One point in the McHugh article I found interesting was how Missy’s owner insisted on the term “human mother.” While that term seems a little out there to some, pet owners take care of their pets in a way similar to an infant or small child. The owner is in control of when they eat, where they go and dealing with their waste. Human mother is a more loving term as compared to owner, which implies that the pet is simply property. It was out of love that Missy’s owners chose to clone her. Missy was a mixed breed of unknown origin. But rather than calling her a mutt, she was described as a “breed apart” and became the “clone mother” of a new breed. By luck, they stumbled upon what they considered the perfect mix of features and they hoped to replicate that mixture despite her inability to reproduce due to human intrusion. Interestingly, the only way to continue with a “breed” so free of human control was to let humans genetically replicate it.
As for cute vs. anti-cute, I cannot help but think of chubby babies. Our culture stresses thinness with beauty in adults, but loves fat babies. Can you imagine what an adult with the same proportions would look like? I’m sure you have, and I’m sure you were a bit disgusted. Another cute/anti-cute situation that comes to mind is what has become known as the “duck face”, a more accurate description of the “kissy face” pose seen in many Facebook photos. This blog collects these photos and calls out their ridiculousness http://antiduckface.com/.
I have a friend who is obsessed with penguins. She has penguin stuffed animals all over her room, sleeps in penguin printed sheets and of course keeps her feet cozy in penguin slippers. Of course, not a single one of these is true to the anatomical features of a real penguin. The cute vs. anti-cute article was right; we do alter these animals into being cute. We make penguins round and fluffy, bears cubby and friendly, pigs pink, clean and cuddly, and even scrunching up our lips to the camera cute.
No comments:
Post a Comment