In defense of the sanctimonious women's studies set || First feminist blog on the internet

Friday Catblogging

I took the kitties in for their yearly vaccinations this week. Buddy needs to be vaccinated because his immune system is compromised; Mitsy needs to be vaccinated so that she doesn’t catch the virus from her brother. So I always get nervous around this time of year. (You can read their story from last year.)

The vet had nothing but complements for the two of them. Buddy, in particular, always gets exclamations of surprise for his coat, which is medium-length, thick, and soft like flannel. (Mitsy’s fur is long and soft like silk. I love petting both of them at the same time.) He’s doing beautifully, now three years and three months old and healthy as can be. We hope he will stay with us for many years more.

They screamed the whole way to the vet’s office in the car — but as soon as we entered the door, they shut their traps — because there was another cat there already yelling louder than both of them. They behaved perfectly for the vet, then started screaming at me the minute I took them back to the car. Brats.

Mitsy immediately ran off to clean her leg where she received one of her vaccinations.

IMG_9956

IMG_9921

I decided this week to dig up an old-school picture of my dog, Rainey. She lives with my mother in California — we could bring the cats over to PA to live in our apartment, but not the Chow-Chow/black Laborador mix. She’s an absolute sweetheart (with a black-spotted tongue!), and a handful of Mom’s friends and acquaintances have threatened to steal her. I miss her a lot. We haven’t been to California since we got married just over two years ago, and probably won’t be able to make it for at least a year more.

(Yes, I blinked.) Helping Mom plant some flowers in front of her house, back in 2004.

P3210449

(Cross-posted at Three Rivers Fog)

Shocking news of the day: Cats are useless.

It’s true. I am a notorious cat-hater who also happens to be a cat owner, and I think I can confirm that they have no actual utility beyond sleeping and pooping twice their body weight. Luckily, Percival is half puppy — he follows me around and always wants to cuddle — so I enjoy his company. I don’t think I’ve put up pictures since he was a wee kitten, so re-meet him:



Percy’s spot, originally uploaded by JillNic83.

As you can see from the picture, he has bigger boobs than me. Ah, they grow up so fast!

When he isn’t sleeping on the stairs, he also enjoys sending me into hysterics by poisoning himself with lilies, incurring potential kidney damage, nearly averting death and leaving me with a $1,300 vet bill.

Read More…Read More…

Friday Catblogging

Happy Friday! Time to break out that much-lauded Cat-Only Internet Filter.

IMG_9852

…. but wait, you say! That’s not a cat! No, it’s not, but it’s cat-related!

I’m growing cat grass. I’m trying it with plain ol’ wheat grass seed in a packet, and growing from one of those kits at the same time — this one has wheat, oat and barley seed. This is my first time actually potting plants with my own soil, germinating the seeds etc. Yeah, it’s not much but it still has me excited. This is the two pots (kit seed, packet seed) on our window sill.

Now for some actual cats! Mitsy gets comfortable in some awkward positions.

IMG_9832

IMG_4668

Buddy, on the other hand, is lying belly-up as usual.

IMG_9815

Would that I could borrow some of his bliss.

(Cross-posted at Three Rivers Fog)

Dear animal rights activists, please stop taking your cues from the anti-choice movement

Elaine Vignealt of Vegan Soapbox emailed me this link, where she opposes a California law that would, she says, limit the First Amendment rights of animal rights supporters. A reader then posts the full names and home addresses of UC Berkeley professors who do scientific experiments on animals.

[As an update, Elaine received a take-down request from Berkeley. I was aware of the request when I wrote this post, but didn’t realize it was a matter of public record; since its existence was communicated privately to me, I didn’t include it in the post. Now that I see it’s on the front page of Elaine’s blog, I’m adding it in.]

I’m no supporter of unnecessary animal experimentation; I think many of these experiments sound horrific and cruel. But publishing personal information is beyond the pale. It’s exactly what anti-choice activists do in an attempt to threaten, intimidate and terrorize doctors. And it’s disgusting to see animal rights activists following that model.

When someone called Elaine out on publishing personal contact info as opposed to just a work email address, she responded:

One reason: Email addresses are much easier to fake or change than physical addresses. The emails simply bounce back and fall into cyberspace forever. The message never even gets sent. And there’s no proof there’s anyone at the other end receiving the message. You can’t send a “certified letter” to an email address.

Another reason: These are not spies with top secret information. These are people using public funds to conduct morally reprehensible and sometimes illegal activities. The public deserves to know who they are and how to contact them.

That’s exactly what anti-choice terrorist abetters say.

I’m not going to weigh in much on the First Amendment issues here; without a clear threat, Elaine is probably within her rights to publish the information (of course, her advertisers and service providers are also probably also within their rights to stop doing business with her). But legalities aside, just because you have the right to do something doesn’t mean that you should do it. With the murder of Dr. Tiller last week, we saw yet again that campaigns of intimidation through the release of personal information too often result in violence. I wouldn’t put radical animal rights activsts in the same league as radical anti-choicers, but a few of them seem to be pushing it. By allowing the personal information of researchers to be published on her website, Elaine is enabling them. It may not be totally illegal, but it is surely ethically questionable and morally reprehensible.

So please, knock if off. Liberals can do better than this.

Buy Indie Day

via Kate comes the news that today is Buy Indie Day. Head to your local independent book store and pick up something. Kate’s book isn’t out yet, but you can pre-order it. And I’ll second her recommendation of Jessica Valenti’s latest, The Purity Myth, which I will hopefully be writing about in more detail in the coming days. Today, though, I think I’m going to buy Netherland, which I embarassingly have not yet read.

And as long as we’re buying independent, might as well eat independent too — check out the Eat Well Guide, which helps you find local organic and sustainable food, markets and restaurants. It’s exactly what I need after reading this article. (Thanks to Jaclyn for the link).

New Legislation Would Expand Domestic Violence Laws to Include Pets

It looks like both Washington and Iowa are considering legislation that would include family pets under domestic violence protections.  In Washington, the legislation would allow courts to issue restraining orders against abusers that include pets as well as the abused party; and in Iowa, the legislation would not only allow restraining orders to be issued, but would also allow a court to issue an order giving the abused party full custody of the pet(s) without a restraining order.

On the surface, for the uninitiated, this may seem a bit silly, or even trivializing of domestic violence.  But indeed, it’s anything but.  These pieces of legislation aren’t just about protecting animals — who, I would argue, do indeed deserve our protection.  They’re primarily about protecting the abused human.

How?  Because it’s not at all uncommon for abusers to used beloved family pets to get to their victims. They may threaten the safety or life of the pet in order to prevent the abused person from leaving, and may actually do harm to the pet, including torturing and killing it in order to do emotional damage to the human victim.

Any of us who has a pet who they love dearly can easily relate to this.  If someone threatened my cat, who I love more than almost anything?  Yeah, that’d probably work.  And it actually does work in a lot of cases.  People, especially women, have been murdered because they couldn’t stand the thought of harm being done to their animals.

So this legislation is good news.  It has the potential to save both animal and human lives.  And if you live in either state?  You should be contacting your legislators to let them know that you support it.

See Abyss2Hope for more.