Saturday, November 6, 2010

Are They Evil?

There is a force of evil in the world, not some great unseen force but a very real and deadly evil. Unfortunately many will never see this evil coming because they have been blinded by tactics used against them. So successful are these tactics that people are completely unaware of this evil that they pet, cuddle, give to their children, and even allow in their homes. It will be too late when people realize what I’ve been saying all along: rabbits are evil.

“No they’re not!” you cry indignantly. “How could rabbits be evil? They’re so cute!” Cuteness is perhaps their most powerful weapon against humanity. How easily humans are taken in by something that is cute! It is our biggest weakness and rabbits know this. In the animal world, cuteness is not for our benefit but for our destruction. In a list of “Deceptively Dangerous Animals” we can see the reality of cute and innocent creatures such as: the duck-billed platypus (the males are venomous), Siberian chipmunks (they carry disease), chimpanzees (in one incident a chimp ripped off someone’s eyelids, lips, and hands), bottlenose dolphins (very intelligent and surprisingly violent), and ranking number one are swans. This symbol of love and beauty has been known to attack humans and will often attack from above, forcing their victim underwater (“Deceptively”). We can see that cuteness has nothing to do with the nature of an animal. If anything, the fact that rabbits are cute only contributes to their deadliness.

“But rabbits make such wonderful pets!” You argue. With this I have to disagree. When I was young, my family adopted an abandoned rabbit who we named Abby. We all loved Abby and decided to let her be a house bunny, having free run of the house. Abby quickly and completely won my family over. While I was determined that Abby and I would be special friends Abby had determined that I was her first target. Abby would sit and glare at me, or completely ignore me. She became more purposeful in the way she moved about the house and finally one day she put her plan into action. Every single time I sat down on the couch she would hop up, squeeze in behind me, and head butt me until I slid onto the floor. It was funny to my family but I realized there was more at stake than a quirky pet. Abby must have realized I knew this because she disappeared soon after. Was she really eaten by a hawk like my Dad claimed? Or had she realized her cover was blown and taken off? Clearly she had an agenda and she was determined to remove me from the house. Rabbits are certainly not an ideal pet.

“Rabbits never attack people,” you insist. I beg to differ. Perhaps the most damning evidence of a rabbit’s true nature is the attack orchestrated against President Jimmy Carter in 1979. President Carter was fishing on April 20th, supposedly safe in his hometown of Plains, Georgia; but during that expedition a fearsome rabbit swam up to his boat. The rabbit didn’t achieve its goal (unless its goal was to make Jimmy Carter flail around with a paddle) but Carter’s press secretary, Jody Powell, said, “what was obvious…was that this large wet animal, making strange hissing noises and gnashing its teeth, was intent upon climbing into the presidential boat” (qtd. in “Jimmy Carter”). Evidently rabbits do attack people and are prepared for land and water strikes. Are we prepared to defend ourselves? Sadly we are not.

It’s plain to see that rabbits aren’t perfect but are they truly evil? In the Random House dictionary evil is defined as “morally wrong or bad; immoral; wicked.” Evil can also be something that is “harmful [or] injurious” (“Evil”). Using this definition most people would agree that Satan is evil. This doesn’t require a belief in God or even in the person Satan, just in the idea. Satan is “the chief evil spirit; the great adversary of humanity; the devil” (“Satan”). The Online Etymology Dictionary tells us that the Greek name for Satan is Beelzebub. In Hebrew it is Baalzebub, the god of Ekron. Two possible translations of this are “the lord of flies” or interestingly “the lord of dung” (“Beelzebub”). Rabbits and some rodents are unique in that they produce nutritive dung called cecotropes which they ingest from the anus (Logsdon). Pellets that they don’t ingest unfortunately look like tiny little chocolates and I have seen more than one child consume this “candy.”

Adolf Hitler is generally accepted as an evil person. He definitely fits the definition above and, not surprisingly, rabbits are very similar to Hitler. First of all Hitler believed in a pure race, and in propagating that race. Rabbits are fairly proficient at the expansion of their race. In fact, a rabbit mates as early as 3 months old, their gestation period is only 31 days and they can birth anywhere from 4 to 12 kits. If a doe has 4 litters a year of 5 kits each then that’s 20 new rabbits per doe every year. If you keep doing the math the numbers would be staggering. Hitler was also known for installing population controls and rabbits have similar measures to prevent the population from surpassing its food source. Hitler’s population controls, although very unpopular, probably weren’t disliked as much as a rabbit’s would be. Humans will tolerate many things but most draw the line at eating their own young.

No matter what your opinion of the rabbit is, clearly they are a species to be reckoned with. Think of the rabbits you know: the White Rabbit, the Easter Bunny, or maybe the Rabbit of Caerbannog of Monty Python fame (“Rabbit”). Really look at them to find their sinister undertones. Do they lead little girls into danger and darkness? Do they come from pagan traditions to take over holidays? Do they attack and decapitate you with the slightest provocation? All of this is important to consider when judging the evilness of rabbits. However, judge quickly or else they might just be sneaking up behind you, ready to knock you off the couch.



Works Cited

“10 Deceptively Dangerous Animals.” It’s Nature. N.p., n.d. Web. 09 June 2010.

Andrews, Connie. “Rabbit Fact Sheet.” Hopper Home. N.p. Jan. 2005. Web. 09 June 2010.

“Beelzebub.” Online Etymology Dictionary. Douglas Harper, Historian. Web. 01 June 2010.

“Evil.” Dictionary.com Unabridged. Random House, Inc. 01 June 2010.

Logsdon, Alexandra and Anne McDowell. “Feeding Your Pet Bunny for a Long Healthy Life.” My Bunny. N.s., n.d. Web. 09 June 2010.

“Jimmy Carter Rabbit Incident.” Wikipedia. Wikimedia, 03 May 2010. Web. 01 June 2010.

“Rabbit of Caerbannog.” Wikipedia. Wikimedia, 01 June 2010. Web. 01 June 2010.

“Satan.” Dictionary.com Unabridged. Random House, Inc. 01 June 2010.

Monday, November 1, 2010

The Pioneers...

So lately I've been thinking about pioneers. And more specifically, how many pairs of socks and how much underwear did the pioneers have? I know in the little house on the prairie books the girls usually only had two to three dresses, an everyday dress and a Sunday dress, and maybe another one. But it never mentions how many socks they have, I'm assuming not very many.

Now to find out how I got to this point we have to follow my train of thought back a little further, all the way to my childhood in fact. When I was younger my parents used to drive me nuts by saying "Well that's the way the pioneers did it!" Everytime I whined about something they would connect it to the pioneers, it drove me insane. I'm not sure why it bugged me so much, except maybe that was the time when my parents were going through this really dumb phase. It was so strange, from the time I was 15 until I turned about 17 my parents were just idiots. Then they kind of grew out of it and now they actually know quite a bit. Really intriguing, but I think maybe everybody's parents go through that, it's just a part of life.

But I digress. In short, now in my life I am constantly making random connections to the pioneers and wondering how THEY did things.

The sock connection occurred because I have one pair of black shoes that I can wear to work, and I have four pairs of black socks I like to wear with them. I dislike doing laundry and so I don't do it until I run out of underwear (note: I have a lot more underwear than socks). I had worn my last pair of socks the previous day and now I faced a dilemma, wear my thin, black, gross, awkward ankle socks that make the shoes horribly uncomfortable? Or wear my previously worn socks?

Well how did the pioneers do it?

They obviously didn't have a great many socks. Clearly it was acceptable for them to wear socks repeatedly. And if it was acceptable then, why not now? So I wore my socks...for three consecutive days because I still have underwear left in my drawer and so have not done laundry. Perhaps others would just wear the socks without a fuss (or do their laundry before it retains the shape of the hamper when you dump it out). I prefer to be proudly justified in my dirty socks: This is how the pioneers did it.