#look i deal with a lot of animal cruelty in a professional context

[hellenhighwater]

Hi Hell, congrats on the exciting foster kitten news!

I just applied to adopt a kitten and had my interview for her today. The woman seemed most interested in convincing me of how terrible dry food, traditional litter (she preferred clay), and tap water is for cats. She said the carbohydrates and ingredients were terrible for their kidneys, the dust in litter is bad for their lungs, and the chlorine in water is harmful. I have a 12 year old cat named Scipio who has been using those things all his life, and now I feel guilty and scared for his health. He seems perfectly healthy to me but she said “cats are stoic.” What do you use with the Tiny Terrors? Is she extreme?

Well, I'm not a vet, so the actual answer is that your cat should be getting what their doctor recommends. But I've had those conversations with people before, and I can give my two cents--just take it with a grain of salt.

So...it's basically always true that you can spend more money on fancier 'health' options and there is, to some extent, benefit to the pricier choices. But there's a point at which that benefit is pretty minimal compared to what you get for the midrange price options. This is as true for pet health as it is for people health.

It's true that wet food is usually a better option for cats. Among other things, it helps them stay at a healthy level of hydration, can be easier on their digestive systems, and is often more palatable for cats who are elderly or have dental problems. But that doesn't mean that dry food is inadequate--Mal and Vice used to split a can of wet food daily, and graze dry food whenever they wanted. They're currently eating almost exclusively dry food, because Vice is on a sensitive skin and stomach diet to help address his overgrooming. I would avoid the bottom-end dry foods, because they seem prone to contamination, but that's more manufacturer quality than an issue with the dry food generally. Dry food is usually a nutritionally complete way to feed a cat, and there's nothing wrong with it.

Mal and Vice drink tap water. They have a bowl of still water, and a fountain with an inbuilt filter. The fountain is because if they don't have running water, they will make running water by splashing their bowls all over. I can't speak to chlorine but it's definitely healthier than drinking out of puddles, which is what they would be doing if left to their own devices.

They use clay litter because that's what's effective and affordable. When I'm changing it out I generally give it a few minutes for dust to settle before I let them at it--someone always wants to make a deposit in the clean box--but there's pros and cons to all the litter options out there.

In a perfect world with infinite resources, I'd be feeding the cats a careful balanced diet of fresh-prepared meats and filtered spring water, and they'd take dumps in a tiny kitty toilet that cleaned itself without my help. But that's not really practical or achievable for me, my life, or my cats, and frankly, it's not necessary. I want them to have a good life. It doesn't need to be a perfect one. If your cat is doing well, and their vet is giving them a clean bill of health, you probably have nothing to worry about. I'm not a professional; you should consult your vet and research options for yourself (which is what I do) but you're not doing anything wrong here.

I will say that when I was going through the process of adopting Mal and Vice, some places (usually private rescues) wanted me to jump through INSANE hoops to even apply. I respect that their hearts are in the right place, but... There are hundreds of kittens in shelters right now that need homes desperately, and the quality of the cat has very little to do with the quality of the rescue--they might have more or less vet work done, depending on where they're coming from, but nobody's managed to fundamentally change the nature of the beast. If you can provide a safe home, food, clean water, and attention to a cat, that's really all they need. The rest is just gravy.

#look i deal with a lot of animal cruelty in a professional context #and if your cat is having their basic needs met #and is healthy and happy and safe #then youre good #there is so much worse that their life could be #there's always someone who thinks anyone not providing the absolute platinum standard of care is somehow neglect #its not #there's always a better best bestest thing #but that doesnt mean other options are bad

[always-coffee]

The Kind That Might Drown a Man

I have a piece of art that I love. It’s a siren, clearing drowning a man. It was painted by an artist who I considered a friend, who I spoke to nearly every day for three years. He used a rather artsy photo I had taken as a reference photo, with permission. (If we are mutuals, you may ask to see it.)

I was elated when he wanted to use my photo, to make art out of a piece of art (photos are art) I was proud of. I said yes, immediately. He was going to do a series of mythological characters, and I'd be the perfect siren.

When he showed me a photo of the finished piece and also when he posted it, I was happy. Then, he sent the original painting to me as a gift. I was over the moon. It felt cool. I felt cool. Seen, valued. It did something to combat an old wound of mine.

In the past, artists—people who I thought were friends, but who were only ever actually interested in getting into my pants (nooooope)—had asked to paint me. Reference photos were even sent. But the interest quickly fizzled when they realized that what was on offer was only friendship. It wasn't good enough, so those connections faded like sun-seared fog. No one is required to make art of someone, but when something flattering turns out to be wildly disappointing it is, at best, weird. At worst, it’s dehumanizing.

But back to the point: my friend made gorgeous art out of a photo I dearly loved of myself. It felt good, and I felt special. Fast-forward to years later, and I have severed that friendship. It turns out that, despite all the conversation and all the camaraderie and even the co-working we did together, he was a liar.

There were things he casually and purposefully lied about for no discernible reason. And when I discovered the truth, it gutted me. It felt worse than a romantic breakup in a lot of ways. I don’t like being lied to. At all. Tell me the awful truth, and I’ll deal with it. But purposefully, repeatedly, and knowingly abuse my trust? Absolutely unforgiveable.

I’ve spoken elsewhere on the internet about the details of the lies—the utter pointlessness of them. (Imagine, for instance, lying about who redid the landscaping in your backyard.) It was during the pandemic where we began talking in earnest, having entered each other’s orbit through a mutual friend in the art world. He seemed safe. We shared good news with each other, vented about the insanity of the world, swapped cute animal photos and funny memes. But the context of it all was impossibly and completely different than what I was told. The curated image I was given was a lie. Things were deliberately kept from me, information was twisted and distorted—and the kicker was that he lied to other people about me.

Again, for no reason. We’d done professional work together, and it was very public! And very fun at the time. But he apparently claimed we weren’t friends. The moment things started to feel wrong between us was easy to brush aside. Easy to explain away. Easy to understand. He was stressed, job hunting. I was dealing with myriad stresses of my own. No relationship is unmarred by life’s more than occasional weirdness. It’s easy to shrug things off. To ascribe to something banal, innocent.

Then, the truth came out. And honestly, I’m still sifting through the ramifications. The ways the deceit stuns me, even now, not just in the moment. How it felt peculiar to suddenly and wildly not know someone.

In the moment, I took the piece down. I put it away. I didn’t want to look at it. I couldn’t. It was too big of a reminder. It felt like mockery. Because what was it all about? What was the point of any of it? (These are questions that will never have answers.) I was—and still am—angry. Angry at the broken trust. The carelessness of it all. The cruelty too, so unnecessary in its articulations.

But what do I do with the art? Initially, I thought I’d burn it dramatically like Sylvia Plath and the letters. Or chuck it in the trash, as symbolic gesture of getting rid of it all, of closure. (Because there is none of that here, and that is fine. I do not want it. Nothing said could fix or mend or ease.) Getting rid of it, however, feels wrong.

It’s still beautiful. It’s still art. It’s still me.

But for now, it won’t hang where I can see it. It will not be a reminder of heartbreak and betrayal. It will not sit a monument to a lost friend, who was such a small, sad creature in the end. Because to act with such malice—and there was malice in the threads of it—is not the act of a kind or good heart. And I do not have space in my life for anything other than warmth and genuineness.

Someday—I don’t know when—I’ll put it out of the dark and either hang it up or give it away. Someday, maybe someone I love will want it, and I will want to give it to them. A moment of captured beauty, the kind that might drown a man—offered with love.

I’m glad I didn’t burn it, even as I am glad to have burnt that bridge.

#art #artist #friendship #betrayal #humans are weird #sometimes in the bad way #siren #siren painting #ali trotta #poet #hurt #relationships #I really hate being lied to #what to do when the feelings are hard #truth #trust

[christinemeany-blog]

I like mystery stories,here is one of them.

The May 2006 MWA-Colorado Chapter meeting featured a talk by Dr. Johanna Gallers, a psychiatrist and trained FBI profiler. She has taught at Metropolitan State College, Mesa State College, California State University, Northridge and several other colleges and universities in Colorado and Los Angeles; and received her Ph.D. in Clinical Psychology from the California School of Professional Psychology in Los Angeles in 1984. In private practice for 22 years in New York City and Los Angeles, she founded and directed a counseling center in Los Angeles that specialized in treating survivors of sexual and physical abuse. Additionally, she served as a consultant on a congressionally mandated study of the effects of combat exposure on Vietnam veterans, as well as a training coordinator and consultant to a number of organizations specializing in the treatment of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder in various victim populations. In 1991, Dr. Gallers completed specialized training in Criminal Profiling and Crime Scene Analysis provided by the FBI.     Gallers opened her presentation by saying that the psychopaths among us are born, not made. While serial killers tell a consistent story: violent home life, abuse as a child, bad parenting, etc., there must be a genetic predisposition inborn in a person's brain before a serial killer will emerge.     "Whether or not someone becomes a serial killer or a non-violent psychopath, that's where environment comes in," she said. "There are psychopaths among us who never turn violent. Those are the ones who grew up in healthy homes with good parents. But they're still psychopaths. It's in their brains."     Decades of study has shown that this genetic anomaly alters the way emotions are processed in the brain, she said. In normal people, inside the Limbic system of our brains, the amygdela processes negative words and images. However, the amygdela does not work in the brains of psychopaths. This birth defect leaves its victims to process such stimuli in the visual cortex, and the emotion that should accompany the perception of violence is just not there, and cannot be developed. It's like they're watching a two-dimensional movie throughout their lives, because there is no depth to any of their experiences.    Gallers used the example of language. There's denotative language, which is limited to definition of words; and there's connotative language, which allows us to bring an emotional context to the words we use. Psychopaths cannot respond connotatively or even understand the reference.    "A psychopath will say the words 'I love you' because he knows that's what a woman wants to hear, and it will lead to a positive result," Gallers said. "But he will not be able to feel the words. He will not really understand why those words are so important. That doesn't matter to him, as long as they get him what he wants. Words are manipulative tools."    The vast majority of psychopaths are male (90 percent), and the few female psychopaths have different brain-wave patterns than males, so whatever it is that triggers this genetic trait is limited to men, Gallers said. There are other physical and psychological traits they all have in common.    They all have a very low resting heart rate.    As children, there is a consistent pattern for every one of them: fire setting, late-age bed wetting and cruelty to animals.    They all meet the clinical definition of malignant, narcissistic extroverts.    This definition is quite specific. Malignant narcissists internalize a self-hatred that leads them to compensate by creating a grandiose fantasy life. They fantasize that they're perfect. And they burn with resentment when they're reminded that they're not.    "We all know narcissists, people who need to be the center of attention. They might be boring but they're not psychopaths," Gallers said. "But malignant narcissists need to exact revenge for the wrongs they perceive. As children they will begin to fantasize about taking hostages or hurting others.    There is usually a psycho-sexual component in their fantasies from a fairly early age."    Of course, with this kind of diagnostic precision, the question of what to do with the knowledge becomes problematic.    "Today we can pick these kids out very early on," Gallers said. "Teachers know who they are. Therapists know who they are. The problem is, there's no cure for it, and parents generally do not want to hear that their child is a psychopath."    Making the issue particularly thorny is the fact that therapy is useless in such cases. There is no drug that will make the amygdela "switch on." Therapy in fact will exacerbate the problem, because a psychopath will learn just that much better how to manipulate words in therapy.    "They'll be brought in for treatment to deal with obsessive-compulsive behavior," Gallers said."Well, they're not necessarily stupid. They will learn what to say and how to say it to get the appropriate response from a therapist - that is, that they're OK and they can stop coming. Once they've succeeded at conning the therapist, their fantasies can continue and in fact will become more grandiose."    "Their obsessions are often sexual in nature as well," she said. "And it's very often violently sexual. The stimulation needs to be over the top in order to have an effect, since there's no emotion behind it." As fantasies progress, and the psychopath falls deeper into the spell of his own narcissistic need for gratification, there's more of a risk that violence will ensue. Only a very strong sense of discipline can make a difference.    Especially in cases where the child is in an abusive home, perhaps exposed to violence or sexual activity as a young person, there's almost nothing that can be done to keep such a child from turning into a killer, Gallers said.    "So what do you do? There's no cure. The only appropriate thing to do is put them in military school and teach them discipline and how to take orders so they don't turn violent randomly. They become assassins, snipers, killers who are trained to only kill on command."    As to the issue of being extroverts, Gallers said that applies to the psychopath's need to have external stimuli. The internal life of a psychopath is stunted by their inability to feel true emotion and to feel empathy. So while they might be loners, they are actually extroverted in that they base their feelings of self-worth on what others think - or on what they believe others think.    "With some few exceptions, these are not articulate, socially adept people," Gallers said. "They need to express their grandiose fantasies somehow. Violence allows them domination. It allows them to express revenge for slights. It allows them to be in control."    Control, in fact, is very important to the self-image of the malignant narcissist.    "Psychopathic killers are very organized. They bring their weapons with them, they've planned everything out, and they don't leave bodily fluids or other evidence behind. This makes it extremely difficult to catch them," Gallers said. "It takes meticulous police work, and even then luck plays a part. Disorganized killers usually are caught right away. They are impulse-driven. They leave forensic evidence that's easy to track and they leave other clues behind. Organized psychopath serial killers are a different story all together."    One small relief in considering the careers of serial killers, Gallers said, is that while they are never cured, they eventually do stop. "They outgrow it," she said.    As an example, she pointed to the BTK killer in Kansas. "He was not going to be caught," she said. "It had been more than a decade since he'd killed, and he wasn't interested in killing again. He was done killing. But his narcissism got him caught. He wanted to tell the world he was a successful serial killer. He made the conscious decision to allow himself to be caught, knowing he would spend the rest of his life in prison, because he had to be recognized as this notorious, successful killer."    Gallers peppered her talk with references to many well-known serial killers, including Ted Bundy and the Green River Killer. Her training has brought her in contact with many serial killers and with the investigators who profile, track and catch them.    "When we're faced with a serial killer's handiwork, there's really not a lot we can do but to study the victims and figure out everything and anything they might have in common," she said. "We start with a thorough crime scene analysis, and then a victim analysis."    The choice of victim will tell investigators quite a lot about the killer. For instance, the Green River Killer chose prostitutes, women who were easy prey. This was a murderer who was looking for people who would not be missed quickly. On the other hand, a killer like Ted Bundy looked for victims to make a statement. He chose college-educated, attractive, desirable women who lived fairly protected lives. He did so because they took skill to hunt and kill. He admitted as much to the FBI officers who interviewed him before he was executed.    In America, with a few exceptions, our serial killers are white men, she said. White men in this culture feel a sense of entitlement and empowerment, and the psychopath serial killers in this population feel that they are, for whatever reason, kept from this position of power. They are angry and feel entitled to take lives in order to show the world that they are powerful. The psychopaths who do not turn into killers in this population become the unethical CEO who plunders his company's assets or the con men who find power via other means.    Besides the choice of victim and the specific crime scene analysis, profilers and other investigators hunting a serial killer consider the signature behavior exhibited in each murder. This is different from the Modus Operandi, the M.O., which can and does change as the killer learns and the situations alter. But what never changes, Gallers said, is the signature behavior: the ritual around the killing that allows the violent psychopath to live out his personal fantasy.    "There are two kinds of profiling," she said. "There's Inductive profiling, which is the generalized categories we've been talking about - like white male, between 25-35 years old, bad youth. There are many inductive profiles in FBI files.    "Then there's Deductive profiling, and each one of those profiles is unique and developed strictly by the evidence. The investigators drop all preconceived notions and consider the scene, the M.O., the victim analysis, everything specific to the crimes at hand, in order to make the profile of an individual killer."    What with all the talk of serial killers, rapists, pedophiles, and other deviant behavior, the mystery writers listening to Gallers were a sobered bunch as she wound up her presentation and answered numerous questions.    Gallers tried to reassure us.    "The thing to keep in mind is that there are really very few serial killers. There are very few people who kill," she said. "And most people who kill will kill only once and never again, because they killed for a specific reason. The taboo against killing is very much alive and well and operating. Perhaps only one percent of the entire population is made up of psychopaths. We hear more about serial killers because we're better now at catching them, and the media is very good at publicizing them."