an interlude of miscellany

My hair. I’m chomping at the bit to hack it off. For the past few years I’ve gone through these cycles wherein I grow my hair long, cut it all off, donate it to charity, and then grow it long again. The last two times I did this, the hair went to Locks of Love (the picture to the left was taken after my last big cut, in December 2005). During this round I decided I wanted to do something different; namely, donate it to Pantene Beautiful Lengths so it would go to a woman with cancer. They only require an eight-inch ponytail, and since mine is now clocking in at nine inches, I knew I was finally free to chop it. Only…no. Turns out they don’t accept dyed hair, and I finally had to resort to dyeing mine a few months ago, since it’s turning white at warp speed. And even though I didn’t dye my hair at all between the ages of 17 and 32, it’s still exempt from donation. I’m disappointed! I guess I’ll just have to give it to Locks of Love again, as they take dyed hair. However, their minimum requirement is a 10-inch ponytail, so I’ll have to wait another month or two before it’s long enough to donate. Gah!

Plath. I was so pissed at him earlier this week, because he killed a poor little bird when I took him and Freyja in the yard to get some fresh air. When we’re outside I watch them carefully to make sure they don’t attempt to leave the yard, but I guess no amount of careful watching can stop a cat from spontaneously ripping a bird from the sky. Here’s what I don’t get: Plath is overweight, 10 years old, on Prozac, and has been a housecat his entire life. Yet somehow he’s able to leap into the air with the speed and acumen of a cheetah to suddenly pluck a bird out of mid-flight. How does he do it?? He killed one other bird in the past, as well as a mouse. Obviously I need to keep this cat away from the great outdoors! My backyard is turning into a graveyard. If I were a rapper I’d have to go by the name Gravedigga, especially since I had to dig a mouse grave at my mom’s house the other week, too, after her boyfriend killed the poor little fellow.

I’m partially to blame for the bird’s demise, but that didn’t stop me from being a passive-aggressive bitch who refused to talk to Plath for a few days, aside from saying things like, “I’m going to the courthouse tomorrow to get your name legally changed to Plath Wayne Gacy” and “Oh, you want some of this pizza, eh? Well, I bet the bird you killed would like some of it, too. Only HE’LL NEVER EAT AGAIN.”

Lindsay Lohan. She should go to jail. Yes, addiction is a terrible disease, and I do think it would be a shame if she didn’t get the medical help she needs for her addictions, but the bottom line is that she broke the law. Several laws, actually. Having an addiction shouldn’t give you a Get Out of Jail Free card. If Joe Schmo got busted twice for DUI, and both times he had cocaine on him, and he had been drinking underage during the first DUI charge, his ass would be in serious trouble. It wouldn’t simply be a matter of sending him to rehab to wipe the slate clean. Why should Lindsay Lohan be any different? People can break many laws in the name of addiction, and I don’t see the justice in letting them escape punishment for it—especially when those broken laws could cost other people their lives. Should a sex addict avoid jail time if his addiction causes him to start raping women? Should a gambling addict avoid jail time if his addiction causes him to start robbing banks? I personally think Lohan should go to rehab and do some jail time. Hey, at least it will keep her out of the clubs for a while.

Michael Vick. The other day I got into an online debate regarding Vick and the charges against him. I said that I wanted nothing to do with Nike until they drop their sponsorship of them. They have put aside their plan to endorse his shoes, but they haven’t dropped him from their roster completely.

Someone retorted:

Um, let me double check on something. Yep, there it is presumption of innocence. Or, as we laymen like to say: “innocent until proven guilty”.

What if (and yes, I read the whole indictment, honest, you can read it on line) he really had nothing to do with it? Or he isn’t convicted of any wrong doing? And you’re Nike, and you dropped an innocent man from your payroll? Then what?

Well?

I responded:

As for Michael Vick, yes, he could be innocent. That’s for a jury to decide, not me. Personally—and I know my opinion doesn’t mean anything in the end—I think he’s probably guilty. A very intensive long-term investigation found, on his property, 52 pit bulls and dogfighting equipment such as forced breeding stand, treadmills, performance-enhancing drugs, and a bloodstained fighting pit. Is it possible all that stuff was on his property and he knew nothing about it? If he doesn’t actually live there—if he bought the house for his cousins, as he claims—he might not know about it, but then again, doesn’t he have a single staffer who could report to him what’s going on? Doesn’t he ever visit this property? If he visited it even shortly he would’ve seen the bloodstained pit at the very least.

But still, he could be innocent and losing his endorsement over nothing. And you know what? I don’t even care. Call me callous or bitchy or heartless or whatever, but honestly, I could care less if he loses his endorsement deal while he’s innocent. I never want to see an innocent man go to jail, but losing an endorsement deal when he’s already a millionaire? I ain’t shedding any tears over that. Countless innocent people have been falsely accused of crimes in this country, and that’s a damn shame—that’s a major flaw in the system—but it happens, and most people don’t have millions of dollars to fall back on when it happens. If Vick is innocent and lost his endorsement deal or his job with the Falcons unfairly, his career isn’t over. Celebrities always get second and third and fourth chances. Normal people rarely do. Some other team will hire him, and somebody else will give him an endorsement deal, and he’ll make millions more selling his story to the tabloids.

He replied:

I know this is a tough case to put your personal feelings away, but it’s entirely possible that he’s totally innocent. And that he feels just as badly about this as you do. His peeps never told him about it becasue they knew he wouldn’t approve. And yes, isn’t it possible that he never stays at the house, he just bought it for his friends and cousins to live in.

Possible, yes?

So, it seems to me, your arguement boils down to the fact that he’s rich, and likely to get richer no matter what happens. So to hell with him, and the system.

OK. that’s fine. I feel your pain. Be pissed at M Vick.

I’m not sure what Nike’s guilty of here.

Someone else wrote:

This sounds like the same thing - is it a boycott if you don’t already use their product/service? How much business had you done previously with Nike?

The other part of your argument is just emotionally flammable. I understand that this is a news topic, but people (not just you) really are starting to sound like a torch-carrying angry mob. How many folks had those Duke lacrosse players convicted of rape the minute the story broke? If that isn’t all the proof anyone will ever need to make sure we let the whole story play out before we ruin someone’s good name, then I don’t know what would do.

Does my gut say that he is guilty of something? Yup. Do I think his career is over? Yes, again. He may have millions now - but his earning power is severely damaged simply based on the outstanding accusation. Nike, the NFL and anyone else who does business with Michael Vick all need to reassess their business relationship. Right now, he is a cancer - and this is not something that will go away. This is the biggest sports story of this decade - as big as Pete Rose in the 80’s and OJ in the 90’s.

My understanding, by the way, is that the NFL and Nike have both removed all Michael Vick merchandise from their respective web sites. Nike has (at least for the moment) delayed a Michael Vick-related product launch (shoes?). So, if there are still fringe groups (PETA isn’t the most reliable unbiased source, in my own opinion) that are calling for a Nike boycott, it is possible that they have an agenda outside of this incident.

I replied:

QUOTE
is it a boycott if you don’t already use their product/service? How much business had you done previously with Nike?

Like Carrot Cake Man said earlier:

QUOTE
Yes, if I talk about it, and convince others not to [go] there who did before.

I’m desperately unathletic, so aside from buying a single pair of Nikes two years ago (and that was only so my feet wouldn’t be destroyed during a walking-intensive vacation), I don’t use Nike products. There has just never been a need for them for my torpid life. But I know people who do use Nike products quite a lot, and that’s where my boycott comes in. Will they listen to me? Who knows. Probably not. But I tried.

QUOTE
NFL and Nike have both removed all Michael Vick merchandise from their respective web sites. Nike has (at least for the moment) delayed a Michael Vick-related product launch (shoes?)

Yeah, and it’s my understanding that this was driven in part by the outrage of people appalled by the dogfighting charges—people who were boycotting Nike and the NFL and phoning them with their complaints. The media focus also had a lot to do with it. If none of this had happened, would Nike and the NFL be pulling that merchandise? Maybe. I don’t know. This is why I was doing the boycott—to get the merchandise and the endorsement pulled. If Vick is proven innocent, then, as far as I’m concerned, they can sell all the Vick products they want and endorse him all they want.

I agree that people are starting to sound like a torch-carrying angry mob, and it’s not my intention to join them. Mass hysteria and witch hunts don’t appeal to me at all. I’m not baying for blood—I’ve just been telling people how I feel about the issue and then letting the justice system do its job.

QUOTE
I know this is a tough case to put your personal feelings away, but it’s entirely possible that he’s totally innocent. And that he feels just as badly about this as you do. His peeps never told him about it becasue they knew he wouldn’t approve. And yes, isn’t it possible that he never stays at the house, he just bought it for his friends and cousins to live in.

Possible, yes?

It’s absolutely possible. Still, I have to wonder how much responsibility property owners should have for property they don’t live in. If you own a house and give it to your friends and they use it for sexual slavery, should you be held partly responsible for this, even though you didn’t know what was going on? I honestly don’t know. It doesn’t seem fair. Yet how fair was it for the people forced to be sexual slaves? Who was looking out for them? Maybe the one thing that could’ve saved them was a landlord/property owner taking some time to periodically check on his/her property to make sure everything was okay.

It’s kind of a murky, gray area, and if anything good comes out of this Vick case (aside from those dogs being rescued), maybe it can be a clarification of the extent of responsiblity a property owner carries when s/he doesn’t live in the property.

QUOTE
So, it seems to me, your arguement boils down to the fact that he’s rich, and likely to get richer no matter what happens. So to hell with him, and the system.

Well...yeah, basically. Not the part about the system, though. I think the judicial system needs an overhaul because it’s deeply flawed, and the fact that very little is being done about it is a tragedy.

Look, I’m not professing to be unbiased here. I’m totally biased. I’ll readily admit that I’m not a big fan of rich celebrities and athletes who usually think they’re above the law. And I’ll readily admit that when it comes to animal cruelty cases, my first line of defense is for the animals who suffered, perpetrators—guilty or not—be damned. I always take the animals’ side first. No, it’s not fair for me to give a toss about the people accused of animal cruelty. It’s not fair for me to be biased. But I work in the animal protection field and every single day I hear news about horrific acts of cruelty against animals. Today, for example, I got to work and the first thing I saw on email was a press release about two girls who held down a kitten in California and set him on fire. This is what I see every day. After five years it’s getting hard to set aside compassion for the dogfight ring leader or the puppy mill owner or the cat decapitator who might be innocent, especially when investigative facts point to the contrary. It’s hard for me to give those people the benefit of the doubt, because all I see are the mutilated and abused animals. This is my personal bias.

Why not leave my job? Because, daily horror aside, I love my job. I love that I’m doing my part to make a difference in animals’ lives. It’s the same reason my boss’s wife loves being a chemo nurse, even though it means seeing death and despair on a daily basis.

The debate dwindled down after that. Vick’s trial is slated to start in November. It’ll be interesting to see how this plays out...



song heard most recently before posting:
Good Times Gonna Come—Aqualung