Spaya for Freyja

On Monday, Kirsti and I took Freyja to get spayed. As much as I love the idea of a litter of puppies, I'm aware enough of things like consequences and a bigger picture to actually allow for that to happen. In fact, we made sure that she was spayed as soon as possible. She's at about five months now, which isn't unreasonably early, but it's definitely before she could go into heat even once.

I'm a big believer in getting your pets fixed. Oliver, my cat, had to get fixed when we adopted him out of the animal shelter, (same deal with the late Argos) but I would have had it done anyway. He was anywhere between three and five years old when we adopted him, and I would frequently joke about how he was probably responsible for a lot of the other cats that were there at the shelter. Needless to say, his days of spreading his seed are long gone. As for my other dog, Willy, he was fixed when we got him.

For me, it seems like such a no-brainer. There are so many dogs and cats out there who don't have a home, that I don't see why you'd want to bring more into the world if you could do something about it. I guess I'm not really referring to breeders (the respectable, not puppy-mill, kind) but I'd be dishonest if I told you that I was completely okay with that idea. I'm just talking about people who, for whatever reason, don't do their part in curbing the pet population.

I find myself getting very frustrated when I talk to some people about this - so much so that I avoid it. I doubt that it's a Mormon thing necessarily, but for some reason when I was growing up, I knew more than one Mormon family that was against spaying/neutering their pets. One family's dog would wind up having puppies every so often, as she'd go into heat so that all the unfixed neighborhood males would come on by and pay her a visit, resulting in a litter of puppies not too long afterward. I also had a friend who had a male dog who was out of control, and when I suggested that they neuter him, he told me that was a bad idea. I don't remember his reasoning exactly, but I remember it being bassackward.

You also get the arguments from anthropomorphism, where people seem to think that their pets are somehow going to miss having their baby-making abilities. They can't realize that a dog or a cat doesn't sit there and think about what could have been or what could be. They're thinking about what's going on at the moment. When you try and say that to these people, you get the "How do you know what they're thinking?" argument. Honestly, I don't know exactly how to argue this. I mean, I imagine that studies must have been done, and the fact that their brains simply aren't very big should say something. Still, just spending some time around cats and dogs makes it kind of obvious that they're not exactly making plans for the future. If anything, getting them fixed removes something that could potentially stress them out.

I also heard people tell me that I should wait for Freyja to either go into heat one time or to allow her to have at least one litter of puppies. These statements were proceeded with a "They say that..." Of course, "they" are always a rather vague, anonymous bunch, aren't they? When we took Freyja to the vet, I asked her if there was any truth to this, or if this was nothing more than "one of those things that they say". She confirmed that it was the latter, and she told me that when you wait, the chance of her getting a certain type of cancer is increased to the same rate where if she wasn't fixed at all. (I probably should have pointed out that fixing your pets tends to get them to live longer and have fewer health problems - just in case you didn't already know that.) But hey, who the hell does she think she is to go against the common sense wisdom of "they"? Just because she's a vet, that doesn't mean that she knows anything. How elitist!

I suppose that somewhere in here, I should point out the irony that if the people who gave me Freyja were a little more proactive about fixing their pets, I wouldn't have such a wonderful dog right now. Still, as much as I love her, I'm sure that I could have gotten a great dog at the shelter (like I did with Argos). I was actually somewhat conflicted about taking her instead of getting a shelter dog, but then I reasoned that if they couldn't find enough homes, those puppies would probably wind up in the shelter themselves. One way or another, I'm giving a home to a dog. It would have been different if I had encouraged my neighbors to let their dog get pregnant in the first place. (I should also point out that they gave her to us. We didn't pay them, so they didn't make any sort of profit off of it. They wouldn't even accept reimbursement for her deworming medication.)

With all this said, I'm still not in favor of any laws that make it mandatory for people to spay and neuter their pets. I liken it to owning a Humvee. Sure, you may have the right to own one, but that doesn't mean that you should. Likewise, you have every right to not get your pets fixed. But still, come on...get 'em fixed. If you're worried about cost, look around online. We got Freyja spayed at the Animal Shelter for $95. Smaller dogs, males and cats are cheaper, and I'm sure that if I really looked around, I could have probably found something even less expensive. If you live in Contra Costa County, here's the link for more information.

Comics Roundup for 8/4/10

Captain America #608 - To think that I was bemoaning the fact that the covers on this series were looking kinda shabby. This is probably the best looking one on the shelf this week. Anyway, we have yet another solid installment of this series with this one, as Baron Zemo continues to shake up the life of "Bucky" Barnes. Bucky's secret identity is out in the open, and even worse, everybody knows about his time as the Winter Soldier, where he worked for the communists (albeit against his free will). Brubaker is really putting this character through the wringer in this series, and it makes for some compelling reading. Speaking of which, I liked the Nomad backup even more (maybe not the art so much) this time around, as it's finally starting to deal with what's interesting about the character - the fact that she's a "girl out of her world" which is a nice parallel to how Captain America is a "man out of his time". It was nice to see her story tie a bit more into what's going on in the main storyline as well, as she got a chance to talk to Steve Rogers, her former partner and the original Captain America.

Avengers Prime #2 (of 5) - I like how this issue managed to still deal with the tension between Steve "not Captain America now" Rogers, Iron Man, and Thor while still having them all off on separate (although connected) adventures. Of course, the Alan Davis artwork is always nice to see.

The Amazing Spider-Man #639 - Last issue, we found out how Peter and Mary Jane never really got married in the first place. This issue, we found out how Aunt May managed to survive. Next time, we'll learn how everybody forgot the fact that Peter is Spider-Man. One thing is certain, this story is not going to undo the undoing of the marriage. I also have to say that in way, this story makes more sense than the original did, considering everything that was going on in the series right up until the marriage issue. I'm old school, and I remember even back then that it seemed kind of abrupt that all of a sudden, Peter was proposing to Mary Jane (despite the fact that he was shirtless and embracing Felicia Hardy, the Black Cat, in the previous issue.)

Hellboy: The Storm #1 (of 3) - This was another great issue. The best part was the quiet moment where Hellboy thought about his childhood with Professor Bruttenholm. It really did a nice job of emphasizing the fact that he's a monster who simply wants to be human - which is precisely what makes him so human.

So, it's not constitutional to discriminate?

Unless you live with your head up your butt, you've no doubt heard that a judge has ruled Proposition 8 to be unconstitutional. In other words, you can't discriminate against people who want to marry somebody of the same sex. Honestly, should this come as a surprise? Of course, all the pro-8 people are very keen to point out the fact that the judge just happens to be gay himself. That's awfully convenient for them, as they don't have to examine the case and decision on its own merits, and now they can play blame-the-gay-guy. It's only a matter of time before we hear the term "activist" judge.

I'm not going to revisit the inanity of all the pro-8 arguments. They're still saying the same old crap, where every single argument rests on some basic logical fallacy - everything from the false analogy to the slippery slope. Instead, I'm just going to write about my reactions to the current ruling.

Obviously, as a fan of equality, I'm pretty darned happy. I read online that there was going to be some rallies in my area to support the judge's decision. One of them was to be in Martinez, but when I drove down there, I didn't see anything going on. So, I headed out to Concord's Todos Santos park, where there was a modest demonstration. I stood with a sign for a bit and got a chance to talk with a few people.

I chatted it up with a lesbian couple, which was really cool. Not that I think that there's anything extra cool about talking to lesbian couples, but on such a historic date as today, it had a bit of extra significance. The one thing that was really cool was that one of them was pregnant, and they were expecting the birth of a son just like I am. Their baby isn't due until November, but we bonded as parents-to-be. The really cool thing is that when I told them that my son's name was going to be Logan, one of them instantly went, "Oh, cool! Wolverine!" The other looked at her in a somewhat puzzled manner. In other words, it was kind of like when I geek out in front of my wife. That conversation really drove home how little difference there really is between a gay couple and a straight one.

Obviously, this conflict isn't over yet. It's still going to go to the Supreme Court, and hopefully Californians can vote on it again and just vote the damn thing away as well. (And you know that's inevitable with the younger generation being more in favor of marriage equality.) Still, hopefully we can maybe compare this to D-Day. It's not the final battle, but it's an important step in getting us to that final victory.

My hope is that when Logan is old enough to have some understanding of politics and civil rights, he'll listen to my stories of attending these kinds of rallies. I hope that when I tell him that gay people were once not allowed to get married that his reaction will be one of confusion, wondering why the hell anybody would ever be against it in the first place. That's the kind of world I hope he grows up in.

I am not excited

As my the birth of my son gets closer and closer, a lot of people have been asking me, "Are you excited?" Here's the problem: I am obsessed with accuracy. I often have to really restrain myself to not correct people, and I think that a lot of people would tell you that I correct people too often anyway. I once got really annoyed at some coworkers when they talked about the horned helmets that the Vikings wore, and I felt the need to point out that they actually never wore them. They looked at me like I was crazy. Whatever, the point is that even though it was just a casual conversation, I couldn't just sit there and let a trivial inaccuracy pass me by.

And that's where the problem comes with that question. If I was a normal person who didn't have this problem, I would just respond with, "Yes! I can't wait!" Unfortunately, there's just something in me that won't allow me to just tell them what they want to hear.

So, what's my problem then? Do I not care? Am I dreading it? Am I wishing that it wasn't happening? Well, no. In fact, those words are even MORE inaccurate.

The problem is this: it's too simple of a word. "Excited" is a word that I use for a lot of things, but the feeling for those things is not the same as the feeling that I'm experiencing right now. I'm excited about the Captain America movie. I'm excited about the fact that I finally made some really grubbin' gormeh sabzi today. I'm excited every Wednesday when new comics come out. I can't use the same word that I use to describe these things to describe how I feel about being a father.

What I'm feeling right now is better than excitement, but it's also far more complex. Part of this is that I have no idea as to what I'm in for with this whole thing. I haven't met my son yet. For me, he's still an ever-growing bump on my wife's belly (that moves around a whole lot). He's also a moving Rorschach test every time we see the ultrasound images. In other words, he's more of an idea than a reality to me.

The thing is, I'm at the point where I just want him to be here already. I'm glad that we'll be inducing a week early, which means that I'll still have one week of summer break before I have to return to work. Still, I wouldn't mind if he were to show up a little early, and even though it would make certain areas of my life a bit inconvenient (Freyja has an appointment to be spayed on Tuesday, and she'll need some TLC for a couple days while she recovers) I really wouldn't mind if Kirsti would walk in to interrupt me while I write this blog to tell me that we should probably be getting to the hospital. Hmmm...let me wait a second and see if she's coming.

Nah. Okay, I'll keep going then...

I'm also really looking forward to Thanksgiving, Winter, Spring, and Summer Breaks along with all of my various weekends and scattered holidays. I really can't wait until he's old enough to start talking, so I can start getting a real sense for what he thinks. I'm also hoping that he'll get into comic books, and if he does, it will be exciting to relive some of my favorite comics (like the original Stan Lee/Steve Ditko issues of The Amazing Spider-Man). More importantly, I can't wait to see what he gets into on his own. Will he be into science? Sports? Computers? I don't know, but I sure hope that he shows some passion for something.

I'll be honest about one thing. I'm more excited at the idea that I'll have a son than I am about the idea that I'll have a baby in the house. Honestly, I always have a fun time with little kids, but I really don't know what to do with babies. Like many men, I'm afraid that I'll break them. Aside from eating, sleeping, and pooping, I don't know what else they can do. And yes, I realize that my attitude will most likely change once he gets here, so please save your comments telling me this.

So no, I'm not excited. I guess what I'll have to do is print out this blog post and hand it to anybody who asks me if I'm excited. Yeah, that's the ticket.

Comics Roundup for 7/28/10

Batman: The Return of Bruce Wayne #4 (of 6) - This was probably my favorite issue as far as the story is concerned, but it was my least favorite art-wise (not that the art was bad - it just wasn't up to the standards of the previous artists). As I've mentioned before, this series has been somewhat confusing; however, I'm continuing to buy it as I have some faith in Grant Morrison. I just re-read every issue of Batman and Robin and all the stuff that confused me when I read it issue by issue was pretty much cleared up. I'm figuring that when all is said and done with this series, I'll be able to say the same thing. Anyway, Bruce Wayne in the Old West? What's not to like, especially since Jonah Hex (who I understand was pretty much ruined in that bomb of a movie) and Vandal Savage get thrown into the mix.

The Flash #4 - Speaking of stuff I recently re-read, I went through the last three issues of this series recently, and I was reminded of why I liked it so much. With that said, I was a bit disappointed that the subplot, where Barry Allen opens up an old file, wasn't followed-up on very much, this was still a pretty solid installment in the life of the Silver Age Flash. Also, enough can't be said about how Francis Manapul is the perfect artist to draw this series.

Green Lantern #56 - Larfleeze, the greedy "Orange Lantern" finds out about Santa Claus in this issue, and his arguments for Santa's existence somewhat remind me of the arguments that people make for God's existence. Maybe that's just me though. Anyway, this was an amusing issue, and it's nice to see that they're finally doing something with Hector Hammond, a villain that they've been teasing since this series began.

Secret Avengers #3 - Speaking of stuff that will probably read better when you don't wait a month between issues, I only moderately enjoyed this one. Still, this is one of the more interesting combination of superheroes ever put into a book, and the new Ant Man is definitely intriguing. I'll keep getting it, as I have stacks and stacks of comics written by Ed Brubaker that I count amongst my favorites, so I'll give this series the benefit of the doubt.

Primus sucks!

Last year, one of my freshmen wrote in his journal about how one of his favorite bands was Primus. I wrote in the margin: "Primus sucks!" Now, you might be thinking: "Hey, Lance, just let the kid like what he likes. Why do you have to editorialize and judge people who don't like what you like?"

Well, if that's what you're saying, then you're not a Primus fan. I was worried that he might not get the reference, actually. After all, I'm a fan of Primus, and I saw them play New Year's Eve for three years in a row starting in 1992. This kid wasn't even born then! Luckily for me, he got the reference, and I think that he was pleased that he had a teacher who was a fellow fan.

The thing is, just like my chili beer, Primus isn't for everybody. If you're sitting there, scratching your head, wondering why fans of a band would chant that the band sucks at their concert, then you're definitely not the type who'd be a fan. If you think it's weird to sing about fishermen, race car drivers, and an inbred hick who bashes in some guy with a baseball bat, then Primus definitely isn't for you either. If all you want to hear are bands that sound a lot like other bands, and sing about the same kinds of things as other bands, then Primus isn't gonna be your bag.

'Cause the thing is with Primus, there just ain't two bands like 'em.

So just who would like Primus then? Well, the first song on their first studio album is a song called "To Defy the Laws of Tradition." (Sadly, I can't find a decent version of it on Youtube to include on this.) Essentially the song is about just that - doing things differently from what we're used to. And whether you like Primus or not, you have to admit that they have always done things their own way. In other words, anybody with any sort of nonconformist bent to them just might like them.

Of course, being different isn't enough to make a band great. They're also great musicians. Sure, they do some wacky stuff. First of all, you don't have a lot of bands where the bass creates the primary melody. Not only that, but what Les Claypool plays can be best described as ridiculously complex. Now, complex doesn't equal good, but he manages to create sounds that are simultaneously convoluted and catchy.

And how about Larry LaLonde's guitar? Honestly, I sometimes think that's my favorite part. He manages to find that right balance between following the melody and being completely chaotic at the same time. It sounds like a buzzsaw that just got loose and developed a mind of its own. Of course, you need to have one amazing drummer with Tim Alexander (later the equally capable Brian Mantia) to hold it all together and not get lost in the shuffle.

As for their lyrics? Well, they're silly. But they're deliberately silly. I've mentioned before that I prefer a deliberately silly lyric to something that's bloated and pretentious. I also prefer it to generic, insipid love songs that completely devalue such a powerful emotion. Why not sing a song about how sometimes the only thing that can satisfy your hunger pangs is a nice slab of beef?

I'm more than aware that there are plenty of people who say "Primus sucks!" but they don't mean it in the same spirit that fans like I do. I'll even admit that I'm somewhat surprised that when I listen to their music after all this time, I still like it. (What about Claypool's solo stuff and side projects? I find that to be rather hit-and-miss.) What pleases me even more is that they have some real staying power, and I have students and former students posting on Facebook about how they're planning to see them live. Obviously, there must be some lasting appeal to loud, crazy, catchy, chaotic, nonconformist music.

I just read that Les Claypool is forming a new incarnation of the band. Here's hoping they continue to suck! And let's get some Rock Band downloads already!

Why I'm not a conservative

A couple years ago, I wrote a blog post about why I don't like to call myself a liberal. I couldn't seem to find it (not that I tried really hard) but the basic gist of it was that by labeling myself, it's like I've already determined what my opinions are going to be before I get all the information. I mean, when we have to decide which side of the war between zombies and vampires comes along, which side is the conservative side and which is the liberal? I'm going to have to wait until I get all the facts, and I'm not going to pick a side based on whoever Kieth Olbermann supports.

In all seriousness, the problem is that I just don't like to label myself. The only time the word "liberal" gets used around me is when other people accuse me of being one. I even got accused of having a "liberal agenda" one time. That seemed weird to me. I was just speaking my mind, and I didn't give any thought as to what agenda I happened to have. I guess I have the same agenda as everybody - to make the world more the way I want it to be (without breaking any laws and/or violating the rights of others.) Also, I don't think that all of my views are necessarily what one would call liberal. I think that my attitude on gun control would be considered to be more moderate. (Although I'm probably a raving liberal compared to the people with bumper stickers that say that you're not doing your job as an American citizen if you don't have a gun.)

So, I'm not a liberal because it just doesn't mean a whole lot to me. Still, I have a much easier time saying that I'm not a conservative than saying that I'm not a liberal. Why is that? Here are my top two reasons. Beware! Gross generalizations shall follow!

1. Conservatives are anti-science. Actually, a better way to word this is that the anti-science movements in this country are predominantly conservative. Intelligent Design/Creationism? It's not liberals who are pushing that one. Global Warming denial? Yup, it's the conservatives.

This isn't to say that there aren't liberals out there who are anti-science as well. Still, you don't associate things like the anti-vaccination movement as being a liberal cause. In fact, many of the most ardent supporters of vaccinations that I know of you could probably categorize as being further to the left than the right.

I mean, isn't it stupid that issues like evolution and climate change are even thought of as being conservative or liberal? Isn't it the facts that matter here? And where really is the controversy? Many conservatives would have you believe that the scientific community is mixed when it comes to these issues. Well, regarding climate change, 97% of currently published climatologists support the notion that we are having an impact on the earth's increasing average temperatures. (This is a point that many conservatives don't seem to get. They'll use cold winter days as proof that things aren't getting warmer, which shows that they don't even understand the issue in the first place.) And yes, I'm aware of the big list of scientists who deny global warming. The thing is with that, anybody with a BS could add their name to it. They even had a few dentists! Maybe we should actually stick with the experts when it comes to climate change - namely, climatologists. (Or maybe I can get a big list of people who deny that car engines run on gasoline, and I can get a bunch of podiatrists to sign it as my "experts". Hey, they're scientists!)

As for the evolution "debate"? I suggest you check out Project Steve. The gist? The NCSE was able to get a much larger list of scientists who support evolution than the ID proponents could get. Not impressed? Well, the NCSE limited their list to biologists. Oh, and you could only get on the list if your name was Steve.

2. Conservatives love strawmen and the false dilemma. I don't know how many times I've debated a self-identified conservative and I've had to point out that they were putting words in my mouth and arguing a point that I wasn't even trying to make in the first place. What's worse, when I point out that they're doing this, they don't acknowledge it. When I explain the concept of "strawman" they act like I'm pulling some sort of rhetorical trick on them. It's difficult to even engage in any kind of honest debate in the first place. Also, if you tune in to shows like O'Reilly, Hannity, and Beck, they basically thrive on knocking down strawmen. But hey, it's easier to argue an imaginary point than an actual one, I guess.

They also love the false dilemma. Everything is either completely this or completely that. A conservative recently recommended the book Liberty and Tyranny: A Conservative Manifesto by Mark Levin. I read through bits and pieces of it at Barnes and Noble, but I think that I read enough to say that it's ridiculous. His first chapter sets up both the strawman and the false dilemma. Basically, you were either a conservative, or you were a "statist". Essentially, if you weren't somebody who identifies as being conservative, then you essentially want a government that controls every aspect of your life. I remember reading his opening chapter and thinking, "I'm not either one of these things!" Yeah, yeah, I know, you probably shouldn't judge a book unless you've read at least the majority of it. But how can I keep going when the initial premise is so flawed to begin with?

And don't get me started on his chapter on religion. His whole argument was, "Science can't explain reason, so therefore a magical man who lives outside of space and time created everything." (Okay, he didn't use phrases like "magical man" but that's still the crux of his argument. Since you can't explain something, therefore a god must have done it. This of course is fool-proof logic, as we all know that Thor brought lightning before we could explain it.)

Anyway, I was going to give more reasons, but then I started to realize that they were things that liberals tend to do as well. Shoot, liberals might use a lot of strawmen and false dilemmas too, and maybe I'm just not noticing them since I tend to sympathize more with the left. I was going to write about how conservatives love to boil things down to simplistic talking points, but I know plenty of liberals who do the same thing, and it's just as maddening to hear it from somebody with whom I agree.

The thing is, in my experience I notice that conservatives embrace their label much more enthusiastically than liberals do theirs. This isn't to say that there aren't people who proudly identify themselves as being liberal, but I know a lot of people who are as left, if not more left, than I am, and they seem to be just as uneasy with the label as I am.

I'm not beyond having opinions that might be considered conservative, but it seems to me that if I want to identify myself as being one, it involves a commitment that I'm just not willing to make.