realitybites (13041)

(email not shown publicly)

Journal of realitybites (13041)

Monday August 20, 07

barking up the wrong tree

10:19 AM

Wow, Moz is back for round 2! He's playing four dates at The Fillmore in San Francisco! I saw the Violent Femmes at this venue in '89.' I was a bit stoned so I can't remember all the details. But it was very punk--to me anyway--loud, raw, sexy!

Also, Moz is returning to The Pearl in Las Vegas. I don't blame him. The venue is really top notch. I'm also glad to learn that he has rescheduled the shows that he had canceled earlier this summer. And as far as I can tell, there has been no more talk of playing in Tehran.

I mentioned Moz and Tehran in my previous journal entry. A heated discussion regarding eating animals ensued. While some good debate came about, there was also some emotionally charged mud slinging going on. Each person who participated is a good person--I know this from my prior interactions with her/him. And though I am glad to see that entry is now laid to rest, this debate will many circles--now and for years to come. There is no win/win solution at the moment.

I do want to state for the record, that I do care about animals. Admittedly, I am a bit of a speciesist--I care for some species more than others. I won't apologize for this either--simply because it is the politically correct thing to do. It is true; I love cats. But, I don't get along with dogs. I love gorillas. Yet, I don't care much for birds. But I don't want to harm dogs or birds. Cows are OK. Pigs are special. So while I don't think twice about eating beef, I do my best to avoid pork. I value pigs more than cows. I prefer cats to dogs--gorillas to birds. All animals are not created equal. And therefore do not deserve equal consideration. A Lobster is a water bug--its central nervous system is as primitive as a cockroach. So I don't shed tears into the stock pot when I drop them into the boiling H20. OK, I've only cooked lobster once. But if it was cheaper and readily available, I would eat it with greater frequency. But... if I had to go into the wild and kill a deer... well, I would have an emotional toll to pay. I couldn't kill a deer without pause, reflection, sadness... it wouldn't be easy for me.

But, it would be almost impossible for me to kill a human. It would have to be in self defense. But for some people it seems, it would be easier for them to kill their own kind than an animal. Just recently, football player Michael Vick was arrested and charged with animal cruelty--he was running an illegal dog fighting ring out of his estate in Virginia. The public is outraged. The man has received so much scorn... more than if he had murdered his girlfriend instead. In the rap community, misogyny is the norm. Many of these men treat their dogs better than their female partners... this seems to tie into my point about people caring more about animal rights than human rights. And I'm not just talking about the values that people hold dear. There are actual laws to prove my point:

Henry Bergh, founder of the ASPCA, was particularly repulsed by the brutality of the dog fighting he saw in New York and elsewhere. His 1867 revision of the state’s animal cruelty law made all forms of animal fighting illegal for the first time, including bull, bear, dog and cock fighting. The federal Animal Welfare Act (1976) prohibits the interstate transport of animals for the purposes of fighting. In 1999, Title 18, Section 48 was added to the U.S. Code, making it a federal crime to “knowingly create, sell or possess a depiction of animal cruelty with the intention of placing that depiction in interstate or foreign commerce for commercial gain.” The term “depiction of animal cruelty” means any visual or auditory depiction, including any photograph, motion-picture film, video recording, electronic image, or sound recording of conduct in which a living animal is intentionally maimed, mutilated, tortured, wounded, or killed. As of 2007, dog fighting is a felony in all states except Idaho and Wyoming, where it is a misdemeanor. In most states, the possession of dogs for the purpose of fighting is also a felony offense. Being a spectator at a dogfight is currently a felony in 20 states, a misdemeanor in 28 and legal only in Georgia and Hawaii.

Men had the legal right to ‘beat their wife’ with a stick no thicker than their thumb until 1891. The police did not view domestic violence as a crime until the late 1980’s. Rape within marriage in the UK was only made illegal in 1995. (The Cruelty to Animals Act 1835 in the United Kingdom was the first legislation in the world that made dogfighting illegal.) Today, in California, a man can be charged with a felony if he causes physical injury to a woman. If he simply batters her, it is a misdemeanor.

Recap: Dogs were granted protection in 1867. Women became protected against the spousal rod in 1891. The Federal welfare act to protect dogs was established in 1976. Women are afforded protection by the police in late 1980's. In 2007, being a spectator of dog fighting becomes a felony in 20 states. Beating your wife, girlfriend, or lover is still a misdemeanor in many states.

This discussion was created by realitybites (13041) for Friends only, but now has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough:
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • Hmmm, so according to Morrissey my nation's government is worse than the Iranian government. What an idiot.

    But I just noticed you had 45 comments to your last entry! Wow, that must be a Morrissey-Solo record! Nice.
    Sullen -- Monday August 20 2007, @03:31PM (#271825)
    (User #11477 Info)
  • what is your point in comparing the oppression of women and the oppression of animals. must you create a hierarchy of victims? you don't need to pit the rights of animals against the rights of women. that's just a divisive, diversionary tactic. you're using women's rights as a straw man.

    I'm a feminist, animal rights activist and human rights activist. Not necessarily in that order. One thing you said in this post I agree with, You are a species-ist. Why do you feel the need to defend your meat-eating. You know it's wrong. Just admit. hey, I'm not posting this to start a big argument again.

    sorry for the typos. if I have to proof read this now, I can't hit submit.
    artful dodger -- Monday August 20 2007, @08:26PM (#271867)
    (User #13974 Info |
    and as for me, I stand with the tribe of Morrissey.
  • If Vick was found to have what, how many dogs did he have? Anyway, if he'd been found to have that many women, all scarred up from being pitted against each other, and if he were found guilty of having killed women because they lost fights, or deliberately set them against an opponent he knew would kill them or seriously injure them, and if he had caused many horrific fights between women for sport, for betting, etc, as he did do with the dogs, then he would be slapped alot harder by the establishment than he is being slapped. He won't suffer that big of a price, for having made so many dogs so miserable.

    Cockroaches are surprisingly like humans, in my opinion. When they are enjoying a feed, they are very much like humans, and when they are afraid, they act hauntingly like humans, ducking, feigning, jumping off heights in desperation, running as fast as they can, hiding in crevasses, in shadows, in inclosures, ...and they are very drawn to warmth, and the smell of food.
    redpathetic -- Monday August 20 2007, @09:06PM (#271873)
    (User #6184 Info)
    Happy in this final acceptance of his own absurdity...Albert Camus
  • "Humans by design are 'omnivores' meaning we eat almost anything. The human mouth has teeth for cutting (the incisors), teeth for tearing (the canines) and teeth for grinding (the molars) Pure vegetarian animals only have molars, and pure carnivores have mostly canines (for catching and for eating)."

    If we were meant to eat *only* vegetables we'd have mouths full of nothing but molars, so really, people shouldn't be made to feel guilty for eating meat, no more than vegeterians should be mocked for being, well... counter intuitive.

    I can't believe vegeterians get so heated over this debate, as it's rather hypocritical. Something must die in order for us to live, it's the natural cycle of things. Many vegeterians don't understand that they're killers too, as every single time they uproot a plant for dinner, that plant dies.

    How's to say a plants life is any more or less important than an animal's life?

    Sullen -- Tuesday August 21 2007, @05:26AM (#271894)
    (User #11477 Info)

[ home | terms of service ]