I'm important. Via SarahMC
In reaction to news that Washington state may extend domestic violence restraining order protection to pets, some Jezebel commenters expressed outrage that people allegedly care more about animals than women and children.
Ignore, for a moment, the fact that this potential law is not even an effort to help animals; it’s an effort to help people. Abuse victims often stay in abusive situations in order to protect and remain close to their animals. Including pets in restraining orders removes one roadblock women face when attempting to flee their abusers.
The notion that working on behalf of group A is tantamount to privileging group A over all other groups and evidence that one’s priorities are out of whack is not only illogical, it’s insulting. Has anyone ever demanded that you stop caring about some “little issue” in order to focus on the so-called big issues?
For example, “Who cares about sexist commercials?! There are more important things to work on, like genocide in Darfur!”
This is a silencing tactic, and it’s typically used by people who care about neither sexist advertising nor Darfur. They are simply uncomfortable with people who agitate for social change. It’s also used by people who mistakenly believe that compassion is a limited resource that would be best spent on their issue of choice.
I care about animals. I care about humans. As you can see, I’m a dedicated feminist. My concern for animals does not deplete my compassion reserves. I do not believe that humanity must solve the world’s endless problems that *do* meet the arbitrary criteria for Worthy Cause™ before I devote my time, energy and money to the issues near and dear to my heart. In many cases, I can do both.
Many of us who fight on behalf of animals are also fighting on behalf of women, and children, and any number of other oppressed and marginalized groups. The only people who deserve comdemnation are those who live apathetically and fight only on behalf of themselves.
*Related: Liss’ Feminism 101
For example, “Who cares about sexist commercials?! There are more important things to work on, like genocide in Darfur!”
THIS. Like how people didn’t understand why I gave a rat’s ass when the family planning expansion measure was stripped from the stimulus package. Worrying about family planning =/= not worrying about the economy.
And as someone who is truly obsessed with her three pups, I cannot imagine the heartbreak of having to leave a pet behind because you fear for your life. It is not that I would not value my own life, but that I place a very high value on my dogs’ lives. And losing them would be devastating.
I’m not sure I understand the outrage. It’s not like Washington State is taking away domestic violence protection and extending it to animals.
The move makes a lot of sense to me, actually. I know that, here in Florida, we deal with similar problems come hurricane season. A lot of people stay in homes that are not safe because the vast majority of shelters won’t accept pets and they refuse to leave their pets behind. I remember having to evacuate once without my cats, and the mere thought of my kitties stranded in my flooded beach apartment, stuck on kitchen counters and refrigerators with no one to care for them was enough to send me into hysterics.
Policy makers often do not take animals into consideration when making provisions for people, and I think those who do should be applauded for their thoughtfulness, not criticized.
Honestly I felt like people could have been more clear if they had simply clicked through to the actual article. It got a little ridiculous.
p.s. your puppy is an adorable sausage.
Thank you! I honestly cannot understand why people think that caring for one thing automatically precludes you from caring about another. It reminds me of this one time when a friend of mine asked me “who do you love more, your sister or your husband?” I love them equally. I love them both more than I could possibly describe. You can love more than one person at the same time. You can care about more than one cause, as it were, at the same time. The human capacity to feel compassion is only limited by an individual’s refusal to extend compassion to all living beings.
I never understand people who play the charity/cause hierarchy game. I probably can’t count the number of times I’ve replied to someone on Jezebel explaining that caring about one thing does not mean caring about it to the exclusion of all other things. We all have a finite amount of time, resources, and passion to devote to causes. We tend to pick where we will spend these resources, simply because we have to. My personal huge causes are poverty and the environment. That’s where most of my time, energy, and money goes. Doesn’t mean I won’t chip in to support a women’s or animal rights issue, or that I can’t have opinions on other issues, I just choose to focus on two.
Also, the Hoagie is so cute. Wish he could play with my girls.
Oh, some of the comments in that post yesterday made me SO MAD! I was glad to find myself in the company of some ladies like you who, y’know, GET IT.
Also, your dog is adorable and totally important.
BTW, just because I’m missing her right now, here is my dog. As you can see, she is a total strumpet. And she’s important, too.
As someone that works at a domestic violence shelter, I can tell you that batterers often use the pets as bait. They threaten to harm the pets if the woman leaves. And abuse of an animal is a huge predictor of abuse of a partner. Many, many women do not leave for fear of something happening to their animals.
I think this is a great thing.
Note: That’s my foster dog Gary in the picture. He is up for adoption!
That attitude drives me bonkers. I do a lot of blogging on sexism in media like comic books, videogames and movies. And I’m CONSTANTLY being told I shouldn’t be worrying about little crap like that, and should instead be talking about Darfur, or Domestic Violence, or…
It makes me crazy, and I have on occasion unleashed wrath on someone who didn’t entirely deserve it, but merely worded their questioni poorly.
I applaud that law. I’ve seen too many women refuse to leave because they couldn’t take their pets with them, and they knew their abuser would kill them to get at them.
Thanks for posting this! I remember the outrage in CA that Prop 2 passed (treat farm animals well) as well as Prop 8 (no on gay marriage). So, does that mean animals should, essentially, continue being tortured until gay marriage is legal? Would that make people feel better? As someone who is very much for animal rights, gay rights, and rights for every living being on this earth I get very irritated about these apples to oranges comparisons. They are two different issues!!! Thanks again for pointing this out.
My brain almost exploded trying to explain this idea to someone last week. She posted a VERY ANGRY RANT on a message board about how America has completely forgotten about the war(s) going on because all they can think of is the economy. She actually used the word “selfish” to describe Congress passing the stimulus bill.
And your point about women staying in relationships because of their pets (just like they would for children) makes the outrage completely unfounded. EXTENDING the restraining order helps women – isn’t that the whole point??
I think part of the reason we come across this from people who truly believe, as was stated upthread, that for some to get a bigger piece of the metaphorical pie, others have to let go of the “pie” they have, is because we are trained to think in scarcity mode, where you need to get what you can while you can because supplies are limited. Its a zero-sum game, where there is a set amount of something, even compassion, or rights, and one person getting some means less for everyone else.
There is no logical reason for a scarcity model to be applied to kindness, compassion, or rights and freedoms.
“Compassion is a renewable resource.” That should be printed on a tshirt and plastered on billboards. I have this thought about a million times a week.