Naked Mole Rats: Surviving Oxygen Deprivation.

Rats, ever extraordinary!

Deprived of oxygen, naked mole-rats can survive by metabolizing fructose just as plants do, researchers report this week in the journal Science.

Understanding how the animals do this could lead to treatments for patients suffering crises of oxygen deprivation, as in heart attacks and strokes.

“This is just the latest remarkable discovery about the naked mole-rat — a cold-blooded mammal that lives decades longer than other rodents, rarely gets cancer, and doesn’t feel many types of pain,” says Thomas Park, professor of biological sciences at the University of Illinois at Chicago, who led an international team of researchers from UIC, the Max Delbrück Institute in Berlin and the University of Pretoria in South Africa on the study.

In humans, laboratory mice, and all other known mammals, when brain cells are starved of oxygen they run out of energy and begin to die.

But naked mole-rats have a backup: their brain cells start burning fructose, which produces energy anaerobically through a metabolic pathway that is only used by plants – or so scientists thought.

The full story is here.

House Democrats Call for New DAPL Permitting Process.

Left to right, Standing Rock Sioux Chairman David Archambault II, Cheyenne River Sioux Chairman Harold Frazier, Lakota elder Faith Spotted Eagle, Apache Stronghold founder Wendsler Nosie Sr., and youth representative Gracey Claymore speak to Democratic U.S. Representatives at a forum on Thursday September 22. Courtesy House of Representatives via YouTube.

Left to right, Standing Rock Sioux Chairman David Archambault II, Cheyenne River Sioux Chairman Harold Frazier, Lakota elder Faith Spotted Eagle, Apache Stronghold founder Wendsler Nosie Sr., and youth representative Gracey Claymore speak to Democratic U.S. Representatives at a forum on Thursday September 22. Courtesy House of Representatives via YouTube.

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers’ approval of permits for the Dakota Access oil pipeline did not comply with legal consultation requirements, House Democrats Raúl Grijalva and Raul Ruiz, MD, concluded after a forum late last week.

Even as the sale of Cannonball Ranch to Dakota Access LLC was being finalized by its private owners on September 22, Lakota and Apache leaders were in Washington D.C. to give statements before Democratic members of the U.S. House of Representatives about not only the current trials of the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe, but also the bigger picture.

In a two-hour discussion attended by about two dozen lawmakers, a panel consisting of Standing Rock Sioux Chairman David Archambault II, Cheyenne River Sioux Chairman Harold Frazier, Lakota elder Faith Spotted Eagle, Apache Stronghold founder Wendsler Nosie Sr., and youth representative Gracey Claymore spoke and answered questions about the crisis surrounding the Dakota Access oil pipeline’s construction. They also addressed the larger issues surrounding Indigenous Peoples and their relationship with the United States—what consultation really means, what the implications are for industrial projects, and what needs to happen next with Dakota Access.

The discussion ranged from how the permitting process is conducted, to the impact of sacred sites destruction within the context of historical trauma, to the resurgent hope that has indigenous youth standing up for their cultures, and to the very notion of what constitutes archaeology and who gets to define it.

In terms of Congress, what it came down to was a matter of law.

“I just want to remind everybody that the piece of land we’re talking about is on federal land,” noted Ruiz, the ranking member of the House Committee on Natural Resources Subcommittee on Indian, Insular, and Alaska Native Affairs, in closing remarks. “So this is land that is under the jurisdiction of the federal government. And that what we’re talking about here is not just a matter of what is right. It’s the law.”

Not only that, he said, but those laws had been violated, and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers had been warned earlier this year when three federal agencies wrote separate letters urging the Corps to do a more in-depth environmental and cultural study of the areas of the pipeline that would run through federal land.

[Read more…]

Democrats’ Filibuster on Gun Control.

Chris Murphy.

Chris Murphy.

There’s a glimmer of hope that the tiniest shred of gun control legislation might pass the Senate in response to the Orlando shooting that left 49 people dead.

After nearly 15 hours of talking on the Senate floor, the filibuster held by Democrats on Wednesday and into the early hours of Thursday has apparently been a success, and there will be two votes on gun control measures.

The two ideas — stopping people on the terrorist watch list from buying guns, and requiring background checks even when someone purchases a gun online or at a gun show instead of in a store — will be allowed votes by the full Senate, Democrats say.

“We chose to ask for the two least controversial provisions possible that will still do a world of good,” said Sen. Chris Murphy of Connecticut, home to the Newtown mass shooting that killed 20 children and six adults. He spoke from the Senate floor and announced Republicans had agreed “on a path to get those votes.”

With the Senate controlled by Republicans, it’s essentially up to Majority Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky on whether any piece of legislation gets a vote. So Democrats, led by Murphy, filibustered an existing funding bill, called the Departments of Commerce and Justice, Science, and Related Agencies appropriations bill. It worked, and now they must focus on winning enough votes to pass the laws.

“Least controversial provisions”. I can’t get past that, nor can I muster up even a tiny bit of hope. Yes, this might help, a teeny, tiny bit, if these actually make it through, but I am so fucking sick and tired of every single sensible person in uStates feeling the need to walk on tiptoes on eggshells, so as not to upset all the gun fetishists. FFS, wouldn’t this normally be called terrorism, where people are scared to death of those with weapons? A good portion of uStates is being held hostage, and nothing is going to be done, unless it’s a tiny, marginally effective sop.

Full Story Here.

Thank you, Rats

File this one under: FFS. My apologies to PZ, for pestering him unnecessarily. I’ve had to change things in my studio lately, to accommodate all the ratlets, and didn’t realize the rats could get up on the computer station. Even more stupidly, I left an admin page open, and left my keyboard on. In their usual mysterious way, they hit a perfect storm of keys, and borked everything here. It’s all fixed up now, so all you wonderful people who commented today, you’ll have to do it again, I can’t figure out how to move comments (if it’s even possible – the rats could probably do it.) For your trouble, here’s Ville, one of Violette’s boys, named after Ville Valo, because of the wicked cute.

Ville

Ville1

Adopt, Don’t Shop! – and its Limitations

I’m a big fan of adopting rescues and very critical of most modern dog breeding.

The rescue part you might have already guessed from Socks being, well, a rescue dog. The goodest rescue dog.

front view of a tricolour small dog lying on the grass

©Giliell, all rights reserved

You might have also guessed that I’m not the biggest fan of most modern breeding, with varying degrees from hatred for puppy mill owners and people who breed dog breeds that are inherently unhealthy (German has the apt word “Qualzucht”, torture breeding) like Frenchies over people who breed dogs that are mostly not suitable as family dogs but being sold mostly to families (Border Collies and Aussies, anybody?) to being mildly critical to dog breeds that need more genetic diversity to counter (manageable) health issues but who aren’t getting any due to stupid breed standards.

I’m not going to call everybody who gets a puppy from a breeder names, just a lot of them, so let’s look at the arguments being made in favour of getting a purebred puppy and which ones hold up, but also at the arguments pro and against getting a rescue.

First of all some necessary information before we start talking past each other:

In Germany and other wealthier European countries there exist two parallel rescue systems. The first one is the local shelters, which are all no kill and will take in pets that are surrendered but also pets that are confiscated or abandoned. The second system is foreign adoption from Eastern and Southern European countries with low animal welfare and kill shelters. Both have their pros and cons and I’ll talk about those as well.

First argument: But I love breed X!

This is the one I can simultaneously understand the most but that also infuriates me the most. Dog breeds have been created over centuries for specific purposes with specific goals in mind, so members of a breed are very likely to not only share a look, but also certain character traits. I mean, who doesn’t love a Golden Retriever? There’s still reasons I don’t have one. So there are people who either want a dog for a specific purpose (i. e. hunting) and get a specific working breed, or there are people who are really looking into which breed fits their lives and get those and I can understand that.

Unfortunately, most people don’t look at all aspects of a breed, they look at the optics or the image. They get a breed that has been popularized by media or celebrities. Border Collies are one of those breeds, as are Dalamtians and most tragically, French Bulldogs. Fuck Lady Gaga, The Rock and the rest of them who popularized Frenchies. In Germany there’s a huge problem with breeds like the Belgian Malinois or Kangals: Both dogs that require experienced owners, lots of attention and real good training, not to mention the right living conditions. But people will watch three videos on the internet and go “awwwww” and now German shelters are full with them, as well as the assorted bully breeds. This is a huge problem and ties in with argument #2.

Second argument: They wouldn’t let me have a rescue dog!

Congrats, so you went to a backyeard breeder, because if you didn’t get a rescue, then no responsible breeder would sell you a puppy. Now, I know that some local shelters can be a bit over the top, but most are not, if you’re being reasonable as to which dog you want. And often there will be no dog available that fits you, because see #1. When we looked for a doggo, we also looked at the local shelters. They had German Shepherds, Malinois, Bullies, their mixes and a very sick pug. These dogs need knowledgeable people and nobody should have given me any of them, should I have applied. Which I didn’t. I went to a (reputable) rescue organisation and yeah, me, a first time dog owner full time working person got a dog. But one that fit our lives.

Third argument: I don’t want a traumatised dog /surprise box that is a rescue

Another argument that holds a bit of truth, but not much. Just like those dogs from the local shelters who are often already demanding breeds now with added issues from bad keeping, a lot of foreign rescue dogs come with trauma and trust issues. Those dogs also need expereinced people willing to work with them and put up with a lot (anybody remember Caine’s half coyote who would keep its bones in her bed? Not everybody’s cup of tea) and should also only be given to such people. Me, I’m not that people. I still found a rescue dog. Socks isn’t the biggest fan of tall men and strangers, but he’s affectionate, smart and very easy to train. It’s also not like every individual of a certain breed will be a perfect example of that breed. The one dog in our doggy school group that had the most issues and the least progress was a Golden Retriever.

Also, as I mentioned, people go for looks and images, but not actual breed behaviour. They get a Dachshund (you shouldn’t) and are surprised that it’s stubborn as fuck. Those doggos were bred to hunt badgers, alone in the dark. They do their own thinking. They get any kind of shepherd and are surprised the dog is herding and nipping. They get a lifestock guarding dog and are surprised that their dog doesn’t listen at all because for centuries those dogs have stayed with the herds without seeing a human for days.

That’s also something you have to take into account when getting a rescue mutt. Pay attention to the telltale guarding dog looks. So yeah, getting arescue requires you to do some thinking and careful choice of dog, but so does getting a purebred.

Fourth argument: I want a dog that was socialised well

It’s one I will let somewhat stand. A good breeder does a lot of work to make sure the puppies have a good start. They will be carefully introduced to stimuli, socialised, and will have some basic connection to humans. It certainly gives you a headstart with your dog. But it also doesn’t mean that you don’t have to work with the dog. As mentioned before, Socks and I go to doggy school. We’re in a group of dogs the same age and have been for the last 6 months. At the start, Socks had some catching up to do, since he didn’t have any training before he was adopted, and was also new to a lot of situations. But by now he has well caught up and is often ahead of the well socialised purebred classmates.

Fifth argument: Good breeders health test their dogs

Another two sided sword. Yeah, good breeders will health test their dogs to some extent before breeding them, but this opens a whole can of worms: Breed specific health issues, fucked up breed standards and genetic diversity. Many popular breeds have so little genetic diversity that all individuals are genetically as close as siblings or first cousins. It’s no use that their pedigree shows no direct inbreeding, they simply don’t have a large enough gene pool. Now taking out individuals with certain traits will further decrease the gene pool. This is why many breeds simply cannot remove certain unhealthy traits by no longer breeding those individuals. Apart from creating more suffering, it’s not possible to create healthier Frenchies by breeding longer snout individuals. It’s only now that we’re beginning to understand how certain things are related. Did you know that white coats and being deaf is related? For decades breed standards demanded a colour that also carried a high risk of deafness, but now breeds like Dalmatians have lost all other healthy allels. Back to the Goldie? I love them, but their hips are fucked. People joke about them eating everything, but just like Labradors most of them are missing the gene that regulates hunger and being full. While the assorted retrievers are not among them, honestly a lot of breeds simply need to go. The giants and the teacups, the brachycephalic dogs, and many many more. No amount of health testing will solve issues that are breed standards, especially if there isn’t a viable population without those issues. They would need to cross in other dogs nad that will never happen. Not only would it change their beloved standards, it would also mean investing money and not making it (that’s also the reason why doodles won’t become breeds).

Does a rescue guarantee a healthy dog? Nope. After all, their gene pool is the same fucked up mess, you’re just combining more. Our neighbours have a lovely rescue mutt who’s going blind. White coat, blue eyes, high probability. But it means that you’re not supporting a sick system.

Sixth (and for now final) argument: Foreign rescues are just puppy mills in disguise / they clogg local shelters 

Again one that has some truth to it. With foreign rescues being pretty popular, it attracts two types of unethical players.

Type one: The puppy mill. They always have cute puppies for adoption. They’re all mutts, so nobody suspects a puppy mill at first and they will tell you some sob story. A good rescue will have all kinds of dogs. They will occasionally have puppies, but you will also be able to get the spayed momma dog after the puppies are weaned.

Type two: The Good Samaritians Without a Plan. While Type one is in for the money, these people are in for feeling good themselves. Their goal is to get as many dogs out as possible without actually making sure that those dogs go to good homes. They will often allow people to adopt just after having seen a cute pic and heard a sorry tale, they will not check before, they will brush over issues and have absolutely no plan B. They do significantly contribute to the local shelter population.

If you ever look into getting a foreign rescue, these are the signs of a reputable organisation:

-There are dogs you cannot adopt. Not all dogs will adjust to a family life. Some are too traumatised to ever trust humans again. You can sponsor them, and they get to live the rest of their days in peace, fed, safe and cared for.

-They work locally. That’s like the biggest point. A good rescue organisation wants to make itself unnecessary. They offer spaying and neutering for the locals, they educate people on how to prevent unwanted litters, thus reducing the number of animals that need them.

-They have foster places where the dogs can adjust and you can get to know the dogs. While they may also do direct adoptions where you get the dog without it having lived with a foster family, they do so responsibly

-They check on you and won’t just give you a dog. The foster lady we got Socks from is a friend of my friends, so we already had a good reputation by hearsay, but she still had us fill out all the forms, talked about problems that may happen and checked us at home to see if our data was correct, the same way a good breeder does.

-They have a plan B. Even with a careful adoption process, things can go wahoonie-shaped. A goood rescue still feels responsible for the dog. Our contract states that we cannot sell or surrender the dog without their approval, if they disapprove the dog goes back to them. That’s an important point. It also means that they’re a lot more careful about whom they give which dog. They want things to work, because otherwise the dog becomes their problem again.

-They never apply emotional pressure to make you adopt a dog. No sob story. No “if you don’t take it, it will be killed”. They may ask for your money (I swear, in the end you pay as much for the rescue as you pay for a purebred, just that you pay a little every once in a while), but never for you to adopt more dogs than you can handle.

-They are honest. If you llok at their website and find dogs with trust issues, there’s a good chance that you can also get one without trust issues and not one who is deeply traumatised but has been lied about.

 

As you see, I’m not at all unsympathetic to people who responsibly get a certain breed, and I won’t claim that rescue dogs are for everybody, but I’m so sick and tired of those bullshit arguments.

Self-Sustainability Tangent – Part 14 – Pets, Pests & Other Animals

Pets are out of the question in our particular self-sustainability scenario with one singular exception (see later). Dogs and cats are carnivores and would add a significant burden on the need to produce animal protein. A working barn cat would be useful by keeping down the voles and mice, etc., a bit, so that option might be worth the hassle of having to increase the rabbit production a little, but on a small plot like this, the cat would spend most of its time somewhere else anyway (speaking from experience). So IMO not worth it.

But I do count on having five egg-laying hens in our scenario, producing about 1000 eggs a year. And those could also be pets. A friend of mine has bought retired egg-laying hens, with the intention of having them lay eggs for a year and then killing them for meat. His wife took to observing them after work (first mistake), started to recognize their individual traits (second mistake), and gave them names (third mistake). At that point, she became opposed to the idea of killing and eating them, so they were allowed to live until natural death. And AFAIK, they continue to do this still, about ten years later. The hens still provide them with eggs, and they live comfortable and happy lives until death. They are not cuddly like cats or dogs, but they can get affectionate and entertaining.

From spring to fall, five hens should be able to find enough food in the coppice, with occasional supplementation with kitchen scraps. Hens can and will eat virtually anything, although they prefer insects and small animals. In the winter, they would require feeding, but it should be possible to grow enough surplus to keep them alive through winter with a combination of food scraps, cracked grain, and boiled potatoes/potato peels (there will inevitably be some potatoes that are not fit for human consumption due to pest damage) mixed with shredded and boiled alfalfa hay. It is also not unreasonable to expect more walnuts than one person can comfortably eat, and hens will love those in winter.

Rabbits or guinea pigs would not be pets in this scenario; they would be meat. Their whole purpose would be to eat plant parts inedible to humans and convert them into something edible. They can be omitted entirely in favor of pet hens, but the plot will thus inevitably lose some efficiency by using all excess plant material (and there would be plenty) just for composting.

Like the hens, the rabbits should be able to graze in the coppice throughout the summer with the chickens, since they eat different stuff. The water cleaning facility, the fallow field, the coppice, and the orchard should provide enough plant material to make hay for winter to keep one buck and two does alive through winter. In the spring and summer, there should be enough surplus plant matter to get at least 10 kg of meat out of their offspring.

With rabbits, there would be a need for outward input – vaccination. Without it, a deadly outbreak of myxomatosis is inevitable at some point, again, speaking from experience.

10 kg of meat and 1000 eggs would provide about 90 Mcal, getting the total to 954 Mcal, enough to keep an active person alive.

Pests are another problem. The hens would help a bit with pest control by devouring any insects that travel through the coppice. But mice, rats, and voles would be a problem. Hens will kill a vole or mice if they catch them, but they are not particularly good at catching them. In my opinion, the best self-sustainable way to keep these pests under control would be to strategically put bucket traps baited with walnuts. And subsequently killing all captured rodents and feeding them to the hens.

What slugs and bugs get onto the veggies anyway can be in part destroyed manually, and in part by homemade insecticides. For that purpose, growing a few potted chrysanthemums would be necessary to make an insecticide spray if needed. Daisies growing anywhere in the garden should be cherished, because they can serve in this capacity, too.

To someone uncomfortable with killing animals of any kind and in any context and for whatever purpose, I do not recommend attempting food self-sustainability. Whatever spiritual connection one feels to fellow living creatures, that connection is inevitably strained beyond breaking point when said creatures literally threaten one’s survival by destroying their only food source. It is easy to be high-minded about this when the food comes from the supermarket. It is less easy when it comes from hard work and a yearly gamble with nature.

Please meet Socks

With all the horrors going on in the world, let’s have something positive. Please meet the newest member of the Giliell family: Socks

©Giliell, all rights reserved

I’ve always wanted a dog. I wanted a dog before I could write “dog”, but of course my parents said “no”. Later the circumstances weren’t right. First I was a poor college student, then I had two small kids in a small flat, then I had long commutes. Now the kids are mostly grown, we live in a house next to the woods and my commute is 10 – 20 minutes. The only other obstacle was my beloved not wanting a dog, but over the last 2 years the kids and I wore him down. Now the question was “What dog and when”? The “what was pretty easy. We wanted a small to medium mixed breed rescue and went with a rescue that brings in street dogs and dogs from kill shelters in Romania. Now, when you get your dog from a foreign rescue you have to be careful about some things, just like when you get your dog from a breeder, “breeder” or local shelter. We went with one that had a couple of decades of history, makes sure they visit prospective adopters and most importantly where the local contact / foster mum is a personal friend of our BFF’s mum.

Why not a local shelter? Two problems: First, someof them have unrealistic expectations like you mustn’t work outside the home and leave the dog alone. Second: German shelters are 80% populated by dogs that people shouldn’t have gotten in the first place: dogs listed as potentially dangerous like staffies, bullies, etc and their cross breeds and high need dogs like Malinois or Kangal. I can’t do a high need dog, which is what I also told the rescue lady, so we worked together. Our initial plan was to look for a dog that would then go on the March transport. She would foster until the start of the easter break and then we’d have 2 weeks to get used to each other.

Then she got a foster dog on the January transport and told me: “Come look at this one, I thinks that’s the onbe for you”, so we went for a first visit. The dog we met was still very shy and had to be carried across the doorstep because he was afraid, but we instantly fell in love. The little guy even matched the name my daughter had already picked back when we first decided to get a dog: Socks.

Small tri colour dog being carried, looking very shy

©Giliell, all rights reserved

Look at how shy he was back then!

Within days we agreed on a “test” day and then a few days later went to pick him up. He very quickly lost all that shyness once he realised that finally had a family.

The doggie lying on his back with his mouth open next to a leg. You can see a hand giving belly rubs. He looks cheeky.

©Giliell, all rights reserved

Did I mention that we’d wanted a mixed breed? Joke’s on me.

The rescue guessed that he was an Australian Shepherd mix, which, if you look at pics of tri colour Aussies does make some sense.

Tri colour Aussie in a field of flowers

By Wikimedia Commons

But some things didn’t quite add up:

  • He’s looking very much like an Aussie, except for his build. He’s relatively short legged and pretty small. If one of his parents was an Aussie for those Aussie looks, what was the other parent?
  • No characteristic double coat.
  • None of the herding behaviour I remember from our friends’ Aussie mix
  • Digging. He loves digging so much

Last weekend somebody said: “He looks like a Kokoni” and I was “he looks like a what?” Please meet the Kokoni, one of the world’s most ancient dog breeds. They’re thankfully not a recognised breed by any kennel club, but they have been around in Greece for probably 3.000 years, while being rarely known outside of Greece (but it’s not too far away from Romania where he was found). I looked the breed up and sure there was my dog. Not only were there pictures that looked exactly like him, the breed description also describes his character to a T. Thankfully since nobody has ever come up with any breed standards, they have no known breed specific health issues. They’re friendly, active, loyal and smart and they’re also used to keep mice and rats away. That explains the digging.

So how’s life with a dog? Of course it’s work. My day now starts at 5:30 so I can walk the dog before I go to work. But you know what? It’s doing me good. Getting up has always been my nemesis, and I’ve been known to hit the snooze way too often. Guess what? The dog doesn’t have a snooze button, so I get up at 5:30 and then we get ready and I arrive at work without being in a hurry. Also the first week or so I was totally exhausted because I wasn’t used to walk 5-7 km each day, but I’ve built up the stamina and also my jeans fit much better. But the best of all ist coming home and being greeted like I’d gone to Antarktca in a Tshirt and still came back.

The Rise of Whataboutism

Whenever I look at the comment section under an article or video about the Russian invasion of Ukraine, whether in CZ or EN, there is a visible presence of people who either outright say that Russia is right to this or who say that it is not wrong to do it because… Whatabout Iraq? Whatabout Afghanistan? Whatabout Grenada? Whatabout Whatever?

This is a classic Soviet-era propaganda tool, trying to divert the attention from an injustice being done by the USSR to similar injustices being done by the USA. The old adage that two wrongs do not make a right applies. There is no moral difference between the USA invading another country and/or sending in mercenaries trying to overthrow a democratically elected government because it threatens US financial interests and/or egos of its leaders and Russia invading another country and/or sending in mercenaries to overthrow a democratically elected government because it threatens its financial interests and/or egos of its leaders. They are both bad.

Then there is also a not insignificant number of people who engage in what I would call ifonlysm. Ifonly Ukraine did not try to join the EU. Ifonly Ukraine did not have right-wing extremists. Ifonly Ukraine did not have a “coup” against Yanukovich. Ifonly Russia got an iron-clad guarantee that NATO won’t expand no more even if a country’s people wish to do so.

As someone living in Central Europe in a country that was very often right at the center of any big conflict in Europe from  The Thirty Years’ War through Napoleonic wars, WWI, and WWII right up to The Cold War, I very much do not appreciate this rhetoric. Because if history teaches us anything, it teaches us that this is not how any of this works. Appeasing Putin would not stop this invasion, it would only change the timescale and the pretext under which it is done.

Autocrats do not try to gain power for rational reasons and the reasons they say are not the real reasons. The truth is that autocrats want power for power’s sake. Some go the way of amassing useless billions in wealth, some go the way of hijacking the state apparatus to become dictators, some do both. But just as there is no billionaire who cannot be corrupt because “he has amassed enough wealth”, there is no dictator who does not want to expand their area of influence because the “empire is big enough”. The billionaires hoard wealth until the economy collapses and goes into recession, the autocrats hoard power until the state apparatus collapses and a revolution happens. The only limits on what an autocrat can achieve are those imposed on them from the outside.

Putin has now made it clear that he wants to restore the former USSR sphere of influence. And although he did not use such words, it essentially means he wants to build a Russian Empire with him being its Tzar for life. He does not need it. His country does not need it. There is no rational reason to try to pursue such a goal except an insatiable lust for power. And the keyword here is insatiable.

No, Heather, hating your spouse is not normal

I’ve noticed this phenomenon before: women, often self declared feminists, write about their fundamental unhappiness in their heterosexual marriages. They then often try to reason that this is normal and inevitable. It’s no wonder these women are also often deeply transphobic, as they need to pin the source of their suffering down to some weird “biology” instead of either discussing social issues or, heavens forbid, personal issues, especially of themselves.

Heather starts by making a trivial observation that most people in any long term relationship, whether romantic or not, will agree with:

After 15 years of marriage, you start to see your mate clearly, free of your own projections and misperceptions. This is not necessarily a good thing.

The Austrian author Robert Musil once remarked that a good friend is somebody you actually can’t stand. Because in any deep relationship, you are allowed to show the signs that are not pretty. You’re allowed to have bad days, be a flawed human being, and leave the toothpaste unscrewed. I think we can all agree that the better you know somebody, the more intimate your relationship becomes, the better you get to know all their character flaws. But they also get to know yours, so that’s ok. Had Heather written an open ed about all those little quirks and compromises that make up a relationship, her article would have been equally unoriginal as uncontroversial. But Heather didn’t stop there, Heather decided to air all the dirty laundry on a husband she seems to be still married to. Did I say “dirty laundry”? Because this is how she describes her husband the first time that we meet him in the text:

When encountering my husband, Bill, in our shared habitat, I sometimes experience him as a tangled hill of dirty laundry. “Who left this here?” I ask myself, and then the laundry gets up to fetch itself a cup of coffee.

This is not an illusion; it’s clarity. Until Bill has enough coffee, he lies in a jumble on the couch, listening to the coffee maker, waiting for it to usher him from the land of the undead. He is exactly the same as a heap of laundry: smelly, inert, almost sentient but not quite.

If I ever write about somebody I claim to love like this, please whack me over the head and take away my internet because holy shit. Throughout the whole article I’m wondering if Bill knew about this before it was published and how he’s feeling, because this is simply cruel. Oh sure, she then writes a full three lines about his positive aspects before descending again into a diatribe about how aweful living with him is. She comes to this, in her view universal conclusion: Because her husband makes sounds like a normal human being (can you imagine, the guy sneezes!):

This is why surviving a marriage requires turning down the volume on your spouse so you can barely hear what they’re saying.

First note the phrasing. It’s not “for a marriage to survive”, it’s “surviving a marriage” as if that relationship was a life threatening ordeal. But maybe, just maybe, no longer speaking and listening to your partner is what makes your marriage such a miserable place to be in. I’m not going to give marriage counselling here, but I actually do enjoy talking to my husband and listening to him. We’re each others emotional support system. we chat and we vent, we give advice and support. It wasn’t something that can naturally to either of us. Or maybe it did and my parents beat it out of me, I don’t know, but to us, this is what sharing our lives means, and when we’re done with the talking, we can take comfort in each others presence. Any partner would be justifiably upset if their love declared them only barely bearable. Yet the author doesn’t see anything troublesome about her paragraphs over paragraphs on how horrible her spouse is (mind you, I haven’t read anything that would make me think that Bill is actually a bad guy. His major crime seems to be existing in proximity to his wife):

Do I hate my husband? Oh for sure, yes, definitely. I don’t know anyone who’s been married more than seven years who flinches at this concept. A spouse is a blessing and a curse wrapped into one. How could it be otherwise? How is hatred not the natural outcome of sleeping so close to another human for years?

See, it’s that overgeneralising I talked about at the very start of this post. Whoever objects to this is quickly dismissed:

“Well, speak for yourself. I don’t hate my husband,” one of you holier-than-thou marrieds might announce, folding your hands primly in your lap. Do you think I can’t see your left eye twitching ever so slightly, as you resolve to never let each little irritation add up and move into your conscious mind like a plastic bag floating out to sea and then joining the Great Pacific Garbage Patch?

You. Cannot. Not. Hate. Your. Spouse.

Because if you could, then the problem would be Heather and Bill and their marriage. If you could, then maybe this wasn’t some fate you cannot escape, some martyrdom you are destined to experience, but some very mundane issues that arise in most relationships that you can work on. Bill leaves his dirty socks around? Do talk to each other. Bill keeps forgetting to pay the bills? Find a solution that works and hopefully doesn’t risk your mortgage. Or if you find out that you cannot resolve the issues, do get a divorce. But Heather isn’t interested in solutions, she’s interested in telling us how bad she has it, taking us on a family trip to Australia, where her husband comes from.

She tells us about all the things she did on the journey and how travelling around the globe with kids isn’t exactly fun. And yes, I’m wondering: Where’s Bill? It sounds like a typical situation of how women are often burdened with organising trips, doing emotional labour, caring for the children, putting up a brave face. And if that’s the issue, that again isn’t an intrinsic problem of being married to a guy. It’s a social problem and a relationship problem. And it’s not easy to navigate those issues in a relationship. But I’m 100% sure that venting in an international newspaper isn’t going to solve the problem. Though, I must admit that by now I’m already considering her such an unreliable narrator that I’m wondering how much of this is her own doing. Take this part, for example:

Who engages in the 105th hour of an ongoing discussion about Bill’s Bad Knee, which includes speculation, revised imaginary diagnoses, and in-depth analysis of a level of pain that she herself would file under Not Worth Mentioning at All, Ever, Not Even for a Second?

Whose fault is it exactly that she isn’t able to voice that she’s in pain? Whose fault is it that Bill is comfortable saying “I have a medical issue and I need some rest” while she’s soldiering on? Again we have gender stereotypes but also a blank refusal to acknowledge them as well as a blank refusal to take responsibility. I get the impression that she is one of those people who love to complain, but never change anything that would take away the basis of the complaint. Because she sure loves to complain a lot:

And when we arrive at that island in the Great Barrier Reef, the one populated at this time of year by thousands of birds, birds squawking and cawing and clucking and screeching, birds every two feet, bird droppings covering literally every inch of ground, who makes up a game where the first person to get hit by flying bird poop wins an ice cream cone?

Can you believe it? There are birds. In nature. Who allowed that?

Who says it’s OK for one kid not to snorkel? Who says it’s OK for both kids to snorkel without her, since she gets seasick? Who goes snorkeling anyway because both kids want Mommy there, since Daddy will ignore them because he’s super-jacked to snorkel the hell out of the Great Barrier Reef? Who asks the snorkeling guide if she’d be better off in the boat if she’s starting to feel queasy?

Again, this is not a sentence chiselled into stone. It’s a relationship dynamic. It’s one you easily fall into when you’re a woman married to a man. It’s something you can change. Unless your dude is actively endangering the children, in which case I want to know why you’re married to the guy and had not just one, but two children with him, he can take care of them. Don’t just let him, make him. FFS, talk to him! Does Bill actually know that you’re feeling terrible? Or is it another one of those “Not Worth Mentioning” things (except in a national newspaper)? Or do you expect him to read your mind, Heather? Yes, that’s exactly what Heather expects. After enlightening us that her issues with snorkelling aren’t actually her issues, but universally acknowledged truths, she tells us this gem:

And then who gets sick, as predicted, but doesn’t say a single word about it, even as a wave of colorful fish swarms the scene and everyone marvels and wonders why they suddenly appeared, like magic?

Let’s recap this: She went out for an activity the rest of the family enjoyed, but she found out made her sick. Instead of talking to her husband and telling him to please take care of the children, she plays the martyr and goes snorkelling with her children. This makes her sick and miserable. She still doesn’t tell anybody, but probably keeps on smiling. And then it’s obviously everybody else’s fault. Can’t they see what a great warrior she is?

I’ve been feeling ill since we arrived on the ferry. There is no air-conditioning and there are no screens on the windows because we are now honorable eco-warrior vacationers. I have a cut on my finger that I’m pretty sure is infected. I’ve been battling insomnia for over a year. But I don’t say a word about how bad I feel. You don’t believe me, but it’s true! Thanks to writing an advice column for years. I have evolved, unlike my spouse. I am so good, so thoughtful, so generous.

No, Heather, instead of talking to your family like normal people do, arranging time for you to wind down, probably going to a doctor to get something for the insomnia or that infected cut, you write about how you feel in the New York Times. How will your children feel about this? Do they know you basically described them as ungrateful brats instead of children who are basically behaving like children do? But that’s the thing, isn’t it? The victim thing. The thing where the family needs to feel bad about how you are unable to have some boundaries and voice your needs.

Finally, I break.

“You ALL need to make less noise!” I announce. “And you,” I say to the big one, “you’re the worst of all. You can’t hear a noise without making another noise!”

At first they all start making noises at once. So I raise my voice. “No,” I tell them. “I can’t fix this anymore! I am broken!”

“It’s true, but …”

“I’m sorry, Mommy.”

But I can’t stop. “Who could stand this? I need a break! Go have breakfast without me!”

My family exits guiltily.

I’m sure that at this point the family is equally confused as well as feeling guilty without even knowing why, and while I can sympathise with being burned out and overwhelmed and completely at the end of your tether, I cannot sympathise with what she’s doing here. She has repeatedly told us that she didn’t say anything before. She simply swallowed all the big and little things. She didn’t say “no”, she didn’t set a boundary. She gave everyone around her the idea that Mommy was fine and enjoying herself. But again, that’s a Heather problem, not a world problem. I can understand being stressed out. I can understand an overload. I can understand being frustrated when you just spent lots of time and money on something and now your kids aren’t ohhhhing and ahhhhing (usually because they’re suffering from overload as well), but bickering. But it’s not ok to guilt trip your family. Because all they’re learning now is that mommy can snap at any moment without any previous warning. And that’s abusive.

When that outburst is over, Heather muses again how hatred is intrinsic to marriage. And sure, change is needed in their relationship, she clearly sees that. Bill needs to change! Because, and now I suggest you sit down before you read on:

During these talks, I encourage Bill to be more like me: Give up control. Relax. Let these birds make their noises, and they’ll quiet down quickly. When you treat them like they’re doing it wrong, it only gets worse.

Is this satire? Because I remember reading whole paragraphs about how horrible the birds are and how she needs to organise and smooth out every single obstacle that appeared. How can you write that whole text and then think that this describes you? Apparently the author has written a whole book on marriage, to be released come February, and I suppose they gave her this open ed as a promo. I can also imagine this book becoming a bestseller among a certain demographic: White middle class women in the UK and the US, who find out that the dream they were promised hasn’t come true. The promise of equality often only worked to the extend that they have their careers, but once the children arrive, their liberal husbands unconsciously mutate into their own fathers. I always say that women have changed a lot in the last 50 years, men have not (yes, I know, not all women/men). This leads to clashes, tension, unhappiness. But the solution isn’t to claim some natural order in your dissatisfaction. The solution to your husband refusing to do care work isn’t to hire a nanny and a cleaner, so you can have your liberated dream of kids and career. The solution is especially not to abuse your family in the New York Times.

Degupdate Getting Snuggly.

It’s rare for me to like pics of myself. There are hardly any anyway, because I’m usually the camera person, but Candy has gotten me to take selfies. Also, the light in the degu run is pretty flattering, I think, and the degus make me happy, so who cares for the double chin when you got happiness?

©Giliell, all rights reserved

©Giliell, all rights reserved

Estelle is definitely getting more trusting. She comes out almost immediately now, puts her tiny feetses on me and takes treats. Oh, and tries whether my thumb is edible… She is also clearly the clumsy one. Where Candy has added the top of the side track to her territory, Estelle just makes it on top of the box next to it, doesn’t manage to get up and then does a half climb, half jump, half fall off it again. Yes, three halves, that’s how clumsy she is.

©Giliell, all rights reserved

They still make me think of Caine and her kingdom of rats a lot. She would be absolutely delighted with the degus.

Right Wing Terrorism: I’d like to mourn , but I’m too angry

As you may have heard already, there was a right wing terrorist attack in the German city of Hanau. The terrorist killed 9 people, mostly Kurds in two hookah lounges, went home, killed his mother and then himself. His manifesto is the typical mix of racism, incel misogyny and conspiracy theories. This attack only comes a few days after police arrested a right wing terrorist network that had planned attacks on mosques, trying to start a civil war.

It also comes after a couple of weeks into a political crisis started without need by the German liberals and Conservatives in Thuringia who voted together with the far right AfD for a liberal candidate for the Ministerpräsident. The discussions afterwards were endless rehashes of the bullshit horseshoe theory, as if the Left candidate who’d governed Thuringia for the last 5 years was the illegitimate son of Mao and Stalin, when at best he would have passed as a Social Democrat in poor light in the 1980s.

We’ve had the murder of a conservative(!) mayor by Nazis last year, we’ve had an antisemitic terrorist attack in Halle last year, when only a sturdy door prevented a massacre. Yes, right wing terrorism is a growing threat in Germany, yet still our politicians act like it isn’t. Even when talking about the horrible terrorist attack last night, the former leader of the Social Democrats (that’s Labour for the Brits) had this to say on Twitter:

“The enemy of democracy stands on the right [6 words in the original tweet]: It’s undeniable that left wing scatterbrains beat up police officers, set fire to cars and dumpsters and cause lots of monetary damage time after time. All of this is bad and mustn’t be played down [30 words]. #hanau”

That’s 9 words on right wing terrorism that just killed 10 innocent people, 30 words on “left wing terrorism” that causes damage against property. That’s equating burning dumpsters with dead Kurds. That’s zero words of condolence for the survivors, for the friends and family of the victims. That’s zero words towards our fellow citizens, friends, family, neighbours who are afraid to go to a café, a lounge, a Döner take away, a mosque because they have to fear for their lives because racists think they should be dead because of their skin colour, looks, ethnic origin or religion.

That’s contemptible, and Gabriel’s tweet is just the tip of the iceberg.

My heart goes out to the victims and their families, to all racially marginalised people in Germany who again not only have to see how their own get murdered, but also how those in charge play down right wing terrorism and compare them to dumpsters.

I got mail

One of the good things about my neighbourhood is that I almost never have to pick up stuff at the post office. Only usually I know that I ordered something, but this time, I was quite surprised when my neighbour rang the bell. Surprise quickly turned into delight when I saw who sent it. Marcus, who has previously sent me some very nice fridge magnets I asked for sent me a surprise parcel.

First, upon opening, it smelled like Christmas, because there was some incense. Did you make that yourself as well, Marcus?

Then I unwrapped a badge (I assume) that is meant to cover the tank lid, but I added it to my office door below the Unicorn sign:

Dorr sign with a unicorn and a "fuel rats" badge below

The sign above says “eat my stardust you bores”.
©Giliell

Kid #1 is wondering about the hole in the rat’s belly.

Next there were two gorgeous bracelets. Marcus clearly experimented some more with the resin and the seashells.

The first one is all blue and a soft material:

Blue bracelet with seashells

Yes, that’s also the kitchen floor and my feet. ©Giliell

The second one is clear and blue and has gold speckles and I absolutely love it (I love the other one as well, just for the record).

I had to smooth the edges a little, I guess at what was the top while pouring the resin. This one is solid material.

clear, blue and gold bracelet with seashells

©Giliell

And there was another fridge magnet, but I decided I needed a necklace to go with the bracelets so I glued an eyelet to the back and added a leather cord.

Round blue fridge magnet with seashells turned into a necklace.

Not actually the shirt I would wear it with, but I was too lazy to change. I’m looking forward to wearing it to a solid black shirt.
©Giliell

Thank you so much for this wonderful surprise, Marcus. I already wore the first bracelet at work the next day and got many compliments from the kids.