That is seriously the most beautiful puppy I've ever seen aside from my own, who was a black lab mix and looked almost exactly like the one above. Holy crap, PUPPY.
Wow. So the gist of this thread seems to be that I should be indifferent about people fighting dogs and torturing/murdering the loser dogs because I eat chicken Parmesan and the occasional steak? And that only vegetarians have the right to be indignant about dog fighting and dog torturing by some rich asshole?
Um, OK. Still, I eat the occasional steak and I think people who take pleasure in the choice of fighting, torturing and killing dogs are sick individuals.
I do not think people who work at meat factories, or people who eat pork chops, are working at the same level of individual mental depravity.
@gawkimo: I'm a vegetarian, and I agree with you. Conflating the two issues is, in my opinion, a humongous mistake, because it turns empathy into antipathy pretty fast. The two issues are apples and oranges: related, definitely yes, but inextricable, definitely no. As you said, intent is a huge factor.
Ok. Mainly clicked the link to LOOK AT THAT DAMN DOG! Is gawker suddenly using cute cat and dog photos lately to get more threads read? Well, whoever thought that up you're brilliant.
As for Vick. I am the biggest dog lover on the face of the earth. However. He served his time. It's time to let him move on. Flame away on me, but I believe in justice being served and the ability to return to society hopefully rehabilitated.
@manchops: Wow. No flaming here because I agree with you. It's nice to know that loving dogs and being open-minded enough to allow for the possibility of change isn't mutually exclusive. I appreciate your comment.
He (or a member of his scuzzy entourage, while he watched) attached the dogs to jumper cables and threw them into the swimming pool to electrocute them. This is not acceptable human behavior.
@skt.smth: You're absolutely right. It's a complete stretch to compare the average American meat-eater's abuse by proxy of millions upon millions of cows, pigs, chickens, fish, &c., to Vick's abuse of maybe a dozen dogs. Thanks for setting me straight.
@anchower: Well, one can rightly criticize the state of factory farming while realizing, at the same time, that it may not be prudent to stop eating meat entirely in the mean time. On the other hand, you have a guy involving with killing dogs essentially for sport. There is a clear difference here that only an unreasonable person would attempt to gloss over.
@skt.smth: "There is a clear difference here that only an unreasonable person would attempt to gloss over."
Once again, you're absolutely right. Only an irrational person would condemn the abuse of a dozen or so dogs while condoning the abuse of hundreds of millions of other mammals, birds, and fish.
I would just add that only an irrational person would say that the abuse of hundreds of millions of animals is no reason to "stop eating meat," especially in light of the facts that (a) production of meat is grossly energy inefficient (meaning that it takes far more energy to produce a given quantity of meat than you get out that same amount); (b) in the West, at least, consumption of meat is unnecessary for the maintenance of human health (and is actually detrimental to it, especially when you consider that subsidies to industrial farmers directly result in unhealthy foods being cheaper and more readily available than healthful ones), and the only justification for it is the pleasure it affords the humans involved (not unlike dogfighting!); (c) sewage runoffs from factory farming destroy the environment; and (d) humane production of meat is viable.
As for something else that shouldn't be "gloss[ed] over"--many hunters and fishermen "kill[] . . . [expressly] for sport," and sometimes for the very doglike wolf! Gasp!
@anchower: Umm, okay, we're talking about the difference between factory farmers and Michael Vick, though.
Given the fact that people still consume meat for nutrition and that this isn't going to change any time soon, I think we have to admit (not sarcastically!) that there's a difference between killing animals--in a debatably torturous way--not because one personally derives great pleasure from torturing animals, but because one seeks to make meat available in the market on a large, profitable scale ... and a dude who held dogfights and killed dogs brutally on his property for sport.
And bringing up hunting means nothing to me. I'm against hunting, personally, because I'm against people owning guns. I'd love it if there were no more hunters in America.
@skt.smth: Once again, I agree that "there's a difference": Factory farming is orders upon orders of magnitude worse than dogfighting.
No one "consume[s] meat for nutrition." They eat it for taste. You can get the same nutrition from non-animal sources that you can from meat. Hundreds of millions--if not billions--of vegetarians and vegans the world over do every day.
Ultimately, all the suffering of both factory-farmed animals and Vick's dogs is for naught but human pleasure (including the pleasure of profiteering). And since hundreds of millions more animals suffer so that some of us can ENJOY a hamburger or a fatter bank account than so Vick could enjoy his dogfights, he's no more guilty than any meat-eater. (Well, maybe a little more, because I'm sure he's no vegan. But he shouldn't lose his livelihood or have to do prison time because he hurt a few more animals than the rest of us do.)
Incidentally, it's funny that you can instantly envision an America without guns, but have such trouble envisioning an America without factory farms.
Anyway, I'm in no way advocating cruelty toward animals. I'm just saying that it's absurd to condemn Vick while making excuses for factory farmers and their clientele.
@anchower: No it isn't absurd. You are engaged in a self-serving equivalency game here. While I would happily do without factory farming (I probably wouldn't notice the lack of it at all), I wouldn't require ALL farming to be eradicated. There is a humane way to raise livestock. Dogs are not livestock. Dogs are by their very nature pack animals that use trust and companionship as a survival mechanism. The question isn't whether its better or worse for the animal if you kill a cow vs. a dog. The question is what it means about you as a human being to look an animal in the eye, especially an animal that is so predisposed to trust you, and kill it. Now take that one step further to torture, and you have your answer about the person that does that. You and I both know that 99% of humanity wouldn't pull the trigger on the steak they ate last night, unless they were going to starve without it. It's a different story when arrives on a plate.
@Motoko Kusanagi: You're saying that people who have someone else do their torturing for them are better--or at least less culpable--than people who do their torturing themselves. That is absurd.
I just spent an hour with a friend who is a sports med. dr., we were talking about Tiger, pro athletes and their arrogance about not getting caught, being above the law, etc. He has worked with 3 NFL teams and told me, the stuff that makes the news, is the tip of the iceberg. NFL players, most of them, are total pigs. They get away with rape, dui's, drug abuse, cheating, stealing, etc, starting in highschool, and no one ever says no to them. It will never change, Michael Vick is an animal, sub-human, but there are worse guys in the NFL. Sad.
@shag_carpet_bomb: Your comment is a crucial insight in this ongoing dialogue. The sad part about calling NFL players animals is that some animals are gentle and loving by nature.
Ultimately, I think it comes down to "the love of money is the root of all evil" and "power corrupts."
@shag_carpet_bomb: Calling a monsterous black man an "animal" is too much for me. I've noticed that a lot lately. Serial killers, barbarous folks doing heinous shit to kids are called "monsters". But folks are quick as hell to throw out "animal" when the person is black. Like it's sitting on your tongue waiting for the cue.
Calling a dumbass black man who participated in a grotesque TRADITIONAL sport "sub-human" is fucking with me.
If you think am being sensitive, re-read it from where I'm sitting.
@Lysergic Asset: I'm not implying that his actions shouldn't have gone unpunished. No animal deserve that kind of treatment. I'm from Africa where the elephant population has been decimated so we can keep on making piano keys. It's just that words can be charged with such hurftul meaning.
@Le_Horla: As long as the words don't hurt a dog, it's open season for some folks. Too bad elephants aren't cute and cuddly or more people would give a damn about them.
@Le_Horla: I totally understand what you're saying, and you are right in pointing out that the seeming unconscious subtleties of language do matter. I guess I'm just having trouble letting go of my animosity here.
@Lysergic Asset: I am all black, and I am extremely offended by that shit. He's a criminal. He might have psychological issues. He might be a total asshole. But lots of people are criminal, crazy assholes. It doesn't make them "sub-human." Thousands of people have died in order for black people NOT to be considered "sub-human," and I think your comments are kind of a slap in the face to them and to me. I don't mean to be hyperbolic, but I really, really hate that shit.
@taritac002: I would be a ridiculous masochist if I was seeking to perpetuate racial stereotypes. By "human", I meant something kinder and gentler than the current standards of humanity, and by "sub-human", something less than that - which, I guess we all are in some ways... especially the "crazy assholes" you mentioned.
Regarding the origin of this contentious phrase, there would have been no distinction between "half black" and "all black" - we would have all been characterized this way.
I understand why you are offended. All I can ask is that you forgive my idealism. My love for animals trumped my sociological common sense here.
@Lysergic Asset: Slavery still is traditional, all over the world. I ain't excusing dogfighting, I'm saying the shock and outrage at a celebrity participating in an activity that goes on all the time is weird to me.
Again, what he did to his dogs was particularly cruel (even to people who fight dogs).
@marciax3: I appreciate your taking the time to send this follow-up message. Not only is slavery still traditional all over the world, so is genocide. I guess celebrities are lightning rods - everything they do ignites, which is why this became such a huge issue. The sad thing is that it does go on all the time.
@Lysergic Asset: THIS. It goes on in ever hood and holler in the US. I want people to expend some outrage and effort on that lil' fact. Between that and puppy mills, dogs are being abused left and right, some going to the same decent, outraged football fans who initially booed, then cheered Michael Vick.
I would also like to hear any ideas you have about making the issue of animal abuse in urban (read: non-rich, non-white) communities more known, because the whole thing is just a tragedy. Way of the world?
Kind of like sportos who are wife beaters whose friends vouch that he's a "good guy" because he does what? Buy them a pitcher of beer and some wings? Stand up guy, chief. Stand up guy.
Really? Wouldn't this picture be more effective if you photoshopped Michael Vick sticking a cattle prod up this cute pup's ass while laughing maniacally? And you could have the doggy wailing 'Please mean Mr. Black Man, please don't hurt me!' Nice touch putting a link to the story about the little cub reporter alongside Vick's, because they are all alike.
@topsy: The cub reporter is a related story: Damon Weaver—the kid, who had just interviewed Obama—was asked about Michael Vick by an exploitative MSNBC anchor interviewing him, and he dispatched with her stupid question fairly well. Read the post before you go there.
And maybe it could've been more direct, I guess, had I gone with the cattle prod, but I wanted to reserve at least a semblance of subtlety.
@topsy: What's your fucking point on all this? That Vick, for reasons you haven't actually explained, shouldn't be maligned and shamed for deplorable, reprehensible behavior? Or that, for some reason you also haven't explained, his crime is less than what it's been made out to be? In either case, I'm happy to hear your explanation, because right now you're basically saying, "hey, he's black" and leaving it at that.
And yes, this is an unwise comment to make on a website, which I understand. But I've not seen you make a single cogent, reasonable argument for, well, whatever the fuck you are arguing for.
@Lysergic Asset: Hah! I just don't like illogical, stupid statements that pretend to be arguments. I love when people take unpopular, unconventional opinions that they can competently defend - it makes me rethink my assumptions and question my original opinion and has, on more than one occasion, caused me to view an issue totally differently.
But making ridiculous, fact-less statements and falling back to smug, nonsensical hyperbole makes me
A: Doubt the person's conviction
B: Doubt the person's ability to reasonably discourse.
Which, in turn, makes me post long diatribes mocking the person in question.
@Go Like Hell Machine: Of course, it always inspires me (the armchair sociologist) to try to understand where the person is coming from... some are more challenging than others.
The Twilight Zone theme song was for your continued efforts at dialogue with topsy, obvs.
@ClockOnTheStove: This upsets me...[twurl.cc] Not that!! I'm sure when some of those bombs from the Americans in Iraq, Afghan, and Pakistan fall they leave people looking like that. Some of you poeple have a misplaced sense of fuckin' outrage!
Vick is an evil, despicable, shitstain, scum, miserable excuse for a human being.
He electrocuted many dogs and threw them into swimming pools, had their teeth removed so they were forcibly bred or used as bait fighters, viciously tortured them and killed them in hideous manners, all to make money (which he didn't need).
The two years he served in prison were for racketeering, not for his hideous acts against animals, so I call absolute bullshit on the 'time served' argument.
If he saved the world from nuclear annihilation, it would make up for what he did. Nothing else.
Can someone please explain RICO and what it has to do with Vick's case to the black people in this thread? I'm too exhausted from being witness to their stark ignorance to bother.
And he's got his original job back, playing football. Doesn't mean he should get a show too.
I guess I'm stating something obvious to everyone else here, but he's getting a show BECAUSE of the dogfighting, or at least, his being caught, and I think that's f*cked up and trashy, but we're talking about it, which is what BET wants. He got caught, couldn't pay someone (a rape victim, a girlfriend or mistress, etc.) off, and got face time in the media. Plus this case is juicy because of the bullshit idea floating around that dogfighting is okay because the only foundation for disgust is elitist, racist valuing of animals over people.
I wasn't aware being disturbed by animal torture (even if you don't give a shit about pets) is just white peevishness. Or that people can only take offense at violence or abuse of one's wealth/fame against animals OR humans, but not both. Kind of undermines the blogosphere's love of Chris Rock after that stuff he said on Jay Leno. Like someone else on this board, he compared the Vick case to the Polanski case. And like plenty of other fucking idiots (and I LIKE Chris Rock's stand-up), in the interview he referred to the Polanski case as "sex with a thirteen year-old" and made the argument that if it's rape, it's because of the victim's age. Even the celebrities who WILL criticize Polanski only seem to note that it's rape because the victim was thirteen, NOT because the asshole forced himself on someone telling him to stop. God help us, the opponents of Polanski are as stupid as the defenders, because they're obsessed with the age of the victim, not the coercion, making me wonder if any of these famous assholes would sense something amiss if Polanski's victim had been 18.
Regarding the extent of Michael Vick coverage--didn't his case break during summer, making it more likely the media would yammer on about this?
I will say I'm kind of confused; celebrities are no longer default role models, correct? I guess that doesn't matter--they're "role models" because they're paid millions of dollars and people see them as entertainers, if not templates for a successful, decent life. I'm all for holding other athletes to the same standards of public indignation as Vick. The problem is, those "other" athletes can settle with their victims in court or skewer their reputations. Of course dog fighting isn't worse than rape, but unlike human victims, dogs can't attempt to seek justice for themselves. (Though I realize the penalties for pressing charges against some powerful can be lethal too, unless you have a spotless history or hard evidence, so why NOT just demand a settlement?)
Surprised no one has brought up corporate farming to fend off the criticism of this show ("if you eat meat, you shouldn't give a shit that Michael Vick participated in dog-fighting but is rich again").
@maude_flanders: Yup.
While "he served his time" means we should charitably allow him to rejoin society relatively unmolested, there's no right to a NFL contract, with all the lush benefits that accrue.
The NFL and BET embracing him with warm arms and murmurs of encouragement is the true crime that irks most of the people that loathe Vick and what he stands for.
If he received the same treatment that a Dan White or one of many boy-diddling Republican pols (being made to sink into an ignored, faded ignominy), there'd be much less ire.
And for that, Vick, BET and the NFL are all co-conspirators.
@Trai_Dep: Dan White and the boy-diddling Republicans committed crimes against people. Dogs are not people, contrary to what many, mostly white (yes I said it) people think. You can dress them up, get medical insurance for them, and call them 'your baby' but that doesn't change the fact that dogs are animals and in the eyes of the law and the rest of the world, a crime against an animal is not as serious as a crime against a human being. The repeated calls for Vick's death or mutilation reveal that there are a lot of folks who are just as sick as Mr. Vick is accused of being.
Cruelty to animals is horrible and thankfully illegal. Michael Vick was punished and put in jail. He served the time a judge and jury sentenced him with. He doesn't owe anybody a damn thing.
@Trai_Dep: Oh and Dan White basically got away with the murder of two human beings and was allowed to fade away because there wasn't as much outrage about the assassinations of Moscone and Milk as there has been about these dogs.
Vick is a shitbag and anyone who thinks he's "served his time" and should be allowed to port about making millions is a deluded fool.
Find a non-celebrity felon convicted of a violent crime and ask him if he's been able to get a job at all, never mind two highly overpaid ones.
Vick should only be on television greased up with animal fat and thrown into a pen filled with starved, abused, aggressive dogs.
That I would watch.
09:47 AM
05:51 AM
Um, OK. Still, I eat the occasional steak and I think people who take pleasure in the choice of fighting, torturing and killing dogs are sick individuals.
I do not think people who work at meat factories, or people who eat pork chops, are working at the same level of individual mental depravity.
12:32 PM
12/06/09
As for Vick. I am the biggest dog lover on the face of the earth. However. He served his time. It's time to let him move on. Flame away on me, but I believe in justice being served and the ability to return to society hopefully rehabilitated.
12:59 AM
12/06/09
12/06/09
12/06/09
01:02 AM
01:13 AM
01:14 AM
01:40 AM
Once again, you're absolutely right. Only an irrational person would condemn the abuse of a dozen or so dogs while condoning the abuse of hundreds of millions of other mammals, birds, and fish.
I would just add that only an irrational person would say that the abuse of hundreds of millions of animals is no reason to "stop eating meat," especially in light of the facts that (a) production of meat is grossly energy inefficient (meaning that it takes far more energy to produce a given quantity of meat than you get out that same amount); (b) in the West, at least, consumption of meat is unnecessary for the maintenance of human health (and is actually detrimental to it, especially when you consider that subsidies to industrial farmers directly result in unhealthy foods being cheaper and more readily available than healthful ones), and the only justification for it is the pleasure it affords the humans involved (not unlike dogfighting!); (c) sewage runoffs from factory farming destroy the environment; and (d) humane production of meat is viable.
As for something else that shouldn't be "gloss[ed] over"--many hunters and fishermen "kill[] . . . [expressly] for sport," and sometimes for the very doglike wolf! Gasp!
01:51 AM
Given the fact that people still consume meat for nutrition and that this isn't going to change any time soon, I think we have to admit (not sarcastically!) that there's a difference between killing animals--in a debatably torturous way--not because one personally derives great pleasure from torturing animals, but because one seeks to make meat available in the market on a large, profitable scale ... and a dude who held dogfights and killed dogs brutally on his property for sport.
And bringing up hunting means nothing to me. I'm against hunting, personally, because I'm against people owning guns. I'd love it if there were no more hunters in America.
02:39 AM
No one "consume[s] meat for nutrition." They eat it for taste. You can get the same nutrition from non-animal sources that you can from meat. Hundreds of millions--if not billions--of vegetarians and vegans the world over do every day.
Ultimately, all the suffering of both factory-farmed animals and Vick's dogs is for naught but human pleasure (including the pleasure of profiteering). And since hundreds of millions more animals suffer so that some of us can ENJOY a hamburger or a fatter bank account than so Vick could enjoy his dogfights, he's no more guilty than any meat-eater. (Well, maybe a little more, because I'm sure he's no vegan. But he shouldn't lose his livelihood or have to do prison time because he hurt a few more animals than the rest of us do.)
Incidentally, it's funny that you can instantly envision an America without guns, but have such trouble envisioning an America without factory farms.
Anyway, I'm in no way advocating cruelty toward animals. I'm just saying that it's absurd to condemn Vick while making excuses for factory farmers and their clientele.
11:36 AM
08:05 PM
12/06/09
12/06/09
12/06/09
Ultimately, I think it comes down to "the love of money is the root of all evil" and "power corrupts."
12/06/09
Calling a dumbass black man who participated in a grotesque TRADITIONAL sport "sub-human" is fucking with me.
If you think am being sensitive, re-read it from where I'm sitting.
12/06/09
12/06/09
Slavery used to be traditional. So was genocide.
12/06/09
12/06/09
12/06/09
12:23 AM
01:01 AM
01:03 AM
01:04 AM
01:10 AM
#tips
01:11 AM
#tips
01:14 AM
01:38 AM
12:06 PM
Regarding the origin of this contentious phrase, there would have been no distinction between "half black" and "all black" - we would have all been characterized this way.
I understand why you are offended. All I can ask is that you forgive my idealism. My love for animals trumped my sociological common sense here.
12:47 PM
07:32 PM
Again, what he did to his dogs was particularly cruel (even to people who fight dogs).
07:33 PM
07:40 PM
07:45 PM
07:48 PM
08:00 PM
08:02 PM
I would also like to hear any ideas you have about making the issue of animal abuse in urban (read: non-rich, non-white) communities more known, because the whole thing is just a tragedy. Way of the world?
12/06/09
12/06/09
12/06/09
And maybe it could've been more direct, I guess, had I gone with the cattle prod, but I wanted to reserve at least a semblance of subtlety.
12/06/09
12/06/09
And yes, this is an unwise comment to make on a website, which I understand. But I've not seen you make a single cogent, reasonable argument for, well, whatever the fuck you are arguing for.
12/06/09
12/06/09
But making ridiculous, fact-less statements and falling back to smug, nonsensical hyperbole makes me
A: Doubt the person's conviction
B: Doubt the person's ability to reasonably discourse.
Which, in turn, makes me post long diatribes mocking the person in question.
12/06/09
The Twilight Zone theme song was for your continued efforts at dialogue with topsy, obvs.
12/06/09
12/06/09
12/06/09
12/06/09
12/06/09
12/06/09
12/06/09
12/06/09
12/06/09
12/06/09
He electrocuted many dogs and threw them into swimming pools, had their teeth removed so they were forcibly bred or used as bait fighters, viciously tortured them and killed them in hideous manners, all to make money (which he didn't need).
The two years he served in prison were for racketeering, not for his hideous acts against animals, so I call absolute bullshit on the 'time served' argument.
If he saved the world from nuclear annihilation, it would make up for what he did. Nothing else.
12/06/09
12/06/09
10/08/09
10/10/09
10/08/09
And he's got his original job back, playing football. Doesn't mean he should get a show too.
I guess I'm stating something obvious to everyone else here, but he's getting a show BECAUSE of the dogfighting, or at least, his being caught, and I think that's f*cked up and trashy, but we're talking about it, which is what BET wants. He got caught, couldn't pay someone (a rape victim, a girlfriend or mistress, etc.) off, and got face time in the media. Plus this case is juicy because of the bullshit idea floating around that dogfighting is okay because the only foundation for disgust is elitist, racist valuing of animals over people.
I wasn't aware being disturbed by animal torture (even if you don't give a shit about pets) is just white peevishness. Or that people can only take offense at violence or abuse of one's wealth/fame against animals OR humans, but not both. Kind of undermines the blogosphere's love of Chris Rock after that stuff he said on Jay Leno. Like someone else on this board, he compared the Vick case to the Polanski case. And like plenty of other fucking idiots (and I LIKE Chris Rock's stand-up), in the interview he referred to the Polanski case as "sex with a thirteen year-old" and made the argument that if it's rape, it's because of the victim's age. Even the celebrities who WILL criticize Polanski only seem to note that it's rape because the victim was thirteen, NOT because the asshole forced himself on someone telling him to stop. God help us, the opponents of Polanski are as stupid as the defenders, because they're obsessed with the age of the victim, not the coercion, making me wonder if any of these famous assholes would sense something amiss if Polanski's victim had been 18.
Regarding the extent of Michael Vick coverage--didn't his case break during summer, making it more likely the media would yammer on about this?
I will say I'm kind of confused; celebrities are no longer default role models, correct? I guess that doesn't matter--they're "role models" because they're paid millions of dollars and people see them as entertainers, if not templates for a successful, decent life. I'm all for holding other athletes to the same standards of public indignation as Vick. The problem is, those "other" athletes can settle with their victims in court or skewer their reputations. Of course dog fighting isn't worse than rape, but unlike human victims, dogs can't attempt to seek justice for themselves. (Though I realize the penalties for pressing charges against some powerful can be lethal too, unless you have a spotless history or hard evidence, so why NOT just demand a settlement?)
Surprised no one has brought up corporate farming to fend off the criticism of this show ("if you eat meat, you shouldn't give a shit that Michael Vick participated in dog-fighting but is rich again").
10/08/09
While "he served his time" means we should charitably allow him to rejoin society relatively unmolested, there's no right to a NFL contract, with all the lush benefits that accrue.
The NFL and BET embracing him with warm arms and murmurs of encouragement is the true crime that irks most of the people that loathe Vick and what he stands for.
If he received the same treatment that a Dan White or one of many boy-diddling Republican pols (being made to sink into an ignored, faded ignominy), there'd be much less ire.
And for that, Vick, BET and the NFL are all co-conspirators.
10/08/09
Cruelty to animals is horrible and thankfully illegal. Michael Vick was punished and put in jail. He served the time a judge and jury sentenced him with. He doesn't owe anybody a damn thing.
10/08/09
10/08/09
Find a non-celebrity felon convicted of a violent crime and ask him if he's been able to get a job at all, never mind two highly overpaid ones.
Vick should only be on television greased up with animal fat and thrown into a pen filled with starved, abused, aggressive dogs.
That I would watch.
10/08/09