One episode, you have a woman taking back her ex-husband and accepting his son as her own – even though, seven years earlier, he divorced AND SUBSEQUENTLY CLONED HER when she refused to relocate to Eureka for his job and further told him that she didn’t want to have children. (What remains unsaid is that he probably had to create several clones before he found one sufficiently amenable to his desires. What became of the others, I wonder?*)

The next, we meet a genius scientist who habitually subverts her desires to those of her (supposedly) slightly-more-genius husband, all for the greater good – only to discover that she’s the true intellectual superior in the relationship; he’s merely been stealing her ideas all along! (And their marriage is most likely an ongoing kidnapping/rape situation, built on his theft of her short-term memories…using a device he stole from someone else, to boot.)

So which is it – are you feminist-friendly, or not?

* You can call it “over-analyzing”; I consider it “taking a story line to its logical conclusion.”

“A while back, it was about a year ago, I think it was, I had this apartment in San Francisco. I lived on the third floor in this little tiny apartment building, had a little two rooms and a dog, right. I lived on the third floor and I used to walk around town and I had, you know, a couple of pairs of Levis and a couple T-shirts and I thought I had my shit pretty good together, man. You know, I was out on the streets talking and talking, doing all that shit, and every time I found a nice piece of talent he went right straight downstairs to the chick on the second floor. There was another chick on the second floor, right. And I couldn’t understand, I couldn’t understand, I kept thinking, Janis, why are you doing wrong suddenly? Well I so decided to get up one morning…haha…and check out the chick’s action, right, figure out what she had going that I didn’t have going. I got up at 9:30 in the morning, which I want you to know is an effort on my part. And I got up at 9:30 in the morning, I hid in the stairwell right next to the chick’s across from her apartment, right. And I watched her and watched to see what she had, man, that I didn’t have. And I’ll tell you what she had, man, that chick hit the streets at noon. I mean I didn’t even get up till three.”

Yes, there are debates to be had about Hit Girl and Kick-Ass. There are always debates to be had about violence and vigilantes, and what they say about us. But I’d prefer the conversation also turn to why preteen girls don’t have a movie like Kick-Ass that they could see. Let’s ask why Kick-Ass was the only script option Ms. Moretz had if she wanted to play, in her own words, “an Angelina Jolie-type character. You know, like an action hero, woman empowerment, awesome, take-charge leading role.” By now, she should have had a lot more superhero and fantasy options to pick from. There are young adult genre books that center on something other than vampires. There are comic characters who are teenage girls. It’s ridiculous that they languish on the shelf while Spider-Man goes back to high school. Again. You might even ask why Millar thought no one could relate to a teenage girl, and insisted on centering the story around Dave and his girlfriend problems.

- Elisabeth Rappe, The Geek Beat: Hit-Girl Hysteria

No, it’s true. Well, kinda sorta:
 

 
Apparently the Constitution only protects the rights of the rich, the white, the heterosexual, the cisgendered, the faithful and the non-pregnant – and only when they’re in complete agreement with all opinions O’Reilly, natch.

Well done, Jon, well done.

——————

Tagged: Bill O’Reilly fox news The O’Reilly Factor faux news msm constitution right to privacy paparazzi the daily show jon stewart videos video blogging

First, the classic Christian Bale dance remix by RevoLucian:

Then there’s the ever-hilarious Bale vs. O’Reilly:

For our third act, Christian Bale drives David home from the Dentist:

(The original David/dentist video is pretty durn lol-y, too. Reminds me of when I had my wisdom teeth yanked last year.)

Finally, props to Stephen Colbert (who else?) for the most creative use of the Bale tapes:

And the Steve Martin clips weren’t half bad, either:

—————–

Tagged: youtube video video blogging christian bale Bill O’Reilly stephen colbert the colbert report steve martin dentist remix mashup

Sorry for the lack of posts this week, y’all. I’ve been sick since Monday night, and feel ill-equipped to do much more than the daily link roundups. I imagine that the maxim against blogging while drunk includes blogging while drunk on NyQuil. Anywho, I have a number of post ideas on the back burner, so hopefully I’ll be coherent enough by mid-week next week to resume my regular blogging schedule.

Until then, did anyone happen to catch the latest installment of ABC News’ What Would You Do? Basically, it’s a hidden camera type show, wherein ABC News sets up various discomfiting situations in order to determine how the observers stooges will respond. For example, one segment that got some play on the feminist blogs involved a couple (of actors) who were seemingly out at a bar on a first date. When the woman excused herself to the restroom, the man (quite obviously) slipped something in her drink. Cue the crazy.

I only caught the last twenty minutes or so Tuesday night’s episode, but that was more than enough to make me wish I hadn’t. In the last segment, “Dog Left Inside a Hot Car,” a large, fluffy Golden Retriever is left inside a car parked on a suburban street on a hot summer (spring?) day. (The car actually has a hidden A/C unit cranked, and the dog’s trainer is lying on the backseat floor, covered by a blanket.) The windows are cracked so the dog’s barks are audible, and the dog’s “owner” walks to and from the car several times in order to see whether observers will confront him. Strategically placed hidden cameras record passerby reactions.

Unfortunately, ABC News doesn’t appear to allow embedding (grrrr!), so here’s the part where I send you to their website to watch the video.

So, what are your thoughts? How do you think the passerby handled the situation? Did the results exceed your expectations, or fall short? And wtf about those firefighters, eh?

As noted at the beginning of the clip, ABC News also tried this experiment with a (faux) baby: Would You Help This Baby? As with the dog, a fake baby is left inside a hot car (seemingly the same car, parked on the same suburban street, in similar weather conditions). Windows are cracked, so passerby can plainly hear the “baby” crying. As with the dog’s owner, the “baby’s” mother returns to the car after running errands, to see how the gathering crowd reacts to her.*

Hop on over to ABC’s website to watch the baby clip, then meet me back here.

Compare the bystanders’ reactions when it’s a baby – as opposed to a dog – left in a hot car. Granted, the differences could be the result of some seriously heavy editing, but I doubt it. People appear much quicker to take action, to assume responsibility for the “baby” and “make it their business,” and to confront the “mother” with anger, than they did with the dog and her “owner.”

While babies are probably at greater risk of being stolen than are dogs (e.g., kidnapped babies command a higher black market price than kidnapped dogs), both are at risk of suffering heatstroke and death when left in a hot car. Both are sentient beings, capable of feeling pain and suffering. And yet, bystanders were somewhat hesitant to intervene to save the dog. Meh. Yet another consequence of viewing animals as property – wouldn’t want to tell someone what he can and can’t do with “his” dog-property, am I right?

So what should you do if you see a dog – or a baby – left alone inside a car?

First, know your state laws. www.animallaw.info offers this summary, along with a state-by-state table of applicable laws:

Is it illegal to leave your dog in a parked car? The answer to this question, of course, depends on in the state in which you live. Actually, only 13 states (AZ, CA, IL, ME, MD, MN, NV, NH, NJ, ND, SD, VT, and WV) have statutes that specifically prohibit leaving an animal in confined vehicle. The next factor important to the question is the condition under which the the animal is left in the vehicle. Most of these laws provide that the animal must be confined or unattended in a parked or stationary vehicle. Further, the laws add that in order for a person to violate the law, the conditions have to endanger the animal’s life. Some of the statutes specifically state that extreme hot or cold temperatures, lack of adequate ventilation, or failing to provide proper food or drink meet this definition. Other laws are more vague and just require that the conditions are such that physical injury or death is likely to result.

While not all states have laws that address animals in parked vehicles, numerous local ordinances prohibit this, and more may be enacted. It is critical then that owners are aware of their local laws concerning this subject. Even with out a state or local law, this action could still constitute cruelty under some circumstances. In fact, in the Texas case of Lopez v. State, the defendant left his dog in his car on a hot day to go and watch a movie in a theater. He was ultimately convicted under the state’s anti-cruelty law. Notably, Texas does not have a statute that specifically addresses dogs left in parked vehicles.

Thus, while it may not be illegal to leave a dog (or other non-human animal) unattended in a parked vehicle in your state or locality, if the animal is in danger due to extremely hot, extremely cold, or even moderate temperatures, the animal’s “owner” may be in violation of anti-cruelty laws anyway. It’s imperative that you know your state and locality’s laws, just in case you encounter an obstinate or ignorant police officer, security guard, etc. (such as the firefighters in ABC News’ dog clip). It might be a good idea to print out the relevant legislation and keep a copy in your glove box, for good measure.

When you spot a dog (or other animal, including a baby or young child) left alone inside a (hot or otherwise dangerous) vehicle, PETA recommends that you do the following:

If you see a dog in a car and in distress, take down the car’s color, model, make, and license-plate number, have the owner paged inside nearby stores, and call local humane authorities or police. Have someone keep an eye on the dog. If police are unresponsive or too slow and the dog’s life appears to be in imminent danger, find a witness (or several) who will back your assessment, take steps to remove the suffering animal, and then wait for authorities to arrive.

Also, check out API’s study of how quickly the interior of a car can heat up, even with the windows cracked – and even in moderate summer temps. (Again, you might want to print this table up, as further evidence to present to skeptical officers, security guards, “owners,” etc.)

PETA notes, for instance, that even

On a mild 73ºF day, the temperature inside a car can reach 120ºF in 30 minutes. On a 90ºF day, the interior of a vehicle can reach 160ºF in minutes.

Finally, Born Free has some educational materials available at www.mydogiscool.com. If you see an animal left unattended in a car – but not in danger – leave one of their fliers on the vehicle’s windshield. It’s never a good idea to leave an animal unattended, no matter the temperature outside, because there are other risks, too; the car might be stolen, for example.

My dogs are cool. How about yours?

* Though, I should note that the “owner” in the dog clip is a man, while “mom” is a woman, making comparisons between the two experiments a little more difficult. For example, bystanders might feel more threatened by – and thus less likely to confront – a man vs. a woman.

(Crossposted from.)

——————–

Tagged: animals animal rights animal welfare dog canine pet companion animal hot car abc news what would you do hidden camera baby animal abuse animal cruelty cruelty to animals child abuse peta born free my dog is cool companion care video video blogging pop culture dog care

It’s been so long coming, I kind of expected my Bush countdown clock to do at least one cool trick on the 20th. Maybe replace the numbers with an animated exploding A-bomb, or some unicorns and rainbows. At the very least, a smiley face. But no. It got stuck at 0 for two days, and now it’s counting backwards. Way weak, computer geeks. I was promised CHANGE, but this is quite literally MORE OF THE SAME.