"I swear, y'all care more about animals than you do people."
This is the common response I've seen to Michael Vick's situation. In fact, it's the common response to anything wherein animal abuse is brought up, and as happens with most casual brush-off responses to any kind of abuse, it inspires an almost inarticulate rage in me.
It's widely known that animal abuse is unacceptable. Torturing animals is one of three early signs that many serial killers display in childhood (the others being obsession with fire and wetting the bed until a late age). Local news programs have whole segments devoted to animal abuse and showing the victims, burned and discolored and blinded, with their bruises and cuts and sad, limpid eyes. We don't think that it's okay to kick your dog around, but when it comes to the person being punished, nobody seems to think it should be that bad, except for those wackos who "care more about animals than people".
I acknowledge that I'm harder on animal abusers than most. On that note, I am harder on any kind of abuser - child, sexual, elderly, domestic - as to me, abuse of power is something unforgivable. I don't think that there is anything wrong with this line of thinking.
Why? you may ask, or maybe you'd make some comment to the effect of how people must not mean all that much to me, or maybe I'm a crazy cat lady and I'll end up sad and alone in life with my sixty-three cats. This, I assure you, is not the case, and I'll thank you kindly not to tell me how I'll end up in life or what I'm like because if you're condemning me for condemning animal abuse, I don't have much respect for your opinions anyway.
Because, you see, abusing an animal - any animal - is taking the trust that a domestic animal, who has been bred to trust and crave human companionship, places in you; the devotion and love that they automatically give you; taking your role as the sole provider for a domesticated animal in a world civilized by humans; and shattering it so you can prove your dominion, something you never needed to prove anyway.
You are the caregiver of a much smaller creature who cannot do a quarter of the damage you can. You are the provider. You feed, bathe, care for, and protect this creature, who implicitly trusts you. And you take advantage of that implicit trust so you can... what? Kick your dog around? Set your cat on fire? Have people bet on dogfights?
Unforgivable.
And why? So you can feel powerful? Get some extra money? Is there ever an excuse for abuse, any kind, at all?
An animal can not fight back. It can try to defend itself, but as previously mentioned, it cannot fight you back as an equal. You have the upper hand at all times.
Again: unforgivable.
Someone who abuses their animals... well, they're despicable. Abusing the trust of something that gives you untold devotion for simply feeding it? Disgusting. Not so elevated after all, as we humans profess ourselves to be.
Now do you see why I don't care about Michael Vick ever playing again, and if it were up to me he wouldn't?
Showing posts with label srs bsns. Show all posts
Showing posts with label srs bsns. Show all posts
Saturday, August 8, 2009
Wednesday, April 8, 2009
The F-Word (oh-so-retro)
Today's blog is an oldie but goodie. I wrote this about a year ago after a discussion with one of my best friends about feminism and labels. Although I might change a bit of it now (I do self-identify as a feminist now, but I always clarify), the gist still remains my point of view. Yeah, I wish I wasn't all about the F-word too, so to make it up to everyone for the next week I'll write about more generalized topics. Promise.
Enjoy the throwback entry!
--
Today, boys and girls, I'm going to talk about the F-word. That's right: feminism.
I shy away from describing myself as a feminist whenever someone asks me because it's a loaded term. It's not because I don't campaign for equality between the sexes. As a matter of fact, I think sexism is still alive and well in today's society. Why is it that so many female superheroes are sexually degraded as part of their "tragic past" when this is not true of male superheroes, or even that female heroes are killed more brutally than male heroes in comics? Why is it that I can pick up a trillion comics about a stunningly beautiful, smart, goal-oriented woman dating a total drooling nerd, but you can forget ever seeing a comic strip about a sexy slab of manhood seriously falling in love with a geeky girl? Male hourly wages are still higher than female hourly wages – same position, same hours; the male still gets paid a fraction more, which adds up with the hours, letting the male know that he is just that much more important than the female. I think equal treatment in these areas and others are very important, something that is at the core of theoretical feminism. So why on earth do I hesitate to give myself that label?
Nicole and I were discussing this just the other night and why, although we agree that equality is paramount, we veer away from calling ourselves "feminists". Basically, it all boils down to being told what we are able to do as people and as women.
Recently, as most of you know, I've taken up knitting as a hobby with enthusiasm. I love it. And yes, I will be the first to admit I was completely wrong when in high school I made fun of my knitting friends. I rolled my eyes and said I wasn't into all that homey, domestic stuff. Nope, it was academia with the big boys for me at seventeen. I'd rather debate the merits of Satan in Milton's Paradise Lost than knit up a scarf that wouldn't do me much good in South Texas. Well, I'll still gladly tell you why I'd rather listen to Blake's Proverbs of Hell than Paul's Letters, but I just might be clacking my needles trying to finish my latest project at the same time. Why? I enjoy making something. It's not the finished project that I look forward to; it's the looping of the yarn around the needles and the intricate patterns that make me eager to try a new stitch pattern. It keeps me busy and makes for some great presents come baby showers or weddings.
However, knitting is looked down upon in "modern circles". If you casually mention it to your power-suited best friend, she might look at you like you just announced you commune every night with a three-headed Elvis that doubles as the father of your unborn child. "What?" she'll exclaim incredulously. "Why on earth would you want to knit? It’s so old-fashioned and unfeminist." Yet if you told the same friend you'd taken up jujitsu or shooting, chances are you'd receive an approving smile and inquiries as to how you're liking it.
So essentially, a woman taking up traditionally masculine hobbies is "feminist", but a woman trying out traditionally feminine hobbies is "unfeminist" and inherently wrong. Why? Because it's demeaning? I see nothing inherently demeaning about knitting, and in fact some of the strongest women I know love it: my Grandma, my aunt Colleen, my best friend Tifarah, and my sister Crystal. My younger sister's friends see me knitting and exclaim, "That’s so cool, how do you do that?", as if it's some strange mystery that all the cool girls are initiated into to learn how to manipulate yarn with two pointy sticks. When I was their age, I would have rolled my eyes and whispered to my friends about how lame that girl looked with her knitting, just like some old lady, how embarrassing!
Since I was thirteen, I learned what to me is an undeniable truth: everyone has the right to be on the same playing field as everyone else. We should all have equal chances, regardless of gender or race. I should have equal chances of seeing a story about a pretty girl falling for a dorky boy as reading a story about a hunky guy in love with a geeky girl. But I should also be able to do whatever it is I want without anybody dictating what's "right" or "wrong" for me as a woman or as a person. Whether it's something as controversial as sexual prowess or as mundane as knitting, nobody has the right to tell me what I can or should do based on my gender. That was the basis for early feminism: they campaigned for equality and the right to do what they wanted without men dictating the way they lived their lives. Now, I'm sorry to say, we let other women tell us what is acceptable to do, say, or act. That is not what feminism in its core is about. Those women demanded equality with men, not a higher platform. They never said, "We’re better than…" but "We can do that too if we so wish." The point was to say that anybody can do whatsoever they want without anybody saying that it's not appropriate for their gender.
This is why so many women today are afraid of being called feminists. This is the reason why we flinch from it as if it's the vilest of insults. If feminism means acting elitist and snobbish, then I certainly will refuse the label. If it means that I have to only do that which is "acceptable" or only dedicate myself to being better than the men in my life, I can't in good conscience do it. I believe in equality and being able to do the things I like without anyone naysaying me. If this makes me unfeminist, then I will wear that badge proudly. When it comes down to it, I will never be June Cleaver. I am messy and dread cleaning my room (although in public I am tidy out of respect for others). My favorite shoes are my trusty beat-up Vans sneakers. I don't see the point in anything other than wash-and-dry hair. But I also love skirts and heels, knitting any kind of yarn I can get my hands on, and having my doors opened for me.
Conclusion? The things you do don't make you feminist. Wanting to be better than anybody doesn't make you a feminist. Desiring equality and not letting anyone – male or female – tell you what you can and can't do is feminist. And I think it's about time that we started changing our public definition of that loaded word to what it should mean.
Enjoy the throwback entry!
--
Today, boys and girls, I'm going to talk about the F-word. That's right: feminism.
I shy away from describing myself as a feminist whenever someone asks me because it's a loaded term. It's not because I don't campaign for equality between the sexes. As a matter of fact, I think sexism is still alive and well in today's society. Why is it that so many female superheroes are sexually degraded as part of their "tragic past" when this is not true of male superheroes, or even that female heroes are killed more brutally than male heroes in comics? Why is it that I can pick up a trillion comics about a stunningly beautiful, smart, goal-oriented woman dating a total drooling nerd, but you can forget ever seeing a comic strip about a sexy slab of manhood seriously falling in love with a geeky girl? Male hourly wages are still higher than female hourly wages – same position, same hours; the male still gets paid a fraction more, which adds up with the hours, letting the male know that he is just that much more important than the female. I think equal treatment in these areas and others are very important, something that is at the core of theoretical feminism. So why on earth do I hesitate to give myself that label?
Nicole and I were discussing this just the other night and why, although we agree that equality is paramount, we veer away from calling ourselves "feminists". Basically, it all boils down to being told what we are able to do as people and as women.
Recently, as most of you know, I've taken up knitting as a hobby with enthusiasm. I love it. And yes, I will be the first to admit I was completely wrong when in high school I made fun of my knitting friends. I rolled my eyes and said I wasn't into all that homey, domestic stuff. Nope, it was academia with the big boys for me at seventeen. I'd rather debate the merits of Satan in Milton's Paradise Lost than knit up a scarf that wouldn't do me much good in South Texas. Well, I'll still gladly tell you why I'd rather listen to Blake's Proverbs of Hell than Paul's Letters, but I just might be clacking my needles trying to finish my latest project at the same time. Why? I enjoy making something. It's not the finished project that I look forward to; it's the looping of the yarn around the needles and the intricate patterns that make me eager to try a new stitch pattern. It keeps me busy and makes for some great presents come baby showers or weddings.
However, knitting is looked down upon in "modern circles". If you casually mention it to your power-suited best friend, she might look at you like you just announced you commune every night with a three-headed Elvis that doubles as the father of your unborn child. "What?" she'll exclaim incredulously. "Why on earth would you want to knit? It’s so old-fashioned and unfeminist." Yet if you told the same friend you'd taken up jujitsu or shooting, chances are you'd receive an approving smile and inquiries as to how you're liking it.
So essentially, a woman taking up traditionally masculine hobbies is "feminist", but a woman trying out traditionally feminine hobbies is "unfeminist" and inherently wrong. Why? Because it's demeaning? I see nothing inherently demeaning about knitting, and in fact some of the strongest women I know love it: my Grandma, my aunt Colleen, my best friend Tifarah, and my sister Crystal. My younger sister's friends see me knitting and exclaim, "That’s so cool, how do you do that?", as if it's some strange mystery that all the cool girls are initiated into to learn how to manipulate yarn with two pointy sticks. When I was their age, I would have rolled my eyes and whispered to my friends about how lame that girl looked with her knitting, just like some old lady, how embarrassing!
Since I was thirteen, I learned what to me is an undeniable truth: everyone has the right to be on the same playing field as everyone else. We should all have equal chances, regardless of gender or race. I should have equal chances of seeing a story about a pretty girl falling for a dorky boy as reading a story about a hunky guy in love with a geeky girl. But I should also be able to do whatever it is I want without anybody dictating what's "right" or "wrong" for me as a woman or as a person. Whether it's something as controversial as sexual prowess or as mundane as knitting, nobody has the right to tell me what I can or should do based on my gender. That was the basis for early feminism: they campaigned for equality and the right to do what they wanted without men dictating the way they lived their lives. Now, I'm sorry to say, we let other women tell us what is acceptable to do, say, or act. That is not what feminism in its core is about. Those women demanded equality with men, not a higher platform. They never said, "We’re better than…" but "We can do that too if we so wish." The point was to say that anybody can do whatsoever they want without anybody saying that it's not appropriate for their gender.
This is why so many women today are afraid of being called feminists. This is the reason why we flinch from it as if it's the vilest of insults. If feminism means acting elitist and snobbish, then I certainly will refuse the label. If it means that I have to only do that which is "acceptable" or only dedicate myself to being better than the men in my life, I can't in good conscience do it. I believe in equality and being able to do the things I like without anyone naysaying me. If this makes me unfeminist, then I will wear that badge proudly. When it comes down to it, I will never be June Cleaver. I am messy and dread cleaning my room (although in public I am tidy out of respect for others). My favorite shoes are my trusty beat-up Vans sneakers. I don't see the point in anything other than wash-and-dry hair. But I also love skirts and heels, knitting any kind of yarn I can get my hands on, and having my doors opened for me.
Conclusion? The things you do don't make you feminist. Wanting to be better than anybody doesn't make you a feminist. Desiring equality and not letting anyone – male or female – tell you what you can and can't do is feminist. And I think it's about time that we started changing our public definition of that loaded word to what it should mean.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
