Butch Femme Planet  

Go Back   Butch Femme Planet > POLITICS, CULTURE, NEWS, MEDIA > Politics And Law

 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
Old 12-29-2010, 05:14 PM   #11
julieisafemme
Member

How Do You Identify?:
Femme Woman
Preferred Pronoun?:
She
Relationship Status:
Married to Greyson
 

Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: In the present
Posts: 828
Thanks: 3,156
Thanked 3,434 Times in 660 Posts
Rep Power: 21474852
julieisafemme Has the BEST Reputationjulieisafemme Has the BEST Reputationjulieisafemme Has the BEST Reputationjulieisafemme Has the BEST Reputationjulieisafemme Has the BEST Reputationjulieisafemme Has the BEST Reputationjulieisafemme Has the BEST Reputationjulieisafemme Has the BEST Reputationjulieisafemme Has the BEST Reputationjulieisafemme Has the BEST Reputationjulieisafemme Has the BEST Reputation
Member Photo Albums
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by June View Post
I have a herd of small dogs. A Westie and two Shih Tzu's. They are clearly not meant to be any kind of protection at all, except for perhaps an early warning system.

Protecting humans is a tall order to place on dogs. My Westie might attack someone trying to hurt me, but he would be easily dispatched by a kick to the head. I go on the presumption that someone that intent on getting into my house would be armed, thereby rendering my dog(s) an unreliable source of protection, and putting them at risk.

I never considered it necessary to have dog as protection when walking down the street, and the same presumption for me exists, if someone wanted to harm me, they are probably going to be armed and will be able to overcome both myself and my dog.

For me, dogs are companions. If I lived on a sheep farm, I might get a herding dog. Under no circumstances would I get a dog that was considered any kind of risk to myself or my visitors. That's my choice. I know lots of Rottie and Pit owners that think differently.

I don't expect my current dogs to *do* anything for me except provide companionship and cost a lot of money to maintain annually with their vet and food expenses.

I'm a white, middle class woman. My experience and expectation of dogs is formed by that. I did not grow up an environment where dogs were not treated well, or thought of as part of an arsenal for personal protection. My family, to the best of my knowledge never engaged in fighting dogs as a form of recreation. Sadly, I cannot with assurance say that they did not, a couple of generations ago engage in race baiting and lynchings.

Why am I talking about this? Because I am very sure that that a lot of this discussion is about both race and class on a lot of levels.

'We' are so willing to crucify Michael Vick for his former behavior and deny him redemption of any kind, when seriously, if we are white, it is extremely likely that our recent ancestors have committed even graver acts of "inhumanity" and never been punished for it at all. In fact, they were probably rewarded for it in some way because it was okay. And yet, 'we' decry restitution as "Not our fault".

I am seeing some of this residual belief system being played out here as well. In almost 2011 by "Liberal" Queers.

Let me tell you what I am hearing between the lines in some cases:

Poor people shouldn't be allowed to own dogs because they are irresponsible pet owners. (What this means to me is that the people who are likely to be poor, are also more likely to be people of color, especially in the USA).

Does anyone else besides me see how this thought process should be examined?

I am interested in knowing, but may never know -- How people of all races can justify dog, bull and cock fighting for sport. What makes them devalue another life so much? In the same way I often wonder how hundreds thousands of Germans (and others) were able to justify killing Jews, Romas, Gays and anyone else who was different.

In the same way that a vast number of white citizens of the United States are immediately suspect of Muslims and have no qualms about wishing them dead, don't care that when the bombs fall in Iraq, Afghanistan or Pakistan that hundreds and thousands of civilians are being killed. They will get all worked up about a house of worship being built several blocks away from a site where people of all nationalities and religions were killed by a predominately Arab group of religious zealots, and huh, we're not even at war with Saudi Arabia because we don't want to compromise our ability to get oil from them.

Feel things, then think about why you feel them. Even if it hurts.
That is the human pathology I was talking about. Othering allows us to make all sorts of distinctions that we use to justify our behavior. That is why reducing the discussion down to dogs vs. pigs misses the bigger conversation as to what we are going to do about how we treat one another and this planet. All the "isms" are part of this othering. They are all distinct and separate but are part of the bigger problem. We do it to humans, we do it to animals, we even do it to plants.

I don't think Michael Vick is beyond redemption. I am more concerned with and passionate about how we can stop humans from hurting one another and other living things.
julieisafemme is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to julieisafemme For This Useful Post:
 


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:27 AM.


ButchFemmePlanet.com
All information copyright of BFP 2018