrifying and even cause some injury but it's very rare to hear of death by a non predatory bird (there aren't even many instances of death by predatory birds that doesn't also involve an infant or very small toddler.).

 

All that said if we looked at the behavior of modern birds rather than lizards, which were the previous model for what we believed dinosaurs to be like (and curiously missing from your examples of less than harmless plant eaters - seriously when was the last time anyone was attacked by a gecko) upon which most previous fictional accounts were also based, then yes it seems probable that herbivorous dinosaurs would be a bit less friendly than depicted though carnivorous ones would almost certainly still be happy as hell to take a bite out of you (most predators learn what is safe to eat by eating or attempting to eat something not by deductive reasoning or "oh I don't recognize that, might be poisonous").

 

And of course: none of that takes into account any of the basic structure of fiction that demands moments of action dispersed between moments of peace, heartwarming mixed with thrilling, a protagonist and an antagonist, realistic enough to enjoy but not actually reality.

[TheMastersSon]

It comes down to chemistry. As livestock are killed they see others being killed ahead of them, they release adrenaline which winds up in the meat.

 

The physical effects of this have been well documented for over a half century. Adrenaline in, agression out. This old SCTV clip is the first thing that came to mind (starts at 1:31):

[Deleted1205226User]

Herbivores = friendly, carnivores = mean is an (wrong) emotional and moral translation of a simple fact: herbivores are preys, carnivores are predators.

Predators attack preys, preys defend their lives with the means they have.