Here, finally!, is my review of Strategic Action for Animals: A Handbook on Strategic Movement Building, Organizing, and Activism for Animal Liberation (Melanie Joy, 2008). At 2,000+ words, it’s perhaps my longest book review yet. Towards the middle, I kind of wander off the book review path, discussing issues of “mainstreaming”, violent vs. non-violent tactics and intersecting oppressions. Some of these are central to Strategic Action for Animals, while others are just touched upon. They all struck a chord with me, though, maybe because they’ve been floating around the internets lately. But bear with me, it’s all related.

By the by, I posted a condensed review on Amazon, so if you’d like the short of it, go here (or here, if you prefer LT).

Otherwise, onward.

(More below the fold…)

Anthrozoology, A to Z

In Social Creatures: A Human and Animal Studies Reader, editor Clifton P. Flynn has assembled a diverse selection of writing and research on the topic of Human-Animal Studies (HAS).

HAS (also called anthrozoology) is, quite simply, the study of human-animal interactions. Because of its multidisciplinary approach, HAS is a vast and varied field; human-animal interactions can be examined through a multitude of lenses, including psychology, sociology, ethology, anthropology, zoology, veterinary medicine, health science, history, philosophy, women’s studies and ethnic studies. Consequently, scholarship in this field represents a motley body of work.

Social Creatures both reflects and embraces the heterogeneity of Human-Animal Studies. The thirty-one pieces in this hefty volume are grouped into nine topics: An Emerging Field; Studying Human-Animal Relationships; Historical and Comparative Perspectives; Animals and Culture; Attitudes towards Other Animals; Criminology and Deviance; Inequality - Interconnected Oppressions; Living and Working with Other Animals; and Animal Rights - Philosophy and Social Movement. A number of subjects are touched upon, including the human-animal bond; religious perspectives on animal rights; animal rights philosophy; the effects of gender on attitudes towards animal rights and participation in animal rights activism; correlations between support for animal rights and other social causes; grief in companion animal caretakers and shelter workers; and links between cruelty to animals and interpersonal violence, including child and partner abuse, to name but a few.

(More below the fold…)

I’m bogged down with implosion-inducing allergies, so I thought I might recycle share this review of Bordertown that I posted on Amazon a few months ago. I agree with Melissa at Women & Hollywood - it’s not the best movie, but still worth a look.

Disposable women, disposable society

Loosely based on several of the many Ciudad Juárez murders, BORDERTOWN is two parts docudrama/political commentary and two parts suspense/thriller. Though the subject of the film is an important one, the movie does suffer from a few major flaws.

Most likely, you’ve heard little or nothing about the 15-year serial killing spree(s) in the neighboring Mexican cities of Juárez and Chihuahua. Probably you’ve read a short article, maybe buried in the back of the “international” section of your local paper, about the latest death toll. Maybe you’ve seen a few pieces over the years, each giving rise to an eerie sense of déjà vu: “Haven’t I read this before? Didn’t the police already catch this killer? Surely this is a different case…”

Between 1993 and the present day, at least 400 women, primarily employed in the maquiladoras established along the Mexican/American border, have been found dead. Raped, murdered, strangled, mutilated. Dumped like trash. Another 5,000+ women are reported missing. Most likely they are dead, but their families will never know, can never rest, because there is no outcry, no investigation, no justice. Government corruption, police incompetence, and international indifference have all conspired against justice. After all, these are poor brown women we are talking about. Disposable women in a disposable society.

(More below the fold…)

Save the Lobsters, Save the World

In his debut novel, Stephen Evans has created a quirky – yet touching – story about love, loss and our moral responsibility to our fellow earthlings, human and non.

Lawyers Nick and Lena are the titular couple in THE MARRIAGE OF TRUE MINDS. On a whim, law school student Lena enrolled in Nick’s environmental law course, and by term’s end, the two had fallen head-over-heels in love. After they married, Lena joined Nick’s law firm, and the two became crusaders for human and environmental rights. In time, Nick’s seemingly tenuous grasp on reality unraveled, as did his marriage to Lena. When Nick’s increasingly erratic behavior became too much for Lena to bear, the two divorced; she bought out his half of the house and firm, and set up a bank account for his living expenses…which he promptly squandered on a “guerilla activist” prank involving 144 lobsters, the mayor’s swimming pool and the Minnesota Zoo.

In addition to costing him upwards of $250,000, Nick’s latest eco-prank is also threatening his very freedom. Enter Lena, who agrees to defend him in court – against her new beau, one Preston Winter. (Awkward!) Without revealing too much of the plot, suffice to say that the brilliant Lena succeeds in saving Nick from both jail and psychiatric commitment – that is, if he can manage to complete his court-ordered community service and mandatory counseling without incident. Given that the volunteer work is to take place at the local animal shelter, Nick’s chances don’t look good.

(More below the fold…)

You know, I wasn’t going to bother posting my review of Thirty Ways of Looking at Hillary here; the book is an anthology of thirty essays, and I find it exceedingly difficult to review an anthology in 3,000 words or less. The “3,000 words or less” guideline is Amazon’s; I usually write my reviews for that site, since it’s actually a really effective way of advertising my blog. But lately they’ve turned into quite the pearl-clutchers. First they rejected my review of Shackled Warrior: Israel and the Global Jihad because I was too mean to the book’s warmongering neocon author (and, even though I’ve rewritten it several times to their specifications, they have yet to post the fucking thing); then when I tried to submit my review of Thirty Ways of Looking at Hillary, the misogynists edited out the word ‘breasts’. No, for real. “Breasts” is a naughty word, dontchaknow!

And, mind you, it’s not as though I was even attempting to use the word as a slur. Nor was it unrelated to the review: one of the essays in the book is titled “The Road to Cleavagegate: What Do We Want Female Power to Look Like?” By, erm, Robin Givhan. Yeah, that Robin Givhan. So the word “breasts”? Totally appropriate. But any mention of dirty lady bits is off-limits to Amazon. Sigh.

As I mentioned in a comment to my own review (let’s see how long it takes them to delete it),

In all their infinite wisdom (or should I say ‘pearl-clutching reactionism’?), the Amazon censors saw fit to edit out the word ‘breasts’. In a review of a book written by women, about a woman (and yes, her body parts), the word ‘breasts’ is apparently taboo, a naughty word. As a woman with breasts, I find it highly offensive that Amazon considers my anatomy to be a slur, even when the word isn’t used in such a manner. And to encounter such sexism in relation to a book about sexism? Ironic, that.

So here’s the review, unedited and followed by my comments. I think I’m pretty much done trying to write to their Puritanical standards. Maybe I’ll just start posting any future reviews here and we can play a nice game of “What will send the prudes at Amazon to their fainting couches next?”

I’d also like to point out that Library Thing never edits my reviews.

(More below the fold…)

OK, so I’m way late on this one, but here’s my review of Jesus Camp, which is every bit as awesome (awesomely scary, rather) as you’d expect. In my defense, we’ve had the DVD for awhile, but every time I suggested we watch it, Shane passed, reasoning that it’d get me too worked up and why don’t we just watch a comedy instead? See, I have a awful habit of abusing the pause button in order to rant about this-or-that when whatever it is on the teevee pisses me off a great deal. I confess, I can be downright insufferable. So I finally decided to watch Jesus Camp solo, and I can honestly say that I wouldn’t have hit pause a single time had I watched it with someone else. It’s like a car wreck, there’s just no looking away, if even to discuss the horror you’re witnessing with the rest of your carpool.

In sum, it is so awesome that it managed to shut even my overactive yapper.

Oh, and the icing? The three families profiled are all from the Kansas City area. I live in the Kansas City area.

*Shudder*

(More below the fold…)

Since I’m in the middle of writing a rather substantial essay, not to mention devouring all my wonderful new books, I haven’t had as much time to blog as I’d like. So I thought I might dig into the archives - like, way back, as far as my pre-blogging days - and post an older book review that I wrote for Amazon in 2003 (in other words, this book review was actually quite current when I first wrote it!). Dominion is an older book and, as you’ll see from the review, not explicitly pro-animal rights, but it’s still one I’d recommend, as it’s for the most part a powerful animal-friendly piece.

easyVegan.info (my AR blog) actually started out as a Yahoo Group, and for a short time we had a nice little book club going. When I say “a short time”, I think this was our only selection. ‘Twas fun while it lasted, though!

(Crossposted from.)

(More below the fold…)

Oh yays! The lovely Kara from Lantern Books sent me two ARCs (Advance Reading Copies), and I’m psyched about them both: Strategic Action for Animals by Melanie Joy and Social Creatures: A Human and Animal Studies Reader, edited by Clif Flynn.

Strategic Action looks as first glance as though it will make a nice supplement to Striking at the Roots, and Social Creatures is an anthology of essays on anthrozoology. So, yays all around!

Lantern Books has a pretty interesting selection of new releases, not all of which deal with animal advocacy issues. For example, there’s a book on male aggression (Boys Will Be Boys) and another about the Columbine school shootings (No Easy Answers). So, go check ‘em out. As of last month, they’re also on Library Thing - so if you’re an Early Reviewer (and, um wtf wouldn’t you be, you silly bird?), maybe you’ll be able to snag a Lantern book via LT. Last go-round they offered up 15 copies of Aftershock, with 321 members requesting a copy…not too shabby!

I also treated myself to a few early birthday presents - a subscription to Veg News (The two-year subscription comes with a free tote, which is friggin massive. I should be able to cram an entire Whole Foods trip into it. Well, almost. All that Purely Decadent ice cream might put me over the top.), and three more books: The Handmaid’s Tale by Margaret Atwood (I was reading a library copy, but I ran out of renewals!), The Caged Virgin by Ayaan Hirsi Ali, and Thirty Ways of Looking at Hillary, another anthology of essays.

Oh mans, I love book piles. Maybe a little too much.

(Crossposted from.)

—————-

Tagged: books shout out lantern books strategic action for animals social creatures activism animals animal rights animal welfare animal activism animal advocacy anthrozoology flickr photos

When I signed up for Library Thing Early Reviewer program a few months ago, one of the first books I received was Caroline Glick’s Shackled Warrior: Israel and the Global Jihad. Coulda woulda shoulda done my research; had I known that Glick writes for the likes of The National Review, I wouldn’t have wasted my time on this piece of right-wing neocon trash. Lazy trash, at that: it’s just a collection of previously published columns, with no original content to speak of. Weak.

Anyway, Amazon has this new fucktarded policy wherein they don’t allow customers to review products (books, at least) prior to the release date. Which is all fine and good, until you consider that publishers hand out advance reading copies of books to, you know, create some buzz. Like, before the release date. Whatevs.

So come March 20 (the release date), I submit my review, and…nothing. After emailing customer service, come to find out that they rejected my review because

your comments in large part focused on authors and their intentions, rather than reviewing the item itself.

Our guidelines do not allow discussions that criticize authors or their intentions. We encourage all voices to respond openly in our store, both positive and negative. However, we do exert some editorial control over our customer reviews.

As such, your review cannot be posted on Amazon.com in its current format. What I can suggest is that you resubmit your review, restricting your comments to critically analyzing the content of the item.

Oh mahs! I unleashed such slanderous bile as “Like most neoconservatives, Ms. Glick has yet to advance beyond Piaget’s concrete operational stage of cognitive development” and “she seems incapable of anything but dichotomous thinking”! I hope I didn’t drive our fearless heroine to the brink of despair with such uncouth language and personal attacks.

Fucking pearl clutchers.

Firstly, there are only three direct criticisms of Glick the person; the entire second paragraph, basically. The rest of the review either centers on quotations pulled directly from the book, the reasoning employed within, or arguments posited throughout. In other words, I reviewed the goddamn item.

Secondly, an author’s intentions in writing something, be it a book, a column, or a lowly blog post, most certainly are relevant to the discussion. Glick is a Zionist - she’s even received the Zionist Organization of America’s Ben Hecht award for Outstanding Journalism - so don’t tell me she doesn’t have a stake in the war on terror. Clearly an author’s intentions and biases color how they view, interpret and analyze a situation. All of which is totally fucking relevant.

And for thirds, what is a book if not a reflection of its author? Should I dismiss everything written in The Shackled Warrior as not truly representative of what Glick really thinks? She displays black-or-white thinking throughout a decade’s worth of columns, yet it’s a “personal attack” to call her a dichotomous thinker? It’s not as though I used racial, ethnic, or gender slurs - all of which Amazon would be correct in disallowing. Rather, I simply inferred that the personality exhibited in her book is indeed her personality. Silly me. Do you really mean to tell me that I can’t call Ann Coulter a right-wing hack based on the things she’s written and said? For reals?

If I offend her delicate sensibilities (or any neocon Amazonian, for that matter), she can always skewer me in the comments. I mean really, does she need Jeff Bezos to protect her from the mean peoples on the internets?

Besides, I want to know where the fuck Amazon gets off acting all offended by this relatively tame review (the most naughtiest word I used is probably “homosexual”, which is probably how my review got flagged to begin with) when they trade in atrocities such as shark fin soup and cockfighting mags. Wankers.

On the plus side, I hope this means that “neocon” is finally considered an insult. Because it is.

Anyway, being the compulsive personality I am, I revised the review so that the more global, “personal” “attacks” are now directed solely at the book and not the author herself. Let’s see if this salt brings the Amazon editorial staff out of their spell. If not, fuck ‘em.

Both reviews are copied after the jump (the original appears first, followed by the revision). If the tittybaby version is ever accepted, I’ll link to it below.

(More below the fold…)

I received a copy of The Translator: A Tribesman’s Memoir of Darfur, by Daoud Hari through Library Thing’s Early Reviewer program a few months ago. Given the huge lag between the release date and when I reviewed it, I figured I’d hold on to the review until the book is actually available in stores. Which would be…today!

Although…I almost sat on it a bit longer, at least until the international Darfur Awareness Week. According to a recent email I received from Oxfam, the commemoration is “approaching,” but I’ll be damned if I couldn’t find an actual, firm date for it this year (FAIL!). Anyone? *Shrug*

The only point I’d like to add to my (earlier) review is that, to this atheist, all the god-praise got really frustrating, really fast. In the face of such horrors, the god that Daoud exalts is, at best, either cruelly indifferent to all the violence and suffering “his” creations are perpetrating on one another, or he does care but is powerless to stop it (which would call into question that whole omnipotent thing). Or he’s a sick sadistic bastard. None of these options really merit unquestioning obedience and the subservience of one’s entire worldview now, do they?

But if you can get around the blind faith, it’s a good read. (If not, there’s always Ayaan Hirsi Ali’s Infidel, which is an even better read.)

(More below the fold…)