Ain't nobody here but us chickens

All photos from my Flickr page.









Will somebody please explain to me how a bunch of meat-eaters can judge Michael Vick? As "key figure" of an extensive dogfighting ring, he was convicted and properly served his time. And now, various self-righteous asses want to continue to punish him, as somehow WORSE than other NFL players... and if you follow the exploits of various sports figures, as I do, you know how hilarious that is.

If I see one more condemnatory TV announcer blathering on, then --cut to a KFC commercial-- (!!!) I'm gonna hurl. Yes, eat eat eat that meat, endless profit-driven commercials for Hardees, Burger King and McDonalds, all while calling Michael Vick a BAD MAN. It's some of the most illogical mass-insanity I have ever witnessed.

All I can manage to say is: how dare you.

And before you say anything: YES, IT IS THE SAME.

EXACTLY THE SAME.

Ohhhh nooooo, the carnivores say, we LIKE TO EAT BIRDS. So, it isn't the same thing as dogfighting. We have said so!

Actually, it might be worse. At least the dogs get a fighting chance. The birds are raised to die.

Ohhhhhh nooooo, the carnivores say, WE MUST EAT.

Yes, I am fully aware that we must eat, but I haven't eaten meat in well over a decade now. I am alive and well and typing. YOU DO NOT NEED TO EAT MEAT TO LIVE AND BE HEALTHY.

Ohhhhh noooo, the carnivores say, there is sadism and unsavory pleasure taken in dogfighting.

Really?

There is also unacknowledged SADISM in putting an animal in your mouth and ripping it to pieces, chewing it up (GROSS!) and going MMMMMMM (instead of retching) when this is not necessary to live and is only for the pleasure of your palate. How is your deliberate ripping, slicing and cooking of birds, God's creatures (not yours!), any different from sport? It's all about entertainment of one kind or another. How is the entertainment of your palate supposedly superior to the entertainment provided to Michael Vick and his friends? The only difference is that one form of sadism is culturally acceptable and one is not.

In some countries, eating dogs is acceptable, too. Is that objectionable to you? Why? (Because as Samuel L Jackson instructed us, a dog has a personality, and a personality will take you a long way.)

I wrote this at the outset of the Michael Vick extravaganza, and my opinion has not changed one iota. In fact, I am more pissed than ever as I watch a parade of carnivorous cluelessness on TV and in Blogdonia.

ESPN comments on Vick's current situation:

Michael Vick, who has been conditionally reinstated by NFL commissioner Roger Goodell, is free to sign with a team but which situation is the best fit for the league's former highest paid player?

Coming off a two-year prison sentence, many teams aren't sure about what Vick has to offer. There are questions about his fitness and skill level and the public relations hit a team could take is certainly in every owner's thoughts. Will he be the type of quarterback to stay in the pocket and throw the ball down field? Is he still the run first, pass second guy? Is quarterback even the right position for him?

Take all these questions into account as you decide which teams are most likely to step up to the plate and give Vick the second chance he so desperately wants.

It's right that teams should worry about his fitness level, but when they start the moralistic horseshit, I reach for my gun.

Meanwhile, PETA is up to their usual assholery. When they aren't doing "cutting edge" stuff like parading naked gals in front of every available camera, they are engaging in constant media whoredom, barging into every network news-show that will put up with them. They are now calling Michael Vick a "psychopath"--if you can believe it. Let's see if they have the guts to call every CEO of a factory farm a "psychopath" also. Ha! I smell hypocritical NEWS WHORES at work, once again.

From HuffPo:

To clarify misleading stories regarding PETA and Michael Vick, PETA withdrew its offer to do a TV spot with Michael Vick last winter when a U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) report on Vick's dogfighting activities revealed that he enjoyed placing family pets in the ring with fighting pit bulls and that he laughed as dogs ripped each other apart. PETA believes that this revelation, along with other factors in the report, fit the established profile for anti-social personality disorder (APD), and we called on Vick to have a brain scan to help confirm this. People diagnosed with APD are commonly referred to as "psychopaths." They are usually male, prone to lying and manipulation, often take pleasure in cruelty, and cannot feel genuine remorse, which frequently leads to recidivism. PETA had previously been in talks with Vick's management, public relations, and legal teams about shooting a public service announcement to help combat dogfighting, upon Vick's release from prison. In December, after consulting with psychiatrists, PETA withdrew the offer for the TV spot, and in January, we called on NFL Commissioner Goodell to require that Vick undergo a brain scan and full psychological evaluation before any decisions were made about the future of his football career.

I've seen people laughing their asses off and shoving baked cows, pigs and birds into their mouths at the same time. Unbelievable, but true. Let's see PETA call the majority of Americans "psychopaths" and start the bullshit-pop psychology on THEM! Oh, wait... if they did that, they might not get asked back on Fox News for comedy relief!

Assholes. PETA and Michael Vick's dogfighting droogs all deserve each other. Lock em all up in a dogfighting pen and see who comes out first... as the infamous tagline for "Texas Chainsaw Massacre" asked: Who will survive, and what will be left of them?

PETA does more damage to vegetarianism and animal rights than any one organization in the world.

And BTW, if you like your meat? You refuse to give it up because the pleasure of your palate is more important than animals? THEN LEAVE MICHAEL VICK ALONE. The meat-eating culture that devalues animals CREATED HIM. If you want respect for animals, you must have respect for them all, not just the cute ones that obey you.

~*~

Okay, rant over. Now for some lightheartedness...

Ain't nobody here but us chickens - Louis Jordan and the Tympany 5 (1946)

On male modesty, naked protests, etc.

Olivia Mora protests the unethical treatment of circus animals in downtown Greenville Tuesday, Jan. 20, 2009. Photo by Cindy Hosea of the GREENVILLE NEWS. (The protest was against the Ringling Brothers and Barnum & Bailey Circus, coming to Greenville the first week of February.)

~*~



Wednesday, I wrote about PETA's penchant for employing naked women at their protests. In response I got this post, from "Lacey":

You folks might want to check the actual news: PETA uses men nearly as often as women and would use more except that women willing to get partially naked are easier to find.

This has been bugging me.

If appearance standards are more strict for women, why are men seemingly more modest?

Why are men so much less likely to get naked for a protest? Are men less likely to shed clothes in general?

Is this a way to make sure certain parts of the male anatomy remain mysterious and sacrosanct? Or are naked men also more likely to be arrested than women? (Since the PETA demonstrations are covered by the First Amendment, that doesn't seem to be the issue.)

In my post, I mentioned the readiness of male Yippies to get naked for protests. I was specifically recalling the infamous "streak for impeachment" back in the 70s, but there were several other such incidents.

Unfortunately, I found only one online mention of this fun chapter in radical history, focusing on the University of Wisconsin:

The UW's Daily Cardinal quoted various students who claimed explicit political meanings for the activity: fifteen students who chanted "Dicks against Dick" during their streak; a woman who planned to streak for women's rights; a male streaker who said, referring to Nixon, "We have to show that bastard we don't care about him and want him out. Streaking is an expression of freedom against his policies" [...] The paper also reported on "streak-ins" planned by the Yippies and ran an editorial by a leading African-American campus activist, Kwame Salter, calling for more political streaks [...]

It seems PETA is the only group left employing these tactics. Why has it largely fallen to animal-rights people to use this attention-getting tactic, and where are the guys?

Discuss!

Random notes on PETA, with politically correct linkage

The circus is coming to town.

Argh, here we go again.

PETA (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals) is demonstrating. I would like to demonstrate, but not with PETA. In fact, some PETA members demonstrated yesterday here in downtown Greenville and... yes, you guessed it, one attractive female got naked, or nearly naked in the winter cold.

Can I ask why they keep doing this? The naked-girl routine? Does this mean we should be clothing the poor animals? What is the purpose? What's the frequency, Kenneth?

And why is it always a bombshell gal that gets naked? I mean, if we are discussing circus elephants... shouldn't a chubby gal (like me) get naked instead? Isn't that closer to what we are talking about?

But then, how would that go over? People might well ask: why is she doing that? Are we supposed to clothe the elephants? But see, with a young and attractive female, people just GAPE and forget their sense.

Does anyone honestly believe that the GREENVILLE NEWS would take 44 photos of two everyday PETA demonstrators, if one wasn't nearly-naked and covered with fake-blood?

Graphic at left from strength never power.


And yes, as a former Yippie, I get it. I really do... getting media attention in our jaded times is important and necessary. I have enthusiastically participated in several rather bizarre political actions in my life, wearing chadors, clown make-up, Nixon masks (while blowing bubbles!) and such. But when the Yippies wanted naked women in a political action, the women would always demand naked men accompany them in said action, which was only fair. (Yippies being what they were, this was never a problem.) PETA has apparently never heard of that, and I never see naked men in their demos, only women. Why?

Anyway, if yall want me to go out there (fully clothed, I do not want to frighten the horses) and hold a sign about the elephants, I will be happy to do that. My email is in my profile, drop me a line. But this will be as an independent person... not as a PETA member, which I'm not and won't be, unless they cut this shit out.

~*~

More cool stuff/linkage:

Rural Advancement Foundation International USA - cultivates markets, policies and communities that support thriving, socially just and environmentally sound family farms: While focusing on North Carolina and the southeastern United States, we also work nationally and internationally.

Southwest Women's Fiber Arts Collective - connects fiber artists with one another and with opportunities to sell work, learn new skills, teach, and secure materials. SWFAC performs outreach to women and children by teaching fiber arts: We promote the concept of cottage industry as a means of fostering economic self-sufficiency and artistic development for women and others working in the fiber arts.

Local Harvest - a handy-dandy online guide to locate locally grown food: Use our website to find farmers' markets, family farms, and other sources of sustainably grown food in your area, where you can buy produce, grass-fed meats, and many other goodies. (Of course, you know you shouldn't be eating meat, at all, ever, under any circumstances, but if you DO, please eat meat with no hormones or chemicals, grass-fed, free-range, blah de blah.)


Equal Time, since I mentioned meat!


Pangea Vegan Store - sells a very nice fake leather jacket that looks real. (Unfortunately, it costs about the same.)

Ethical Planet - sells all kinds of neat stuff...including some of my favorite candles from Way Out Wax!

My post about calorie restriction last week brought some private emails from people who wanted to ask me some questions but didn't feel okay posting. That's fine, people, keep those cards and letters coming in! It all makes me feel dreadfully important. And let me assure you, at this time of year, when they start giving out all the bigshot blog awards to 23-year-olds, I really need that.

One person asked me which "woo-woo vegan cookbooks" I was talking about... so here are some:

Vegan with a Vengeance by Isa Chandra Moskowitz - comes with a blurb from Joan Jett, of all people. (This cookbook is popular among people I know.)

How It All Vegan!: Irresistible Recipes for an Animal-Free Diet and The Garden of Vegan by Sarah Kramer and Tanya Barnard. Sarah has her own website... and both of them have fabulous tattoos!

But the best vegan recipes are from my friend Jackie, at her blog THE VEGAN DIET! And the best vegetarian/vegan publication overall is still VegNews.

----------------
Listening to: Joy Division - A Means to an End
via FoxyTunes

Odds and Sods - Long Brawl edition

Left: Snoid, by R. Crumb.







Some great writing in mighty, mighty Blogdonia this week, and thought I'd spread the love.

Menstrual Poetry writes that John McCain isn't sure if he supports contraception or not. What's that?

Asked if he supported abstinence-only education in Africa, instead of distributing condoms, McCain said:

“Well I think it’s a combination. The guy I really respect on this is Dr. Coburn [R-Oklahoma]. He believes — and I was just reading the thing he wrote — that you should do what you can to encourage abstinence where there is going to be sexual activity. Where that doesn’t succeed, then he thinks that we should employ contraceptives as well. But I agree with him that the first priority is on abstinence. I look to people like Dr. Coburn. I’m not very wise on it.”

Not very wise on it? Is he wise enough to be president, in that case? GOOD LORD, PEOPLE!

~*~

Feministe reports on PETA's latest naked girlies, which is somehow supposed to, umm--well what IS it supposed to do, again? Fire us up so that we will clothe the poor naked animals, or what? As usual, Jill sums up in her usual succinct fashion: "If you want to draw attention to the plight of animals by humanizing them, go for it. But you don’t have to de-humanize women in the process."

Why is this so seemingly-impossible for PETA to understand?


strength never power also offered some excellent commentary, as well as the terrific graphic at left!

~*~

And finally, here is Thene at Aaru Tuesday, who quoted MOI (((kisses self dramatically, as the late, great Florynce Kennedy used to do))) in her great piece on Anonymous. I've edited out the name of the website in question, but Thene's original piece has it... I just didn't want a bunch of searches of their name ending up here, since they are um, notoriously very picky about how they are represented in print. Thene writes:

From what I recall of internets culture five years ago, ______ was there and Anonymous wasn't. _____'s big point as a community wasn't the anonymity, it was the anarchy. No limits, no mods or rules to speak of; the anonymity was because ____ was intended as an English-language alternative to 2channel, with anonymising architecture to suit. Rather than being a 'one', 'legion' Anonymous, a then-friend who was one described /b/tards as being a deliberate non-community; a group of people who browsed the same place (and shared an already notably intricate internet dialect) but perceived themselves as being unconnected.

And I am wondering if there is any such thing as people who browse the same place staying unconnected? Can that really happen? What makes us so hungry for the hive-mind, even in the name of REJECTING the hive-mind?

~*~

In political news, Hillary Clinton has taken the Ohio and Texas primaries, and Politico.com's piece today is aptly titled DEMS FACE A LONG BRAWL.

Ugh. Ain't it the truth.

----------------
Listening to: Pavement - Date With Ikea
via FoxyTunes

Ingrid Newkirk is our new Marie Antoinette

Ingrid Newkirk, of People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA), has just trashed Michael Moore, now under attack by America's right wing, for being fat.

I repeat: Ingrid Newkirk, whom one assumes has very good health insurance, has just attacked Michael Moore, a man on the side of the angels, for being FAT.

I shit you not.

Apparently, Newkirk believes that becoming a vegetarian will make you thin...which I have been waiting to happen for over 10 years now!

From MSNBC:

"There’s an elephant in the room, and it is you," PETA president Ingrid Newkirk wrote in a letter to Moore.

Newkirk urged the rotund Moore to become a vegetarian, which many nutritionists say is a good way to lose weight, and visit PETA’s Web site GoVeg.com for veggie recipes.

Writes Newkirk: "As they say at Nike (sorry!): 'Just do it.'"

I love how she quotes a company that uses both leather and sweatshop labor, there at the end. Bang-up finish!

Is Newkirk claiming that universal health care wouldn't be necessary if everyone was a vegetarian? That is indeed how she sounds.

Does she believe this preposterous bullshit is the way to convert people to vegetarianism?

She makes a vegetarian diet sound like the province of rich people (like her?) who already have guaranteed medical care. Otherwise, she might respond to the substance of Michael Moore's movie SICKO, just released, instead of attacking him relentlessly, as the right-wing media has.

These are the people who make me ashamed to be vegetarian, and give vegetarianism a BAD NAME amongst the working class. Can you say "out of touch with the mainstream"? Good going, PETA!

Let them eat (vegan! dairy-free!) cake, huh Ingrid? And just in time for Bastille Day, too!

PS: Fuck you.