Friday, January 2, 2009

Sports Illustrated article: Too little, too late!

A very positive article about the plight of the “Vicks Pit Bulls” in the December 29, 2008,| Volume 109, Issue 26 of Sports Illustrated. Here is the cover and here is the article.

I suppose, this should be construed as repentance! A kind of apology, I guess. To my mind, it is a lot too late and too little.

Personally, I will not accept an "apology" from Sports Illustrated. I don't care how many pro-APBT articles they publish or how many naked women they show. I dropped my subscription right after the infamous July 27, 1987 "Pit Bull" cover and never read a single issue since.

They are crass. Don't let them fool you. Even if it seems to serve our and our friends' interests, know them for what they are: repulsive, money-mongering, soulless and mindless media reps.

What am I talking about? For those of you who are too young to remember, the editors at Sports Illustrated lost their minds and created a new Media Monster with that cover. Go to the SI archives to see the cover and judge for yourself.

Look at that cover and understand that given its circulation and ability to influence men, SI has single-handedly STARTED the Pit Bull insanity.

I am not making this up, I promise. I took it from Karen Delise's book "The Pit Bull Placebo" and I agree with her.

Soon after that, news stories began slipping “pitbull” into headlines as shorthand for dangerous dog, even if it was a different breed involved in that particular crime. "Pit bull" entered our everyday lives as an adjective. People would say "I hope you've gotten yourself a pit bull attorney." Yet, when two Florida lawyers used a pit bull in an ad a few years ago, they were reprimanded by the Florida Bar for dragging the profession down to the level of these animals. Then, of course, we all know about the reference to Mrs. Palin as a Pit Bull with lipstick.”

At that time in 1987 it was the Doberman that was the media “darling” for horror stories and most people had no idea what a Pit Bull was, much less the thugs and criminals like Vick. Many will point to that Sports Illustrated July 27,1987 issue's arrival as the pivotal moment when the bad guys of the world decided they had to get their hands on these bad ass, scary looking dogs that everyone seemed to fear. The Pit Bull became the status symbol for a life-style that you and I can't even attempt to understand. We are not just talking gangs, drug-dealers, ghetto creeps - we are talking cruelty not elevated to this level since Hitler's Germany. I should have stayed from the comparison (see Godwin’s Law in your Wikipedia), but it’s the only one that fits the situation. Both are responsible for millions of deaths. [Here I was quoting almost verbatim BadRap.Org's Blog - credit goes where credit is due].

Yes, I loved the new SI article, but I also KNOW that the only reason it was written and published is because it's fashionable to hate Vick and the newly found care for Pit Bulls sells copy. On the coat-tails of myriad of programs on dogs (including the very real and effective "Dog Town"), SI just goes with the money flow.

J'accuse Sports Illustrated of indirectly causing the murder of TENS OF MILLIONS of Pit Bulls.

I fervently hope that their specific Hell is millions of Pygocentrus nattereri
(the most ferocious piranhas known) biting and hanging on their collective executive asses in perpetuity. I know this is not very Christian of me, but this is how I feel and I will never change my mind about this particular topic.

At the same time I pray that THIS article and cover will propagate as much of a wave as the first ones did, 'cept in the opposite direction. We can only hope that this is a new beginning.


Tony said...

I had a nasty experience with what looked like an American Pit Bull not more than 20 minutes ago. The poor dog was going beserk, he thought my little terrier was breakfast but when I commented on the dog's behaviour it was clearly obvious that the problem was the dick headed owner not the dog.
A lot of people have Pit Bulls in my area and most are well behaved happy dogs. The dog I met this morning was clearly unhappy and I blame the halfwit who owns him not the dog. When these situations arise they should euthanise the owner not the poor dog who suffers at his hands.

Andrew said...

You are absolutely right, Tony. When somebody uses a car in a dangerous manner, we don't blame the car, do we? I am the one who is responsible how I use a car or how my dogs behave.