Today many researchers discuss the peculiarities of the ecological misbalance, the environmental protection, and the effects of the human invasion in the animal world. All these problems involve the issue of the humans’ relationships with animals. It is possible to note that the history of these relationships is as long as the history of our planet. Many philosophers and scientists argued the question of the distinction between the humans and animals with focusing on the problem of the human’s possible superiority. Thus, today more and more people are inclined to think that humans are the leaders in this world. However, to understand the peculiarities of the relationships between men and animals, it is necessary to concentrate on the notion of ‘animalization’ as the aspect of this distinction and its main consequences. Although the problem of the distinction is still actively discussed, it is possible to determine such consequences as the correlation of the concept of ‘animalization’ and the notion of ‘humanity’, the connection of the problem with the question of civilization, and the effects of animalization on men, women, and children. In spite of the fact the concept of ‘animalization’ can be frequently observed in the scholarly literature and in press, the problem of its definition remains current because different philosophers, scholars, and scientists determine various aspects for the necessary focus in the possible definition. Today animalization can be considered as the act of human’s behaving like an animal, which means that a person is too cruel or even lacks the normal human qualities under the influence of anger or any other conditions. Moreover, animalization can be also discussed as the opposite notion for the process of humanization which also becomes popular today, especially with references to the people’s behaviour with their pets. Can the fact of humans’ animalization be considered as the breaking of the natural balance in the world? What are the ethic aspects of the issue? The first significant consequence of the problem of the clear distinction between the world of humans and animals is in the absolute necessity of this distinction. There are many arguments that humans and animals as the beings which share the space of our planet should be discussed as equals in their rights on the necessary natural resources as the sources of their life. The problem of humans’ rights in the contrast to the problem of animals’ rights is also discussed in the fields of ethics and philosophy. Thus, Levinas even states that animals should be considered as ethical beings with their own rights, but he also accentuates the possibility of the human’s superiority in this world as a being having a ‘face’ (Levinas 2004). These rather contradicting considerations contribute to the development of the further discussion of the question. That is why it is possible to emphasize the fact that in the context of the modern civilization the distinction between animals and humans is intensified by the increased opposition of these two worlds: the world of animals and the world of humans. With the gradual breaking the natural bonds between the animals and humans, the ro