Stacy over at Accepting Abundance posted on her feelings about her kids having to witness homosexual acts of affection in a public setting. For daring to speak about her beliefs, she's getting a lot of hateful comments. If you've the time, please pay a visit and give her some encouragement. Here's the link:
http://www.acceptingabundance.com/2011/08/you-duped-me-o-lord.html?showComment=1314636125640#c432774936900928214
BUFFALO, NY, August 26, 2011 (LifeSiteNews.com) – A study by University at Buffalo sociologists has found a rise in “pornified” images of women in popular media. The researchers are warning that these findings are cause for concern because previous research has found that such images of women have negative consequences for both men and women.
University at Buffalo (UB) Department of Sociology assistant professors Erin Hatton and Mary Nell Trautner are the authors of “Equal Opportunity Objectification? The Sexualization of Men and Women on the Cover of Rolling Stone,” which will be published in the September issue of the journal “Sexuality & Culture.”
Hatton and Trautner examined more than 1,000 images of men and women in “Rolling Stone” magazine from 1967 to 2009. They chose “Rolling Stone,” according to Hatton, because “it is a well-established, pop-culture media outlet. It is not explicitly about sex or relationships … and so offers a useful window into how women and men are portrayed generally in popular culture.”
The authors measured the intensity of sexualized representations by developing a “scale of sexualization.” The scale gave an image “points” for being sexualized if the subject’s lips were parted or tongue was showing, if the subject was only partially clad or naked, or if the text describing the subject used explicitly sexual language.
Hatton and Trautner found that in the 1960s, 11% of men and 44% of women on the covers of “Rolling Stone” were sexualized. In the 2000s, the percentage of men who were sexualized had increased 55% to 17% and the percentage of women 89% to 83%.
“In the 2000s, there were 10 times more hypersexualized images of women than men, and 11 times more non-sexualized images of men than of women,” said Hatton.
“Sexualized portrayals of women have been found to legitimize or exacerbate violence against women and girls, as well as sexual harassment and anti-women attitudes among men and boys,” Hatton says. “Such images also have been shown to increase rates of body dissatisfaction and/or eating disorders among men, women and girls; and they have even been shown to decrease sexual satisfaction among both men and women.”
“Although on the surface these findings are not surprising, I was indeed surprised by the intensity of women’s sexualization relative to men,” Hatton told LifeSiteNews (LSN).
“Such images came under fire in the 1970s, but since then we as a culture don’t think they are particularly problematic,” she said. “People say, ‘Well, what do you expect? Sex sells!’ Or, ‘We are a sexual society.’ But if that were the case, we would not see such a dramatic difference between men and women, AND we would not see such a dramatic increase in hypersexualized images of women, but not men, over time.”
“I think it’s time to open a new and heated public discussion of the prevalence of such images and the problems they cause, and I think that there would be broad-based agreement from both sides of the political spectrum that these images are problematic,” Hatton said.
(End of story, my comments follow)
Everytime I go to the local grocery stores I see the latest issues of "Cosmopolitan" and other women's magazines by the checkout counters. Almost without exception the pictures on the cover are close to "soft porn". It gets pretty disturbing when I wonder what message it sends to my growing children.
We no longer watch television, the "wardrobe malfunction" of Janet Jackson led us to that. My wife actually witnessed it, I had gotten up for a cup of coffee during the halftime show. What really surprises me is the number of our acquaintances who DO watch the tube and let their kids do it. Today at the "meet the teacher" meeting of our church preschool class my daughter's teacher tried to determine if our girl watched "Clifford". I felt strange because we don't use our TV for anything except videos. In other words, I feel out of place because my children don't wallow in a cultural cesspool. That is pathetic.
I can't even shop for my daughter's clothing now without keeping an eye out for "hottie" outfits. The last time I went (two weeks ago) I bought several pairs of shorts for her. It wasn't until they'd been washed and we replaced her other clothing with them that I realized how damned short the things were. They qualify as hotpants IMO. I'll be making another clothing run soon. But it's damned annoying.
The list goes on and on.
Where does it all end? Damned if I know, but as a parent I'm disturbed by it all.
Brainwashing U
By ROBERT SHIBLEY (H/T The New York Post via Moonbattery)
Parents sending children off to college for the first time, beware: Their “freshman orientation” is all too likely to include being herded through a “tunnel of oppression” to learn about the evils of “white privilege,” being lectured about how they’re part of a “rape culture” or being forced to discuss their sexual identities with complete strangers -- before they even meet their first professor.
That’s right: For all we hear about faculty ideological or political bias, campus administrators are often worse when it comes to brainwashing students.
Consider the shocking account from a student trained to be a dorm supervisor -- a resident adviser, or RA -- at DePauw University in Indiana. One of her first duties last fall was to lead her new students through a house decorated as a “Tunnel of Oppression,” where supposedly “realistic” demonstrations in each room taught lessons such as how religious parents hate their gay children, Muslims would find no friends on a predominantly non-Muslim campus and overweight women suffer from eating disorders.
Indeed, in her training to become an RA, “We were told that ‘human’ was not a suitable identity, but that instead we were first ‘black,’ ‘white,’ or ‘Asian’; ‘male’ or ‘female’; ... ‘heterosexual’ or ‘queer.’ We were forced to act like bigots and spout off stereotypes while being told that that was what we were really thinking deep down.” Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. must be spinning in his grave.
Unsurprisingly, she turned down the school’s offer to be an RA this year -- she’d rather find another job.
DePauw is no rare case. At least 96 colleges across the country have run similar “tunnel of oppression” programs in the last few years.
Perhaps the most infamous re-education program was the University of Delaware’s: Every single student in the dorms endured an Orwellian “treatment” (the school’s word) program to expunge supposedly incorrect beliefs. Delaware demanded that its RAs ask intrusive questions about students’ sexual identity and write reports about their responses while lecturing students on environmentalism and telling them that “citizenship” required them to recognize that “systemic oppression exists in our society.”
The “treatment” was shut down a few years back after a faculty whistle-blower turned materials for the program over to the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (where I now work), which publicized the outrage. But a series of “Residential Curriculum Institutes” started by those in charge of the Delaware program continues to this day.
And the same spirit infects much of American higher education. In New York, Hamilton College last fall ordered all first-year men to attend a “She Fears You” presentation, designed to get them to acknowledge their personal complicity (after just a month on campus!) in Hamilton’s “rape culture” and to change their “rape-supportive” beliefs and attitudes. Not coincidentally, the program’s presenter is a speaker at this year’s Residential Curriculum Institute.
Did Hamilton warn incoming female students of the campus “rape culture” before it took their tuition? I doubt it. But publicity did force administrators to make the seminar optional -- just minutes before it started.
How many other schools host similar events that no one off campus ever hears about?
How to fight this indoctrination? First, warn your children or grandchildren about it -- and remind them that every public college (and most private colleges) must leave students free to make up their own minds on such controversial ideas as “all white people are racists” or “all men are responsible for rape.” College is supposed to teach you how to think, not what you must think.
And, for the many students who do go through a creepy orientation program, please save any documents you’re given on the program and tell us about it at FIRE (thefire.org).
Justice Louis Brandeis famously opined that sunlight is the best disinfectant. If students go into orientation with their eyes open and a willingness to alert outsiders, we can hope to purge the infection of thought reform on America’s campuses.
Robert Shibley is senior vice president at the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education.
(Story ends here, my comments follow).
Yep, those who can, do. Those who can't, teach. Those who can't teach become administrators.
My personal experience consists of a few semesters in a junior college. The nuttiness extended even there, we had a cross dressing dean, the Economics teacher ran a club for moonbats following the latest government conspiracy theories and all the Trekkies periodically played "dress up" on campus (the Klingon chick was hot in a geeky sort of way!).
If my kids make it that far, I'll have them go to tech schools. At least there they'll learn how to support themselves.
I'm serious, I haven't seen many college grads who had their heads screwed on right. My wife is an exception, I think learning to be an RN is a form of tech training, she certainly kept her common sense.
But others of her family? They weren't so lucky.
Her mom holds some sort of teaching degree in music. She's living proof of the flakiness of musicians. The degree served her well, she worked as some sort of computer wienie for Dallas County until retiring this year. Her final salary was about what I made in the USN 15-20 years ago.
Her dad is a pharmacist. This is the same guy who believes "A Clockwork Orange" is the best flick of all time (I think he likes posing as an intellectual while drooling over the T & A). He's also the fool who threatened my wife that he'd come meet me with a baseball bat after initially finding out his little girl was shacking up with a guy 22 years her senior. FWIW, we're both 6' 3" and I outweighed him by about thirty pounds at the time. Most of that weight was muscle (now turned to lard). He didn't understand why the wife started laughing. By now he's met me and understands. DOPE!
The wife's oldest of two brothers (six years her junior) has a degree in anthropology, has been working as a cook, is 31 years old and sports a dying Mohawk (it's dying because he's got male pattern baldness in progress). This dope is currently newly married and moving to Viet Nam where he and the wife will be English teachers. This is the same guy who can't get stopped by a local cop without pissing him off to the point of getting an in-depth search of his vehicle. It's happened more than once. Guess he never learned to stop spouting off about his "rights". So now he's moving to a Third World country. Been nice knowing him.
(FWIW, her other brother is a high school dropout who works as a maintenance tech. At least he supports himself.)
I'd guess you could get a college education without turning into an over educated moron. I'm just lucky(?) enough to meet those who do go that way.
Just say "tech school".
Pops at Conservative Outrage has a post that is short and to the (well made) point:
A normal person has 1,000 wishes. A SOLDIER only has one, to come home safe. I know 97% of you won't post this as your status, but the 3% that do are my friends. In honor of someone that died, a wounded warrior, or who is fighting for your freedom, please (Like) and re-post in their honor..
Found this at www.azcentral.com via Pewsitter:
Phoenix diocese cathedral won't allow girl altar servers
Girls no longer will be allowed as altar servers during Mass at the cathedral of the Roman Catholic Diocese of Phoenix, SS. Simon and Jude.
The Rev. John Lankeit, rector of the cathedral, said he made the decision in hopes of promoting the priesthood for males and other religious vocations, such as becoming a nun, for females.
Made up primarily of fifth- through eighth-graders the altar-server corps in American churches has included girls since 1983 in many places. Girls and boys regularly serve together at churches throughout the Phoenix Catholic Diocese.
Bishops and pastors always have had the option of restricting the role to boys, but only one diocese, Lincoln, Neb., and scattered parishes have done so. Before 1983, when church law was revised, girls were not allowed to serve.
At SS. Simon and Jude Cathedral in Phoenix, the girls will be offered the role of sacristan, the person who prepares the church and the altar area before Mass.
Lankeit said 80 to 95 percent of priests served as altar boys, but he could not state the percentage of altar servers who go on to be priests.
He made the decision on his own, he said, even though the cathedral is recognized as the home church of Bishop Thomas J. Olmsted and is used for some important church events.
"He leaves these decisions to me," Lankeit said.
SS. Simon and Jude is believed to be the first church in the diocese of Phoenix to ban girls from serving Mass, according to the diocese.
Altar servers have a direct role in the Catholic Eucharistic ceremony, assisting the priest, and are the only lay people directly involved throughout the entire service. Other lay people may serve as lectors or Eucharistic ministers, helping the priest distribute communion.
"The connection between serving at the altar and priesthood is historic," Lankeit said. "It is part of the differentiation between boys and girls, as Christ established the priesthood by choosing men. Serving at the altar is a specifically priestly act."
There appears to be little if any research connecting altar service to a later decision to enter the priesthood - or connecting other types of service for girls to religious life as a nun. Anecdotally, the Diocese of Lincoln, Neb., is one of the stronger dioceses in developing new priests.
The Rev. Kieran Kleczewski, pastor of St. Thomas Aquinas in Avondale and director of the diocese Office of Worship, does not expect other parishes following the cathedral's policy just because it is the cathedral.
"That's not the way things work in our diocese," he said. "The pastor has the authority over the parish's liturgical practices."
Kleczewski allows girls to serve Mass and has no plans to change.
Lankeit said there had been little reaction to his decision so far, but it was unlikely to sit well with many Catholics, especially those who have daughters who wish to serve.
"It is a shame on how the church continues to abuse the females," said Bob Lutz of Phoenix, a Catholic with three grown daughters. "Church attendance is shrinking now, and this adds more fuel to the fire on how females are treated as second-class citizens."
Carole Bartholomeuax of Phoenix, who attended St. Joan of Arc parish, said girls outnumbered boys as altar servers there.
"I believe Mary Magdalene set the example for women to be altar servers. I am so sorry to hear of this going backwards," she said, adding that she still loves her church, "warts and all."
But Michael Clancy, who heads the diocesan men's group, said girls never were supposed to be allowed to serve, based on his understanding of the rules of the Mass.
(End of story, my comments follow.)
That has got to be the most stupid thing I've come across all day.
..SHELBYVILLE, Ky. (AP) — The dispute between a Kentucky man and a surgeon over the necessity of amputating the patient's penis during surgery in 2008 is set to go to trial this week.
The doctor maintains he found cancer in the man's penis during surgery and that it had to be removed, according to the physician's attorney. The patient claims the surgery was supposed to be a circumcision and he never authorized the amputation, nor was he given a chance to seek a second opinion.
Jury selection begins Thursday in the lawsuit brought by Phillip Seaton of Waddy and his wife, Deborah, against Dr. John Patterson of Louisville. Attorneys hope to start opening statements that afternoon.
The Seatons sued Patterson in Shelby County Circuit Court in 2008 after an operation that resulted in the amputation.
Seaton, now in his 60s, was having the procedure on Oct. 19, 2007, to better treat inflammation.
Neither Kevin George, the attorney for the Seatons, nor Clay Robinson, the attorney for Patterson, would comment on the case. George said Shelby Circuit Judge Charles Hickman asked the lawyers to refrain from making public statements. Robinson did not respond to phone and email messages left at his office in recent weeks.
The lawsuit alleges Patterson removed Seaton's penis without consulting either Phillip or Deborah Seaton.
George said during a pre-trial hearing on Aug. 2 that the case comes down to whether jurors believe the amputation "was a necessary part of the surgery.'
"This is really a fact-driven case," Shelby Circuit Judge Charles Hickman said during the pre-trial conference.
George has said that the doctor's post-surgical notes show Patterson thought he detected cancer and removed the penis. But, George added, the situation was not an emergency.
"It didn't have to happen that way," George said in 2008, shortly after the lawsuit was filed.
Robinson has previously said that Patterson, a Kentucky-based urologist, had permission to perform any medical procedure deemed necessary and that the doctor found cancer in the organ during the surgery. Robinson has said that Patterson "had no reasonable option" but to remove the cancer.
"Mr. Seaton's problem was not the surgery, it was the cancer," Robinson said in 2008.
The trial had initially been set for January, but Hickman delayed the proceedings because of pre-trial publicity.
"I'm optimistic we can seat this jury," Robinson said during the pre-trial hearing.
The Seatons are seeking unspecified damages from Patterson for "loss of service, love and affection."
The Seatons also sued Jewish Hospital, where the surgery took place. The hospital settled with the Seatons for an undisclosed amount.
The Seatons' suit is similar to one in which an Indianapolis man was awarded more than $2.3 million in damages after he claimed his penis and left testicle were removed without his consent during surgery for an infection in 1997.
(End of story, my comments follow.)
I'd guess it's a good thing Seaton didn't go in for a colonoscopy, he might have come out sporting a colostomy bag.
The dismantling of what has been the greatest military in the world continues. Here's the latest: Radical overhaul of military retirement eyed
It's more than evident whoever is seriously considering this never spent an appreciable amount of time on active duty. Let me share a few experiences of my own, please keep in mind I had it relatively easy since the sub service often dodged the bullet of spending cuts that hit the rest of the canoe club. In addition to that, not too many bullets get fired at you while on submarine patrols.
But here were a few things I've personal knowledge of;
1) A supertanker going over your head really does sound like a freight train. That happened right after the sonar supervisor told the Officer Of the Deck (OOD) we should definitely NOT proceed to periscope depth. Good call on that one.
2) A near miss in colliding with a Russian AGI will never make the news.
3) Russian AGI's were to American subs as fleas are to dogs. Put #2 together with this and do the math.
4) Sudden depth excursions due to differing thermal layers in the water will get your attention, dropping 200-300 feet in 2-3 minutes won't feel like a roller coaster but the excitement is definitely there. For more info, Google search "submarine depth ratings". You don't know where those different layers are until you're in the middle of them. Surprise!
5) Watching the steady parade of shipmates heading into divorce court can be depressing.
6) During the Cold War the only excuse for not making a deployment was a death in the family, preferably your own. This was due to the nature of submarine qualification. I'd guess that if a soldier or marine had to miss a deployment their billet could be readily filled by another basic warm body with approximately the same training, I don't know for certain since my experience was solely in the sub force. But if you're qualified on a specific boat, even under ideal conditions it'll take a few weeks to bring any unexpected replacement up to speed so your shipmates aren't "taking up your slack". That probably means losing a lot of sleep, taking on more tasks and hoping the new guy isn't a washout. It doesn't sound too bad and maybe compared to actual combat arms of the military it isn't. But my pharmacist father-in-law definitely doesn't have the same problems if one of his techs decides to hit the road. This is a "had to be there to understand" situation.
I'd guess the absolute worst example of this I witnessed was seeing another boat get ready for patrol in Rota, Spain back in the early '70's. They were just slightly shorthanded, having lost about a third of the crew due to a busted pot party the night before they took over the boat (this was an FBM and had two crews assigned to it.) Some of the makeup came from the crew that was supposed to go home, but that only went so far. Sounds like a real incentive for reenlisting, call your wife and tell her you'll be gone an additional three months due to some idiot getting caught smoking dope.
That boat got underway on time. No excuses allowed. Failure was not an option. That was how life was back on the missile boats at that time.
7) Being a supervisor in the military means you are personally responsible for the conduct of junior personnel under you. That means if little "Johnny" goes out, gets drunk and spends the night in the local calaboose you will be speaking personally to the Executive Officer of your command to explain just what is the problem with your division. Anyone with more than a few years will be automatically groomed for supervisory positions, so these talks become inevitable the longer you serve. I was a supervisor for over half my 22 year career.
8) Speaking of being personally responsible, that extends to "being there" when the shit hits the fan for "Johnny". I recall in '86 as my own marriage was falling apart around my ears, one of my guys asked me to accompany him to his home in military housing after we pulled into port. His wife had taken off to parts unknown, the first he knew about this was when the squadron sent a radio message to the boat to inform him his kids had been turned over to the state after their babysitter had waited almost a week for "mom" to return. So I went with this lad to his duplex. The first thing we saw entering his home was that every piece of furniture had been upended in the living room, the floor was covered with cigarette butts and marijuana roaches, holes were punched in the walls and on the wall above where the couch had been were the words, "(his wife's name), Find her, Feel her, Fuck her, Forget her." We subsequently were informed that the wifely one was hosting sex/booze/drug parties for all the local teen boys.
Welcome home son. As I said, I had my own problems waiting for me, but this guy's took precedence due to our relative positions and the fact that you always help out a shipmate.
9) That term "shipmate" has a connotation of personal involvement that "coworker" never will. You eat, sleep, drill, and live with somebody it's inevitable that you'll more closely identify with him than you would with your own brother. This happens no matter what the race or economic background. Yankees would go to the mat for rednecked Rebels, blacks would watch the backs of whites, rich boys would stand by their poor white trash fellows. If that sounds positively heartwarming just consider how it is when you try going back home and discover yourself defending "those" people against the insults from your closest family members. You find yourself becoming the square peg in a round-holed world.
10) Speaking of fitting in, you never really do as regards civilians. They haven't "been there, done that". There's always a big gulf, even after a couple of decades into retirement.
I could go on but it'd be whipping a dead horse.
Did I do it for the retirement? Hell no, throughout my 22 years I did it because I believe in this nation and it's history. I had good times, I had bad times. The bad include two marriages that should never have happened and I'll cheerfully take the blame for those. But going into a divorce court after learning that the presiding judge has a young daughter whose sailorboy boyfriend knocked her up and then beat feet puts a bit of a spin on the proceedings I'd never have experienced as a civilian. Just another anecdote.
No, it never was for the retirement benefits. If it had been for those then I'd never have lasted past the first enlistment. They weren't worth it considering the day-to-day shit you'll have to take. Yes, the case can be made I chose the life I led and nobody put a gun to my head. But we've a volunteer military because of patriotic fools who believe in what they're doing.
I've earned every damned benefit I have. The same holds true for EVERY soldier/sailor/marine/airman. From the men in the SEAL teams to the dental technician in some landlocked naval air station. If they stayed for twenty or more years they earned their benefits.
Every. Damned. One.
As it is, I'm 58 years old and will probably get "grandfathered" on most changes. I've also had the attitude that nothing regarding my benefits is carved in stone so it's always subject to being taken away. I could handle it, nobody promised any one of us an easy time in this life.
But any modifications that will screw those still in uniform is flat wrong. End of story.
My overeducated moron of a brother-in-law is currently moving to Viet Nam while his equally "dumb as a box of rocks" father recently confided he wants to move to Costa Rica. I think they would both benefit from this:
6 Reasons Your Plans to Move Abroad Might Not Work Out
But to be completely honest it'd probably be like trying to teach a pig to sing, i.e. you just waste your time and amuse the pig.
Sometimes I really wonder if my wife is a foundling.
(H/T to the Ignorant Redneck)
The fix is in.
Oh yes, it certainly is: ATF Promotes 3 Managers Who Oversaw ‘Operation Fast and Furious’
Five gets you ten these three will now clam up big time. Look for anyone cooperating with the investigation of this travesty to be demoted or transferred to the Southwestern version of Siberia. The MSM will continue ignoring this story (today was the first time in almost three weeks I sighted anything in our local fishwrap about "Fast & Furious". It was a variation of this story and it was covered on page 2A of the Dallas Morning News).
In the end it will die a quiet death, unlike any victims of this criminal enterprise by our government.
Oh. Please.
Nanny State Madness: California‘s Proposed ’Fitted Sheet’ Law
Look, I'm sorry that some folks will have to be hotel maids all their working lives. It's a damned lousy job and no mistake about it.
But every job has it's hazards and getting a kink in your back because of fitted sheets is pretty small potatoes. FWIW, one of the problems my wife had as a RN working a hospital MedSurg floor was moving morbidly obese patients around. THAT will put your back out in a second! I can't count the number of times she came home griping about various lardassed sickos as she went looking for the ibuprofen. Having a BS in Nursing didn't help her avoid the same problems of your average hotel maid, as a matter of fact I'd bet that maid will have far fewer back problems over the course of her professional career than any RN working in a hospital. Just my uneducated opinion on that one, but I've yet to see any mattress that topped 300 lbs.
It used to be that lousy working conditions served as an incentive to move on up in the work world. As I've already implied, some folks never will advance and that's too bad. But whoever promised any of us a rose garden?
To quote Lou Reed from his "New York" LP in 1989, "Life is always good but never fair".
Seems there isn't anything going right lately.
Our local fishwrap (Dallas Morning News) gives scant IF ANY coverage to stories such as Obama's total disregard for the War Powers Act in his bid for regime change in Libya, or the can of worms opened by investigating "Operation Gunwalker" aka "Fast & Furious". But I do get a lot of info regarding how the heat is breaking records. BFD, I have air conditioning. Even without the AC the damned heat is small potatoes compared to the disregard for our Constitution and the imperiled lives of Border Patrol agents, Mexican citizens and other innocents.
All of my so called "friends" in this area are fast becoming fair weather acquaintances, i.e. I see/hear them only when nobody else is around. Hey, I ain't anyone's consolation prize in life. Buzz off!
All too many Catholic blogs I frequent seem caught up in piously bemoaning (pick one) the death penalty, the anniversary of Nagasaki, the plight of our "poor" due to not having their entitlements raised during the budget battle, the lack of the TLM, and there are probably more that I can't bring to mind right off the top of my head. I remember now how easy it was to leave the Church some years back, when everything you believe in is criticized you get the "why bother" attitude and head out the door while giving the "single finger salute".
I don't see any Reaganesque figure emerging from the GOP for the nomination in 2012. I've a hunch it'll be another case of "hold your nose while voting". Done too much of that already. Voldemort and Sauron are both dead so it's back to picking the lesser of two evils.
On the home front, my in-laws have gone out of their way the past few months to remove all doubt of their shallow, inane, narcissistic and infantile character. The good news in that area is the wife doesn't expect me to do anything but keep my big mouth shut. I often wonder if she was a foundling.
There is a lot more I can piss, moan and groan about. You got the point ten minutes ago. I'm getting to where I just don't give a damn anymore, Scarlett. I know that glass is half full, just have to adjust my attitude again. There are actually a lot of good things going on in my life, like most folks I focus on the crap. It's just another attitude attack.
It's break time. See ya later.
FREDERICKSBURG, Va. (WUSA) -- Eleven-year-old aspiring veterinarian, Skylar Capo, sprang into action the second she learned that a baby woodpecker in her Dad's backyard was about to be eaten by the family cat.
"I've just always loved animals," said Skylar Capo. "I couldn't stand to watch it be eaten."
Skylar couldn't find the woodpecker's mother, so she brought it to her own mother, Alison Capo, who agreed to take it home.
"She was just going to take care of it for a day or two, make sure it was safe and uninjured, and then she was going to let it go," said Capo.
But on the drive home, the Capo family stopped at a Lowes in Fredericksburg and they brought the bird inside because of the heat. That's when they were confronted by a fellow shopper who said she worked for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
"She was really nervous. She was shaking. Then she pulled out a badge," said Capo.
The problem was that the woodpecker is a protected species under the Federal Migratory Bird Act. Therefore, it is illegal to take or transport a baby woodpecker. The Capo family says they had no idea.
"I was a little bit upset because I didn't want my mom to get in trouble," said Skylar.
So as soon as the Capo family returned home, they say they opened the cage, the bird flew away, and they reported it to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
"They said that's great, that's exactly what we want to see," said Capo. "We thought that we had done everything that we could possibly do."
But roughly two weeks later, that same woman from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service showed up at Capo's front door. This time, Capo says the woman was accompanied by a state trooper. Capo refused to accept a citation, but was later mailed a notice to appear in U.S. District Court for unlawfully taking a migratory bird. She's also been slapped with a $535 fine.
"I feel harassed and I feel angry," said Capo.
"Kids should be able to save a baby bird and not end up going home crying because their mom has to pay $535. I just think that's crazy," said Skylar.
If convicted, Capo could face up to a year behind bars.
Virginia State Police just released the following statement:
"We have confirmed that the US Fish and Wildlife agent requested our presence when they served their federal summons. The trooper stood on the porch and said nothing. We had nothing to do with the charge."
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service issued this statement at around 12:30 p.m. Tuesday, August 2nd:
"On June 13, a special agent with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service observed a woman carrying a cage that contained a woodpecker at a home improvement store in Fredericksburg Virg.
As possession of a bird may potentially violate the federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act, the agent initiated an inquiry to determine whether a potential violation had occurred.
Upon speaking with the subject, later identified as Alison Capo, on June 27, the agent determined that no further action was warranted. A citation that had been previously drafted by the agent was cancelled on June 28.
Unfortunately, the citation was processed unintentionally despite our office's request to cancel the ticket. The Service has contacted Ms. Capo to express our regret. The Service is also sending Ms. Capo a formal letter explain the clerical error and confirming that ticket should never have been issued.
This misunderstanding was the result of a Service inquiry into possible violations of federal wildlife law. In particular the Service is responsible for the protection of all federally listed migratory birds. The Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries did not participate in the inquiry."
(End of story, my comments follow.)
I wonder just how much this entire farce cost the taxpayers? Maybe I really don't want to know, I've passed up reading several opinion pieces lately for that reason.
